Orthodoxy vs Catholisism

[excaliber]

Hello everyone

I am starting RCIA soon, I would like to enter it free of ( Major) doubts.

I will be blunt, I am not sure who is 100 percent correct in the schism. Catholosism has far more influence on me so I side with Catholics…but at the same time Im devided.

How is it that a MAJOR responsibility such as Vicor of Christ Infalible teacher of Christs church…was completely unknown by Antioc-Constantenople
etc…etc…

How is it that when the Bishop of Rome made an adjustment in the creed…EVERY other sea responded negatively…and completely disagree on the procession of The Holy Spirit.

Someone was way of in there doctrine about athority in the church, AND The Holy Trinity!!!

Why was there no council called to
make sure on these matters?

Several possibilities come into play…

1. Papal Infalibility was always taught by the whole church, HOWEVER Rome was a little negligent and aloud the eastern churches to not teach Infalibility. There for alowing them to take communion while at the same time not believing the apostolic faith.
2. Rome was Correct about Infalibility. However using this athority to adjust the creed, BEFORE the whole had a council and agreed on Infalibility…stumbeled every other sea but rome into schism. And stumbeling other christians is very serious.
3. No other sea had any qlue papal infalibility existed, because it didn’t. Rome called no council but instaled papal infalibility on its own…because a council would not aprove it. And by independantly proclaiming a doctrine without the whole church, forced the orthodox to break away so they could keep orthodoxy in tact.

This seams to be the last major obstruction for me to overcome. Any help will be apreciated.

 

[excaliber]

Not to ask to many questions at once…but I am learning from Orthodox, that the Filique was not only a problem because (it seems) that Rome altered the creed without a council.
But also the altered creed presents
doctrine problems…MAJOR ONES. With the altered creed The Holy Spirit has two sources…without the altered creed (I am asuming) The Holy Spirit was believed to Proceed from The Father.

Also I was told that Rome made the new creed optional for some churches. This bothered me…Its true or not, why is it optional?

Also because the new creed defines an aspect of how the Third Person of The Holy Trinity interacts in the God head.
It can’t be optional, because Rome has stated that The Third Person of The Holy Trinity has two sources…so it must be believed in order to be unified in doctrine.

Im a little…well…Im a lot over my head in this one.

Also I hear that all of Orthodoxy is in the Catholic church…so where is Holy Fire in the Catholic church.
For example a blinding light is said to come from Jesus’s tomb,and light the tourches of only Orthodox.

Also they said that they don’t think what happened at fatima was done by The Holy Mother. But I hear they think the hail Mary is ok…even though it came from fatima.
They also said that Orthodox have visitation from her often.

WHAT’S GOING ON HERE???!!!???

 

[adstrinity]

oce.catholic.com/index.php?title=Filioque

Somebody else on this forum pointed me to this just today.

 

[Volodymyr]

ORTHODOXY CATHOLICISM

Dear friend, you are getting very upset about such things that (I risk anger of many theological minded persons on this sait) are of interest to theologians only.

Most important is to be member of Church and temple that draws you closer to Our Lord Jesus Christ and which will make your prayer and spiritual life better, which can give you a spiritual father and priest to hear confession and help you, to feed with holy Mysteries. All of other things you will suddenly be most certain of. For me, Orthodox church is such a place. But only way for you to know is to go to Orthodox church and pray with Orthodox, talk to priest, think of him to be confessor. Pray to Holy Spirit that you make good decision. But then relax and trust in God. Catolics are wonderful people of deep faith - they can help you. This is not to say indifferentism - but I think from your letter you are getting too confused by details and need to step back and let Holy Spirit lead you. Since Orthodoxy interests you - find out from Orthodox what it is like to live, pray and worship in Holy Orthodox faith.

Trust Holy spirit. Please, do not be vexated by controversies. Perhaps such people as I who write here slighty enjoy controversies, but they are not necessary and can be quite harmfu to such a person as you.

 

[excaliber]

ORTHODOXY CATHOLICISM

Dear friend, you are getting very upset about such things that (I risk anger of many theological minded persons on this sait) are of interest to theologians only.

Most important is to be member of Church and temple that draws you closer to Our Lord Jesus Christ and which will make your prayer and spiritual life better, which can give you a spiritual father and priest to hear confession and help you, to feed with holy Mysteries. All of other things you will suddenly be most certain of. For me, Orthodox church is such a place. But only way for you to know is to go to Orthodox church and pray with Orthodox, talk to priest, think of him to be confessor. Pray to Holy Spirit that you make good decision. But then relax and trust in God. Catolics are wonderful people of deep faith - they can help you. This is not to say indifferentism - but I think from your letter you are getting too confused by details and need to step back and let Holy Spirit lead you. Since Orthodoxy interests you - find out from Orthodox what it is like to live, pray and worship in Holy Orthodox faith.

Trust Holy spirit. Please, do not be vexated by controversies. Perhaps such people as I who write here slighty enjoy controversies, but they are not necessary and can be quite harmfu to such a person as you.

As Catholic or Orthodox I will be part of this controversy, I can’t avoid it.

It is important not to be devided. I must side with the Pope or the patriarcs.

It (seems) to me that you are saying…whatever improves my prayer life and makes me feel close to God is ok. However I have many Jehovahs witness family members that feel close to god, but are part of a MAJOR herasy.

I want to be part of the One True faith…there not both ok. Because
the doctrines are different.

but I will look at your link.

 

[Hesychios]

Hello everyone

I am starting RCIA soon, I would like to enter it free of ( Major) doubts.

I will be blunt, I am not sure who is 100 percent correct in the schism. Catholosism has far more influence on me so I side with Catholics…but at the same time Im divided.

How is it that a MAJOR responsibility such as Vicor of Christ Infallible teacher of Christs church…was completely unknown by Antioc-Constantenople
etc…etc…

How is it that when the Bishop of Rome made an adjustment in the creed…EVERY other sea responded negatively…and completely disagree on the procession of The Holy Spirit.

Someone was way of in there doctrine about athority in the church, AND The Holy Trinity!!!

Why was there no council called to
make sure on these matters?

In the first place, no bishop of Rome (aka Pope) ever called a universal Council on his own authority up until that time in history. In fact they never chaired a universal Council either, until after the schism.

Several possibilities come into play…

1. Papal Infalibility was always taught by the whole church, HOWEVER Rome was a little negligent and aloud the eastern churches to not teach Infalibility. There for alowing them to take communion while at the same time not believing the apostolic faith.

No. Papal infallibility did not exist as a belief in those days.

The bishop of Rome had no authority to teach such an idea, and no ability to stop eastern Catholics (for that is what they are) from taking communion in their own churches.

1. Rome was Correct about Infalibility. However using this athority to adjust the creed, BEFORE the whole had a council and agreed on Infalibility…stumbeled every other sea but rome into schism. And stumbeling other christians is very serious.

No, Rome was not correct or incorrect, Papal infallibility was not even discussed in those centuries. It really had nothing whatever to do with the schism, although today it is a major additional obstacle to reunion.

1. No other See had any clue papal infalibility existed, because it didn’t. Rome called no council but installed papal infalibility on its own…because a council would not approve it. And by independantly proclaiming a doctrine without the whole church, forced the orthodox to break away so they could keep orthodoxy in tact.

No, because papal infallibility did not exist as a doctrine. Neither did universal jurisdiction.

So of course the other Sees did not have a clue, but that is not the reason for the schism. The schism began because a Cardinal of the church, acting on his own authority broke relations with the See of Constantinople. I think they probably thought they were doing a good thing, but they were not, they were a confused couple of guys. This caused the Latin church to drift from Orthodoxy, and continue to morph in some amazing ways.

The Latin left Holy Orthodoxy and went into schism.

This seams to be the last major obstruction for me to overcome. Any help will be apreciated.

You want us to liberate you from your doubts?

Perhaps you should repost this in the Apologetics section.

Good luck and God Bless you.

 

[StRaphael]

…so where is Holy Fire in the Catholic church.
For example a blinding light is said to come from Jesus’s tomb,and light the tourches of only Orthodox.

Also they said that they don’t think what happened at fatima was done by The Holy Mother. But I hear they think the hail Mary is ok…even though it came from fatima.
They also said that Orthodox have visitation from her often.

I’ve given 12 reasons why I believe the “Holy Fire” is not miraculous @ forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=4126777&postcount=2, and though several of my friends here have issued rebuttals I will address them when I get a chance.

There are so many sites proving Catholicism to be the true Faith so I will explain how it is that, in light of EENS, genuine miracles can sometimes occur outside of the visible confines of the Catholic Church:
There are sometimes genuine miracles outside of the visible confines of the Church. The only true miracles of this sort are worked by and through persons of good faith (e.g. Raphael, Nicholas, and Irene of Lesvos) and in support of Catholic truth which the separated churches have maintained to varying degrees. There are certain Eastern Orthodox individuals, who in the Church’s words, despite being “outside the visible boundaries of the Church,” nonetheless retain an “imperfect communion with the Catholic Church” because they value and practice “the written Word of God; the life of grace; faith, hope, and charity, with other interior gifts of the Holy Spirit, as well as visible elements, all of these coming from Christ and leading back to Him.”{1} They can be very holy because they celebrate often the Sacraments they retained from the Catholic Church. Thus God grants these almost “crypto-Catholics” the charism of miracles.

1. God never works miracles that justify and sanctify error/heresy and schism. Thus, any Orthodox “miracles” of this breed are not real miracles by God, but the product of (1) demons; (2) imagination; (3) hallucination; (4) exaggeration; (5) legendary accretion; or (6) outright fabrication. Note also that many of the alleged miracles were not verified by and might not pass by the bar set by the strict Congregation for the Causes of Saints. Modern miracles must be subjected to the rigorous investigation of this holy body. Genuine miracles were worked by the most holy jurisdictionally Eastern Orthodox men Gregory Palamas and Sergius of Radonezh, which is why these two men are officially Catholic saints.{2}
2. We must point out some important differences between Catholic miracles and Orthodox miracles. There is nothing in genuine Orthodox miracles that cannot be found in genuine Catholic miracles. The converse is not true. (1) We see the stigmata virtually exclusively among Catholics, and (2) resurrection of the dead is much more often accomplished by Catholics. Also, (3) there have been many true miracles that have proved Catholic doctrines which the Orthodox have (often dogmatically) forsaken, e.g. Eucharistic miracles with unleavened as opposed to leavened bread, God endorsing the theology of St. Thomas Aquinas, and the Theotokos proclaiming her Immaculate Conception to St. Bernadette Soubirous.{3} Another salient difference is (4) whereas Catholic wonderworkers come from all classes and vocations, Orthodox wonderworkers, for all intents and purposes, come from only three groups: ascetics, clergy, and royalty (e.g. according to compelling reports,{4} Emperor and Autocrat Nicholas II of All the Russias). The former two categories are most often intertwined, e.g. Seraphim of Sarov and John Maximovitch of Shanghai and San Fransisco were ascetic clergymen who apparently worked many true miracles.{5} Moreover, (5) the number of wonderworking Orthodox people pales in comparison to the number of Catholic wonderworkers because the Church that the Lord Jesus Christ founded is and subsists in the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church, the Roman Catholic Church, and these Catholics are able to achieve even greater holiness than their separated brethren because they are in full and perfect communion with the only Church that possesses the fullness of truth.
3. So, for the aforementioned reasons, even genuine Eastern Orthodox miracles are no problem for Catholics: I have explained how that is possible in light of the true and infallibly defined dogma of Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus, reassured you that God does not work miracles to glorify falsehood, and distinguished in five ways the aspects of the (much smaller in number and more limited in scope) Orthodox miracles from the ubiquitous Catholic miracles which directly confirm the truth of Catholicism.

Notes and references in next post…

 

[StRaphael]

Notes and references in next post…

Notes and References
{1} UR (Unitatis redintegratio) 3. Cf. In Dominus Iesus, His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI (then Cardinal Ratzinger) says, "For those who are not formally and visibly members of the Church, 'salvation in Christ is accessible by virtue of a grace which, while having a mysterious relationship to the Church, does not make them formally part of the Church, but enlightens them in a way which is accommodated to their spiritual and material situation. This grace comes from Christ; it is the result of His sacrifice and is communicated by the Holy Spirit;'81 it has a relationship with the Church, which 'according to the plan of the Father, has her origin in the mission of the Son and the Holy Spirit.'82

(81) JOHN PAUL II, Encyclical Letter Redemptoris missio, 10.
(82) SECOND VATICAN COUNCIL, Decree Ad gentes, 2. The famous formula extra Ecclesiam nullus omnino salvatur is to be interpreted in this sense (cf. FOURTH LATERAN COUNCIL, Cap. 1. De fide catholica: DS 802). Cf. also the Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston: DS 3866-3872."
{2} St. Gregory Palamas is commemorated by Eastern Catholics on the Second Sunday of Great Lent, since, with a 200-page Votum, Cardinal Josyf Slipyj convinced the Vatican that Gregory Palamas is a saint; for part of the rationale, see thebananarepublican.blogspot.com/2008/07/sainthood-of-gregory-palamas-concluding.html. St. Sergius of Radonezh is on the Roman Martyrology for September 25.
{3} Will R. Huysman (7/30/2008), “List of Catholic Miracles” @ thebananarepublican.blogspot.com/2008/07/list-of-catholic-miracles.html. Hyperlinked sources coming soon.
{4} Will R. Huysman (7/28/2008), “List of Alleged Eastern Orthodox Miracles” @ thebananarepublican.blogspot.com/2008/07/list-of-alleged-eastern-orthodox.html. Hyperlinked sources coming soon.
{5} Ibid.

 

[Hesychios]

As Catholic or Orthodox I will be part of this controversy, I can’t avoid it.

There is a myth that you can avoid the schism by picking one or the other side and be “correct”. Unfortunately the schism is a reality and you cannot avoid it, you will be in schism no matter what you decide.

It is important not to be divided. I must side with the Pope or the patriarchs.

It (seems) to me that you are saying…whatever improves my prayer life and makes me feel close to God is ok. However I have many Jehovahs witness family members that feel close to god, but are part of a MAJOR herasy.

Me too, pray for them.

But this division between Orthodox and Latin Catholics is not that serious. Don’t go into a panic over it.

I want to be part of the One True faith…there not both ok. Because the doctrines are different.

In point of fact, everything…EVERYTHING the Orthodox church teaches is also taught in the churches under the Pope. The Papacy cannot condemn any of it, one reason is because that is where they came from, and they would be condemning their own ancestors and predecessors who believed nothing more than Orthodox believe today. Another reason is that there are some eastern Catholic churches which still teach what the Orthodox believe, even though they are under the control of the Pope.

The only complaint the Papacy has against Holy Orthodoxy is that the Orthodox will not accept the new doctrines coming out of the west which were unknown to them in the early church. That’s not the same thing as claiming the Orthodox teach anything false. There really is no false teaching in Orthodoxy from Romes perspective.

So you see, both churches teach what the Orthodox believe.

 

[Volodymyr]

Some document reassures you that God does not work miracles to glorify falsehood, and distinguished in five ways the aspects of the much smaller in number and more limited in scope of orthodox miracles from the ubiquitous Catholic miracles which directly confirm the truth of Catholicism.

Catolic miracles are better and more numerous? Very subjective and very difficult to verify. But for most Christians perhaps an argument of pettiness and arrogance.

Beware of those who tell you of miracles to help you believe. Satana can also do these. Seek what your Jehovah’s witness cannot give you - priests, holy mysteries, prayer. You will probaby most appreciate the great supernatural miracle of Christ’s holy Orthodox church to receive Holy Body and Worthy Blood of Christ in communion.

 

[josephdaniel29]

ORTHODOXY CATHOLICISM

Dear friend, you are getting very upset about such things that (I risk anger of many theological minded persons on this sait) are of interest to theologians only.

Most important is to be member of Church and temple that draws you closer to Our Lord Jesus Christ and which will make your prayer and spiritual life better, which can give you a spiritual father and priest to hear confession and help you, to feed with holy Mysteries. All of other things you will suddenly be most certain of. For me, Orthodox church is such a place. But only way for you to know is to go to Orthodox church and pray with Orthodox, talk to priest, think of him to be confessor. Pray to Holy Spirit that you make good decision. But then relax and trust in God. Catolics are wonderful people of deep faith - they can help you. This is not to say indifferentism - but I think from your letter you are getting too confused by details and need to step back and let Holy Spirit lead you. Since Orthodoxy interests you - find out from Orthodox what it is like to live, pray and worship in Holy Orthodox faith.

Trust Holy spirit. Please, do not be vexated by controversies. Perhaps such people as I who write here slighty enjoy controversies, but they are not necessary and can be quite harmfu to such a person as you.

That’s some of the best advice I’ve heard in a while and I second it. Of course giving intellectual assent to what a Church teaches is important but we must always remember, faith is first and foremost something that you do. Orthodoxy or Catholicism is a way of life. Go to a Catholic church, pray the prayers, sing the hymns, look at the sculptures and artwork, and when I say go I don’t mean just on Sundays. Do the same thing with an Orthodox church, pray our prayers, look at the icons, sing the hymns, attend the Liturgy, vespers and matins. That’s how you will discern God’s will for you and where you can most easily draw near to Him. Once you are convicted one way or the other go for it and don’t let these questions dissuade you. There is no theology quiz to get into heaven, God doesn’t keep a checklist on whether or not you recited the filioque.

Go to church, partake of the mysteries, pray and do the works of God. You’ll be just fine.

Yours in Christ
Joe

 

[StRaphael]

Catolic miracles are better and more numerous? Very subjective and very difficult to verify.

I gave abundant objective criteria and details, and distinguished Catholic miracles from Orthodox miracles in five perspicuous ways.

But for most Christians perhaps an argument of pettiness and arrogance.

Hopefully we can all follow the teaching of our Lord, “Judge not, and ye shall not be judged” [Mt 7:1].

God bless you and yours!

 

[josephdaniel29]

I gave abundant objective criteria and details, and distinguished Catholic miracles from Orthodox miracles in five perspicuous ways.

Who cares? If your faith is dependent on miracles you should probably spend less time on a discussion forum and more time in prayer.

Can you imagine one of the great Catholic saints going to such lengths to “disprove” Orthodox miracles? Somehow I doubt it. It shows a marked lack of spiritual maturity.

My friend I’m not judging you as I’m in no position to judge anyone, I’m just offering some brotherly advice based on what you have written. Your faith in the truthfulness of Catholicism and your spiritual well being will be served far more by proactively living a Catholic life, going to church, prayer and almsgiving. Constantly trying to tear down anothers faith in the long run can only serve to separate you from God.

St Seraphim of Sarov said.

You cannot be too gentle, too kind. Shun even to appear harsh in your treatment of each other. Joy, radiant joy, streams from the face of him who gives and kindles joy in the heart of him who receives.

All condemnation is from the devil. Never condemn each other. We condemn others only because we shun knowing ourselves.

When we gaze at our own failings, we see such a swamp that nothing in another can equal it.

That is why we turn away, and make much of the faults of others. Instead of
condemning others, strive to reach inner peace. Keep silent, refrain from judgment.

This will raise you above the deadly arrows of slander, insult and outrage and will shield your glowing hearts against all evil.

Yours in Christ
Joe

 

[excaliber]

oce.catholic.com/index.php?title=Filioque

Somebody else on this forum pointed me to this just today.

I read the link and acording to it. The Eastern side of the church had people present at the councils where these matters where discused, AND AGREED WITH THEM.

However some how an adition was made to the creed…although the Pope did not want it, And a leader in the east used it as an excuse to break from rome.

However the doctrine of prosesion from The Son was originally agreed on.

Do I have it correct?

 

[ralphinal]

I want to put this on here because I love it.

The first documented use of the Filioque was in an EO Church in the Middle East.

Peace

 

[excaliber]

In the first place, no bishop of Rome (aka Pope) ever called a universal Council on his own authority up until that time in history. In fact they never chaired a universal Council either, until after the schism.
No. Papal infallibility did not exist as a belief in those days.

The bishop of Rome had no authority to teach such an idea, and no ability to stop eastern Catholics (for that is what they are) from taking communion in their own churches. No, Rome was not correct or incorrect, Papal infallibility was not even discussed in those centuries. It really had nothing whatever to do with the schism, although today it is a major additional obstacle to reunion.
No, because papal infallibility did not exist as a doctrine. Neither did universal jurisdiction.

So of course the other Sees did not have a clue, but that is not the reason for the schism. The schism began because a Cardinal of the church, acting on his own authority broke relations with the See of Constantinople. I think they probably thought they were doing a good thing, but they were not, they were a confused couple of guys. This caused the Latin church to drift from Orthodoxy, and continue to morph in some amazing ways.

The Latin left Holy Orthodoxy and went into schism.
You want us to liberate you from your doubts?

Perhaps you should repost this in the Apologetics section.

Good luck and God Bless you.

You said several times that Papal infalibility did not exist before the schism.

However I thought there were ancient writings that have early christians from WAY before the schism, admiting that the bishop rome had the athority of St.Peter?

 

[excaliber]

I want to put this on here because I love it.

The first documented use of the Filioque was in an EO Church in the Middle East.

Peace

WHAT!!!

well why then do the Orthodox say
that Rome came out of know where with the Filique?
As to say that they had no idea about it…then all of a sudden it was in there creed???

 

[excaliber]

I don’t like the idea of going to both churches. I would be intelectualy and financialy supporting two churches.

Also I don’t trust myself…people Will affect my decision. For example what if I go to the Orthodox Church and meet some people becoming friends??? That would make me WANT that church to be correct.

I want to make a decision based of accurate information.

 

[ralphinal]

WHAT!!!

well why then do the Orthodox say
that Rome came out of know where with the Filique?
As to say that they had no idea about it…then all of a sudden it was in there creed???

Because there is more to this than theology. The West, starting in France and Spain, added it to fight heresy. The word makes theological sense in Latin, and it has been defined correctly. It does not translate the same into Greek. Nor did the definition. Now, the West, almost without regard to the implications to the East but with the intention of continual protection of the faith, added it into the Latin that was used. The Greeks, though it could be explained to their satisfaction one the huberous on both sides was reduced, still bore ill will to Rome for adding it in.

Yes, they knew about it before Rome put it in. I see no issue with it. The Creed is correct either way.

 

[JackQ]

Not to ask to many questions at once…but I am learning from Orthodox, that the Filique was not only a problem because (it seems) that Rome altered the creed without a council.
But also the altered creed presents
doctrine problems…MAJOR ONES. With the altered creed The Holy Spirit has two sources…without the altered creed (I am asuming) The Holy Spirit was believed to Proceed from The Father.

Also I was told that Rome made the new creed optional for some churches. This bothered me…Its true or not, why is it optional?

Also because the new creed defines an aspect of how the Third Person of The Holy Trinity interacts in the God head.
It can’t be optional, because Rome has stated that The Third Person of The Holy Trinity has two sources…so it must be believed in order to be unified in doctrine.

Im a little…well…Im a lot over my head in this one.

Also I hear that all of Orthodoxy is in the Catholic church…so where is Holy Fire in the Catholic church.
For example a blinding light is said to come from Jesus’s tomb,and light the tourches of only Orthodox.

Also they said that they don’t think what happened at fatima was done by The Holy Mother. But I hear they think the hail Mary is ok…even though it came from fatima.
They also said that Orthodox have visitation from her often.

WHAT’S GOING ON HERE???!!!???

Rather than go on an exhaustive dissertation on history, let me just suggest that when you look at a picture of history due caution requires that you consider who is painting the picture. Polemics and honesty are uneasy travelling companions. This forum is real good for polemics, not so hot for learning history. Go elsewhere for that.

Now who’s right when it comes to all of the areas of dipute that you have raised? You might be convinced by someone or by yourself on any given point, but when do you know that you’ve considered everything and are absolutely right? Under these conditions how are we ever to know?

Fortunately, God did not leave us to judge debates between theologians. Instead he made it utterly simple to see where the true Church is. He said to Peter “thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” (Matthew 16:13-19) Where there is Peter, there is the true Church.

Many try to neutralize this passage by saying that Peter was not the first bishop of Rome and martyred there, which is clearly false, or by saying that Jesus was somehow not really saying what he clearly was saying. But viewing these things prayerfully, with the realization that the gospel was meant to be understood by the plowman as well as the theologian will lead to clarity.

Finally, ask yourself this: when you find yourself confused, is God the author of that confusion? If he isn’t, then who is?