Why so many Catholics becoming Orthodox?

[jeannetherese]

What is the cause of 2 priests having sex in the open in a car in Florida?

Lust. One of the deadly sins to which priests, and laity, of all churches, are susceptible.
May God strengthen us to resist this sin and give us the grace to repent and seek forgiveness for the times we have failed to live in accordance with the will of God.
Amen.

 

[BlueKumul]

My Belarussian father converted from Orthodoxy to Catholicism to marry my Polish mother. But he always spoke kindly of the “Holy Church” of Moscow. So I have some connection to both, though I prefer Catholicism because I perceive it as directly descended from the Church started by St Peter in Rome. Personally I’m worried by the modern Orthodox leaders supporting Putin, who ordered poisoning of peaceful activist Navalny and murdered innocent people in Chechenia.

 

[mathematoons]

It doesn’t work that way. Mortal sin requires full knowledge and consent.

 

[mathematoons]

I think it’s because people want to be spoon-fed their faith rather than having to do the hard work of actually meeting their own spiritual needs with God’s help. I read about someone who converted to Orthodoxy because the Catholic Church didn’t require much of him, but the Orthodox Church he went to did. Well, apparently he couldn’t even do that “little” (ha ha) that was required of him (in other words, stay in the Church).

Don’t be fooled by people who leave the Church for someplace they deem “holier.”

 

[MarkRome]

Modern liturgies, questions raised about the integrity of marriage annulments, sex scandals.

In other words, no reasons related to history, authority, or truth.

 

[dochawk]

Honestly, I’ve never met a person who converted to orthodox. Not in real life, not on the internet.

I’ve seen it at my parish; most EC can probably say this.

I’ve seen it both here and on byzcath.

And I"ve seen just as many the other direction.

EC refer to someone as “doxing” when they do this . . .

was communism play friend.

I wouldn’t go that far.

However, the Russian Orthodox Church was effectively a part of the Tsarist government fof quite some time before the bolshevik takeover, and continued to some extent a similar role with the new communist masters.

However, the “Ukrainian Orthodox Church (mp)” is a creartion of the ROC backed by soviet guns and secret police.

Unlike some EC groups, the Ukrainian chruch entered communion with Rome hundreds of years ago. The church itself, not a breakaway group.

The ukrainian church now in communion with (ruled by) moscow was created in 1946 at the False Synod of Lviv. The ukrainian bishops were arrested by the soviets, along with many of the priests. At the “synod”, the remaining priests and russian bishops “voted” to recognize moscow, and the new entity was handed substantially all of the Ukrainian church’s property. The church, now the UGCC, was banned and had to go underground.

Note that something like 90% of the Orthodox are not in the UOC-MP, but were in either the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (KP) or the much smaller Ukrainian AUtocephalous Orthodox Church, which merged two years ago into the Orthodox Church of Ukraine, which is recognized by the EP. This is what led to the current schism between Moscow and Constantinople,

The UOC and the UGCC have reasonably warm relations.

It is quite likely that Rome and Constantinople would both quietly not object if the UOC and UGCC were to merge and try to retain communion with both. Moscow, however, would have kittens . . .

 

[AlNg]

In other words, no reasons related to history, authority, or truth.

Not sure about that. Father Constantin Simon, S.J. gives his reasons in the video above. (near post 17).

 

[mathematoons]

Humans are such sinners, we can convince ourselves that anything we want to be true is true. So that’s really the exception that proves the rule.

 

[AlNg]

Humans are such sinners, we can convince ourselves that anything we want to be true is true.

I do not see a response to the reasons given by Father Constantin Simon as to why he converted to the Russian Orthodox Church.

 

[mathematoons]

Right back at you—I don’t see a response to my point either.

 

[MNathaniel]

This is a beautiful post.

May I ask for your perspective: do you view what you’ve described as something innate to Catholicism that cannot exist in Eastern Orthodoxy? Or do you view it as a phenomenon that exists in practice but that could theoretically be different? That is, as something that doesn’t necessarily have to be part of what it means to be Catholic (i.e. perhaps it will change in future, or by region – or perhaps even within the situation as it is now, there is a way to live within it in an other-focused way), or as something that could theoretically become part of Eastern Orthodoxy?

What I still don’t understand about Eastern Orthodoxy is how it’s secured from change, including in the direction of legalism. At least there’s one thing about legalism: it stakes out defined territory so that all know the boundaries not to cross. Especially so that those without power know what the lines are and can hold the powerful accountable when those lines are crossed.

Perhaps I’m blurring topics now, though. Apologies if my question is unclear. I suppose it’s more the sort of conversation to chat about over a meal than in an online interview-seeming way. Pandemic and distance applying, though, I’d be interested to hear more of your thoughts if you have them.

 

[ReaderT]

I’d say it’s inherent/innate to Catholicism - for one thing, it’s a central feature of the Catechism. You don’t get more official than that!

Because it is so fundamental and essential to Roman Catholicism, I don’t believe it could ever “change in the future, or by region”. Rome has written in stone: “mortal sin” is a definitive thing that exists in reality, as does venial sin, and so also the whole system between them with absolution and form/matter/intent etc. You can’t jettison these things and remain Catholic, so either everything stays or everything goes.

Why is Eastern Orthodoxy secured from legalistic tendencies? Well, ultimately we can only say: because we have the Holy Spirit . But I know that won’t be a satisfactory answer to outsiders because they may not believe it. Anyway, our system isn’t very focused on “rules” for their own sake but as a means to an end, which is a deeper relationship with the Lord. The same priest may tell one parishioner to try to uphold the whole Nativity Fast but then suspend many fasting rules for a new convert, because the whole fast might crush the new guy. And that is totally fine: they have the power to apply and suspend rules as they see fit to cultivate our spiritual growth.

 

[MNathaniel]

Thank you for your response. What you describe certainly does sounds appealing (while at the same time I reflect on the office and jurisdiction of Peter potentially having unfolded this way for a reason; if Jesus and the Holy Spirit do intend Peter’s office to heavily involve preservation and clarification of truth, it does seem consistent that Peter’s jurisdiction might over time develop more granular and concretely written down definitions of what the truth involves, than other jurisdictions would).

Follow up in the awkward online style:

What, in your understanding, is the Eastern Orthodox view of the Catholic Church? I suppose I mean regarding salvation, authority to teach truly (even just the regular ol’ authority of a hierarch over those within the jurisdiction of Rome, not speaking here of authority over those the EO considers not under Rome’s jurisdiction).

Since both the RC and EO seem to allow intercommunion (under special circumstances) and recognize one another’s holy orders etc as valid, I tend to assume that both consider the other basically valid churches that preserve and teach an acceptable degree of authentically Christian spiritual truth to those in their regions, however politically separated the churches are temporally. But it sounds like in your understanding, there are RC beliefs about the nature of reality that the EO would say are false? (E.g. mortal vs venial sin.) Or is it just that the EO would say that certain RC beliefs are unknowable and can safely be disregarded or disagreed with as speculation?

 

[ReaderT]

What, in your understanding, is the Eastern Orthodox view of the Catholic Church? I suppose I mean regarding salvation, authority to teach truly (even just the regular ol’ authority of a hierarch over those within the jurisdiction of Rome, not speaking here of authority over those the EO considers not under Rome’s jurisdiction).

Well, as a friend once said, “We agree with the Catholics on 7 out of 10 things, but those remaining 3 are very big disagreements.” Ultimately, one of us has to be 100% correct - one of us has to be Pure Church and Bride of Christ; we can’t both be if we believe contradictory things (“Is Christ divided?” - 1 Cor. 1:13) and so we believe we have it fully correct. Regarding salvation of non-Orthodox; I’d say that’s not my department (I don’t sit on God’s throne) but He does and He loves man more than man loves himself, so I’ll leave salvation to Him. As for “authority to teach truly”, we’d say if the teachings are not orthodox, then of course they’re not true, but Catholic teachers do teach many things that are true.

I tend to assume that both consider the other basically valid churches that preserve and teach an acceptable degree of authentically Christian spiritual truth to those in their regions, however politically separated the churches are temporally

We’d definitely recognize that both groups can trace their link back to the Apostles and share 1000 years of saints, and (as above) Catholic priests teach many true things. But we’re not both the Bride of Christ and there are sticking points:

The Fourth Ecumenical Council (451 A.D. - universally accepted by Catholic and Orthodox) said that nobody was permitted to change the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed, which of course Rome did in 1054 with filioque. Here is a link to the Legion of Mary’s website with the Council documents:

“As for those who dare either to compose another creed or even to promulgate or teach or hand down another creed for those who wish to convert to a recognition of the truth from Hellenism or from Judaism, or from any kind of heresy at all: if they be bishops or clerics, the bishops are to be deposed from the episcopacy and the clerics from the clergy; if they be monks or layfolk, they are to be anathematized.”

But it sounds like in your understanding, there are RC beliefs about the nature of reality that the EO would say are false? (E.g. mortal vs venial sin.)

Correct - we’d say they’re false, and it’s not how reality works.

 

[MNathaniel]

That’s very interesting. Thank you for sharing your thoughts! Especially about the fourth ecumenical council, something I’m not familiar with.

I have to run for a family meal but I will screenshot your response for myself to reflect on further.

 

[PeterT]

I don’t think this is a widespread has it sounds…

But when it happens, I think it happens for one of a few reasons:

1. they were scandalized by the sex abuse scandal
2. they are scandalized by liturgical abuse at their local parish and don’t have a Latin Mass Parish near by
3. they are scandalized by something else happening (or something that happened) at their local parish or by the bishops.
4. finally, they have been convinced by someone that the Catholic Church is not the true, one Church

All are pretty tragic.

Or maybe they have come to believe (incorrectly) that the Holy Spirit proceeds only from the Father and not from the Son and hence they cannot recite in good conscience the Catholic version of the Nicene Creed at Mass.

 

[Isaac14]

Or maybe they have come to believe (incorrectly) that the Holy Spirit proceeds only from the Father

Shame the council fathers didn’t get that right either!

 

[HomeschoolDad]

redcatholic:

I’ve never met a person who converted to orthodox.

Roman-Catholic priest converts to Orthodoxy - Orthodox Church

This is one of the saddest things I’ve ever seen in my life, and I am not one to have emotional reactions to matters of faith.

I love the East, I am all in favor of the East being in communion in Rome, but Western I began, and Western I shall remain. For life.

 

[AlNg]

This is one of the saddest things I’ve ever seen in my life,

Did you view the video where Father Constantin Simon gives the reasons for his conversion? I was saddened by the extreme Ukrainian nationalism against Russia and against the Russian Orthodox Church that I saw here on CAF. Can you believe that a Ukrainian Catholic Church has a mural of the Russian Orthodox president Putin burning alive in hell? What is a mural like that doing in a Catholic Church?
I was also saddened by the fact that discussions on CAF of the known collusion between the Nazis and extremist Ukrainian nationalists - (many of whom were Greek Catholics) - against Russia was censored and deleted.

 

[ReaderT]

PeterT:

Or maybe they have come to believe (incorrectly) that the Holy Spirit proceeds only from the Father

Shame the council fathers didn’t get that right either!

Even a worse shame that a later Council anathematized anyone who would add to the Creed:

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)