02-17-2008, 02:54 PM
All,
From my own woefully uninformed perspective, which is wholly derived from experience (personal and witnessed) on this site alone, there seems a clear (almost denominational?) rift between two anatomical groups (East and West) that together comprise the Body of the COE. What???s remarkable about these distinctive schools of thought, at least in my present estimation, is the stark contrast in the underlying philosophies, particularly those involving modes/methods of dealing with people both inside and outside of the Church.
My question is two-fold in nature. First, I wonder whether my perception, that the western tradition is the more fundamentalist/dogmatic/intolerant (ETC) of the above-mentioned ???groups???, is aligned with reality; and secondly, if this is the case, does this divergent approach take root in the inter-textual differences and/or additional books recognized by the western canon?
From my own woefully uninformed perspective, which is wholly derived from experience (personal and witnessed) on this site alone, there seems a clear (almost denominational?) rift between two anatomical groups (East and West) that together comprise the Body of the COE. What???s remarkable about these distinctive schools of thought, at least in my present estimation, is the stark contrast in the underlying philosophies, particularly those involving modes/methods of dealing with people both inside and outside of the Church.
My question is two-fold in nature. First, I wonder whether my perception, that the western tradition is the more fundamentalist/dogmatic/intolerant (ETC) of the above-mentioned ???groups???, is aligned with reality; and secondly, if this is the case, does this divergent approach take root in the inter-textual differences and/or additional books recognized by the western canon?