Anyone who leaves the Catholic Church should become Eastern Orthodox instead of Protestant

[Mannyfit75]

This is my view. Since Protestantism have broken off with Historical Christianity, any Catholics who wish to join that Sect should reconsider joining the Eastern Orthodox Church instead of Protestantism. Why?

I can point out several reasons. The Eastern Orthodox Church is in Schismatic with the Church and they have valid Sacraments (Seven of them) and they have valid Holy Orders(Though I think the Eastern Orthodox Church recognized Holy Orders of the Anglicans; correct me if I am wrong), and believe in the Real Presence. They can also trace their origins back to the Apostles and Jesus Christ.

Most Protestant Churches do not believe in Real Presence and they do not have valid Sacraments, nor they not believe in them, and they have problems with the Pope Eastern Orthodox should do find because they do not believe in Petrine Authority…(note I said Petrine Authority not Rome Authority because Rome is not authority that concerns Papacy but the See of St. Peter not the City of Rome).

So if you are Catholic and want to leave the CC, reconsider joining the Eastern Orthodox Church. They are historical Christians just like Catholics.

 

[trophybearer]

Besides the obvious fact that I disagree with your assessment of the Orthodox Church, it seems unlikely to me. I would imagine most Catholics who leave for protestant denominations are looking for feel-good, happy-clappy worship, and a “me and Jesus” attitude among other things. They aren’t going to find that sort of thing in the Orthodox Church, even less so than the RCC. The only reason anyone should be joined to the Orthodox Church is that they believe it to be the “One, Holy catholic and Apostolic Church” of the creed, as we do. Anyone coming in for any other reason either won’t last or their participation in the life of the Church will slowly become less and less(which is something I don’t see someone making the effort to convert doing unless it’s just because of marriage).

 

[justin_sp]

Anyone leaving the catholic church to join the orthodox church inflicts themselves with the deadly wound of schism thus damning themselves. The orthodox reject papal primacy,purgatory,that the Holy Spirit proceeds form the Father and the Son,and also allow divorce and remarriage as many as 3 times for 1 person,depending on the orthodox church in question.

 

[trophybearer]

Anyone leaving the catholic church to join the orthodox church inflicts themselves with the deadly wound of schism thus damning themselves. The orthodox reject papal primacy,purgatory,that the Holy Spirit proceeds form the Father and the Son,and also allow divorce and remarriage as many as 3 times for 1 person,depending on the orthodox church in question.

if you say so, buddy.

 

[Mannyfit75]

Besides the obvious fact that I disagree with your assessment of the Orthodox Church, it seems unlikely to me. I would imagine most Catholics who leave for protestant denominations are looking for feel-good, happy-clappy worship, and a “me and Jesus” attitude among other things. They aren’t going to find that sort of thing in the Orthodox Church, even less so than the RCC. The only reason anyone should be joined to the Orthodox Church is that they believe it to be the “One, Holy catholic and Apostolic Church” of the creed, as we do. Anyone coming in for any other reason either won’t last or their participation in the life of the Church will slowly become less and less(which is something I don’t see someone making the effort to convert doing unless it’s just because of marriage).

So where do you want them to go then?

 

[ThuriferAcolyte]

So where do you want them to go then?

I think you’re missing his point. People that end up looking at Protestantism generally won’t be attracted to Orthodoxy, because (let’s say they’re looking at evangelicalism) the things that they disagree with in Catholicism may also be found in Orthodoxy. This is especially the case with those attracted to evangelical Christianity, and are repulsed by veneration of saints, icons/statues, Real Presence, etc. So, those looking into Protestantism from Catholicism may not be doing so just because they don’t like Papal doctrines, Purgatory, Indulgences, Immaculate Conception, etc.

And of course people leaving Catholicism may not care so much about what the Catholic Church says about other churches.

So I’m sure he’d love for those leaving Catholicism to join the Orthodox Church, but the point is that many of those leaving Catholicism are doing so for reasons that also make the Orthodox Church not a option in the matter.

 

[Mannyfit75]

I think you’re missing his point. People that end up looking at Protestantism generally won’t be attracted to Orthodoxy, because (let’s say they’re looking at evangelicalism) the things that they disagree with in Catholicism may also be found in Orthodoxy. This is especially the case with those attracted to evangelical Christianity, and are repulsed by veneration of saints, icons/statues, Real Presence, etc. So, those looking into Protestantism from Catholicism may not be doing so just because they don’t like Papal doctrines, Purgatory, Indulgences, Immaculate Conception, etc.

And of course people leaving Catholicism may not care so much about what the Catholic Church says about other churches.

So I’m sure he’d love for those leaving Catholicism to join the Orthodox Church, but the point is that many of those leaving Catholicism are doing so for reasons that also make the Orthodox Church not a option in the matter.

Good point having them convert to “feel good” Christian revival Holy Spirit filled doesn’t make them anymore close to historical Christianity. Protestants Churches lack a lot of sacraments… If they want to be anywhere close to how the Apostles lived, they aren’t living it because the Early Christians consumed the Body of the Lord and drink his blood… Their Protestant practices are man-made not God made.

 

[John_Larocque]

This assessment, from one of my favourite Orthodox bloggers, is one of the best I’ve read. Essentially you find your way to the Roman church or the Eastern churche(s) based on your headset - if your mindset is “Eastern” eventually you’ll head that way, and vice verse. There’s a great deal more to Orthodoxy than “smells and bells” (although if that’s what you want you’ll get plenty of that). If you’re going to embrace any faith system, it has to be based on what it is, not what it isn’t. If Orthodoxy is nothing more than a halfway house for those who miss the Old Mass or what not it won’t last.

Somewhat unrelated, the blog post refers to Richard Neuhaus’ tribute to Alexander Schmenann, which is a good introduction to his published diaries.

I referred in another thread to an essay at Pravmir which addressed the questions converts should be asking.

My approach to this has been to tell any potential convert to take some time, to hang around the church for a year or so, seeing what it is like to be Orthodox, and finally to make sure it is Orthodoxy they are coming to, and not something else they are fleeing from. Baron von Hugel told an Anglican niece who wanted to become Catholic that she should learn the strengths of Anglicanism, and not become Catholic until it would be clearly a sin for her to remain in her own tradition, until it was completely necessary for her to convert. This seems about right. People who move from one tradition to another for negative reasons bring all those negative reasons with them.

Finally, is this advice to potential converts: “Don’ t look back, don’t look back in anger.”

 

[Justy90]

QUOTE=Mannyfit75;5747417]This is my view. Since Protestantism have broken off with Historical Christianity, any Catholics who wish to join that Sect should reconsider joining the Eastern Orthodox Church instead of Protestantism. Why?

I can point out several reasons. The Eastern Orthodox Church is in Schismatic with the Church and they have valid Sacraments (Seven of them) and they have valid Holy Orders(Though I think the Eastern Orthodox Church recognized Holy Orders of the Anglicans; correct me if I am wrong), and believe in the Real Presence. They can also trace their origins back to the Apostles and Jesus Christ.

So does the Anglican Communion.

Most Protestant Churches do not believe in Real Presence and they do not have valid Sacraments

Anglicans practice 7 Sacrements

, nor they not believe in them, and they have problems with the Pope

What the heck does that mean?

Eastern Orthodox should do find because they do not believe in Petrine Authority…(note I said Petrine Authority not Rome Authority because Rome is not authority that concerns Papacy but the See of St. Peter not the City of Rome

).??? What does that have to do with anything?

So if you are Catholic and want to leave the CC, reconsider joining the Eastern Orthodox Church. They are historical Christians just like Catholics.

Yippie!:stretcher:

This is cereal box proselytization and a poor attempt at a thread.

 

[RevDrNorth]

Anyone leaving the catholic church to join the orthodox church inflicts themselves with the deadly wound of schism thus damning themselves. The orthodox reject papal primacy,purgatory,that the Holy Spirit proceeds form the Father and the Son,and also allow divorce and remarriage as many as 3 times for 1 person,depending on the orthodox church in question.

No actually, the Roman Catholic Church went into schism against the church founded by Christ. They abandoned the other partriarchs and effectively became the first Protestant Church and the Pope the first Protestant. The RCC then developed innovative doctrines that went against the conciliar church. At least all of that from the Eastern orthodox point of view who consider THEMSELVES the Catholic Church.

If I recall correctly there are Orthodox that do not consider the orders and sacraments of Rome valid.

Your schism gave birth to other schisms as is natural since the RCC was born in schism.

It is all perspective. In other words if I were you I might tone down the rhetoric

 

[Mannyfit75]

No actually, the Roman Catholic Church went into schism against the church founded by Christ. They abandoned the other partriarchs and effectively became the first Protestant Church and the Pope the first Protestant. The RCC then developed innovative doctrines that went against the conciliar church. At least all of that from the Eastern orthodox point of view who consider THEMSELVES the Catholic Church.

If I recall correctly there are Orthodox that do not consider the orders and sacraments of Rome valid.

Your schism gave birth to other schisms as is natural since the RCC was born in schism.

It is all perspective. In other words if I were you I might tone down the rhetoric

First Protestants? The last I look up that definition is anything against Catholicism. The CC and the Eastern Orthodox Church are in Schism. Just because they are, there that doesn’t Make Catholics Protestants. Next time, I suggest you look up what the word Protestant means.

 

[Mannyfit75]

This is cereal box proselytization and a poor attempt at a thread

It is and Anglicans do have 7 Sacraments but they are not valid in the eyes of the Catholic Church. For one you sect ordain homosexuals, and women. That is completely “unorthodox” and a complete departure from historical Christianity.

 

[ThuriferAcolyte]

No actually, the Roman Catholic Church went into schism against the church founded by Christ. They abandoned the other partriarchs and effectively became the first Protestant Church and the Pope the first Protestant. The RCC then developed innovative doctrines that went against the conciliar church. At least all of that from the Eastern orthodox point of view who consider THEMSELVES the Catholic Church.

If I recall correctly there are Orthodox that do not consider the orders and sacraments of Rome valid.

Your schism gave birth to other schisms as is natural since the RCC was born in schism.

It is all perspective. In other words if I were you I might tone down the rhetoric

I agree that the rhetoric should be toned down, however your assessment of the Catholic Church is no more correct than his assessment of the Orthodox Church (though you portray it as the “Orthodox point of view”). It’s all a matter of perspective. Many Catholics see the Orthodox as the first “Protestants”, many Orthodox see Catholics as the first “Protestants”.

Orthodox tend not to speculate on the “validity” of the Orders and sacraments of non-Orthodox churches. And in that, the reception of [Catholic] converts to the Orthodox Church varies within the Church, from confession and a profession of faith, to chrismation, to baptism. This is similar to the stance on reception of Catholic priests and [re]-ordination as an Orthodox priest.

 

[ThuriferAcolyte]

It is and Anglicans do have 7 Sacraments but they are not valid in the eyes of the Catholic Church. For one you sect ordain homosexuals, and women. That is completely “unorthodox” and a complete departure from historical Christianity.

With Anglicanism, you have to figure out which “Anglican church” they’re talking about, since not all people that say they are Anglicans are members of the Episcopal Church or even the Anglican Communion. I don’t believe the Anglican Church in North America (which Justy90 is apparently a member of) is part of the Anglican Communion (yet). I heard from another ACNA parishoner that they put a moratorium on female ordination, though another ACNA member can confirm that.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

It is and Anglicans do have 7 Sacraments but they are not valid in the eyes of the Catholic Church. For one you sect ordain homosexuals, and women. That is completely “unorthodox” and a complete departure from historical Christianity.

This post is loaded with fallacies and distortions. First of all, you are doubtlessly citing apostolicae curae by Pope Leo XIII calling Anglican orders null and void. This point has been rehashed a zillion times on CAF by learned Anglicans. In the early twentieth century there were many consecrations of Anglican and Episcopal priests by the Old Catholic Dutch bishops of Utrecht. These Anglicans then consecrated other Anglican priests and bishops. They call this the “Dutch Touch” so, by Roman standards these bishops would have valid yet illicit sacraments. So the argument of invalidity is weak.

Saying “your sect ordains homosexuals” shows you do little homework there, Manny. The ACNA (Anglican Church of North America) does NOT ordain homosexuals. That’s the whole point of why they left the Episcopal Church, right? You are partially correct, sadly, that 6 out of the 28 constituent members of the newly-formed ACNA do indeed ordain women. Hopefully with time this innovation will finally be terminated and they will come to a consensus about this silliness of women’s ordination. To say that women’s ordination is a departure from historical Christianity is an understatement; I agree completely. I pray it ends for good! The vast majority of Anglican provinces globally do NOT ordain homosexuals and more do not ordain women than do actually.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

With Anglicanism, you have to figure out which “Anglican church” they’re talking about, since not all people that say they are Anglicans are members of the Episcopal Church or even the Anglican Communion. I don’t believe the Anglican Church in North America (which Justy90 is apparently a member of) is part of the Anglican Communion (yet). I heard from another ACNA parishoner that they put a moratorium on female ordination, though another ACNA member can confirm that.

At last, an honest post about Anglicans without prejudice or exaggeration! Kudos!

 

[RevDrNorth]

First Protestants? The last I look up that definition is anything against Catholicism. The CC and the Eastern Orthodox Church are in Schism. Just because they are, there that doesn’t Make Catholics Protestants. Next time, I suggest you look up what the word Protestant means.

Churches split from the RCC (schism) as the RCC their parent went into schism against the ancient church. Ask yourself why one patriarch was right and the others wrong???Not even Peter claimed that authority. Ask yourself why you developed innovative doctrines that were not part of the conciliar church.

Russian Theologian Alexis Khomiakov (1846) called all Protestants “crypto papists”.
He called the Pope the “First Protestant” and told a high church Anglican cleric when asked how to “shake off the pernicious effects of Protestantism” he replied “First shake off your Roman Catholicism”. Timothy Ware states that for the Russian Theologian, the two went hand in hand for Protestantism was “hatched from the egg Rome laid”. Protestantism and Roman Catholicism are “two sides of the same coin”.
See The Orthodox Church by Timothy Ware, pg 2.

As I say, it is all perspective.

 

[AJTheMan]

Yeah, generally, people who leave the Catholic church are tired with the ancient ways of the mass and generally go for the modern “services.” RCC and Orthodox are so incredibly similar that if the person in question is leaving to get away from the “Traditional” type mass, then I’m certain that Divine Liturgy is not for them. (Because really, you can count the differences between a Mass and Divine Liturgy on one hand. )

 

[Mannyfit75]

Churches split from the RCC (schism) as the RCC their parent went into schism against the ancient church. Ask yourself why one patriarch was right and the others wrong???Not even Peter claimed that authority. Ask yourself why you developed innovative doctrines that were not part of the conciliar church.

Russian Theologian Alexis Khomiakov (1846) called all Protestants “crypto papists”.
He called the Pope the “First Protestant” and told a high church Anglican cleric when asked how to “shake off the pernicious effects of Protestantism” he replied “First shake off your Roman Catholicism”. Timothy Ware states that for the Russian Theologian, the two went hand in hand for Protestantism was “hatched from the egg Rome laid”. Protestantism and Roman Catholicism are “two sides of the same coin”.
See The Orthodox Church by Timothy Ware, pg 2.

As I say, it is all perspective.

An very ignorant statement too. Russian Theologian Alex Khomiakov view is completely bias and based on that quote, “very Anti-Christian” or “Anti-Catholic.” The term papist is also insulting. What the nerve of the guy to make that stupid opinion. The Catholics have not defame Eastern Orthodox in later years, yet in this response you make. You seem to make them to be Anti-everything.

 

[Mannyfit75]

This post is loaded with fallacies and distortions. First of all, you are doubtlessly citing apostolicae curae by Pope Leo XIII calling Anglican orders null and void. This point has been rehashed a zillion times on CAF by learned Anglicans. In the early twentieth century there were many consecrations of Anglican and Episcopal priests by the Old Catholic Dutch bishops of Utrecht. These Anglicans then consecrated other Anglican priests and bishops. They call this the “Dutch Touch” so, by Roman standards these bishops would have valid yet illicit sacraments. So the argument of invalidity is weak.

Saying “your sect ordains homosexuals” shows you do little homework there, Manny. The ACNA (Anglican Church of North America) does NOT ordain homosexuals. That’s the whole point of why they left the Episcopal Church, right? You are partially correct, sadly, that 6 out of the 28 constituent members of the newly-formed ACNA do indeed ordain women. Hopefully with time this innovation will finally be terminated and they will come to a consensus about this silliness of women’s ordination. To say that women’s ordination is a departure from historical Christianity is an understatement; I agree completely. I pray it ends for good! The vast majority of Anglican provinces globally do NOT ordain homosexuals and more do not ordain women than do actually.

They are invalid regardless of their position. The Anglican Church was founded by Henry VIII, the adulterer and murderer.