1. The universal application of the atonement, i.e. universalism per Ernst Benz.

2. Whether the Holy Spirit can be said to proceed THROUGH the Son

3. What is sin? Saying that the corruption/sin/death is found in the body but not the body is a pretty poor answer. Then what is it? They can’t agree.

4. Did Christ take any guilt on the cross? I know EO’s that say no, and I know the EO theology teacher here in Louisville that says yes.

5. Can the icon be 3 dimensional or only 2 dimensional?

6. The Orthodoxy of the painting/icon of the Trinity where three guys are sitting at the table by Andrei Rublev. The theology teacher here had a big problem with it as I understand many others do as well.

7. It has been the tradition of the Greek Church to use no instruments yet some churches are now introducing organs.

8. There are disagreements on whether the substance and accident distinction of transubstantiation can be fully imported into the Greek system of the sacrament. Some say yes, some say no.

9. The idea of doctrinal development and catholicity: some hold Vincent’s “everywhere by all” statement others do not.

10. The Eucharist, The Presence of Christ

Fr Raphael Vereshack says

“There was a discussion about this at monachos last April which eventually became quite heated. At the time possibly every Holy Father known was quoted to support both positions. By the time this finally cooled off there were two basic positions that seemed irreconcilable.”


11. Ecclesiology; Who’s In the Visible Church?

Ina recent article by Energetic Procession, The Priest between the believer and God? A convert of the Orthodox Church complains,

“Forgive me, but I don’t understand how you can believe this…Take for example the recent schism between ROCOR and Moscow. Which one tore itself away from the Church? Are we to say that the priests of the guilty party ceased to truly be priests, and that the people no longer truly received the sacrament? And what are we to think now that ROCOR has been reconciled to Moscow? Surely ROCOR believers do not think that their status as members of Christ’s Body was fundamentally changed by this reconciliation?

And what about the schism a couple centuries ago between Constantinople and Antioch. Are they to go on believing that the other was outsides the true Church for the duration of that schism? Surely they do not believe that, and if they did then the two patriarchates would have two conflicting narratives of their common history. Is that acceptable?

What you think about the present schism between Jerusalem and Romania? What do you think about the Macedonian Church? What do you think about the possibility of reunion with the Non-Chalcedonian churches? Must they confess that they have been separated from Christ’s Body for 1500 years before we can possibly be reunited. Would it not be inconsistent to say otherwise?”

There were shallow responses given here that do not show any superiority to the separations between protestant Churches.

12. Called To Communion’s Bryan Cross says, “In this statement the Orthodox representatives recognized a universal primacy of the bishop of Rome.”


Need I say any more?

13. Who’s Interpretation of Dionysius is right?



14. What is Baptism? Does a convert from a Protestant Church need to be re-baptized or just chrismated? From Monk Patrick’s article Baptismal Membership it is clear Eastern Orthodox Churches are not agreed. If they don’t agree than they don’t agree on the nature of Baptism.