In between Catholic Church and Orthodox Church

  • Thread starter Thread starter EIF5A
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
E

EIF5A

Guest
Hello,

I’ve been lurking for a while after a thought was placed in my heart about the Catholic Church. (That was months ago, and I’ve still been searching.) Currently, I’m a Protestant (of the charismatic persuasion, no…not the jumping up and down and rolling on the floor kind), but the idea of a universal, catholic church has been appealing to me.

Then I discovered that there was such a thing as the Orthodox Church who also claims to be the true catholic church. Confused, I looked into their history, and they seem to make sense as well.

So now, I’m just kind of torn because I do want to find a spiritual home, and on the one side, I’m leaning towards the Catholic Church because they do seem to be Catholic in the global, worldwide sense (and perhaps primacy of Peter is true), but the Orthodox Church is also appealing because, well, they don’t seem to have statues (yes, I know, that sounds like an idiotic reason) and they don’t have quite an intellectual, rational approach to every spiritual mystery. Both Churches place a heavier emphasis on the Virgin Mary/Theotokos that I’m still not quite familiar with (e.g., Queen of Heaven, Bride of God). (I still have baggage leftover from reading/hearing about the Catholic Church being the h*rlot and all that business…)

The one major issue is the Real Presence of the Eucharist. My current church believes Communion is only symbolic. But I feel drawn to believe that Christ our Savior is present. (This belief has been made more firm after reading The Dialog of St. Catherine of Siena.)

So in about the six months I first posted here, I’ve barely made 1 step and I’m just as confused now because of the claim by the Orthodox Church.

I don’t really have a question, but if anyone switched from RCC to OC or OC to RCC, I would love to hear your opinion.

(I’m still not sure why the Filioque was such a giant deal…it sort of seems like…semantics…? :confused: Please don’t stone me for saying that…)

Now I’m off to Mass (missed the one at 11:30 am). Thank God the parish that is two blocks away has multiple Masses… It’s actually been a while since I’ve been to Catholic Mass, even though the parish has been right there all along…
 
Hello, EIF5A!

I sympathize with your dilemma. On my own faith journey, trying to find the fullest, truest expression of Christianity, it came down to Catholic and Orthodox. In the end, I became a Catholic and I haven’t regretted it one bit. But both Churches trace back to the beginning, and they are the only two with plausible claims to being the true One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. Both have seven valid Sacraments.

For me, the part that convinced me was the UNITY of the Catholic Church. We are all under one hierarchy, under one Pope (the successor of Peter). I really believe that Christ wanted that kind of unity for the Church, and that this unity is something that all Christians should aspire to.

You may also wish to consider the Eastern Catholic Churches. They are churches in full communion with Rome and the Catholic Church, but they have different rites and practices that are more similar to our Orthodox brethren. There is a lot of variety (and I am not an expert in Eastern practices), but I understand many have a less Marian orientation than the Latin church and a more Eastern artistic style (more icons, fewer statues).

But having said all that, I recommend that if you feel called to the Catholic Church, study it! Go to RCIA classes at your local parish, talk to Catholics, and learn. I also have trouble with the statues and the Marian elements of the faith at first, but the more learned about them, the more I fell in love with them…not at the expense of devotion to Christ, but along side my growing devotion to Him.

Finally, perhaps some of our Orthodox brethren can join in on this, but my understanding was that the Filioque controversy was less about the actual text/semantics, and more about the WAY it was added to the creed. I think they felt they had been left out of the process and thus the edition wasn’t valid. I’d have to study-up some more on this to say anything about it definitively, but I do think it is probably more of an argument over process and Papal authority, which boiled over with the misunderstanding over the meaning of the words…sort of the ‘straw that broke the camel’s back, if you will.’

I’m not the Pope (thank God!), but if I was I think I would remove the Filioque from the creed. It wouldn’t change the actual meaning in any substantial way, since the three persons of the Trinity are consubstantial and it doesn’t much matter if the Holy Spirit proceeded from the Father or from the Father and the Son. But it would show, in a big way, that we (Catholics) are serious about moving toward reunification. Obviously it’s just one step among many that must be taken if reunification is going to happen, but I think it would count for a lot and show that ‘reunification’ doesn’t just mean ‘okay, all you Orthodox become Catholics now.’

Getting off on a tangent a bit 😉 God bless! I look forward to reading other replies to this interesting topic!
 
I think you’ll find many here who have been there EIF5A.

Given the specific issues you mention (which are very much core to either a Catholic or Orthodox identity), I suggest reading “Becoming Orthodox”.

It is the story (warts and all) of a group affiliated with Campus Crusades, who eventually joined the Orthodox Church. They struggled with the questions you bring up.

This book doesn’t deal with the question of Orthodoxy vs. Catholicism, so don’t expect it to help you with that question. For that I suggest a deeper study of the issues of authority which separate the two churches, because ultimately it is a question of authority, rather than doctrines they follow.
 
Hi,

Thanks for your reply. Today’s sermon (homily?) was about Our Lady of Fatima and how only she can provide peace. That kind of struck me because…I thought only God can provide…? Maybe Mary can pray on our behalf, but the wording was such that the Blessed Virgin Mary is the one providing peace to the world… I always thought Catholics pray to saints to pray on their behalf to God, not to provide directly to them…

I mentioned to my parents that I might consider the Catholic Church, and they were aghast because of the whole Marian devotion.

I do like some of the Byzantine/Greek music of the OC, but they seem to really not like musical instruments of any kind for their Liturgy…
 
EIF5A said:
Hello,

I’ve been lurking for a while after a thought was placed in my heart about the Catholic Church.
(and so forth)
Click to expand...
If you do not understand the historic context of the Filioque controversy, study THAT first. Find out on your own why this issue split the Church. If you still think that the cause of fracture in the Body of Christ on earth is not a giant deal, you may be better served by the Roman Catholic Church.
 
EIF5A said:
I do like some of the Byzantine/Greek music of the OC, but they seem to really not like musical instruments of any kind for their Liturgy…
Click to expand...
This was one of the hardest things to get used to. But you can get used to it. And nothing stops you from going out and enjoying some good Western-Christian music.
 
Kirovsakya said:
If you do not understand the historic context of the Filioque controversy, study THAT first. Find out on your own why this issue split the Church. If you still think that the cause of fracture in the Body of Christ on earth is not a giant deal, you may be better served by the Roman Catholic Church.
Click to expand...
I never said the cause of the fracture was not a big deal. And if “The Orthodox Church” by Bishop Kallistos Ware provides any perspective, it seems the issue was more historical and political than doctrinal. And even some theologians believe that the Filioque is by itself a semantic issue if it weren’t for other issues leading up to the final break at 1054.
 
EIF5A said:
I never said the cause of the fracture was not a big deal. And if “The Orthodox Church” by Bishop Kallistos Ware provides any perspective, it seems the issue was more historical and political than doctrinal. And even some theologians believe that the Filioque is by itself a semantic issue if it weren’t for other issues leading up to the final break at 1054.
Click to expand...
The Filioque was the proverbial straw that broke the camels back. It raised the question of whether or not the Bishop of Rome has the authority to demand conformity from other autocephalous Churches. Constantinople said no, Rome said yes. Over time Constantinople would be joined by the other churches of the day leaving only Rome.
 
I was once where you are. I searched for answers for a long time, then someone published this book: Jesus, Peter, and the Keys. It really explained from Catholic, Protestant, and Orthodox sources, the Primacy of Peter.

Totally cleared up my confusion and I have been happily Catholic ever since. You can probably get it from your local library or else through interlibrary loan, which your librarians can do for you.
 
EIF5A said:
I never said the cause of the fracture was not a big deal. And if “The Orthodox Church” by Bishop Kallistos Ware provides any perspective, it seems the issue was more historical and political than doctrinal. And even some theologians believe that the Filioque is by itself a semantic issue if it weren’t for other issues leading up to the final break at 1054.
Click to expand...
It is in fact a specific heresy which Roman Catholic and Protestant must renounce publicly before being received into Orthodoxy.

Bishop Kallistos, as one involved in an ongoing dialog with counterparts in the RCC on the topic of the unification of the churches, provides considerable perspective. In fact, I was in attendance at a workshop several months ago when he fielded a number of questions on the requirements of unification. Within that context, he declined to use the term “filioque” without the related term “heresy”.

The musings of “theologians” may be entertaining on some level, but the day Eastern Orthodoxy merges with Roman Catholicism - under false doctrine - is the day to start exploring Islam.
 
Kirovsakya said:
It is in fact a specific heresy which Roman Catholic and Protestant must renounce publicly before being received into Orthodoxy.

Bishop Kallistos, as one involved in an ongoing dialog with counterparts in the RCC on the topic of the unification of the churches provides considerable perspective. In fact, I was in attendance at a workshop several months ago when he fielded a number of questions on the requirements of unification. Within that context, he declined to use the term “filioque” without the related term “heresy”.

The musings of “theologians” may be entertaining on some level, but the day Orthodoxy merges with Roman Catholicism - under false doctrine - is the day to start exploring Islam.
Click to expand...
Is it a heresy because the Holy Spirit only proceeds from the Father, or because of the way “and the Son” was added?
 
EIF5A said:
Is it a heresy because the Holy Spirit only proceeds from the Father, or because of the way “and the Son” was added?
Click to expand...
It is heresy because the doctrine itself is false. It corrupts Trinitarian doctrine by redefining the relationship between the persons within the Trinity. This is not trivial. It is an attack upon the most fundamental foundation of all Christian doctrine.

The study of history, politics, dominance and submission is useful in establishing the human sources of various heresies and what motivated the players. Do not allow yourself to be sidetracked. Regardless of what motivated the heretic - heresy is heresy - before it is ever promulgated.
 
Kirovsakya said:
It is heresy because the doctrine itself is false. It corrupts Trinitarian doctrine by redefining the relationship between the persons within the Trinity. This is not trivial. It is an attack upon the most fundamental foundation of all Christian doctrine.

The study of history, politics, dominance and submission is useful in establishing the human sources of various heresies and what motivated the players. Do not allow yourself to be sidetracked. Regardless of what motivated the heretic - heresy is heresy - before it is ever promulgated.
Click to expand...
So how does “and the Son” corrupt the Trinitarian doctrine? The Three are Consubstantial --is “and the Son” to be a drastic misrepresentation of “through the Son”, which was not seen as heretical?
 
Oh I guess another thing I’m struggling with is the Immaculate Conception of Mary and how she’s the Ark of the New Covenant. (But there’s already a thread on that.)
 
EIF5A said:
Hi,

Thanks for your reply. Today’s sermon (homily?) was about Our Lady of Fatima and how only she can provide peace. That kind of struck me because…I thought only God can provide…? Maybe Mary can pray on our behalf, but the wording was such that the Blessed Virgin Mary is the one providing peace to the world… I always thought Catholics pray to saints to pray on their behalf to God, not to provide directly to them…

I mentioned to my parents that I might consider the Catholic Church, and they were aghast because of the whole Marian devotion.

I do like some of the Byzantine/Greek music of the OC, but they seem to really not like musical instruments of any kind for their Liturgy…
Click to expand...
The Greek Orthodox churches in America seem to all have organs, at least the ones I have been to.
 
andrewstx said:
The Greek Orthodox churches in America seem to all have organs, at least the ones I have been to.
Click to expand...
In Canada, at least, I know of one without an organ. Although that parish is pretty much the extent of my practical knowledge of Greek churches, so I have no other churches to compare it to.
 
Hi. I am not in communion with either of the communions you seem to be looking into, but I have been both Protestant (was raised Presbyterian) and Roman Catholic before being received into Coptic Orthodoxy (one of the churches of the so-called “Oriental” or non-Chalcedonian family that also includes the Ethiopian, Armenian, Indian, and other churches) a year or so ago. So I can relate to the feeling of not knowing where to go because you’re not sure if you’re in the right place. Heck, I was posting here when that really came to a head for me.

My advice: Don’t post or lurk at a place like this. I mean, sure you just made this thread, so go nuts with it for the time being, but once you have gathered enough perspective to know what members of both churches would have you believe or do, keep those in mind and try to step back from it for a while. The doors of the church are always open, but you don’t want to rush through them before you know what’s on the other side. Pray a lot. Ask God to show you what you cannot find by your own reasoning. Study the scriptures and try to find versions that are in accord with each church you are looking into (translations have their own biases, after all). I know that the RCC publishes their own version(s) of the Bible, and now there is the Orthodox Study Bible, which is not without problems but does provide what seems (to an outsider) to be a pretty decent introduction to Eastern Orthodoxy.

While it was given in the context of returning the believer to God, perhaps some aspects of this sermon will help you in your confusion. I know it always helps me, and the part about not leaving God’s side until He blesses you reminds me of how I felt when I was confused about where I should go. I asked, and He answered…and sometimes that’s just what we need to avoid being in paralysis due to the conflict between needing to be right and having no idea what is right, even if we’ve been over the evidence on all sides a million times. There is definitely a limit to where listening to arguments can take us, but there is no limit to what God can do.

God be with you in your journey, EIF5A.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top