Help choosing between orthodox catholic and lutheran

[Traditional_Ang]

More on St. Thomas More - And a Question for Protestants

Thomas More wrote (some of these really prove how glad the “Reformers” must have been when King Henry VIII “Solved their problem”
Various poems published in English & Latin (1503 to 1516)
The Life of John Picus (1510)
The Life of Pico della Mirandola (1510)
The History of King Richard the Third (1513-1516)
Utopia (1516)
Four Last Things (1522)
Response to Luther (1523)
The Answer to the Poisoned Book (1527)
Dialogue Concerning Heresies (1528-29)
Supplication of Souls (1529)
Confutation of Tyndale’s Answer (1532)
Apology (1533)
Debellation of Salem and Bizance (1533)
Treatise on the Blessed Sacrament against the Masker (1533)
A Dialogue of Comfort Against Tribulation (1534)
The Sadness of Christ (1535)
Please understand, this is NOT a complete list, St. Thomas More wrote letters & made speaches, including the one we’re so familiar wwith from “Man for all Seasons” (Yes, St. Thomas More actually said that, and extemporaneously)
luminarium.org/renlit/morebib.htm
thomasmorestudies.org/library.html

According to to one article, St. Thomas More might have written many of those works, and done his duties as the Lord Chancellor of England (or as a Prisoner in the Tower of London), with a Cervical Disc Lesion. Suffering from a couple of Disc Lesions myself for several years, I can tell you how painful and distracting they can be… The question for any non-Catholic needs to be - How could this brilliant man, who because of his position as the Chief Law Enforcement Official in England knew full well what the punishment for Treason was (Excruciating Drawing & Quartering - Thomas More’s beheading was a reprieve granted by King Henry VIII himself) have not just simply signed the paper giving his friend Henry Authority over the “Church in England” and his much longed-for divorce? Why not just sign the blasted paper and receive back his home, position and all of the wealth that had been confiscated from him (wealth he had used in many cases to benefit his poorer neighbors)? Why not just sign that paper granting King Henry VIII his divorce and authority over the “Church of England”, unless Christ had already given that Authority to the Pope in the same way A King gives Authority to a Prime Minister or Regent?

** For Onifir** - Try watching EWTN’s Coming Home & listening to some of their shows that deal with Catholic Doctrine. I’m going to disagree with some of my brothers here - Talk to the Lord about Submission and Obedience. and, Don’t be afraid to do it right in front of Him - I’m sure some of you’re fellow church goers will think that you’ve lost your marbles, nut I want you to be sure that you’re doing the right thing. Submission to Godly Authority is the two hardest thing for us to do. It’s real easy to say we’re going to obey God when there’s no one over us telling us what to do or what not to do. It’s completely different when we have listen & submit to the people that God puts over us, and when we have to do that, not just when it’s easy and when we want to, but when it’s hard and we just don’t feel like it.

I can pretty much guarantee you that, once you begin to get to the place where you can submit to Godly Authority, Protestantism will disappear into the Rear View Mirror, because you’ll begin to see the Authority of the Church as a Gift from God.

That will leave the Catholics and the Orthodox. I now consider myself a Maronite Catholic, and I’m beginning to accept their Spirituality… I think you can help yourself by making friends with both Catholics & Orthodox on this board, and by questioning them about their life lived “Hidden with Christ”.

I haven’t been as good about coming to this forum as I should be, but, if I know someone such as you will be asking questions, I’ll try to get here more often to answer your questions.

I hope this helps. Keep praying for me as I pray for you.

Your Brother & Servant in Christ, Michael

 

[Traditional_Ang]

I agree about attending services at each one and praying, although I obviously think the outcome will be different than others have stated. If you do attend an Orthodox church, try to go to one with English services.

Alveus

I would remind everyone the Orthodox have a Western Rite (or Rite of St. Tikkun?) which was/is based on some of the Anglican parishes that left PECUSA during the 1970’s & 1980’s. My father’s church was one of those which converted to Orthodoxy back in 1981… Anyone attending a “Western Rite” Orthodox Parish would generally believe they had fallen into an orthodox Anglican Solemn High Mass, except for the lack of the filioque, the prayers for the Patriarch and the “Beefed up” Epiclesis (Most of which are barely noticeable). Oh, and the presence of young people and children…

I’m sorry you feel that way about how things were done - A lot of Catholics received the “Heave-ho”, too, and it seems as if a lot of good posters were tossed out with some real screw-ups from both camps, and I don’t think it did anything to improve the quality of dialog or the quality of “Ghostly Counsel” some people received.

I don’t like what happened, but I don’t think it was for the reason you’ve stated… I really think the Mods thought we were out of control and looked at who they thought the worst offenders were. Because I do know I saw a lot of people I had begun to care about with “BANNED” under their Screenname.

There are POSITIVE THINGS about Orthodox Spirituality, and how Orthodox Pray both singly and in community. After we lost the fight to save Teresa Schindler-Schiavo, one of the Orthodox Brothers gifted me with a copy of the Akathist for the Repose of the Souls of those who have Fallen Asleep. I had a priest who thought he was an authority on Orthodoxy who had never seen this Prayer, let alone heard it, and yet I had a translation in English. I’ve had brothers & Sisters in Christ who lost loved ones - The first thing I do is give them this or pray it with them. The effect is amazing. Our Western Prayers don’t come close in how they touch the soul…

I have noticed one conflict (and it’s a real doozy) in Orthodoxy - Between the “Old Calendarists” (Julian Calendar) and the New “Calendarists” (Revised Julian/Gregorian Calendar).
Links
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_Old_Calendarists
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Calendarists
This article could almost have been written by a certain acquaintance of mine-
orthodoxwiki.org/Old_Calendarists

This one seems to be even worse than the one between the Sedevacantists and the rest of Catholicism. You can send a PM with your thoughts and which side of this you’re on if you want…

Your Brother & Servant in Christ, Michael

 

[DavidKays]

Hi! I am sorry to see that alot of people in these posts regard the Orthodox to a seperated group. I apologize that people who make statements as such do not really know the Orthodox and their place in the Apostolic Church. First of all let me say that the Orthodox Church did not start in the 11th century as many of you have stated. The Orthodox Church started in the year 33AD. Now for some reason Catholics think too much of themselves as the Church without consideration to who the Orthodox are. We are not part of the Church of Rome. Ok you have that for yourselves. There is no way the Eastern Church was originated by the Catholic Church. Your founding Apostle was St.Peter and for some of you that is all you think about. I ask you this. What do you think the other Apostles accomplished? It was they in large part who founded the Eastern Church. Just as St.Peter founded the Church in Rome so the other 11 founded the Eastern Church. This was to enable God to have intact the Apostolic College today with the Pope in Rome and the Eastern Bishops in the East. I am going to make a statement here that might set off some fireworks. That is Ok. The Eastern Orthodox Church must have Her rightful claim alongside the Church of Rome. Too long has this seperation 1000 years ago has dulled the memory of what the original Church was and what plan God wanted for it. Now you Catholics have a rightful claim in the Church. The Pope is the successor to St.Peter and is the Rock which Our Lord established. But you cannot be the Church without the Orthodox. She has a rightful claim in the government of the Church which was suppressed 1000 years ago. The Late Pope His Holiness John Paul II wrote that the Church must breathe again her 2 lungs. He even wrote that the Church of Rome is willing to go back to the same relationship with the Orthodox as these 2 Churches had in the beginning. He has constantly apologize to the East for the actions of the Catholic Church especially those events which led to the seperation. He was willing to affirm that the Catholic Church was in error in dealing with the East and therefore his own actions hopefully will be read by the Orthodox as a means to be reconciled. That will all it take to finally put this damn fued ( excuse my language ) to rest. Let us bury it once and for all. Can’t any of you see that it was the devil who started this and he must be enjoying this feud for the longest time. I say to the Orthodox to reflect on the great gestures of the Late Holy Father and the present one so we can go on united to help God to evangelize and witness for Him to the world. All the Popes are waiting for this. They have apologized. It is up for us to accept the apology and to receive again in our arms Our Catholic brothers and sisters. That is all it will take. We are the same Church. It must drive Our Lord crazy to see what we have done to His Church. Let us then make Him happy and be willing to be reconciled. God Bless!

 

[searn77]

Alveus

I would remind everyone the Orthodox have a Western Rite (or Rite of St. Tikkun?) which was/is based on some of the Anglican parishes that left PECUSA during the 1970’s & 1980’s.l

There’s actually 2 main western rites used: The Rite of St. Tikhon (which is based off the Anglican liturgy) and the Rite of St. Gregory (which is based off the Catholic Tridentine mass). And you’ll also hear of ROCOR resurrecting old western liturgies here and there.

 

[Alveus_Lacuna]

It is up for us to accept the apology and to receive again in our arms Our Catholic brothers and sisters. That is all it will take. We are the same Church.

If you listened to your bishops and the fathers, you would know that the Branch Theory is Anglican in origin and is a great heresy. It destroys the Orthodox ecclesiology. I believe in ONE Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, not two or three or four of them, nor one which is divided into different sects.

I am just like you in that the separation is painful and I wish for us all to be one. But for that, they have to return to the Orthodox faith.

As far as “all it taking” is a big hug, give me a huge break. Do you have any idea how complicated and ingrained the differences between our churches are? Our understanding of the nature of the bishopric is different. Our ecclesiastical structures are irreconcilable. Our theological paradigms are vastly different. Accepting an apology doesn’t give us the same understanding of the nature of the Church.

I pray for unity as well, but only real unity, not one where everyone pretends that we are the same.

 

[steve_b]

We Orthodox know and proclaim that we are the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church of the Creed, without revision of alteration of the original Christian Church.

With all due respect,

• what makes you one?
• what makes you Catholic?

and I would also add, it’s not apostolic behavior to seperate from Peter.

 

[Deacon_JAR]

The Eastern Orthodox didn’t exist until the 11th century, and Lutheranism didn’t exist until the 16th century. That should give you something to ponder as to which one is the true Church established by the big man himself in the first century

David

May the Peace of the Lord be with you all. I am a member of the Catholic Church and I am very proud of my Catholic faith and traditions. Neverhtelss, I consider anyone who loves the Lord with all his(her) mind, soul, heart, and strength as my brother or sister in Christ. Ecumenism movement is very important in our Christian world.On the other side, we cannot deny events and facts in the history of the Christian faith. Only two of the three denominations our friend mentioned can make a claim of "apostolic succession: Catholic and Easter Orthodox. The apostolic roots of Christianity can only be traced to these two denominations.

 

[steve_b]

Hi! I am sorry to see that alot of people in these posts regard the Orthodox to a seperated group. I apologize that people who make statements as such do not really know the Orthodox and their place in the Apostolic Church. First of all let me say that the Orthodox Church did not start in the 11th century as many of you have stated. The Orthodox Church started in the year 33AD. Now for some reason Catholics think too much of themselves as the Church without consideration to who the Orthodox are. We are not part of the Church of Rome. Ok you have that for yourselves. There is no way the Eastern Church was originated by the Catholic Church. Your founding Apostle was St.Peter and for some of you that is all you think about. I ask you this. What do you think the other Apostles accomplished? It was they in large part who founded the Eastern Church. Just as St.Peter founded the Church in Rome so the other 11 founded the Eastern Church. This was to enable God to have intact the Apostolic College today with the Pope in Rome and the Eastern Bishops in the East. I am going to make a statement here that might set off some fireworks. That is Ok. The Eastern Orthodox Church must have Her rightful claim alongside the Church of Rome. Too long has this seperation 1000 years ago has dulled the memory of what the original Church was and what plan God wanted for it. Now you Catholics have a rightful claim in the Church. The Pope is the successor to St.Peter and is the Rock which Our Lord established. But you cannot be the Church without the Orthodox. She has a rightful claim in the government of the Church which was suppressed 1000 years ago. The Late Pope His Holiness John Paul II wrote that the Church must breathe again her 2 lungs. He even wrote that the Church of Rome is willing to go back to the same relationship with the Orthodox as these 2 Churches had in the beginning. He has constantly apologize to the East for the actions of the Catholic Church especially those events which led to the seperation. He was willing to affirm that the Catholic Church was in error in dealing with the East and therefore his own actions hopefully will be read by the Orthodox as a means to be reconciled. That will all it take to finally put this damn fued ( excuse my language ) to rest. Let us bury it once and for all. Can’t any of you see that it was the devil who started this and he must be enjoying this feud for the longest time. I say to the Orthodox to reflect on the great gestures of the Late Holy Father and the present one so we can go on united to help God to evangelize and witness for Him to the world. All the Popes are waiting for this. They have apologized. It is up for us to accept the apology and to receive again in our arms Our Catholic brothers and sisters. That is all it will take. We are the same Church. It must drive Our Lord crazy to see what we have done to His Church. Let us then make Him happy and be willing to be reconciled. God Bless!

I appreciate your sentiments for unity.

As you point out the popes have been trying to explore all kinds of avenues for reunification. . As you also point out, they have apologised. And Popes can speak for the entire Church. I’m not familiar with what efforts the EO are taking in this process

 

[searn77]

With all due respect,

• what makes you one?
• what makes you Catholic?

We’re one because our Church is one. I don’t know how else to put it. We are united into one Church.

And here’s a definition of why our Church is catholic from
oca.org/QA.asp?ID=193&SID=3

Orthodox Christians understand the word “catholic” word to mean “whole, complete, lacking in nothing.” Hence, when we say “one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church,” we mean that the one, holy, and apostolic Church is “whole, complete, and lacking in nothing.” The word “catholic” with a small “c” has nothing whatsoever to do with Roman “Catholic” with a capital “C”. If it were incorrect to use the word “catholic” in the Creed, we wouldn’t use it. And every English translation of the Creed that I have ever seen uses the word “catholic.”

When “catholic” is defined as “universal,” it does not mean in the sense of “found everyplace in the universe.”

The word used in Romanian – like the word sobornyj used in the Slavonic version of the Creed – also means something like “council based,” but not in the sense of “conciliar,” but, rather, in the sense of “all parts coming together to form a whole” – hence “whole, complete, lacking-in-nothing.”

Apart from the word “catholic,” there really is no English word that implies “all parts coming together to form a unified, complete whole” other than “catholic.” Saying “one, holy, conciliar, and apostolic,” “one, holy, complete, and apostolic,” or “one, holy, all-around-the-world, and apostolic” simply does not work linguistically.

and I would also add, it’s not apostolic behavior to seperate from Peter.

By saying this I’m guessing you mean that it’s not apostolic behavior to separate from the Pope. Peter also founded the church at Antioch. Orthodox believe the Pope to have had a “first among equals” status. But if the Pope went into error, we wouldn’t follow him just because he is the “first among equals.” Obviously Catholics believe the Pope to be more than “first among equals” and they also believe that he didn’t go into error . We’ll just have to agree to disagree.

 

[steve_b]

I have. I am not convinced. To be fair to this website their arguments are their own. We (Orthodox) have our own arguments which I find more convincing (else why would I be Orthodox?) using the same Church fathers and the ecumenical councils as a reference. Agree or disagree; I know the Roman Catholic arguments for the Filioque and I do not accept them. If you want to know our objections check out an Orthodox forum or reliable source for the Orthodox position.

Do you have a recommendation that is acceptable to ALL EO?

With Catholics, we have the Vatican website, encyclicals, the Catechism of the Catholic Church, ALL online.

 

[steve_b]

We’re one because our Church is one. I don’t know how else to put it. We are united into one Church.

"Orthodox Christians understand the word “catholic” word to mean “whole, complete, lacking in nothing.” Hence, when we say “one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church,” we mean that the one, holy, and apostolic Church is “whole, complete, and lacking in nothing.” The word “catholic” with a small “c” has nothing whatsoever to do with Roman “Catholic” with a capital “C”. If it were incorrect to use the word “catholic” in the Creed, we wouldn’t use it. And every English translation of the Creed that I have ever seen uses the word “catholic.”

When “catholic” is defined as “universal,” it does not mean in the sense of “found everyplace in the universe.”

The word used in Romanian – like the word sobornyj used in the Slavonic version of the Creed – also means something like “council based,” but not in the sense of “conciliar,” but, rather, in the sense of “all parts coming together to form a whole” – hence “whole, complete, lacking-in-nothing.”

Apart from the word “catholic,” there really is no English word that implies “all parts coming together to form a unified, complete whole” other than “catholic.” Saying “one, holy, conciliar, and apostolic,” “one, holy, complete, and apostolic,” or “one, holy, all-around-the-world, and apostolic” simply does not work linguistically. "

And here’s a definition of why our Church is catholic from
oca.org/QA.asp?ID=193&SID=3

United into one Church …all parts coming together to form a whole" – hence “whole, complete, lacking-in-nothing.”

Does that describe EO? No.

 

[RobBahoura]

Hi,
2000 years ago Jesus set up one church and gave the authority to peter (Matt. 16:18). My friend that is the catholic church. I cant pick for you but i will say pray and tell the Holy Spirit Come and fill my heart with the truth which it did for me and if you study hard like i did you will see there is one true church and it is called Catholic. The catholic church is the Pillar and Foundation of the Truth.

 

[searn77]

United into one Church …all parts coming together to form a whole" – hence “whole, complete, lacking-in-nothing.”

Does that describe EO? No.

Why doesn’t it? We all have the same faith and are united into one Church so we are indeed catholic.

 

[steve_b]

By saying this I’m guessing you mean that it’s not apostolic behavior to separate from the Pope. Peter also founded the church at Antioch.

Answering this quickly and hopefully not derailing the thread,

• Popes ordain many bishops during their office. It doesn’t make those bishops a pope.
• Peter didn’t stay in Antioch. AND even the EO don’t make much of a deal over that because Antioch in order of ranking, isn’t it Constantinople, Alexandria Antioch, Jerusalem in that order?

s:

Orthodox believe the Pope to have had a “first among equals” status.

Jesus didn’t set it up that way. He made Peter really and truly the leader. Not just make believe leader.

http://forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=3544884&postcount=964

As Fr Ambrose who used to post here said, if one is first then all aren’t equal, and if all are equal no one can be first.
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=1587677&postcount=129

 

[searn77]

Answering this quickly and hopefully not derailing the thread,

• Popes ordain many bishops during their office. It doesn’t make those bishops a pope.
• Peter didn’t stay in Antioch. AND even the EO don’t make much of a deal over that because Antioch in order of ranking, isn’t it Constantinople, Alexandria Antioch, Jerusalem in that order?

Jesus didn’t set it up that way. He made Peter really and truly the leader. Not just make believe leader.

http://forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=3544884&postcount=964

As Fr Ambrose who used to post here said, if one is first then all aren’t equal, and if all are equal no one can be first.
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=1587677&postcount=129

We’re just going to have to agree to disagree. I don’t like debating in forums anymore (as the whole Orthodox vs. Catholicism thing has been debated many times before), it usually ends up being un-Christian altogether, and plus I’m supposed to be doing other things right now anyway. But I will say I don’t believe Peter was a make believe leader. I believe he was a true leader. As to what that leadership entails for a Pope to have is what I disagree with Catholics.

 

[Alveus_Lacuna]

United into one Church …all parts coming together to form a whole" – hence “whole, complete, lacking-in-nothing.”

Does that describe EO? No.

Of course it does. You might not be accustomed to any definition of completeness which does not include St. Peter as the first “vicar of Christ”(is He gone?!?!), but in the Orthodox Catholic Church, i.e. the REAL Catholic Church, we retain the original concepts surrounding the various apostolic thrones. There have been plenty of heretical popes even before the schism, as well as many of our own bishops have fallen into heresy at different times. But the Catholic Church is there, as St. Ignatius teaches, whenever the college of presbyters are united in harmony with an Orthodox apostolic bishop. That church is complete, and it lacks nothing. This bishop then works in a conciliar fashion with other bishops, and when they need to combat heresy they come together to make united synodal decrees, but even a Patriarch only has immediate control over his local jurisdiction. Each bishop has full authority in his diocese, and the image of the Church is complete there.

Even if “catholicism” was meant to be understood as a church which is distinguished by it’s multi-ethnic and international character, I don’t see how Orthodoxy would fail the test. The Church is comprised of Greeks, Slavs, Bulgars, Arabs, Native Americans (the Aleuts), Japanese, Americans, Australians, et cetera. It’s not a numbers game anyway, it is about who has retained the apostolic deposit in purity.

 

[Alveus_Lacuna]

As Fr Ambrose who used to post here said…

And where did he run off too after 18,000 posts? Oh, wait, that’s right, there was a purging because too many of you were converting back to Holy Orthodoxy…

 

[shondrea]

And where did he run off too after 18,000 posts? Oh, wait, that’s right, there was a purging because too many of you were converting back to Holy Orthodoxy…

You seem to hold yourself as quite the forum authority on the ins and outs of moderation and banning for someone who’s only been around 3 months

 

[steve_b]

Why doesn’t it? We all have the same faith and are united into one Church so we are indeed catholic.

You know that the Catholic Church has been committed to fostering unity through the efforts of many past popes.

Cardinal Kasper deals with ecumenism. With that process as you can imagine, it is necessary to talk with people who have the authority to speak for the whole. When you don’t have that kind of authority, then you have to talk to every single entity individually and negotiate with each seperately

http://www.zenit.org/english/visualizza.phtml?sid=17658

The Crisis of Ecumenism, According to Cardinal Kasper

A Delicate Project “Totally Different from Relativism”

*ROME, MARCH 7, 2002 *

Cardinal Walter Kasper made the following points.

1. "We are increasingly conscious of the fact that an Orthodox Church does not really exist,
2. it does not seem that Constantinople is yet capable of integrating the different autocephalous Orthodox Churches;
3. " there are doubts about its primacy of honor, especially in Moscow."

Taking the first point, IOW no ONE speaks or can make a decision for EO. Therefore, the notion of ONE Church doesn’t exist.

Your thoughts?

 

[steve_b]

Of course it does. You might not be accustomed to any definition of completeness which does not include St. Peter as the first “vicar of Christ”(is He gone?!?!), but in the Orthodox Catholic Church, i.e. the REAL Catholic Church, we retain the original concepts surrounding the various apostolic thrones. There have been plenty of heretical popes even before the schism, as well as many of our own bishops have fallen into heresy at different times. But the Catholic Church is there, as St. Ignatius teaches, whenever the college of presbyters are united in harmony with an Orthodox apostolic bishop.

You’re refering to Ch8 letter to Smyrna

See that you all follow the bishop, even as Jesus Christ does the Father, and the presbytery as you would the apostles; and reverence the deacons, as being the institution of God. Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop. Let that be deemed a proper Eucharist, which is [administered] either by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude [of the people] also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church. It is not lawful without the bishop either to baptize or to celebrate a love-feast; but whatsoever he shall approve of, that is also pleasing to God, so that everything that is done may be secure and valid.

As I’m sure you know, Polycarp and Irenaeus also came from Smyrna. Polycarp was a disciple of St John the apostle as was Ignatius, and Irenaeus was a disciple of Polycarp.

Irenaeus wrote in “Against Heresies”

AH Bk 3 ch 3, vs 2-4
2. Since, however, it would be very tedious, in such a volume as this, to reckon up the successions of all the Churches, we do put to confusion all those who, in whatever manner, whether by an evil self-pleasing, by vainglory, or by blindness and perverse opinion, assemble in unauthorized meetings; [we do this, I say,] by indicating that tradition derived from the apostles, of the very great, the very ancient, and universally known Church founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul; as also [by pointing out] the faith preached to men, which comes down to our time by means of the successions of the bishops. For it is a matter of necessity that every Church should agree with this Church, on account of its pre- eminent authority everywhere, inasmuch as the apostolic tradition has been preserved continuously by those [faithful men] who exist everywhere.

All must agree with Rome.