Anyone close to converting to Catholicism?

  • Thread starter Thread starter kristanl
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Hesychios said:
Hello Angel, This has yet to be proven. The phenomenon of cafeteria Catholicism is a huge problem. Also is the indifference the Latin Catholic church shows when allowing PNCC and Orthodox to receive communion, although they do not believe all of the Roman Catholic dogmas (while condemning it’s own members for the same).

Finally, the penchant to propose and adopt new dogmas is particularly disturbing. None of this lends itself to stability in doctrine. This also stimulates division and dissension as members either leave or conceal their doubts in the cafeteria.
You clearly are still learning about Holy Orthodoxy.

There are no ‘branches’ of Orthodoxy. Either one is Orthodox or one is not, no in between and no shades of grey.
Holy Orthodoxy also has Western and Eastern rites.

However, the western rite Orthodox have come of their own free will, under no coercion or political pressure. They are not the children of scandal or repression, and the Orthodox church never attempted to exploit divisions in the western church to it’s own advantage, although there were many opportunities to do so.

What we pray for is the return of the entire western church to the unity of Faith it’s ancestors and predecessors once shared with Holy Orthodoxy.

We have no desire to take over the western church, simply to see it return to communion with us in Faith and Love.
Holy Orthodoxy has the Magisterium. It is the teaching authority of the church, although we would not necessarily use a Latin word to describe it.

In fact, the one specific demand Holy Orthodoxy makes is conformity in doctrine, which is why Roman Catholics are not allowed to commune in Orthodox Divine Liturgies.

The Roman Catholic church is not so particular.
What you need is the seven Councils of the Fathers.

The canons of which are still studied and applicable in the Orthodox church.
Click to expand...
What about the Differences between certain Orthodox Communities,ex. Russian Orthodox
Armenian Orthodox
There are some differences (at least i’ve heard)

The Pope, Cardinals, and the others in the Vatican are what make up The Magesterium. Guided by the Holy Spirit, it will not fall into error.

Why does the Eastern Orthodoxy seem to have such a view of the Pope, as not the leader of the earthly church?
 
Hesychios said:
Hello Angel, This has yet to be proven. The phenomenon of cafeteria Catholicism is a huge problem. Also is the indifference the Latin Catholic church shows when allowing PNCC and Orthodox to receive communion, although they do not believe all of the Roman Catholic dogmas (while condemning it’s own members for the same).

Finally, the penchant to propose and adopt new dogmas is particularly disturbing. None of this lends itself to stability in doctrine. This also stimulates division and dissension as members either leave or conceal their doubts in the cafeteria.
You clearly are still learning about Holy Orthodoxy.

There are no ‘branches’ of Orthodoxy. Either one is Orthodox or one is not, no in between and no shades of grey.
Holy Orthodoxy also has Western and Eastern rites.

However, the western rite Orthodox have come of their own free will, under no coercion or political pressure. They are not the children of scandal or repression, and the Orthodox church never attempted to exploit divisions in the western church to it’s own advantage, although there were many opportunities to do so.

What we pray for is the return of the entire western church to the unity of Faith it’s ancestors and predecessors once shared with Holy Orthodoxy.

We have no desire to take over the western church, simply to see it return to communion with us in Faith and Love.
Holy Orthodoxy has the Magisterium. It is the teaching authority of the church, although we would not necessarily use a Latin word to describe it.

In fact, the one specific demand Holy Orthodoxy makes is conformity in doctrine, which is why Roman Catholics are not allowed to commune in Orthodox Divine Liturgies.

The Roman Catholic church is not so particular.
What you need is the seven Councils of the Fathers.

The canons of which are still studied and applicable in the Orthodox church.
Click to expand...
Are Orthodox allowed to contracept and remarry?
 
NoWings said:
B would be the non-recognition of divorce. Seeing as how I’ve never been baptised and my ex-wife was never baptised either, it may fall under the Pauline or Petrine privilege. Then again, I’m not even close to being an expert on canonical Catholic marriage. An example of how this could be negative would be a woman in an abusive relationship that has five children that are also being abused that may be uneducated or have a low-paying job. Does she leave him to fend for herself and her kids alone with no father, or does she ride it out because they’re sacramentally bound?

A would be the teaching on contraception. After reading one the Ask an Apologist answers on this site, I’ll never be Catholic. I can’t go into great detail because that would involve the business of another which would violate their privacy.
Click to expand...
hello NoWings. Sorry can’t make up the rules concerning mortal sin. You can however check your circumstances out with a local priest, You may be mistaken about how things add up to you. You are right tho’ can’t pick and choose on the hard stuff. God bless you ,and because you believe it has got to be all or nothing at all I think you would make a great Catholic:D Carlan
 
Angel7 said:
What about the Differences between certain Orthodox Communities,ex. Russian Orthodox
Armenian Orthodox
There are some differences (at least i’ve heard)

The Pope, Cardinals, and the others in the Vatican are what make up The Magesterium. Guided by the Holy Spirit, it will not fall into error.

Why does the Eastern Orthodoxy seem to have such a view of the Pope, as not the leader of the earthly church?
Click to expand...
Don’t bother engaging him in such a conversation Angel we’ve (he and I as well as others) have discussed this in previous threads. It will go nowhere.
 
JMJ_coder said:
The Church understands that there are extraordinary circumstances where a civil divorce may be necessary in order to protect a spouse and/or children. Yet, even so they are still married – the sacramental bond lasts “'til death do us part”. Therefore, what is condemned is when one of the spouses attempts to become remarried, for the Church there sees that as an act of adultery (a grave sin).
Click to expand...
Oh, I understand the way of thinking behind the idea. I just don’t agree with it. Paul said bishops could be the husband of one wife, but the Church decided upon mandatory celibacy. Christ also said there are some who makes themselves enunuchs for Heaven’s sake, but the Church forbade people from self-castration. Last but not least, Saint Peter and the apostles were given the authority to bind and loose and Heaven would recognize it. If it can be bound with Holy Orders, it can be dissolved with Holy Orders.
I respect your desire to protect yours and/or a friends privacy, so all I’ll say here is that the Church’s teaching on this is rooted in the nature of marriage and the dignity of persons. If you wish I can link you to references that go indepth with this.
Click to expand...
No, that won’t be necessary. I’ve read the Church apologetics along with the verses and quotes from Church Fathers. Anything can be cherry-picked from CF quotes. I just don’t understand why the Church decided to settle upon that. Abortaficients. Fine. Barrier methods? I see nothing wrong with it. That, and NFP is also a conscious act to deter from pregnancy, so there’s at least one allowance.

I don’t see how that would ever diminish two people sacramentally bound. If they’re sacramentally bound… really. Is a condom really going to make that much of a difference? I doubt it. I would rather assume that the signifying mark that God conveys through matrimony is mightier than a small piece of latex.

But, that’s the Church’s position. One either agrees with it or doesn’t. Those that don’t should either do so or leave. Maybe I’m extreme with that view. Being agnostic, my point of view on the Church is rather meaningless anyway.

Peace.
 
NoWings said:
Oh, I understand the way of thinking behind the idea. I just don’t agree with it. Paul said bishops could be the husband of one wife, but the Church decided upon mandatory celibacy. Christ also said there are some who makes themselves enunuchs for Heaven’s sake, but the Church forbade people from self-castration. Last but not least, Saint Peter and the apostles were given the authority to bind and loose and Heaven would recognize it. If it can be bound with Holy Orders, it can be dissolved with Holy Orders.

No, that won’t be necessary. I’ve read the Church apologetics along with the verses and quotes from Church Fathers. Anything can be cherry-picked from CF quotes. I just don’t understand why the Church decided to settle upon that. Abortaficients. Fine. Barrier methods? I see nothing wrong with it. That, and NFP is also a conscious act to deter from pregnancy, so there’s at least one allowance.

I don’t see how that would ever diminish two people sacramentally bound. If they’re sacramentally bound… really. Is a condom really going to

But, that’s the Church’s position. One either agrees with it or doesn’t. Those that don’t should either do so or leave. Maybe I’m extreme with that view. Being agnostic, my point of view on the Church is rather meaningless anyway.

Peace.
Click to expand...
But NFP is natural and therefore is not going against one’s body (that was created by God). Have you found anything concerning CFs that would imply they did support contraceptives? If you haven’t then why would you put aside what the CFs had to say against it? This would not be cherry picking.

p.s. If they are sacramentally bound then nothing should separate husband and wife not even a condom.
 
josie_L said:
But NFP is natural and therefore is not going against one’s body (that was created by God). Have you found anything concerning CFs that would imply they did support contraceptives? If you haven’t then why would you put aside what the CFs had to say against it? This would not be cherry picking.

p.s. If they are sacramentally bound then nothing should separate husband and wife not even a condom.
Click to expand...
More natural I’ll grant, but it’s still a conscious effort to NOT get pregnant.

I honestly don’t remember if the Church Fathers ever mentioned barrier methods. I do remember abortaficients. I could be gravely mistaken. It’s been a while since I’ve read up on it.

As far as cherry-picking goes, I’m speaking more generally than just for birth control. For example, Saint Basil mentions remarriage of three times… but this teaching from this Church Father is ignored while others are favored. That’s what I’m talking about.

Lastly, if a husband and wife are sacramentally bound nothing CAN separate them, EVEN a condom, in my opinion.

This thread has gotten off-topic. My apologies for that.
 
Hello Angel,
Angel7 said:
What about the Differences between certain Orthodox Communities,ex. Russian Orthodox
Armenian Orthodox
There are some differences (at least i’ve heard)
Click to expand...
The Armenians separated from YOUR CHURCH AND MINE, (Orthodox Catholicism) long before the great schism. The disagreement was over the two natures of Christ. Your church and mine are diaphysite, the Armenians, Jacobites and Copts are miaphysite. You wish to attribute these groups to a division of Orthodoxy when they are just as much a division of Catholicism, and in the same way for the same reason!

You are wrong to attribute them to Orthodoxy just because they want to use orthodox in their name, just as you might say I am wrong to attribute the PNCC or Anglo-Catholicism to a division of your church.
Angel7 said:
The Pope, Cardinals, and the others in the Vatican are what make up The Magesterium. Guided by the Holy Spirit, it will not fall into error.
Click to expand...
Yet it already has, and continues in it’s error, but the Latin Catholic church can return to true belief. There is hope yet.

Your definition of Magisterium is actually a modern one :rolleyes:

The Magisterium is the teaching authority of the Orthodox church. 🙂

It is a hallmark of Holy Orthodoxy that absolute conformity in doctrine is essential. This has never changed.

In fact, Holy Orthodoxy has neither ADDED nor SUBTRACTED any doctrine since the dispute with the Miaphysites. Saint John of Damascus ( 676AD - 760AD, a Doctor of your church!.. as well as one of Orthodoxy’s great theologians) wrote a treatise on Orthodoxy An exact Exposition on the Orthodox Faith that stands even today as a very good description of our Orthodox faith (requiring no additions), as well as being a description of your church in the distant past… I suggest you read it.

Because we are so strict about theology, we cannot accept the new ideas circulating the west about the bishop of Rome. They were at one time highly honored and respected Orthodox bishops, but never had universal ordinary jurisdiction nor the ability to declare dogma upon their own authority. That’s all new, and dangerous.
Angel7 said:
Why does the Eastern Orthodoxy seem to have such a view of the Pope, as not the leader of the earthly church?
Click to expand...
Because the Papacy you know is a modern invention, and the western church under it teaches error.

You don’t have to take my word for it, all you have to do is read independent scholarship and form your own opinion. I won’t despise you for disagreeing with me.

You ask me the question, and I answer it. 🙂
 
NoWings said:
More natural I’ll grant, but it’s still a conscious effort to NOT get pregnant.

I honestly don’t remember if the Church Fathers ever mentioned barrier methods. I do remember abortaficients. I could be gravely mistaken. It’s been a while since I’ve read up on it.

As far as cherry-picking goes, I’m speaking more generally than just for birth control. For example, Saint Basil mentions remarriage of three times… but this teaching from this Church Father is ignored while others are favored. That’s what I’m talking about.

Lastly, if a husband and wife are sacramentally bound nothing CAN separate them, EVEN a condom, in my opinion.

This thread has gotten off-topic. My apologies for that.
Click to expand...
Individual CFs could have erred on specific issues, what you have to consider is the weight of evidence in favor of a position by many CFs to see whether or not there is validity in the belief? Please check out this cite (if you are humble enough you will find the answers). God bless.

catholic-pages.com/dir/contraception.asp

p.s. NFP is a conscious effort not to violate God’s natural laws.
 
Hesychios said:
Because we are so strict about theology, we cannot accept the new ideas circulating the west about the bishop of Rome. They were at one time highly honored and respected Orthodox bishops, but never had universal ordinary jurisdiction nor the ability to declare dogma upon their own authority. That’s all new, and dangerous.
Because the Papacy you know is a modern invention, and the western church under it teaches error.

You don’t have to take my word for it, all you have to do is read independent scholarship and form your own opinion. I won’t despise you for disagreeing with me.

You ask me the question, and I answer it. 🙂
Click to expand...
The papacy is not a modern invention unless you want to call Sacred Scripture and Tradition into question. 🙂
 
josie_L said:
Don’t bother engaging him in such a conversation Angel we’ve (he and I as well as others) have discussed this in previous threads. It will go nowhere.
Click to expand...
I beg to differ.

Perhaps no where for you at present, but the Truth of Holy Orthodoxy will continue.

I harbor no ill will toward you. 🙂
 
josie_L said:
The papacy is not a modern invention unless you want to call Sacred Scripture and Tradition into question.
Click to expand...
Absolutely not!

Sacred scripture and tradition support Holy Orthodoxy. I thought we covered that already. 🙂

Your ideas about the Papacy are essentially circular reasoning. What you see today you read back into history… but it’s not there.

That’s OK, you are not the first to fall for that.
 
JonNC said:
Presbyterians are part of the Calvinist, reformed part of the Protestantism. While they are brothers and sisters in Christ, they view the sacraments differently, they believe in a more symbolic presence in the Eucharist, double predestination, and limited atonement.

What makes me not convert to Orthodoxy, too? My comment was more of a choice thing - “if I had to choose, I would be Catholic or Orthodox before reformed or Baptist”. And some of the above issues answer that question, especially the Eucharist. Transubstantiation is much more palatable (to me) than symbolic or spiritual presence.
The more direct answer is there are parts of Catholic Doctrine that I am not yet reconciled to - papal primacy, and purgatory being two. I also believe in the desirability of corporate reconciliation. I’ll be very interested in seeing what happens with the TAC (Traditional Anglican Church), and the ALCC (Anglo-Lutheran Catholic Church), for example, both of whom have petitioned Rome for full communion.

Jon
Click to expand...
Thanks for your response. Yes, I understand how believe some things can be hard, especially when you were raised not believing them. But as a Lutheran, you come from a religion that still relies on tradition, which may be why you can connect more with the Catholic Church.
Do you believe that the split from the Catholic Church has gone too far? Meaning do you think Luther wanted it to get split up as much as it did?
 
josie_L said:
Individual CFs could have erred on specific issues, what you have to consider is the weight of evidence in favor of a position by many CFs to see whether or not there is validity in the belief? Please check out this cite (if you are humble enough you will find the answers). God bless.
Click to expand...
If I’m humble enough?
p.s. NFP is a conscious effort not to violate God’s natural laws.
Click to expand...
By circumventing another of God’s natural laws?
 
kristanl said:
Thanks for your response. Yes, I understand how believe some things can be hard, especially when you were raised not believing them. But as a Lutheran, you come from a religion that still relies on tradition, which may be why you can connect more with the Catholic Church.
Do you believe that the split from the Catholic Church has gone too far? Meaning do you think Luther wanted it to get split up as much as it did?
Click to expand...
Yes, I believe the schism went to far, and no, I don’t think this was Luther’s original intent. In fact, at the beginning, he was convinced he was helping the pope by exposing abuses he felt the pope, 1) didn’t know about, and 2) would condemn.

You are correct that, for me, there is a connection I have for Catholicism. I also am developing one for Orthodoxy. There are things you do that I believe Luther would approve, that we Lutherans for the most part don’t do. It seems some of the division between us is time, our varying languages of faith, culture, and old hostilities. Overcoming doctrinal differences might be easier if we conquered these others - one of the reasons I’m here.

Jon
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top