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

[srp643]

It appears you read the wrong things–and it makes you bitter. I will pray for you.

I don’t think so. Based on the number of your posts, it appears the bitterness is on your end brother. You feel compelled to spend hundreds of hours on a Catholic forum whereas I have little to no desire to spend anytime on the various orthodox websites (I’d rather spend the time praying for the orthodox, Protestants and non-Christians) since we already have the Truth. You are clearly still searching based on your actions, which is good. Many are trying to help you with your search so stay with us. Use your bitterness as a motivator.

I will always welcome sincere prayers so thank you, and likewise, we pray extensively for you and your separated brethren. My girlfriend is orthodox (one of the Russian versions although I think hers recently merged with another version) and she’s slowly but surely coming around which may be one of the best things I ever do in my life. I cannot even believe how galactically misinformed and ignorant she was but then again, Communism and the KGB are unequivocally diabolical. I would likely be as screwed up about Christianity as she was if subjected to what she went through. Now she is being fed the Truth.

Will you or another orthodox poster attempt to answer the objective questions I have posed above?

 

[Isa_Almisry]

That’s not how I remember it - besides, the logical conclusion to my line of thinking is that Rome is not capable of error, and that Honorius was not condemned for teaching heresy.

Does the thread still exist? Then the readers can judge for themselves.

See Above. Further, why wouldn’t they scrutinize the letter? Being from the Pope of Rome, I’m sure the council Fathers thought it was worth scrutinizing to learn what it taught

Scrutinize: inspect critically.
I scrutinize my students work. I scrutize my colleagues work. I scrutinize the union proposal. I don’t scrutinize accredidation findings, the legal decisions on schools, nor federal mandates.

(i.e., the orthodox faith). What you still can’t whitewash over is that after reading the letter, the council Fathers considered it “divinely written” as though by Peter himself.

I think we covered that I haven’t even try to whitewash this. Many times over. No need: they, and I consider Matthew 16 divinely written as though by God Himself, but neither they, nor I, read Vatican I into it.

Were the other letters considered by the Fathers to be “divinely written”?

Since they were the ones writing them, and we are talking about their content-they claim divine inspiration and protection for the Christ loving emperor- it’s not relevant.

No one said Pope Agatho’s letter is Pastor Aeternus, however, you can’t get around the more than plain text of the letter which states that Rome cannot err because of the divine promise of Christ to Peter.

And you can’t get around that the SAME Fathers (and the same Pope for that matter) anathamatized the Pope of Old Rome for erring.

Of course that would be the Orthodox solution. Unfortunately it is untenable based on the historical record, especially the witness of St. Maximus, Pope Martin, Pope Agatho, and the personal secretary of Honorius himself.

So we should call the Sixth Ecumenical Council a mistrial?

Sorry, the statute of limitations has expired. The Church has spoken. The case is closed.

Thank you for your kind words. I do like it here, but still prefer my hometown of Baltimore.

I’m afraid too hummid for my tastes. And scrapple

 

[Isa_Almisry]

Hilarious. One need not be an expert to make a simple observation. Does Russia recognize Estonian orthodoxy

Yes.

Btw, The Patriarch of Moscow, Alexei is ESTONIAN.

(not sure which version)

same version

the same it would some other version of Eastern Orthodoxy?

we only have one name brand.

My understanding is Russia does not.

You understand wrong.

So is Estonia currently in “schism” from the main Moscow version?

Some are in an uncanonical relationship, not schism.

But maybe Estonia is in union with other orthodox churches.

Like all of them, no matter which Estonian hierarchy you are attached to.

How about Latvia and Georgia?

Ditto, just more straight forward.

Au contrare, I didn’t know you were an expert on our councils. It appears you just lost twice, again a good effort but our Lord is all merciful. My question was simple, is a synod the same as an ecumenical council in your religion and are all versions of Eastern Orthodoxy present at these synods? I cannot believe this question is that difficult to answer, so a response is appreciated but I will look elsewhere.

No need. No they are not the same. There is only one version of Orthodoxy. If you are referring to all autocephalous Churches or ethnic Churches, perhaps, but not mandatory. Many Churches were not represented at the Ecumenical Councils: Constantinople I, the one that wrote our Creed, had NO representatives from Rome, and those there were not in communion with Rome at the time.

 

[Isa_Almisry]

Based on what I’ve read, I don’t think so brother. Sadly, not even close.

No bitterness on this end (I’m blessed to have been given the gift of faith in the one, holy Catholic and Apostolic Church) but alarming can be good on your end - our Lord demonstrated the effectiveness of tough love. For some people, this indeed can be very effective. I think a lot of people (especially non-Christians) need a huge wake up call and the status quo isn’t working that well it appears.

So again, am I accurate when I say that an ecumenical council is the final authority on matters of faith in at least a majority of orthodox churches?

All Orthodox Churches.

Maybe it is a local Patriarch

No.

, unclear.

very clear. We don’t place the Church’s infallibility in a single bishop.

 

[Isa_Almisry]

Good stuff, thanks. Not sure when the term “orthodox” came into being in this context but, yes, per numerous Early Church Fathers, the same churches that were ultimately under Peter (formerly called Simon), Deo gratias.

I know that St. Peter sojourned at Corinth, but I don’t know of any trip to Thessalonica. Do you have any info?

I’m curious, does anyone know if any of the other apostles had their name directly changed by the Lord?

Don’t you read your Bible?
Mark 3:17 "and James, the son of Zebedee, and John the brother of James (to them He gave the name Boanerges, which means, "Sons of Thunder “)”

 

[Isa_Almisry]

I don’t think so. Based on the number of your posts, it appears the bitterness is on your end brother. You feel compelled to spend hundreds of hours on a Catholic forum whereas I have little to no desire to spend anytime on the various orthodox websites (I’d rather spend the time praying for the orthodox, Protestants and non-Christians) since we already have the Truth. You are clearly still searching based on your actions, which is good. Many are trying to help you with your search so stay with us. Use your bitterness as a motivator.

I seem to recall Mickey was in your communion. He came to Orthodoxy while here. Am I wrong Mickey?

I will always welcome sincere prayers so thank you, and likewise, we pray extensively for you and your separated brethren. My girlfriend is orthodox (one of the Russian versions although I think hers recently merged with another version)

Are you the one that was claiming, despite all proof to the contrary, that the word Pope appeared in the Bible, back in January or so?

Why don’t you ask your girlfriend about these “versions” of Russian Orthodoxy, so we all know what you are talking about?

and she’s slowly but surely coming around which may be one of the best things I ever do in my life. I cannot even believe how galactically misinformed and ignorant she was but then again, Communism and the KGB are unequivocally diabolical. I would likely be as screwed up about Christianity as she was if subjected to what she went through. Now she is being fed the Truth.

by whom?

Will you or another orthodox poster attempt to answer the objective questions I have posed above?

I think I’ve answered the quesitons in question. Let me know if not.

 

[mtr01]

Does the thread still exist? Then the readers can judge for themselves.

It was my impression that all threads in the now defunct “Eastern Christianity” forum were deleted.

Scrutinize: inspect critically.
I scrutinize my students work. I scrutize my colleagues work. I scrutinize the union proposal. I don’t scrutinize accredidation findings, the legal decisions on schools, nor federal mandates.

It was my word. Perhaps “perused” would have been more appropriate.

I think we covered that I haven’t even try to whitewash this. Many times over. No need: they, and I consider Matthew 16 divinely written as though by God Himself, but neither they, nor I, read Vatican I into it.

Vatican I was simply an organic development of the doctrine. Only a “blind” person could not “see” the seeds in what Pope Agatho wrote, which was accepted by the council. Let’s face it, they didn’t have to call the letter “divinely written” - but they did; they could have said, “your doctrine is orthodox, but all that other stuff about Rome and erring is an error”, but they did not.

Since they were the ones writing them, and we are talking about their content-they claim divine inspiration and protection for the Christ loving emperor- it’s not relevant.

Of course you wouldn’t think so, but I would venture that saying something like “your rule shows divine inspiration”, and “we consider your letter divinely written as though by the hand of Peter himself” are qualitatively different.

And you can’t get around that the SAME Fathers (and the same Pope for that matter) anathamatized the Pope of Old Rome for erring.

I don’t have to get around it. In fact, I am on record as stating that Pope Honorius erred - in judgement. An error of judgement, however, is not an error of doctrine. After all, Pope Agatho writes of errors in doctrine (errors in faith).

So we should call the Sixth Ecumenical Council a mistrial?

Sorry, the statute of limitations has expired. The Church has spoken. The case is closed.

That is correct, the Church has spoken and the case is closed. However, that doesn’t prevent good people from misunderstanding what happened. When properly understood, all the facts make sense and jive perfectly, this is what I have been demonstrating.

I’m afraid too hummid for my tastes. And scrapple

I lived in New Orleans for seven years, getting my graduate degree at Tulane - talk about humidity - makes Baltimore feel like the Sahara . As for scrapple, I agree (more of a Philly thing though - it’s everywhere up there).

 

[Isa_Almisry]

It was my impression that all threads in the now defunct “Eastern Christianity” forum were deleted.

A pity.

It was my word. Perhaps “perused” would have been more appropriate.

yes. I am sure they perused, and scrutinized, the letter.

Vatican I was simply an organic development of the doctrine.

Cancer is an organic development too.

Only a “blind” person could not “see” the seeds in what Pope Agatho wrote, which was accepted by the council.

Oh, we don’t say we don’t see the seeds, and the fruit it bore in Rome. We just notice that it fell on shallow, stony ground in the Council.

Let’s face it, they didn’t have to call the letter “divinely written” - but they did; they could have said, “your doctrine is orthodox, but all that other stuff about Rome and erring is an error”, but they did not.

If you read the epistolary of the time, you’d understand their response. Hence the reason why the person posted the letter to the emperor.

Of course you wouldn’t think so, but I would venture that saying something like “your rule shows divine inspiration”, and “we consider your letter divinely written as though by the hand of Peter himself” are qualitatively different.

For what we are talking about, no.

I don’t have to get around it. In fact, I am on record as stating that Pope Honorius erred - in judgement. An error of judgement, however, is not an error of doctrine. After all, Pope Agatho writes of errors in doctrine (errors in faith).

hairsplitting which the Fathers didn’t engage in.

That is correct, the Church has spoken and the case is closed. However, that doesn’t prevent good people from misunderstanding what happened. When properly understood, all the facts make sense and jive perfectly, this is what I have been demonstrating.

you’re right up to the last point.

I lived in New Orleans for seven years, getting my graduate degree at Tulane - talk about humidity - makes Baltimore feel like the Sahara .

My sons and I were there (NO) two weeks ago, and then in TX, the Arizona, UT and NM desert. They thought NO was the only hot place we went. God help all those there.

I read something that epitomized my feelings about the place: a nun in the 1700’s there said it was a place “where religion is little known and practiced even less.” No wonder voodoo exists.

As for scrapple, I agree (more of a Philly thing though - it’s everywhere up there).

Really? When I lived in DC, all the Marylanders ate it, and it was every place I went there. I don’t recall ever seeing it in Philly, but I’ve only been there on visits.

 

[srp643]

Yes.

You need to educate yourself. Why did Russia (again, not sure which orthodox version) walk out?

Btw, The Patriarch of Moscow, Alexei is ESTONIAN.

Then he (if he was the one in AUTHORITY to decide) disrespected and dishonored his own countrymen and fellow Christians.

same version

we only have one name brand.

Clearly not. Exactly why Christ himself wanted one leader.

You understand wrong.

I don’t think so.

Some are in an uncanonical relationship, not schism.

Well that’s a nice way to say schisms upon schisms.

Like all of them, no matter which Estonian hierarchy you are attached to.

Ditto, just more straight forward.

No need. No they are not the same. There is only one version of Orthodoxy

Surely you must be kidding. You should be embarrassed to even make that statement.

If you are referring to all autocephalous Churches or ethnic Churches, perhaps, but not mandatory. Many Churches were not represented at the Ecumenical Councils: Constantinople I, the one that wrote our Creed, had NO representatives from Rome, and those there were not in communion with Rome at the time.

**A good try but more lies. I’m curious, did your 7th Ecumenical Council declare that there would be no need for future ecumenical councils? **

 

[srp643]

I know that St. Peter sojourned at Corinth, but I don’t know of any trip to Thessalonica. Do you have any info?

I guess the Pope can’t physically go everywhere. The Pope has not gone to many places but they still fall under his jurisdiction per the Early Fathers.

Don’t you read your Bible?
Mark 3:17 "and James, the son of Zebedee, and John the brother of James (to them He gave the name Boanerges, which means, "Sons of Thunder “)”

I do everyday but I haven’t memorized it. And what did Jesus say about this name change for James and John? And I’ll have to check but Simon was referred to as Peter going forward, whereas James and John were still referred to as James and John, yes?

 

[Peter_J]

very clear. We don’t place the Church’s infallibility in a single bishop.

Neither do we. As I Catholic, I believe that every time a new dogma is defined, infallibility is exercized.

Where I disagree with the Orthodox is when I reject the idea that the Pope – the first-ranking bishop, to be more precise – cannot ever define a dogma.

 

[srp643]

All Orthodox Churches.

No.

very clear. We don’t place the Church’s infallibility in a single bishop.

That’s great, thanks. So if one orthodox church has one interpretation and another has a wholly different interpretation, who’s right? Or if two orthodox churches don’t get along and find themselves in an “uncanonical” relationship, how is it fixed? Putin did a nice job helping two Russian orthodox churches get back together - it’s nice to see the Russian government straightening things out for Christians.

 

[srp643]

I seem to recall Mickey was in your communion. He came to Orthodoxy while here. Am I wrong Mickey?

Maybe he’s having second thoughts, and as I said, we pray for the orthodox.

Are you the one that was claiming, despite all proof to the contrary, that the word Pope appeared in the Bible, back in January or so?

Take a walk buddy, it appears you are in need of some help. Can you show me where I said the word Pope was in the Bible and why you would even ask based on my post?

Why don’t you ask your girlfriend about these “versions” of Russian Orthodoxy, so we all know what you are talking about?

I did. Until Putin stepped in, she told me there were several versions. So if different versions are in an uncanonical relationship, how do they view each other? If they view each other as having valid sacraments, what is the point of even reconciling?

by whom?

Roman Catholicism, of course.

I think I’ve answered the quesitons in question. Let me know if not.

I’ll check and thanks for your efforts.

 

[Mickey]

I seem to recall Mickey was in your communion. He came to Orthodoxy while here. Am I wrong Mickey?

Correct. Roman Catholic for 37 years–Byzantine Catholic for eight years.

In the truth of Holy Orthodox for one year and counting.

But of course, I am bitter because my post count is so high. LOL!

 

[Mickey]

**Take a walk buddy, it appears you are in need of some help. **

A brother asked Abba Isidore the priest, “Why are the demons so frightened of you?” The old man said to him, "Because, ever since the day I began practicing ascesis, I have striven to prevent anger from reaching my lips.
The Desert Fathers

 

[mtr01]

A pity.

Yes.

yes. I am sure they perused, and scrutinized, the letter.

And considered all aspects to orthodox, and in-line with previous councils. Not some parts of the letter, but all.

Cancer is an organic development too.

So are all of the current doctrines in the Orthodox Churches that have been developed.

Oh, we don’t say we don’t see the seeds, and the fruit it bore in Rome. We just notice that it fell on shallow, stony ground in the Council.

Isa, in order to back your untenable position, first you claim the council Fathers were insane, not you claim the council was “shallow, stony ground”, not rich fertile soil?

If you read the epistolary of the time, you’d understand their response. Hence the reason why the person posted the letter to the emperor.

Why don’t you explain your position. Obviously I don’t see what you’re reading into it.

For what we are talking about, no.

Of course there is a difference.

hairsplitting which the Fathers didn’t engage in.

Exactly, the fact of which weakens your case. In an older thread I provided evidence that the term “heretic” was used to describe those teaching heresy as well as those who didn’t quash heresy when they were able (I will try to find it again). Perhaps that is why St. Maximus, Popes Martin and Leo, and Honorius’s personal secretary felt the need to clarify that Honorius did not adhere to, nor teach heresy.

you’re right up to the last point.

The last point is correct. You have failed to offer any alternate explanation that makes sense in light of the facts. My explanation does.

My sons and I were there (NO) two weeks ago, and then in TX, the Arizona, UT and NM desert. They thought NO was the only hot place we went. God help all those there.

I read something that epitomized my feelings about the place: a nun in the 1700’s there said it was a place “where religion is little known and practiced even less.” No wonder voodoo exists.

The humidity is staggering - 30 seconds outside and you’re drenched in sweat.

Really? When I lived in DC, all the Marylanders ate it, and it was every place I went there. I don’t recall ever seeing it in Philly, but I’ve only been there on visits.

Not this Marylander . Since Philly is only 90 minutes from Baltimore, little wonder the popularity spread…but I’m almost positive it’s from Philly.

(ok I googled it According to wikipedia, “Scrapple is arguably the first pork food invented in America. The culinary ancestor of scrapple was the Low German dish called Panhas, which was adapted to make use of locally available ingredients. The first recipes were created more than two hundred years ago by Dutch colonists who settled near Philadelphia and Chester County, Pennsylvania in the 17th and 18th centuries[1]. Scrapple is strongly associated with Philadelphia, Baltimore, Washington D.C. and surrounding eastern Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Maryland and Delaware.”)

 

[Mickey]

Perhaps that is why St. Maximus, Popes Martin and Leo, and Honorius’s personal secretary felt the need to clarify that Honorius did not adhere to, nor teach heresy.

**The Sixteenth Session of the Third Council of **Constantinople

”To Honorius, the heretic, anathema!”

 

[Isa_Almisry]

Yes.

And considered all aspects to orthodox, and in-line with previous councils. Not some parts of the letter, but all.

So are all of the current doctrines in the Orthodox Churches that have been developed.

We don’t have development of doctrine. That’s been discussed a bit here.

Isa, in order to back your untenable position, first you claim the council Fathers were insane, not you claim the council was “shallow, stony ground”, not rich fertile soil?

I said that pursuing your line of reasoning leads to diagnosing them as insane (schizophrenic I believe was the OP). I claim the claims to supremacy fell on shallow, stony ground, not the Council.

Why don’t you explain your position. Obviously I don’t see what you’re reading into it.

Just reading it in context. So of like putting Henry’s title, given by the Vatican, in context: it didn’t mean Henry was the head of the Church.

Of course there is a difference.

Different divinities? I know only one.

Exactly, the fact of which weakens your case. In an older thread I provided evidence that the term “heretic” was used to describe those teaching heresy as well as those who didn’t quash heresy when they were able (I will try to find it again).

Proverbs 22:28 Pass not beyond the ancient bounds which thy fathers have set.

Perhaps that is why St. Maximus, Popes Martin and Leo, and Honorius’s personal secretary felt the need to clarify that Honorius did not adhere to, nor teach heresy.

To support a non-existent distinction?

The last point is correct. You have failed to offer any alternate explanation that makes sense in light of the facts.

Rhetoric. Conscienous Exageration. Hyperbole.

My explanation does.

The humidity is staggering - 30 seconds outside and you’re drenched in sweat.

Not this Marylander . Since Philly is only 90 minutes from Baltimore, little wonder the popularity spread…but I’m almost positive it’s from Philly.

I’ll take your word for it, because although I hail from the hog butcher (emeritus) of the world, I really don’t want to stick my nose, or anything else, in it. Spam is enough to give me the willies.

(ok I googled it According to wikipedia, "Scrapple is arguably the first pork food invented in America. The culinary

The term is loosely applied.

ancestor of scrapple was the Low German dish called Panhas, which was adapted to make use of locally available ingredients

.

The first recipes

There’s actually a recipe?

were created more than two hundred years ago by Dutch colonists who settled near Philadelphia and Chester County, Pennsylvania in the 17th and 18th centuries[1]. Scrapple is strongly associated with Philadelphia, Baltimore, Washington D.C. and surrounding eastern Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Maryland and Delaware.")

READERS! Consider yourself warned.