Thanks for your response, Christina. It is interesting what Romanides says, it is a point I have never read before about EO. The irony is that my observations don't fit with what Romanides says. To give a quick example of what I'm talking about, for this subject in the forum, everybody is looking for Biblical and Patristical sources, and using reason, while observation is being left out in the debate.
I think it would be interesting to have more examples and sources commenting on EO attitude towards observation and experimentation. If EO has always been so open to scientific methodology, it is strange that the scientific breakthroughs took place in the West and not in the East.
Note to someone smarter than me: Correct me if I'm wrong.
The EO don't care about worldly knowledge nor "scientific breakthroughs". Our greatest saints lived without any of these "scientific breakthroughs", which were obviously not necessary for their sanctification (on the contrary, many times they are very detrimental, but that's another topic).
The scientific methodology referred to by the EO is strictly limited to the spiritual life, because everything else is rubbish. Whereas the Pope would claim (he said this a few years ago, didn't he?) that the Rennaisance was a Christian victory, the EO could care less about the Rennaisance. Our scientific method is this: How can I purify my soul, so that I can be close to God? Nothing else really matters.
Disclaimer: I will not be insulted if someone corrects me. I'm just a learner.
Edited by Christina M., 15 January 2011 - 05:56 PM.