Orthodox Christianity - Am I missing anything?

[Spilkman]

After much reading, deliberation & prayer I am ready to convert to the Greek Orthodox Church. It appears that they have “stayed-the-course”, have a more unblemished history, i.e., no crusades, inquisition, misappropriation of funds [think abuse of “indulgences”], etc. Surprisingly I found their apologetics more defensible and easily palatable than answers I discovered in the Catholic theology. Their responses to such issues like the Eucharist, Immaculate Conception appear to be more simplistic yet cerebral; consequently, I ponder serious conversion to the OCA. Enlightenment welcomed. Thank you and God Bless and have mercy on us all.

 

[Alexius]

It seems you have it figured out…what are you looking to find out?

Prayers and petitions,
Alexius

 

[Spilkman]

I suppose I’m looking for assurance… affirmation that I’m not missing “anything”. Either human nature is capricious or the “Holy Spirit” permits numerous interpretations and application of “The Truth”, which is obvious and perplexing to say the least… OR, as many individuals have told/implied to me… maybe it all just doesn’t matter. The Creator knows what is in your heart. Go to the Orthodox Church, Catholic Church, Methodist, Baptist, etc. - - does it REALLY matter… Just stop fighting!

 

[Genesis315]

You might want to read up on how the treated the Nestorians and Monophysites and how they treated Latins in Byzantium before the infamous Latin crusades sacking Constantinople. The East has its fair share of violence. The ship has been tossed by the storms, both in our common past and in the times after the schism.

As for the abuse of indulgences by the Orthodox, this article may prove enlightening:

pravoslavie.ru/enarticles/041125153738

 

[tomarin]

I suppose I’m looking for assurance… affirmation that I’m not missing “anything”. Either human nature is capricious or the “Holy Spirit” permits numerous interpretations and application of “The Truth”, which is obvious and perplexing to say the least… OR, as many individuals have told/implied to me… maybe it all just doesn’t matter. The Creator knows what is in your heart. Go to the Orthodox Church, Catholic Church, Methodist, Baptist, etc. - - does it REALLY matter… Just stop fighting!

no, it has to matter, if only because these different sects and denominations make contradictory claims about the truth. they can’t all be correct, therefore not all religions are equally true. some are “truer” than others.

catholics and orthodox can’t both be right about the meaning of the scriptural verses that establish petrine authority, for example.

 

[Nita]

You’ll be joining a Church, but not the only Church Jesus ever proclaimed as “My Church” - that is, the Church built on the rock of Peter.

Nita

 

[Isa_Almisry]

You’ll be joining a Church, but not the only Church Jesus ever proclaimed as “My Church” - that is, the Church built on the rock of Peter.

…whom the Bible shows founded the Church at Antioch, and continues there in the person of Patriarch Ignatius IV.

 

[SemperFidelis]

…whom the Bible shows founded the Church at Antioch, and continues there in the person of Patriarch Ignatius IV.

Yes, but not even the East before the split recognized Antioch as the Apostolic See or that any Patriarch was above the Primacy of the Pope in Rome.

 

[Ghosty]

You might want to read up on how the treated the Nestorians and Monophysites and how they treated Latins in Byzantium before the infamous Latin crusades sacking Constantinople. The East has its fair share of violence. The ship has been tossed by the storms, both in our common past and in the times after the schism.

As for the abuse of indulgences by the Orthodox, this article may prove enlightening:

pravoslavie.ru/enarticles/041125153738

Note that the Eastern Orthodox actually sold forgiveness of sins, in place of the Sacrament of Penance, as opposed to the Latin practice of selling dispensation (indulgence) from the assigned penances after receiving the Sacrament.

Peace and God bless!

 

[BlaineTog]

We have the popemobile.

 

[RobNY]

After much reading, deliberation & prayer I am ready to convert to the Greek Orthodox Church. It appears that they have “stayed-the-course”, have a more unblemished history, i.e., no crusades, inquisition, misappropriation of funds [think abuse of “indulgences”], etc. Surprisingly I found their apologetics more defensible and easily palatable than answers I discovered in the Catholic theology. Their responses to such issues like the Eucharist, Immaculate Conception appear to be more simplistic yet cerebral; consequently, I ponder serious conversion to the OCA. Enlightenment welcomed. Thank you and God Bless and have mercy on us all.

Unfortunately, as fallen human beings, there are evils perpetuated across different denominational lines. Any Church which is to any significant degree catholic will embrace both saints and sinners. I caution you against choosing based on how human beings have acted-- for good or evil-- because it is very easy to be disillusioned by one’s fellow religionist in a world of sinners.

Before you make any final decision, I would say that you should make sure you understand what people mean by “development of doctrine,” and see whether that makes the Catholic position more or less plausible to you. Heretics no more than the orthodox (meaning orthodox in the sense of those with right belief, not targeting the Orthodox) have appealed to the Scriptures and even to the traditional usages of the Fathers and deciding what is true has been a drawn out and difficult process. One interesting instance is with Eutyches:

Before continuing the narrative, let us pause awhile to consider what it has already brought before us. An aged and blameless man, the friend of a Saints and him the great champion of the faith against the heresy of his day, is found in the belief and maintenance of a doctrine, which he declares to be the very doctrine which that Saint taught in opposition to that heresy. To prove it, he and his friends refer to the very words of St. Cyril; Eustathius of Berytus quoting from him at Ephesus as follows: “We must not then conceive two natures, but one nature of the Word incarnate.” [Note 62] Moreover, it seems that St. Cyril had been called to account for this very phrase, and had {301} appealed more than once to a passage, which is extant as he quoted it, in a work by St. Athanasius [Note 63]. Whether the passage in question is genuine is very doubtful, but that is not to the purpose; for the phrase which it contains is also attributed by St. Cyril to other Fathers, and was admitted by Catholics generally, as by St. Flavian, who deposed Eutyches, nay was indirectly adopted by the Council of Chalcedon itself.

But Eutyches did not merely insist upon a phrase; he appealed for his doctrine to the Fathers generally; “I have read the blessed Cyril, and the holy Fathers, and the holy Athanasius,” he says at Constantinople, “that they said, ‘Of two natures before the union,’ but that ‘after the union’ they said ‘but one.’” [Note 64] In his letter to St. Leo, he appeals in particular to Pope Julius, Pope Felix, St. Gregory Thaumaturgus, St. Gregory Nazianzen, St. Basil, Atticus, and St. Proclus. He did not appeal to them unreservedly certainly, as shall be presently noticed; he allowed that they might err, and perhaps had erred, in their expressions: but it is plain, even from what has been said, that there could be no consensus against him, as the word is now commonly understood. It is also undeniable that, though the word “nature” is applied to our Lord’s manhood by St. Ambrose, St. Gregory Nazianzen and others, yet on the whole it is for whatever reason avoided by the previous Fathers; certainly by St. Athanasius, who uses the words “manhood,” “flesh,” “the man,” “economy,” where a later writer would have used “nature:” and the same is true of St. Hilary [Note 65]. In like manner, the Athanasian Creed, written, as it is supposed, some twenty years before {302} the date of Eutyches, does not contain the word “nature.” Much might be said on the plausibility of the defence, which Eutyches might have made for his doctrine from the history and documents of the Church before his time.

There is truly much thinking which can be done about this. As time progresses, doctrine develops, clarifies, becomes more definite and precise. I think holding to some version of development of doctrine much helps the Catholic position, but you must question whether you think it does as well.

Best of luck in your search for truth.

-Rob

 

[FCEGM]

After much reading, deliberation & prayer I am ready to convert to the Greek Orthodox Church. It appears that they have “stayed-the-course”, have a more unblemished history, i.e., no crusades, inquisition, misappropriation of funds [think abuse of “indulgences”], etc. . . …

You are overlooking the fact that the vast majority of the ancient and medieval heresies sprang from the East:

1. Gnosticism
2. Marcionism
3. Monarchianism / Adoptionism
4. Montanism
5. Manichaneanism
6. Sabellianism
7. Subordination
8. Arianism
9. Nestorianism
10. Macedonianism
11. Monophysism
12. Monothelitism
13. Iconoclasism
14. Paulicianism/Bogamilism

…etc., etc.

And, to this list, one could also add (15) Islam.

The only ancient heresy that arose in the West was Pelagianism, and the West immediately condemned it, whereas the East entertained it as orthodox for a good long time. In medieval times, the only real Western heresies were Berengarianism and Catharism (Albigensianism), but Catharism/Albigensianism was merely a Western form of Paulicianism/Bogamilism, which sprang up in N. Spain/S. France thanks to refugees from the East.

These articles might be helpful to you:

bringyou.to/apologetics/num12.htm

catholic-legate.com/articles/filioque.html

bringyou.to/apologetics/a35.htm

bringyou.to/apologetics/CouncilNicaeaSixthCanon.htm

bringyou.to/apologetics/a30.htm

 

[twf]

Yes, the East often fell into heresy. There were times where ALL the Eastern patriarchs were heretics all at once. It was to Rome that the faithful had to look for orthodoxy, as we see in the example of St. Jerome:

“I follow no leader but Christ and join in communion with none but your blessedness [Pope Damasus I], that is, with the chair of Peter. I know that this is the rock on which the Church has been built. Whoever eats the Lamb outside this house is profane. Anyone who is not in the ark of Noah will perish when the flood prevails” (Letters 15:2 [A.D. 396]).

“The church here is split into three parts, each eager to seize me for its own. . . . Meanwhile I keep crying, ‘He that is joined to the chair of Peter is accepted by me!’ . . . Therefore, I implore your blessedness [Pope Damasus I] . . . tell me by letter with whom it is that I should communicate in Syria” (ibid., 16:2).

The East, in the form of the Byzantine Empire (remember the Emperor had virtual control over the Church) persecuted heretics. The Inquisition was really quite humane for the time. For example, only between 1 and 2% of those tried were executed.

Regardless, you can not base your believe in the True Church upon the actions of sinful human beings. The New Testament warns us that many will come in Christ’s name disguised as lambs when they are really wolves. Judas, one of the Apostles of Christ, betrayed him. Peter denied him three times. Jesus words regarding the Pharisees apply to corrupt Catholic hierarchs:

1 Then spake Jesus to the multitudes and to his disciples,
2 saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses seat:
3 all things therefore whatsoever they bid you, these do and observe: but do not ye after their works; for they say, and do not. (Matthew 23)

Remember also that Caiaphas, God’s own High Priest, condemned Our Lord to death. Did this invalidate his authority as the Priest of the Most High? Not at all. In fact by virtue of his office he “spoke by the Spirit”:

49 But a certain one of them, Caiaphas, being high priest that year, said unto them, Ye know nothing at all,
50 nor do ye take account that it is expedient for you that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation perish not.
51 Now this he said not of himself: but, being high priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus should die for the nation;
52 and not for the nation only, but that he might also gather together into one the children of God that are scattered abroad. (John 11)

God’s people have always been led by a single leader…Moses, then the judges, then the high priests. The ancient Church appealed to Rome to settle disputes and to provide a basis of universal unity. If you reject the papacy and the Catholic Church I don’t understand why you would default to Eastern Orthodoxy. Oriental Orthodoxy also claims to be the “one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church” of Christ. What makes Eastern Orthodoxy more viable than Oriental Orthodoxy? I, like St. Jerome, appeal to the Pope of Rome to learn where the Church is. If I were to leave the unity of the papacy I would have no way to determine which apostolic communion to join.

 

[prodromos]

You are overlooking the fact that the vast majority of the ancient and medieval heresies sprang from the East:

And were defeated in the East. We have developed a very strong immune system to heresy as a result.

Spilkman, you aren’t going to get much support to go Orthodox on this forum. Though their profiles do not show it, the vast majority of Orthodox members at CA have been banned, and those few who haven’t like myself, have little desire to post here anymore.

Have you visited an Orthodox Church yet? If not then I suggest you waste no time in doing so.

John

 

[prodromos]

God’s people have always been led by a single leader…Moses, then the judges, then the high priests.

As Ignatius states, that single person in the Church today is the Bishop. Each Church where the Bishop celebrates the Eucharist surrounded by his flock IS the catholic Church. It is complete in and of itself, lacking nothing. This reflects precisely the nature of God wherein each person of the Holy Trinity is 100% God.

The ancient Church appealed to Rome to settle disputes and to provide a basis of universal unity.

The ancient Church appealed to bishops all over the Church. You won’t find those letters quoted in Catholic apologetics though

John

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

After much reading, deliberation & prayer I am ready to convert to the Greek Orthodox Church. It appears that they have “stayed-the-course”, have a more unblemished history, i.e., no crusades, inquisition, misappropriation of funds [think abuse of “indulgences”], etc. Surprisingly I found their apologetics more defensible and easily palatable than answers I discovered in the Catholic theology. Their responses to such issues like the Eucharist, Immaculate Conception appear to be more simplistic yet cerebral; consequently, I ponder serious conversion to the OCA. Enlightenment welcomed. Thank you and God Bless and have mercy on us all.

The only thing missing is union with the true Church of Christ at the moment, and the Successor of St. Peter who Christ placed over the whole Church on earth. But that may be resolved in the near future with reunion to Rome getting closer and closer.

 

[snowfly]

After much reading, deliberation & prayer I am ready to convert to the Greek Orthodox Church. It appears that they have “stayed-the-course”, have a more unblemished history, i.e., no crusades, inquisition, misappropriation of funds [think abuse of “indulgences”], etc. Surprisingly I found their apologetics more defensible and easily palatable than answers I discovered in the Catholic theology. Their responses to such issues like the Eucharist, Immaculate Conception appear to be more simplistic yet cerebral; consequently, I ponder serious conversion to the OCA. Enlightenment welcomed. Thank you and God Bless and have mercy on us all.

That’s too bad,some people come, some go, this group decided that the Catholic Church is where they should be.

 

[maurin]

And were defeated in the East. We have developed a very strong immune system to heresy as a result.

Spilkman, you aren’t going to get much support to go Orthodox on this forum. Though their profiles do not show it, the vast majority of Orthodox members at CA have been banned, and those few who haven’t like myself, have little desire to post here anymore.

probably because your posts are not filled with the vitriol that others have shown: that same vitriol that keeps our great and ancient Churches apart–despite the fact that even though our expressions of theology may differ, our theologies are in fact quite close.

We pray for Reunification, and thank God for those Orthodox, like you, and Catholics who do not feed the fire of separation.

That they all may be one.

 

[maurin]

As Ignatius states, that single person in the Church today is the Bishop. Each Church where the Bishop celebrates the Eucharist surrounded by his flock IS the catholic Church. It is complete in and of itself, lacking nothing. This reflects precisely the nature of God wherein each person of the Holy Trinity is 100% God.
The ancient Church appealed to bishops all over the Church. You won’t find those letters quoted in Catholic apologetics though

John

rolleyes? why? The Holy Father consults with every Bishop in Communion with him prior to teaching ex-Cathedra. This is the Tradition of the Church, from the Council of Jerusalem, and on. The Bishops of your great Church, as well as the other National Orthodox Churches have been invited to the Councils of the last 100 or so years.

I am at a loss as to why you would make that statement.

 

[ALLGIRLS]

I’m wondering why you came to a Catholic forum with this question? Of course, we Catholics (the majority of the participants here) aren’t going to agree with you! If you really like the Eastern Litugy and Spirituality, check out the Eastern Catholic Churches in communion with Rome. Have you checked out the Eastern Catholic forum yet? You could probably learn a lot there. And I agree w/ a previous poster: don’t choose a church based on the actions (past or present) of the humans running it. We’re all sinners (even the Pope, he goes to confession too, more than most of rest of us!). The recently “planted” nondenominational church down the street probably has a near perfect record of sinlessness, but that doesn’t make their beliefs True, and there’ll no doubt be some scandel or “blemish” at some point, as all humans sin, and then you’re back to square one (that’s why so many nonCatholics end up starting their own “house churches”, b/c they just can’t find a perfect church “out there”, that’s because THEY DON’T EXIST!).

In Christ,

Ellen