Help! Im turning orthodox!

[Magicsilence]

I dont know why but im feeling a pull towards orthodoxy.

I guess i have never really researched it before, but the more i read the more it seems like what they preach as doctrine is what the disciples believed.

Does anyone know how i feel?

Power hungry popes perhaps have jarred my confidence.

I dont really know much about the schism, except an article ive read from the Catholic encyclopedia which as far as i can tell is very biased.

Help!

In Christ.

Andre.

 

[DeFide]

Magicsilence:

Power hungry popes perhaps have jarred my confidence.

Peter’s shortcomings didn’t shake Jesus’ confidence in Peter.

Recommended Reading:

catholic.com/thisrock/2005/0504bt.asp

catholic.com/thisrock/1997/9702eaw.asp

catholic.com/thisrock/1997/9706eaw.asp

catholic.com/thisrock/1997/9711eaw.asp

 

[Matt16_18]

Magicsilence:

I dont know why but im feeling a pull towards orthodoxy.

That is Satan trying to get you to commit the mortal sin of schism. Resist this temptation!

 

[1ke]

Magicsilence:

I dont know why but im feeling a pull towards orthodoxy.

Perhaps your time would be better spent studying the Catholic faith, as only it holds the fullness of truth.

If you are pulled towards the eastern type of liturgy, prayer, spirituality, etc, then investigate the Eastern Rite Catholic Churches. They are in full communion with Rome.

Magicsilence:

I guess i have never really researched it before, but the more i read the more it seems like what they preach as doctrine is what the disciples believed.

And, so which Catholic teachings are at odds with what the Disciples taught? The Catholic Church preaches the doctrine taught by the disciples.

Magicsilence:

Does anyone know how i feel?

Actually, no, I don’t.

Magicsilence:

Power hungry popes perhaps have jarred my confidence.

Well, please name a power-hungry pope in your lifetime. Historically, popes have been good, bad, and indifferent. And, the same can be said of the Patriarchs of the eastern orthodox. Not all perfect men over there either.

So, really, personal character is beside the point. The Keys are the point-- and they were given to Peter, not to anyone else. The Pope holds authority from Jesus.

Magicsilence:

I dont really know much about the schism, except an article ive read from the Catholic encyclopedia which as far as i can tell is very biased.

Well, you do know that schism is wrong because Jesus specifically stated that we should be one body with one shepherd.

The orthodox religion is not the one protected from error and embodied with the fullness of truth. One day, hopefully, they will be reconciled with the truth church.

 

[Mickey]

Magicsilence:

Does anyone know how i feel?

Yes, I do.
As a Ruthenian Catholic, I highly respect my Orthodox brothers and sisters. Pope JP2 told us to breathe with both lungs–East and West. So I am comfortable adhering to the Eastern theological understanding while embracing the Western perspective at the same time.

Unity is important to me.

Meditate on the Gospel of St John Chapter 17.

Peace and blessings to you,
Mickey

 

[Magicsilence]

1ke:

Perhaps your time would be better spent studying the Catholic

faith, as only it holds the fullness of truth.

I HAVE. To death. I cant study it anymore. And the claim is of course made by the Orthodox ASWELL.

If you are pulled towards the eastern type of liturgy, prayer, spirituality, etc, then investigate the Eastern Rite Catholic Churches. They are in full communion with Rome.

I am a maronite Catholic. Its nothing to do with the spirituality, liturgy or prayers.

And, so which Catholic teachings are at odds with what the Disciples taught? The Catholic Church preaches the doctrine taught by the disciples.

I guess im stuck on; purgatory, pope being who he is now, mortal/venial sin, immaculate conception, indulgences, and the theology of Jesus appeasing the fathers anger as opposed to the Orthodox view of Christ conquering death once and for all.

Well, please name a power-hungry pope in your lifetime. Historically, popes have been good, bad, and indifferent. And, the same can be said of the Patriarchs of the eastern orthodox. Not all perfect men over there either.

Yes, but none of them are claiming infallibility.

So, really, personal character is beside the point. The Keys are the point-- and they were given to Peter, not to anyone else. The Pope holds authority from Jesus.

Hmm, why wasnt the bible just plain clear on these issues!

The orthodox religion is not the one protected from error and embodied with the fullness of truth. One day, hopefully, they will be reconciled with the truth church.

Says the Catholic Church, and they say the opposite about us.

Sigh.

In Christ.

Andre.

 

[DeFide]

Magicsilence:

… and the theology of Jesus appeasing the fathers anger as opposed to

This is the second time I’ve heard of someone assigning this modern Protestant spin to Catholic theology.

Where are you getting this misinformation?

 

[Eden]

Have you been reading the Eastern Christianity forums? I used to read those too. The posters over there can be persuasive, but after interacting enough, I recognized several instances in which an Orthodox poster was deliberately misrepresenting the Church to cast our teachings in a negative light and on other occasions deliberately misrepresenting an Orthodox position which would have cast the Orthodox in a negative light. I thought, if they need to resort to deception, are they really teaching truth?

You may enjoy Philip Blosser’s blog. He writes a lot about the Great Schism and the papacy:

www.catholictradition.blogspot.com/2005_01_01_catholictradition_archive.html

I hope you find his blog useful and enjoyable in your search for truth.

 

[Magicsilence]

DeFide:

This is the second

time I’ve heard of someone assigning this modern Protestant spin to Catholic theology.

Where are you getting this misinformation?

catholicintl.com/qa/qa.htm#Question%201

Catholic theology maintains that Christ served as the propitiation to the Father in order to appease the Father’s wrath against mankind, in turn, allowing everyone in the human race an opportunity to be saved. Christ does not pay the punishment of anyone, rather, he sacrifices his life in order to appeal to the Father’s mercy to be bestowed on mankind. The Father answers by offering salvation to man. Man must now respond by his free will. If he responds, then he can escape the punishment of hell.

I know a lot of people here dont like Sungenis, but you cant accuse him of bad theology, right?!

In CHrist.

Andre.

 

[Mike_D30]

Magicsilence:

I guess im stuck on; purgatory, pope being who he is now, mortal/venial sin, immaculate conception, indulgences, and the theology of Jesus appeasing the fathers anger as opposed to the Orthodox view of Christ conquering death once and for all.

I feel your pain, Im stuck on many the same things you are. I’m also stuck on Marian Dogmas, and if the term Co-redemptrix is made a Dogma, I do believe I would have to leave (yes I’ve read everything on this term from this site, and other sources and I can’t reconcile the use of that term). I looked into Orthodoxy, but really in my area they’re all ethnic Churches where outsiders really aren’t welcomed. I’m not Greek or Russian, so I would really be on the outside. I’ve been struggling with a lot, including evolution, Transubstantiation etc…

In essence I feel your pain, and you’re not the only one. I feel like I have one foot in. I’m totally empty but I still go to confession and Church in hopes it will pass and I’ll figure it out. Good luck and God bless!

 

[Eden]

This link from Dave Armstrong’s site links to the Contraception and Orthodoxy thread from last year:

www.socrates58.blogspot.com/2005/06/talk-about-damning-with-faint-praise.html

Maybe you won’t notice the Orthodox methods of deflection and distraction when the errors of their teachings come under scrutiny, but it is threads like this that ultimately made me decide to stop posting there.

 

[Catholic_Dude]

Magicsilence:

I guess im stuck on; purgatory, pope being who he is now, mortal/venial sin, immaculate conception, indulgences, and the theology of Jesus appeasing the fathers anger as opposed to the Orthodox view of Christ conquering death once and for all.

From what I have read the EO do believe in “purgatory” even if they dont call it that, they do have prayers for the dead.

As for the pope issue, thats a huge debate which is really the dividing line. I understand some of your concerns, but there is so much evidence both in Scripture and Tradition of the authority of the Apostolic See, I dont even know of a time I have read the ECF’s commenting on any other See.

The EO do believe in the different degrees of sin, thats what the Sacrament of Pennance exists.

As for the Immaculate Conception, again from what I have read they do believe Mary did not sin even if they dont use the term “immaculate conception”, there are many references to this.
The last Ecumenical Council they accept Nicea2, one of the lines says Mary is “without blemish” that means not tainted by sin.

The indulgence thing is not that big of an issue and it ties into the purgatory thing, I would bet there is similar ideas in EO.

As for the last point about “the Fathers anger”, thats a mixed bag with different views (not mutually exclusive), I have seen this comment by EO around here but from my conclusions its more a play on emotions rather than each group teaching a radically different theology.
I really dont know what your saying by:
as opposed to the Orthodox view of Christ conquering death once and for all
Where does the CC reject this, this is incorrect to say the CC doesnt believe/teach that Christ destroyed death.

I suggest you stick with the CC.

 

[DeFide]

Magicsilence:

I know a lot of people here dont like Sungenis, but you cant accuse him of bad theology, right?!

In CHrist.

Andre.

Sungenis is a former Protestant, who converted to Catholicism, but now attacks and misrepresents many Catholic beliefs. He is not a credible source, and yes, I can accuse him of bad theology.

You need to get your information from authoritative sources, not from dissident misrepresentation.

I know you know where to find the Catechism.

 

[Rand_Al_Thor]

Pax tecum!

Magicsilence:

I HAVE. To death. I cant study it anymore. And the claim is of course made by the Orthodox ASWELL.
If you’ve studied Catholicism so much, I wouldn’t expect some of your other responses. I really think you should study it more.

I guess im stuck on; purgatory, pope being who he is now, mortal/venial sin, immaculate conception, indulgences, and the theology of Jesus appeasing the fathers anger as opposed to the Orthodox view of Christ conquering death once and for all.
**You don’t think Catholics believe that Christ conquered death once and for all?
James said in his epistle that some sins are mortal.
Do you really think God would have allowed Himself to be carried in the womb of someone with the stain of original sin (or rather, could have been)? Jesus is the New Covenant, right? Mary carried him for 9 months; that makes her the ark of the New Covenant. Do you remember reading in the OT that the ark of the covenant was filled with mud?
You seem to have a Protestant understanding of indulgences. They are simply a form of penance. Plain and simple–that’s all they are. They can only be given AFTER one has gone to confession and been absolved of his or her sins. There were abuses of them, like when they were sold by some in the Middle Ages, but that is hardly what they doctrine is.
**
Yes, but none of them are claiming infallibility.
Again, this seems to be a Protestant understanding. The pope himself is not infallible. The pope is just as much human and sinful in nature as the rest of us (as some popes have no doubt proven). It is the OFFICE of the pope that is infallible. ONLY when he speaks on matters of faith and morals is he infallible…and even then it’s not really him that’s infallible–it’s the Holy Spirit guiding him.

Hmm, why wasnt the bible just plain clear on these issues!
I think it was. I would recommend reading Upon This Rock by Stephen K. Ray. He shows, in depth, how clear the Bible really is on the papacy.

In Christ,
Rand

 

[Matt16_18]

Magicsilence:

I guess im stuck on … the theology of Jesus appeasing the fathers anger …

Golly, where would Catholics ever get the idea that God the Father is offended by sin, and that atonement needs to be made for sin?And Moses said to Aaron, “Take your censer, and put fire therein from off the altar, and lay incense on it, and carry it quickly to the congregation, and make atonement for them; for wrath has gone forth from the LORD, the plague has begun.”
Numbers 16:46

You shall not afflict any widow or orphan. If you do afflict them, and they cry out to me, I will surely hear their cry; and my wrath will burn, and I will kill you with the sword, and your wives shall become widows and your children fatherless.
Exodus 22:22-24

Even at Horeb you provoked the LORD to wrath, and the LORD was so angry with you that he was ready to destroy you.
Deut. 9:8

Your hand will find out all your enemies;
your right hand will find out those who hate you.
You will make them as a blazing oven when you appear.
The LORD will swallow them up in his wrath;
and fire will consume them.
Psalm 21:8-9

He who believes in the Son has eternal life; he who does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God rests upon him.
John 3:36

 

[Magicsilence]

Rand Al'Thor:

Pax tecum!

Originally Posted by Magicsilence
*
I HAVE. To death. I cant study it anymore. And the claim is of course made by the Orthodox ASWELL.
If you’ve studied Catholicism so much, I wouldn’t expect some of your other responses. I really think you should study it more.*

I guess im stuck on; purgatory, pope being who he is now, mortal/venial sin, immaculate conception, indulgences, and the theology of Jesus appeasing the fathers anger as opposed to the Orthodox view of Christ conquering death once and for all.
**You don’t think Catholics believe that Christ conquered death once and for all?
James said in his epistle that some sins are mortal.
Do you really think God would have allowed Himself to be carried in the womb of someone with the stain of original sin (or rather, could have been)? Jesus is the New Covenant, right? Mary carried him for 9 months; that makes her the arc of the New Covenant. Do you remember reading in the OT that the arc of the covenant was filled with mud?
You seem to have a Protestant understanding of indulgences. They are simply a form of penance. Plain and simple–that’s all they are. They can only be given AFTER one has gone to confession and been absolved of his or her sins. There were abuses of them, like when they were sold by some in the Middle Ages, but that is hardly what they doctrine is.
**
Yes, but none of them are claiming infallibility.
Again, this seems to be a Protestant understanding. The pope himself is not infallible. The pope is just as much human and sinful in nature as the rest of us (as some popes have no doubt proven). It is the OFFICE of the pope that is infallible. ONLY when he speaks on matters of faith and morals is he infallible…and even then it’s not really him that’s infallible–it’s the Holy Spirit guiding him.

Hmm, why wasnt the bible just plain clear on these issues!
I think it was. I would recommend reading Upon This Rock by Stephen K. Ray. He shows, in depth, how clear the Bible really is on the papacy.

In Christ,
Rand

Please dont misunderstand. I fully comprehend all these issues. What gets me is the lack of CLEAR biblical support for them and the lack of early Church writings on them.

Also, if they were part of the original deposit of faith, wouldnt the Orthodox have therefore had to reject them?

And the mortal/venial sin, ITS clear that the scripture is not talking about mortal sin as we understand it. And its not James, its the First epislte of Saint John, chapter 5; 16-20.

There is a sin unto death

: for that I say not that any man ask.

Ask as in pray. Evidently, we pray for mortal sins, what he is talking about is the sin against the Holy Spirit, which cannot be forgiven and therefore cannot be prayed about.

I know, I know, I know, I know all about infallibility. What gets me is that none of the popes seemed to know they were infallible up until recently.

Sigh, all the evidence for these things are all based upon a little phrase here or there, or a sentence ambiguiosly interpreted. No clear evidence which should settle the debate.

IN Christ.

andre.

 

[DeFide]

Magicsilence:

And the mortal/venial sin,

I’m perplexed. What is your alternative to the distinction about the gravity of sin? Does even the slightest sin lead to damnation?

From 1 Cor 3:

According to the grace of God given to me, like a wise master builder I laid a foundation, and another is building upon it. But each one must be careful how he builds upon it, for no one can lay a foundation other than the one that is there, namely, Jesus Christ. If anyone builds on this foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, or straw, the work of each will come to light, for the Day will disclose it. It will be revealed with fire, and the fire (itself) will test the quality of each one’s work. If the work stands that someone built upon the foundation, that person will receive a wage. But if someone’s work is burned up, that one will suffer loss; the person will be saved, but only as through fire.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

DeFide:

I’m perplexed. What is your alternative to the distinction about the gravity of sin? Does even the slightest sin lead to damnation?

I totally understand the question about the sin distinction. Now, I personally don’t have a problem with the concept of “mortal” and “venial” sins, but I do find it annoying when people seem to be focusing on sins in a quantitative way. In my experience, this quantification of sins can often be connected to an unnatural preoccupation with whether sins are mortal or not.

(Do I *have * to repent for this one, or would it just be nice?)

On the larger topic, I’m not worried about people becoming Orthodox, because I believe that the Roman and the Orthodox churches will be one soon. Lord, make my belief a reality!

I am a bit worried at your reason for considering Orthodoxy, however. What’s wrong with Papa? Why wouldn’t God give the Church one shepherd, even if that shepherd (like Peter) was subject to sin?

Catholics never say that the Pope is perfect, of course. Nor that his teachings are perfect, per se. Just that when the Church, through the person of the Pope, comes to a powerful conclusion through the leading of the Spirit, that teaching has been tested and found to be true.

If you believe that God cannot speak through the Church, by all means, Roman Catholicism is not for you. But if you believe God *can * speak through the Church, then I don’t see where you can call into question our Papa.

 

[DeFide]

Prodigal_Son:

I am a bit worried at your reason for considering Orthodoxy, however. .

Just for the record, even though I was quoted in the response, I am not considering Eastern Orthodoxy.

 

[Amadeus]

Dear Andre:

This is quite personal but are you at liberty in informing us whether you are of Lebanese (or orther Arab) descent or you are of Irish/English (or of other Western) descent?

Because I still have to come across any Maronite Catholic wanting to “convert” to Orthodoxy. For one, there is no “counterpart” of the Maronites in Orthodoxy, Eastern or Oriental.

Besides, the Maronites have a unique perspective and their theology, ecclesiology, and liturgical patrimony are decidedly Eastern. Of course, they are very pro-Roman because, well, they never separated from Rome!

Having said that, it’s your personal journey and no one may begrudge you for that. This is one of the beauties of Catholicism: your free will is never circumscbribed!

Go for it, if you must, but, please, do not look at us, Roman Catholics, as being overbearing or, perhaps, over the edge!