If I convert to orthodoxy will I go to hell?

[RyanBlack]

The Eritrean Church already existed, but wasn’t autocephalous; it was under the authority of the Ethiopian Church, just as the Ethiopian Church had once been under the authority of the Coptic Church, having received autocephalous status in 1950. Pope Shenouda III granted a request from the Eritrean Church for autocepaly following Eritrean independence from Ethiopia. This is not a matter of the Pope of Alexandria having authority over the entire Oriental Orchodox communion. He has no authority over the Churches other than his own that is akin to the authority the Pope of Rome has over the entire Catholic Church. And in fact, the Ethiopian Church did indeed object to the manner in which autocephaly was granted to the Eritrean Church, though they reluctantly accepted it, likely as a matter of accepting it as a fait accompli.

 

[OrbisNonSufficit]

He has no authority over the Churches other than his own that is akin to the authority the Pope of Rome has over the entire Catholic Church.

Let me rephrase; he has authority Popes of Rome claim nowadays and that would go well with Church that is not centralized into Rome. Or so was my understanding.

This is not a matter of the Pope of Alexandria having authority over the entire Oriental Orchodox communion.

Does that mean he can grant autocephaly to independent Churches as Primus? I mostly thought Etritean independence from Ethiopia was concerning states, not Churches in this scenario. Hence either new states automatically get independence of their Church in Oriental Orthodoxy, or Coptic Church actually intervenes and gives formal autocephaly. Ethiopia accepted that reluctantly, as they did not like the manner in which Alexandria did that (something even Catholics can do that way- accept validity of Pope’s action but question it’s prudence).

Pope of Alexandria has duties:
Being the Chairman of the Supreme Ecclesiastical Court, he acts as the Supreme Judge in all matters of ecclesiastical discipline (seems it is not limited to his Patriarchate)
To promulgate missions to preach Christianity to various parts of the world (which effectively puts them under his jurisdiction according to Church canons)
To canonize saints, through the approval of the Holy Synod. A requirement of the Coptic Orthodox faith is that at least 50 years must pass from a saint’s death to canonization.
To consecrate bishops for various dioceses or bishoprics, to elevate bishops to the metropolitan dignity and to consecrate and enthrone Patriarchs
To guide the Coptic Orthodox Church of Alexandria in accordance to the orthodox faith.

 

[ziapueblo]

Maybe they met to discuss the war in Syria? I know that has caused Patriarch John X of Antioch to take another look at the Zoghby Initiative, or at least that is what I had been told.

ZP

 

[OrbisNonSufficit]

that means you believe Roman Catholicism is the true church of god fueled by a notion that Jesus founded his church on a man not the confession of St. Peter like the rest of Christianity holds to

Not rest of Christianity. Early Church Fathers clearly believe it was found on Peter, the man. Scripture clearly says Jesus called him “The Rock” and not just his confession. Anyway, Orthodoxy stands with Peter being Rock upon which Church was built too- or at least did historically.

That must make you think one church can not hold the exclusivities on truth

Technically yes. Even one human can hold exclusivities on truth… Truth is truth and it doesn’t change whether someone believes in it or not.

could it be the Catholic did not believe in that beginning that they held some how how cornered the truth or could it have taken over the centuries pride ego and power that lead to these beliefs in saying we are right and everyone else in the world is wrong

Huh? No, even First Christians had position of “we are right and pagans are wrong, heretics are wrong and all non-Christians are wrong, and even some Christians who hold heresy are wrong”.

I am just saying if the pope was infallible and supremacy why did it take till 1870 to make it a dogmactic position in the church

What? It wasn’t until 1870 to declare Papal Supremacy, and as I demonstrated above, there were Eastern Monks who professed inerrancy (inability to hold error) of Roman Church.

same with Mary being proclaimed

She was proclaimed by Angel to be Full of Grace. So would you say Angel was wrong, or is it forbidden for us to say that which Angel said?

I mean the Catholic has the antiquity going for it but doctrines like prays to the saints and Mary were more started as a practiced in the 500”s

Ehh I don’t quite think that is the case. 500 seems like pretty way over the line even for Protestants.

the rosary beads around the 1100’s Or so the scapular around the same time.

First, those are basically just new prayers and they conform to tradition of praying through Mary (see Greek Church for example, Akathist to Mary is beautiful). Second, 1100 seems, again, way overboard.

 

[OrbisNonSufficit]

Indullenges. and purgatory around 1100’s you see them start the idea that priests must be celibate around the 1200’s or so

Purgatory was belief held much, much earlier by Western Church. And purification of Souls is belief held also by East. Early Church clearly held those views as they are way too uniform in Historical Church to be started by one dissenter party. Celibacy of Priests is a discipline- so it can be changed (like East changed it). However, Priests in Early Church were continent- they did not have sex even if they were married. History proves this to be the case even before Council of Nicea.

The belief in doctrine of Transubstantiation was reinforced

Okay, look at it this way. Transubstantiation is not denied by Eastern Orthodox Church, and in different terms, they believe in what we do. Yet Transubstantiation was defined by Council of Trent. Hence even if we declared it that late, someone who was in Schism from us actually believed it too. This proves it is universal belief. Lutheran Church professes Real Presence too… even though they wouldn’t call it transubstantiation.

I mean the Catholic has the antiquity going for it

Exactly. Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ promised us that He will build a Church and protect it from error- that He will be with us always and that Holy Spirit will lead us. If there is a time where True Church and True Faith do not exist, then our Lord would have broken His promise. Do you believe our Lord broke his promise? Do you believe that when Lord said “I am Truth, Way and Life”, he was lying? If He is Truth, he can not lie, correct? He can not fail to uphold His promise to Church.

change at least I am not like my relatives

Luke 18:9-14 … especially part about Pharisee saying " I thank you, God, that I am not like other people—cheaters, sinners, adulterers. I’m certainly not like that tax collector! I fast twice a week, and I give you a tenth of my income."

With your knowledge about history or theology, I would suggest you to study a bit more before you attack Catholic Faith on Catholic forum. I am thankful for your points as they were done in good faith to help us see truth, but in the end you are misinformed. Most of what you wrote is simply false from historical point of view. God bless you.

 

[ioannes_pius]

Correct.

For “no one can be in doubt, indeed it was known in every age that the holy and most blessed Peter, prince and head of the apostles, the pillar of faith and the foundation of the Catholic Church, received the keys of the kingdom from our lord Jesus Christ, the savior and redeemer of the human race, and that to this day and for ever he lives” and presides and “exercises judgment in his successors” the bishops of the Holy Roman See, which he founded and consecrated with his blood [46].

 

[AlNg]

I know that has caused Patriarch John X of Antioch to take another look at the Zoghby Initiative, or at least that is what I had been told.

I thought that the Vatican already said it would not go along?

Maybe they met to discuss the war in Syria?

They might be shaking hands or touching elbows but would they pray together?

 

[Margaret_Ann]

why would it take 1800 years to pronounce dogmatically the pope as infallible and supreme and 1900 years for the church to proclaim dogmatically that Mary was born immaculate and is co redemtrix

1854 - Bl. Pius IX declared the dogma of the Immaculate Conception:

Accordingly, by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, for the honor of the Holy and undivided Trinity, for the glory and adornment of the Virgin Mother of God, for the exaltation of the Catholic Faith, and for the furtherance of the Catholic religion, by the authority of Jesus Christ our Lord, of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul, and by our own:

We declare, pronounce, and define that the doctrine which holds that the most Blessed Virgin Mary, in the first instance of her conception, by a singular grace and privilege granted by Almighty God, in view of the merits of Jesus Christ, the Savior of the human race, was preserved free from all stain of original sin, is a doctrine revealed by God and therefore to be believed firmly and constantly by all the faithful.

She is conceived (and born) without original sin.

The Catholic Church has not yet infallibly defined Her title as Co-Redemptrix although some Popes have mentioned it (e.g. Leo XIII, St. Pius X).

 

[OrbisNonSufficit]

And different I am stating if Rome was so sure about the two beliefs and the pope and the Virgin Mary why would it take 1800 years to pronounce dogmatically the pope as infallible and supreme and 1900 years for the church to proclaim dogmatically that Mary was born immaculate and is co redemtrix

first, Co-Redemptrix was never declared. Second, if Jesus was really God why did it take Church 300 years to declare? Same logic.

 

[ziapueblo]

I thought that the Vatican already said it would not go along?

True, but maybe they maybe take a look at it. The Melkite Church definitely would be able to look at the Zoghby Initiative again if their synod agrees.

ZP

 

[dochawk]

I thought that the Vatican already said it would not go along?

The key words here are “another look.”

 

[AlNg]

The key words here are “another look.”

OK. I would like to be optimistic, but unfortunately, I am not. I have read about the hostility on the part of Ukrainian Greek Catholics toward the Russian Orthodox Church. There is even a mural in a Catholic Church depicting Putin of Russia burning in hell and he is still alive and well supporting the rebuilding of the Russian Orthodox Church.

 

[dochawk]

I have read about the hostility on the part of Ukrainian Greek Catholics toward the Russian Orthodox Church.

First understand that the UGC is the historical Orthodox Church in the Ukraine. It entered communion with Rome several centuries ago. This wasn’t a split, but rather the actions of the synod of that church.

Now, fast forward to the mid 20th century. Russian Orthodox bishops and the NVKD (soviet secret police, predecessor to the KGB) arrested and imprisoned the Ukrainian Bishops as well as the priests that wouldn’t cooperate, and purported to hold a synod (the “False Synod of Lviv”) with the remaining priests (and no Ukrainian Bishops) and the ROC bishops, which purported to attach itself to the Russian church, and give it its properties, etc. That is the UOC-MP. The church itself went underground, with its remnants eventually being called the UGC. The EP authorized a church (decades ago), and over the EP/MP split, the AUOC tried to, well, split the difference, avoid the fight, or something about that.

So, yes, for some reason the Ukrainians are kind of hostile to the ROC . . . I wonder why . . .
:crazy_face:

And even before Lviv, the treatment of the Ukrainians by the Russian Empire and USSR was so bad that when the Nazi invaders were welcomed as liberators (although they turned out to be worse, but not even in the same league as later Soviet treatment).

The ROC claims is existence as the see of Kiev–the royal family fled Kiev to Muscovy in the face ov invasion, bringing their bishop with them. The people of Kieve, the center of slavic Orthodoxy, saw it differently . . .

It’s all well and good that Putin is backing the restoration of Christianity in Russia, but he remains the head of the entity (or successor to the entity) that has oppressed them for centuries. But, hey, that entity hasn’t done any new evil to them in, oh, a year or two now, and it only confiscated a small piece of the country because, well, it liked it, and Russians had moved there . . .

(I’ll add that I think that that mural should be taken down [in fact, should never have happened!] for a variety of reasons. It is wrong, it is uncharitable, and I’m only getting started. While the Ukrainian resentment of all things Russian has real causes,thhis expression is important)

 

[Margaret_Ann]

I have read about the hostility on the part of Ukrainian Greek Catholics toward the Russian Orthodox Church. There is even a mural in a Catholic Church depicting Putin of Russia burning in hell

I’m Ukrainian Greek Catholic and as I posted months ago, I am horrified that a mural in a UGCC church would depict VP in hell. He’s still living so he shouldn’t be depicted that way.

I’ve also read about how His Beatitude Sviatoslav Shevchuk has reached out to the Orthodox. In 2016, Pope Francis and the Russian Orthodox patriarch met as seen here: https://www.royaldoors.net/2016/02/two-parallel-worlds-interview-beatitude-sviatoslav/

In all inter-religious dialogue, it’s always the RCs and the Orthodox. Rarely have I seen anything where RCs, Eastern Catholics and Orthodox were in the same room actually talking things over. If there’s any “hostility on the part of Ukrainian Greek Catholics toward the Russian Orthodox Church”, it’s not one sided. The Russian Orthodox hierarchy isn’t amenable to the presence of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church either (and that’s the nicest way I can put it).

 

[AlNg]

Now, fast forward to the mid 20th century. Russian Orthodox bishops and the NVKD (soviet secret police, predecessor to the KGB) arrested and imprisoned the Ukrainian Bishops

How many Russian Orthodox priests were arrested and how many Russian Orthodox churches were demolished by the communists? USSR was a totalitarian dictatorship. There was even a Russian Orthodox church in Leningrad that was converted into a museum of atheism.

It’s all well and good that Putin is backing the restoration of Christianity in Russia, but he remains the head of the entity (or successor to the entity) that has oppressed them for centuries.

Putin has supported the restoration of the Russian Orthodox church and Ukrainian Greek Catholics put a mural up in their church depicting him burning in hell.

it only confiscated a small piece of the country because, well, it liked it, and Russians had moved there .

You know there is more to that story than what you are presenting here.

If there’s any “hostility on the part of Ukrainian Greek Catholics toward the Russian Orthodox Church”, it’s not one sided.

Maybe, but the head of your Greek Catholic Church in Ukraine says that they were betrayed by the Vatican after Pope Francis met with the Russian Orthodox Patriarch Kirill.
I saw a video on you tube of a religious procession by Russian Orthodox faithful near Kiev and people on the street were throwing eggs at the parade hitting a precious icon of the Holy Theotokos. Why does it matter so much that it is Russian babushkas that are parading and that it is a Russian monk who is holding high a precious icon of the Mother of God. Why not leave these Russian babushkas alone and respect their devotion to the Mother of God?
In the meantime, even though the head of the greek Catholic church in ukraine says he was betrayed by the Vatican, still italian Cardinal Pietro Parolin met with Patriarch Kirill to promote reconciliation and peace.

Patriarch Kirill and Parolin: Russian Orthodox and Catholics united for peace | Crux

 

[Margaret_Ann]

I saw a video on you tube of a religious procession by Russian Orthodox faithful near Kiev and people on the street were throwing eggs at the parade hitting a precious icon of the Holy Theotokos.

How do you know they were Ukrainian Greek Catholics?

 

[AlNg]

How do you know they were Ukrainian Greek Catholics?

You are right. I don’t know that.
i am hoping for the best and for peace and reconciliation between the various factions in Ukraine. Perhaps in the future we will see a brighter day.

 

[dochawk]

How many Russian Orthodox priests were arrested and how many Russian Orthodox churches were demolished by the communists? USSR was a totalitarian dictatorship. There was even a Russian Orthodox church in Leningrad that was converted into a museum of atheism

Indeed.

The hierarchy of the ROC was largely a department of the imperial bureaucracy for the later part of the Russian empire, and this largely didn’t change.

Those that had other ideas were, indeed, executed, imprisioned, etc.

Those that cooperated collaborated in the abuse of the Ukraine.

But I don’t see how being pressed themselves in any way makes the participation of ROC clergy in the murder Ukrainian clergy, the theft of their property, or the coup in church.

Putin has supported the restoration of the Russian Orthodox church and Ukrainian Greek Catholics put a mural up in their church depicting him burning in hell.

In different words: he is the current supporter of those that executed the faithful Ukrainian clergy and stole their churches . . .

He may in fact be acting in good faith, or he may be an opportunist. But expecting the abused to think well of the current master of their historical oppressors is a bit much.

(Yes, I also understand the Jews that sold their Chryslers when it merged with Mercedes, and the members of my family that wouldn’t buy Japanese cars half a century after the war was over).

You know there is more to that story than what you are presenting here.

Uhm, yes, the oppression is better than that, but there’s no good gloss to put on taking a piece of the next country over (and, yes, I’m aware of the Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo).

Maybe, but the head of your Greek Catholic Church in Ukraine says that they were betrayed by the Vatican after Pope Francis met with the Russian Orthodox Patriarch Kirill.

Again, hardly surprising–the UGC is not recognized by Rome as patriarchal soley because of ROC objection.

that said, this has gone far enough that it belongs in its own thread for Russia and Ukraine, not in one about conversion to orthodoxy . . .

 

[Margaret_Ann]

the members of my family that wouldn’t buy Japanese cars half a century after the war was over

My late father used to say: “Remember Pearl Harbor when you buy your Subaru!” He was a Ford & Chrysler man. He helped me get my first car (Ford) and my second car (Plymouth, which was part of Chrysler) before he passed away.

 

[AlNg]

there’s no good gloss to put on taking a piece of the next country over

I read that there is another side to this story. The Ukrainian Khruschev illegally transferred Ukraine from Russia to Ukraine in 1954. In 2014, Crimea overwhelmingly voted to return to Motherland Russia.
In any event there was talk that NATO had its eyes on Crimea to be used as a base with missiles aimed at Russia.

In different words: he is the current supporter of those that executed the faithful Ukrainian clergy and stole their churches . . .

I am interested to know where Putin said he supported the execution of Ukrainian clergy.
i think it was the other way around. At least from videos on you tube which show a Ukrainian Catholic clergyman calling for assassination and execution by hanging and to kick out all Chinese, Negros, Jews and Russians.
Further it appears that you are forgetting that under communism, Russian Orthodox clergy were also suppressed.