What church should I convert

  • Thread starter Thread starter DictatorCzar
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Submit to Rome? First off, Rome teaches that the Orthodox are “true Churches” who have apostolic succession which means they have the sacraments. Second, Rome also teaches that salvation is found within the Orthodox Churches. How can they be outside the Church?

I can understand an imperfect communion with the Orthodox but the Orthodox as false? No way! It’s not what the Church teaches.

ZP
 
boclucky14 said:
Those are Rites of the Catholic Church. They aren’t seperate a Church, just a different Rite.
Click to expand...
That would be news to Rome (not to mention the members and heads of those churches . . .)
ziapueblo said:
I can be that way. The Ruthenian Church tends to be more ethnically diverse but that’s just my experience.
Click to expand...
We’re a bit short on actual ruthenians these days . . .
on_the_hill said:
I read (some years ago) that it’s difficult for a Catholic to switch between Churches for reasons such as ethnicity and culture, and that it requires a petition to the Vatican.
Click to expand...
That was true some years ago.

Today, it is rather quickly handled with just the sending and receiving bishop, and identifying more with the other church’s spirituality is sufficient reason.

hawk
 
So in this case, can I go either one of them? I have two Catholic Churches and 1 Eastern Orthodox Church near me. Can I go to either catholic or Orthodox Church!
 
Sometimes I’m bad with choices so I get a little nervous and stressed out. So since they’re both true churches. Which one should I go? Can anyone explain and persuade me?
 
I’m Byzantine Catholic so I believe communion with Rome is important. However, there is no problem going to an Eastern Orthodox Church. When I’m out of town and there is no Byzantine Catholic Church I go to an Orthodox Church. Don’t stress over it. Both churches are apostolic churches.

ZP
 
Big Macs and home cookin are both true foods.
Which should I go for?

Does it really matter in the short term?
But if you dont do anything you will starve!

By all means stop going to Mackers if you develop pimples, rashes, bad breath and flatulence.
Then try home cookin.

By their fruits you shall know them.

I dont think God is waiting with a riding crop to whack you if you start trying Mackers instead of mum’s table. He trusts you to work it out for yourself by humbly and honestly looking at the consequences of your choices over time.
 
Last edited:
This is mostly because there were problems in the West that needed to be dealt with so the filioque was included. “Proceeds” worked in Latin but not in Greek where is has a different meaning and therefor the Eastern Church doesn’t include it in the Creed. This is the short explanation. The longer one you will have to look up yourself.
 
HeDa said:
This is mostly because there were problems in the West that needed to be dealt with so the filioque was included.
Click to expand...
Whatever the reason, the creed is not the same in the roman Latin Catholic Church and the Ruthenian Byzantine Catholic Church.
 
Can someone tell me all of the true churches in the Vatican II.
 
Eastern Orthodox, Orietnal Orthodox and Assyrian Church of the East.

ZP
 
What’s the difference between oriental Orthodox and Assyrian church of the east?
 
They separated from the Church after the Council of Chalcedon over differences in Christology.

ZP
 
Think he’s trying to distinguish between those two groups, not between them and EO/Catholic.

I that the ACE is another Oriental Orthodox church, but I haven’t really followed that information.
 
The Vatican II made me change my thoughts a little bit. But what about Catholic that don’t accept the Vatican II and they think it’s heresy. They say that the purpose of ecumenism is ruined and that it should be kept as converting to Roman Catholicism, not uniting. I’m confused now because there’s 2 different sides to this argument.
 
The Church initiates millions of converts every year.

I wonder if some of this just boils down to reading comprehension, but Vatican II isn’t as revolutionary as some people make it out to be. The Council confirms and makes more official (since Ecumenical Councils are the highest authority) what was already widely understood among theologians and being widely taught in various areas, such as that the Church should go to lengths insofar as what is possible in being united with Christian brethren, with Jews, with Muslims, with other people of the world. This was not a novelty of Vatican II. Catholics were already doing this for years and even centuries. St Francis de Sales, one could very convincingly argue, had a spirit of Vatican II and he died 4 centuries ago.
 
Last edited:
The people who disagree with Vatican II say that it’s heretical. They say that they should have to convert to the Catholic Church and no one else. People who agree with the Vatican II are more relaxed about people converting to orthodoxy. So why is this argument a big thing, because aren’t you guys supposed to listen to the authority of the church and their councils?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top