There’s some pretty big difference.
Eastern Orthodox teaches theosis as the goal:
If I remember correctly, they reject the notion of original sin as roman bullshit.
Among some other key differences…
Plus their priests/monks(?) look like cool wizards…
I’m not sure but I don’t think so. I think they can assist an exorcist though since I’ve heard even lay people (regular non priest people) can assist with exorcisms, the only catch is there has to be an authorized trained exorcist priest performing the ritual prayers to cast the ‘devil’ out. So they can definitely assist like pray along with the priest in certain parts or hold the holy (blessed) water etc but they aren’t allowed to exorcise on their own without a priest.
Add on note re deacons in Catholic Church
Seems they can do some priest stuff like baptize (see webpage for further details).
I’m not quite sure what the biggest differences are between priests and deacons other then the deacon never blesses the host at our church and he’s married (so obviously he’s allowed to have sex unlike regulate priests).
Plus, it seems they also believe that during the Eucharist they eat and drink the literal blood and flesh of Christ. They are more metal than some of these demonolaters! No wonder the Romans saw the Christians as a creepy cult in those early days…
No, the regular (western/roman) catholic church does too.
I grew up with that.
I thought the Roman Catholic church views it as it transforming into the blood and flesh of Christ more in the spirit, rather than in the corporeal form
It’s supposed to be one of the great mysteries of the church that the wine and host are transmuted into flesh and blood but due to the subtle nature of this miracle/rite you merely perceive it to be as it was before.
Transubstantiation (Latin: transubstantiatio; Greek: μετουσίωσις metousiosis) is, according to the teaching of the Catholic Church, “the change of the whole substance of bread into the substance of the Body of Christ and of the whole substance of wine into the substance of the Blood of Christ. This change is brought about in the eucharistic prayer through the efficacy of the word of Christ and by the action of the Holy Spirit. However, the outward characteristics of bread and wine, that is the ‘eucharistic species’, remain unaltered.”[1] In this teaching, the notions of “substance” and “transubstantiation” are not linked with any particular theory of metaphysics.[2]
Catholics love to trot out stories of priests who doubted only to find actual blood in their chalice.
There’s also a story of a eucharist that turned into an actual piece of a human heart.
At any rate, every time I went up to recieve “holy communion” it was with the understanding that I was eating the flesh of Christ in the transmuted host, and drinking his blood in the transmuted wine.
There’s also supposed to be tied to the paschal (Passover) lamb.
@crookedpathfinder That’s what they tell you your supposed to believe.
With all due respect, what I know however is I never had a piece of unleavened bread enter my mouth as bread and end with me chewing on meat.
Also they don’t share the wine where I live but I sincerely doubt that I’d take a sip of watered down wine and find myself trying to swallow a mouthful of blood.
Transubstantiation is bologny in my opinion but I’ll keep my mind open enough to believe it if it ever happens to me that I drink blessed watered down wine and find myself swallowing blood or if I stick blessed unleavened bead in my mouth and find myself chewing on meat(steak).
I believe that was also the point of @crookedpathfinder
In my current belief, coming from what others (including EA) have communicated on here from spirits and some of my own experience indirectly in divination, I think such a feat is possible by an extremely skilled and trained magician. Unlikely by your usual priest, however.
Transubstantiation is most likely a later Catholic doctrine, that isn’t present in neither Pauline writings nor Synoptic Gospels. There is a lot of evidence to believe, that the Eucharist in 1 Cor is an etiology, that later went on to become historicized (the exact same thing that happened to Mithraism btw)
Bread & wine/water were always present at the communal meals. It’s only natural for them to adopt symbolic meanings, when used in ritual prayers. The exact symbolism is ad hoc too, as seen when comparing Paul and Didache. This was never supposed to be a new teaching, only a lesson for Corinthians to stop allowing inequality and division, when partaking in the Lord’s Supper (Body of Christ = the community, but i’ve already talked about the symbolic discrepencies before).
And for the biggest contradiction:
No Jew would EVER partake in a blood-drinking ritual. Even a symbolic one
Let that sink in.
Don’t do that; you’re going to block your first chakra; it’s better to have a normal sexuality.
Don’t Eastern Monks also practice sexual abstinence?
I believe Jesus is one of the “Human” (in form only) incarnations of the Sun god as a compassionate master/teacher. He’s also a good intermediary to the Source/Tao/Supreme or however you want to call Him/Her.
Sometimes I’ve put a Sun on my altar, but Father Sun was more distant than Jesus.
AFAIK Lucifer is an enlightening aspect of Venus; not Satan, the god of the Underworld.
Yeah that’s what they say they do. If that’s what they practice I assume they don’t have many spiritual experiences.
Well, considering they essentially came up with the Chakra system, mayhaps something is missing in this equation? In other words, maybe it doesn’t quite work like that?
Otherwise, I’ve seen it in multiple cultures, from magicians that our modern magick is essentially built upon, that sexual abstinence is advised at least some time before a magickal working.
If I may, I find it meh. I always want to fuck like a rabbit and be a monster when it comes to my sexual appetite and I can do stuff just fine.
Yes I also feel it is unecessary to be honest. But, it seems they recommended it for some reason. So perhaps it is done for a reason that has nothing to do with the effectiveness of the magick?
Well from a ceremonial standpoint, those things are meant to prepare the Will (with the capital W) and the self for the work. Of course we Lilith workers twerk on that shit.
Otherwise I have no clue why they would recommend it.
Maybe the intent of recommending celibacy is for monks not to fuck around and leave abandoned children. It may come from a time when there were no contraceptives.
Or just to reserve spiritual power for an elite. Not many are willing to be celibate. Naturally I don’t believe they practice what they preach.
