On the verge of converting
To Eastern Orthodoxy, if that is even called a "conversion." My reasons for doing this are simple. I write this to invite discussion from others to tell me where I am wrong, if in fact I am:
I have been discerning this for a period of a few years. I struggled that if I left Catholicism, that Catholicism would "damn" me, somehow, as am apostate. Even though I know that if I was fully convicted, that should matter to me at all, it did.
Still after lots of study, it seems to me that the practice of Orthodoxy, IS the original, or certainly closest to the original, christian worship practiced by the Apostles and ECF.
Apostolic succession is important.
The EOC treatment of sin and redemption, and its teaching on original sin is far closer to what I have come to believe. (sin as "illness" rather than "crime.")
I do not know who left whom during the Great Schism, but I suspect they were never as organized as the RCC teaches. At least throughout the histories I have read that isn't the case. the difference between "primacy" and "supremacy" seem to have always been real, and it seems that Rome was "prime" but not "supreme."
Both Churches were under the leadership of the Apostles, and I agree that Peter was the rock. I don't know that all of the succeeding popes were Rocks or not. It seems imperial.
Still, my cradle catholicism is strong in me, and I am still struggling with this.
Thanks for reading and I would love to hear any comment.
To Eastern Orthodoxy, if that is even called a "conversion." My reasons for doing this are simple. I write this to invite discussion from others to tell me where I am wrong, if in fact I am:
I have been discerning this for a period of a few years. I struggled that if I left Catholicism, that Catholicism would "damn" me, somehow, as am apostate. Even though I know that if I was fully convicted, that should matter to me at all, it did.
Still after lots of study, it seems to me that the practice of Orthodoxy, IS the original, or certainly closest to the original, christian worship practiced by the Apostles and ECF.
Apostolic succession is important.
The EOC treatment of sin and redemption, and its teaching on original sin is far closer to what I have come to believe. (sin as "illness" rather than "crime.")
I do not know who left whom during the Great Schism, but I suspect they were never as organized as the RCC teaches. At least throughout the histories I have read that isn't the case. the difference between "primacy" and "supremacy" seem to have always been real, and it seems that Rome was "prime" but not "supreme."
Both Churches were under the leadership of the Apostles, and I agree that Peter was the rock. I don't know that all of the succeeding popes were Rocks or not. It seems imperial.
Still, my cradle catholicism is strong in me, and I am still struggling with this.
Thanks for reading and I would love to hear any comment.