For any Orthodox Converts: Why did you leave the Catholic Church for the Orthodox Church?

  • Thread starter Thread starter StMarina303ad
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Well, even I, and outsider to this particular question, can see that this cannot be.

The Orthodox church and the RC church does have a lot in common, yes, but there are also vital issues that seperate them. The bishop of Rome cannot BOTH be the supreme leader (under Jesus, of course) of all Christians, and only first among equal patriarchs.
IMO, I lean more towards the Orthodox view re: the Pope, even though I am now a Catholic. The Pope deserves primacy of honor and esteem. Thank God that the last 150 years of Popes have been good and holy men (even though I may disagree with some of their politics and/or theology)! It makes being under the Pope’s authority bearable 🙂
Either the Orthodox church is right, and the RC is wrong, or the Orthodox is wrong and the RC is right, or none of them are right. There are no forth option (“Both are the true church”).
I think that neither Catholicism nor Orthodoxy come to the complete truth by themselves, but that combined, both together come to as much truth as a church can have in this world.
They are two different churches, and both cannot be “the original church”.
Unless you believe in the two-lung theory… 😉
I, of course, do not believe that EITHER is the original church founded by Christ, although I DO believe that the Orthodox church in many ways comes CLOSER than the RC does…
Then where was the original church founded by Christ in the 1500 or so years before Luther came around? :confused:
 
Holy Orthodoxy was not borne of Mohammedism.
Protestantism was borne of Latin Catholicism.
I think everyone here would agree that “Holy Orthodoxy was not borne of Mohammedism.” But perhaps you meant
“Mohammedism was not borne of Holy Orthodoxy”?
 
LutheranDK,

I, too, reject Branch Theory, but …
Well, even I, and outsider to this particular question, can see that this cannot be.

The Orthodox church and the RC church does have a lot in common, yes, but there are also vital issues that seperate them. The bishop of Rome cannot BOTH be the supreme leader (under Jesus, of course) of all Christians, and only first among equal patriarchs.
Maybe so, but that doesn’t mean that people who believe the pope is the “supreme leader” can’t be in full communion with people who see him as “only first among equal patriarchs”.
 
Typical Mickey - your response as per usual is to offer a meaningless quip that takes less time to write than it does to properly brush ones teeth. Make a bold assertion, follow it with one of your trademark glib emoticons and move along. Such peace you have found in all-Holy Orthodoxy to spend such a great deal of time engaging in such semantics! Go ahead, keep it up… It isn’t great advertising, it makes my work easier still!

As to the wrong-headed assertion that “they are your children deal with it”, well if that were the case (its not) than one could say that they are your great grandchildren as you maintain Rome left YOU! So back at your doorstep the stork drops errant Rome and all her inglorious problems… If your wild ideas were accurate.

If your wild ideas were accurate, than it would ALSO be fair to say that the Muslims are the children of the christologically challenged East, and that the Bolsheviks and their godless reign of terror are the children of Orthodoxy. Were not the first communists to persecute the Orthodox in Russia actually baptized Orthodox themselves as babies?

A sensible person can see you ludicrous and problematic your assertions in fact truly are.
ASimpleSinner,

Don’t waste your time. I already tried pointing out the bolded portion above. It bounces off them like rubber, as if it were the most nonsensical rambling that they had ever heard.
 
LutheranDK,

I, too, reject Branch Theory, but …

Maybe so, but that doesn’t mean that people who believe the pope is the “supreme leader” can’t be in full communion with people who see him as “only first among equal patriarchs”.
I honestly don’t understand? :confused:

Either, the Bishop of Rome has juristiction over the entirety of Christendom, and to deny this is to be in error on a vital topic (= excluding full communion), or he only has jurisdiction over the diocese of Rome, and to believe otherwise is to be in error on a vital topic (= excluding full communion).

I honestly cannot see how BOTH can be possible, especially considering the various dogmas on the position and authority of the bishop of Rome.
 
I honestly don’t understand? :confused:

Either, the Bishop of Rome has juristiction over the entirety of Christendom, and to deny this is to be in error on a vital topic (= excluding full communion), or he only has jurisdiction over the diocese of Rome, and to believe otherwise is to be in error on a vital topic (= excluding full communion).

I honestly cannot see how BOTH can be possible, especially considering the various dogmas on the position and authority of the bishop of Rome.
I agree that BOTH cannot be possible. What I don’t agree with is your claim that therefore one or the other must be “error on a vital topic (= excluding full communion)”.
 
I am interested in this discussion. You say that the Pope of Rome left the earlier Church but surely Catholics say the Orthodox left the earlier Church. What evidence can you produce that it was Catholics who left Orthodoxy and not the other way round?

Another question I ask in all humility: if the Catholic Church was in error, why is it that it vastly outnumbers the Holy Orthodox Church in terms of numbers? Might this be because converts recognise that actually the Catholic Church was the original Apostolic Church and Orthodoxy an offshoot?

One further question if I may: How do you explain the ‘senior’ Patriachal role assumed by Pope St Clement [St Peter’s successor] when one of the earlier Church’s deposed of their rightful bishop and he told them to reinstate their bishop or be excommunicated. Surely this implies a seniority whereas you seem to be suggesting all Patriachs are equal.

So you are saying that before the Great Schism, the Bishop of Rome was ‘Patriarch of Rome?’ Is that correct?

What books can you refer me to which catalogues the Church before and after the schism. I lead a hectic life, would like to learn more but do not have the time to spend in libraries searching for dozens of books on the subject

Blessings and peace
 
IMO, I lean more towards the Orthodox view re: the Pope, even though I am now a Catholic. The Pope deserves primacy of honor and esteem. Thank God that the last 150 years of Popes have been good and holy men (even though I may disagree with some of their politics and/or theology)! It makes being under the Pope’s authority bearable 🙂

I think that neither Catholicism nor Orthodoxy come to the complete truth by themselves, but that combined, both together come to as much truth as a church can have in this world.

Unless you believe in the two-lung theory… 😉

Everyone is clammering for reunification but looking elsewhere in nature, there is overwhelming evidence of bio-diversity so why not in the social and cultural including Christendom?

Who is to say that this is what would happen and what will continue to happen as peoples grow and mature, finding alternative ways of expressing themselves!

The original Church split in two then the one split into two more and that one split into two more and so forth until ultimately we have 30,000 variants within Protestantism. Who is to say that is not natural evolution?

Blessings and peace

Blessings and peace

Then where was the original church founded by Christ in the 1500 or so years before Luther came around? :confused:
 
IMO, I lean more towards the Orthodox view re: the Pope, even though I am now a Catholic. The Pope deserves primacy of honor and esteem. Thank God that the last 150 years of Popes have been good and holy men (even though I may disagree with some of their politics and/or theology)! It makes being under the Pope’s authority bearable 🙂

I think that neither Catholicism nor Orthodoxy come to the complete truth by themselves, but that combined, both together come to as much truth as a church can have in this world.

Unless you believe in the two-lung theory… 😉

Then where was the original church founded by Christ in the 1500 or so years before Luther came around? :confused:
Everyone is clammering for reunification but looking elsewhere in nature, there is overwhelming evidence of bio-diversity so why not in the social and cultural including Christendom?

Who is to say that this is what would happen and what will continue to happen as peoples grow and mature, finding alternative ways of expressing themselves!

The original Church split in two then the one split into two more and that one split into two more and so forth until ultimately we have 30,000 variants within Protestantism. Who is to say that is not natural evolution?

Blessings and peace
 
I am interested in this discussion. You say that the Pope of Rome left the earlier Church but surely Catholics say the Orthodox left the earlier Church. What evidence can you produce that it was Catholics who left Orthodoxy and not the other way round?

History proves it…in 1054 Rome excommunicated it’s self from the rest of the Christian Orthodox Church with a bull they gave in the middle of a Divine Liturgy in Agia Sophia Cathedral in Constantinople…only the Orthodox maintain the Christian Creed (Nicean-Constantinoplian) without additions…there is more, too much for me to address right now.

Another question I ask in all humility: if the Catholic Church was in error, why is it that it vastly outnumbers the Holy Orthodox Church in terms of numbers? Might this be because converts recognise that actually the Catholic Church was the original Apostolic Church and Orthodoxy an offshoot?

Not that #s matter, according to Sacred Scripture wide is the path to destruction and many are on it - or something to that affect. But if you want convert #s - look on a map at Russia - the whole of Russia converted to Orthodox Christianity over the Catholic Church & over Islam (both of which Russia looked into, but rejected) - at least 20 million Orthodox Christians were killed during the first years of Communism - so they are no longer counted among our #, many Orthodox Christians were killed in Palestine after WWII to make room for the Jews coming from Europe after surviving the holocaust, in Greece for 400 + years the Turkish government kidnapped the first born son of every Orthodox Christian family and raised them as the Emperor’s sons teaching them to hate and kill Orthodox Christians, in the Sudan Orthodox Christians are being killed or taken as slaves - so sure for these and other reasons Orthodox #s may be smaller at this time. Just think, if the 20 million Orthodox in Russia hadn’t been killed there most of them would have married and had children, who would have had children, who would have had children by now - greatly multiplying the original 20 million #.
Any how, there are plenty of converts to Orthodoxy just here in the U.S. today - myself and hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of other individuals over the last several decades - as well as an abundance of entire Protestant churches. 2,000 people together in one expanded Protestant Church acrosss the U.S. in the 1980’s, another Church just 2 years ago in central Virginia and plenty before, in-between and since then. There are several books addressing some of the conversions that are taking place both here an in Europe.

One further question if I may: How do you explain the ‘senior’ Patriachal role assumed by Pope St Clement [St Peter’s successor] when one of the earlier Church’s deposed of their rightful bishop and he told them to reinstate their bishop or be excommunicated. Surely this implies a seniority whereas you seem to be suggesting all Patriachs are equal.

No it doesn’t. Some Patriarchs also threatened Rome with excommunication as well. If you’re going to read history, be sure not to read just a one-sided history - especially not one complied with biased commentary or someone like Jurgen’s who picks and chooses what to include so long as it appears to give support to the Roman Church while ending the quotes just before the original writer supports or substaniates the point of view the Orthodox continue to hold to this day.

So you are saying that before the Great Schism, the Bishop of Rome was ‘Patriarch of Rome?’ Is that correct?

Yes and No. Yes, the Bishop of Rome was a Patriarch of Rome, but No, in that he still is today the Patriarch of Rome. The Roman Patriarchate is one of the 5 original Patriarchates - it’s just separated itself from the Church and continues to remain separated from the Church because of the errors the Patriarchate of Rome currently maintains.

What books can you refer me to which catalogues the Church before and after the schism. I lead a hectic life, would like to learn more but do not have the time to spend in libraries searching for dozens of books on the subject

I will have to think about that for a while. But one place to start would be Eusebius - The History of the Church as it is an historical record of the Church during the first 300 years - of course in addition to it, are numerous lives of the Saints which have been recorded such as the Holy Martyr Marina around 303 ad and St. Christina about 100 years earlier, St. Gregory in the and St. Basil also in the and plenty of more which give the true and full accounts of what they believed and how they died for what they believed. It was the Orthodox Church.

Blessings and peace
Blessings and Peace to you also!
 
Hi StMarina303ad ,

Thank you for words of support it is nice to talk to one of my brothers in this chatroom. I hope to many more Roman Catholics join the Orthodox Church. It was the best move I made with GOD help…

You may like to know that a year ago we were bless to have Italian Orthodox Priest join our group and now serves at my parish. One day I made a remark and said that all at the Altar were of Itlain back ground serving the Divine Liturgy at our O.C.A. Church.

What would the Pope say about this? Hummmm!

Have a great and GOD bless you.

Frank J.
That is funny! You know there were many Eastern Churches in Italy - especially in Sicily. I am part Sicilian myself.
 
But, it WAS settled by St. Peter! St. James agreed with St. Peter! Please note, many people did speak, but, when St. Peter spoke, all listened to what he had to say. That was not the case with the others. There was debate, but, when St. Peter spoke, all listened.

The Decree from that Coucil was clearly decided by St. James. I can’t see how you can, or anyone else can get anything else from the words, "13 And after they had become silent, James answered, saying…19 Therefore I judge that we should not trouble those from among the Gentiles who are turning to God, 20 but that we write to them to abstain from things polluted by idols, from sexual immorality,[d]from things strangled, and from blood. 21 For Moses has had throughout many generations those who preach him in every city, being read in the synagogues every Sabbath.” - quoted from www.goarch.org - by bolding

I am glad you explained how you view this, but, this still doesn’t explain how we chose to sin. You’re telling me that Our BVM may have known at a young age knew the difference between right and wrong? That is, since she was free from all actual sin, our 3 year old BVM never gave St. Anne a hard time, or at 5 told St. Anne, “NO!” just because she chose not to?

Mary never sinned either as a child or as an adult.

How would such a girl be so holy without being in constant communion with God? Exactly she chose to remain in constant communion with God - it helped the fact that she had loving parents and that they gave her over to the Temple when she was weaned at age 3. She always maintained a heart that loved God above all other things.

At which point do the rest of us, who according to the Eastern Orthodox, say no to God, and decide to brake off communion with him, despite being in his good graces for the first few months or years of our life?

Well that is different for every person now isn’t it.

I can accept that it is by Mary’s choice she decided NOT to sin, but, I do not see how this could be her choice without God’s grace.

Good, so you understand that everyone born is born into & with God’s Grace. Mary is not an exception. Every single one of us is born with enough grace, the rest of us simply turn away from it (and hopefully back to it again - probably falling and rising millions of times in an average life-time) and Mary did not turn away from God’s grace even for a moment.

Also, how do we know St. Mary of Egypt NEVER sinned again? This means she was free from thought of sin, does it not? Is this legend or is this truth? I know the story of St. Mary of Egypt from, “Saints Behaving Badly,” but, I didn’t know of the walking on water thing. Is this something that came about later or did St. Zosimas of Palestine actually see it? Is this her actual life or was it something that was written down by people centuries later?

Sorry but Tradition of the Church as handed down by Icongraphy and hymnology is not myth. I have no idea what you may have read in “Saints Behaving Badly” I would venture to guess that it was not written by an Orthodox Christian because it is clear that you did not learn the entire truth of the Life of St. Mary of Egypt & because Saints do not behave badly - a particular person may have acted badly before they became a Saint - but again Saints do not behave badly.
 
A nice try but I do see a lot of deformation and a lack of Christianity given how various “orthodox” churches treat each other and how many orthodox churches now acknowledge the primacy of the Pope. Who or what is your final authority on earth if you were say a member of the Estonian Orthodox Church? Where do your subnational churches turn to when there are questions about the faith? I would hope the answer is easy but maybe not.
Is the question that hard to answer for the orthodox here? The silence speaks volumes.
 
Is the question that hard to answer for the orthodox here? The silence speaks volumes.
I shouldn’t really answer since I am no longer Orthodox, but I get the impression that there is currently no higher authority on Earth for members of the subnational Orthodox Churches. I suppose one could bring it up with the Ecumenical Patriarch, but he has no real authority to enforce decisions. In the first millennium, the Pope could have fulfilled the role, but since Orthodox Christians see him as being in schism, he can’t really help.

Does my answer help any, srp643? 🙂
 
Hi StMarina303ad

Glad to hear that your part Sicilian.

May GOD bless the growth the Sicilian Byzantine culture and I hope to see all of Sicily one day become Orthodox area once again.

Our brothers and sisters need embrace culture as Orthodox Christians and not Latins.

Good to hear from you.

GOD bless you.

Frank J.
 
Is the question that hard to answer for the orthodox here? The silence speaks volumes.
Last I heard, the Orthodox were suppose to “go find an Orthodox site and chat it out with them” instead of posting here.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top