Staying Orthodox

Aug 27, 2012
2,126
573
United States of America
✟41,078.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
I would not say become Eastern Catholic, but I would say to divert the energies of talking about that priest and deacon here to taking constructive action to inform the bishop of that parish of what happened.

As I said before, abuse is abuse, whether it took place at home,work, or church, and the only reason why abuse takes place and continues to take place is because the victim and those around the victim and victimizer do not take action to stop the abuse. And if there's one victim, chances are very good that there other victims. So taking action not only helps oneself but helps others who have been victimized.

Please divert the energies of talking about your priest and deacon to actual action that might create actual results and change.

Thank you
 
Upvote 0

dzheremi

Coptic Orthodox non-Egyptian
Aug 27, 2014
13,500
13,648
✟426,076.00
Country
United States
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Returning to the subject of this thread, there is something else to ponder, as I know the OP is wondering about ecclesiology.

While there are certain interpretations of ancient writings that lend themselves to being used in modern debates to support the unique ecclesiology of the RCC, when we read primary sources even as they are given at Catholic websites, we can see how the ancient writings contradict the modern stance quite plainly. All of this stuff about there being only one chair/seat/See of Peter, for instance, which the modern RCC uses to claim that without union with Rome you cannot be in union with Peter...well, apparently Pope Gregory I (540-604) disagreed, as in his letter to Eulogius, the bishop of the Chalcedonians in Alexandria, begins as follows:

"To Eulogius, Bishop. Gregory to Eulogius, Bishop of Alexandria.
Your most sweet Holiness has spoken much in your letter to me about the chair of Saint Peter, Prince of the apostles, saying that he himself now sits on it in the persons of his successors. And indeed I acknowledge myself to be unworthy, not only in the dignity of such as preside, but even in the number of such as stand. But I gladly accepted all that has been said, in that he has spoken to me about Peter's chair who occupies Peter's chair. And, though special honour to myself in no wise delights me, yet I greatly rejoiced because you, most holy ones, have given to yourselves what you have bestowed upon me. For who can be ignorant that holy Church has been made firm in the solidity of the Prince of the apostles, who derived his name from the firmness of his mind, so as to be called Petrus from petra. And to him it is said by the voice of the Truth, To you I will give the keys of the kingdom of heaven Matthew 16:19. And again it is said to him, And when you are converted, strengthen your brethren (xxii. 32). And once more, Simon, son of Jonas, do you love Me? Feed my sheep John 21:17. Wherefore though there are many apostles, yet with regard to the principality itself the See of the Prince of the apostles alone has grown strong in authority, which in three places is the See of one. For he himself exalted the See in which he deigned even to rest and end the present life. He himself adorned the See to which he sent his disciple as evangelist. He himself established the See in which, though he was to leave it, he sat for seven years. Since then it is the See of one, and one See, over which by Divine authority three bishops now preside, whatever good I hear of you, this I impute to myself. If you believe anything good of me, impute this to your merits, since we are one in Him Who says, That they all may be one, as You, Father, art in me, and I in you that they also may be one in us"
(Sorry for all the links in the above quote; they're there in the Catholic Encyclopedia text and for some reason I'm not able to remove them.)

The thought that St. Peter's See is not just in Rome, but "in three places is the See of one" (referring to Rome, Alexandria, and Antioch) is pretty much verboten in the modern RCC, right? Except here we have a Roman Pope who is expressing that very idea. Note that Pope Gregory does not correct Eulogius in the beginning of the letter when he writes that Eulogius refers to himself as sitting upon the chair of St. Peter by virtue of his occupying the (Chalcedonian) See of Alexandria. So Rome's own history contradicts its current ecclesiological stance.

So too a case could be made against the modern idea propagated by the RCC that the Roman Pope was some kind of "final court of appeals" in disputes between bishops, and that this proves his universal jurisdiction over the whole Church. Did he sometimes intervene in disputes between bishops? Absolutely he did. But so did other bishops in disputes between him and others, as HH Pope Dionysius of Alexandria (248-264) did during the Donatist controversy. His letters to Popes Stephen and Xystus are available in translation here.

By the RCC's reasoning, this would be evidence that HH Pope Dionysius had universal jurisdiction over the whole Church, including over the Pope of Rome. Luckily for them, this has never been the way that the Coptic Orthodox Church, who count HH Pope Dionysius as our 14th Pope (many centuries before the RCC would assume that title for their own bishops, I might add), views the matter. We are a conciliar church at heart and in practice, so these things are viewed in a conciliar fashion.

That said, the existence of these letters complicates matters for those of the Roman church who would like to demonstrate some kind of unbroken line in the witness of the ancient Church and the modern RCC in ecclesiological matters. I know that RCs have their own interpretations of these sources, and hopefully the OP or anyone else who is curious can look up the text as presented via the links and form their own conclusion. For what little it is worth, these are just a few of the things that would give me pause, if I were looking into Orthodox and RC ecclesiology.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

E.C.

Well-Known Member
Jan 12, 2007
13,746
1,267
✟134,199.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
Ah... this thread reminds me so much of why I left the Roman Church. Oddly edifying.

CJ, to avoid echoing a bit of what has already been stated the best thing for you to do is pray a great deal that you can recognize the direction God gives you. Catholicism in these recent decades is simply dying and like it or not there is no denying it. In the US, Catholicism has become a political front more than anything since of you were to ask any Catholic what they truly believe it would fall in line more so with American Protestantism than actual Catholicism. Catholicism has been watered down and will continue to water down because that Church wants to be part of the world so much that it is becoming of the world with lazy spirituality and lackluster faith.
Let's look at something real here: birth control. Officially the Vatican says never, the few faithful Catholics in the US many times believe that birth control use will send you to hell, but you'd be foolish to believe that that the many Catholics who do have sex, whether in marriage or not, do use birth control of some kind. Replace that with anything else the Vatican says and you will find the same trend: what is said vs what is understood vs what is actually practiced.
 
Upvote 0
A

aChildOfMary

Guest
How is this relevant?
If you believe that every Orthodox Christian on the face of earth are Holy men and women you should really think your statement through one more time.

Of course there are millions of catholics that ignore the CCC, but that's their choice and their jeopardy of their soul.

To say that since some catholic laymen are indifferent to church law the whole church is corrupt is a false statement, if so the Orthodox Church joins the party.

There is no one that says that all Catholics will win eternal life in the end, most likely most of us will fall short I'm afraid.

Also studies made in all of the world religions has discovered that each human has their very own and unique picture of God.
Even in Catholicism and Orthodoxy the differences between people's view on God differs greatly.
So most likely lots of Orthodox faithful also hold Protestantic beliefs too.

lastly Psychologists has through empirical data discovered that there exist a larger difference between the different wings within a church than Between the different Religions! .
This means that the most liberals of the liberals in our church is closer to the most liberal expressions of say Islam than they are to the most Conservative within Catholicism.
At least this is the case if we trust the experts on this field of psychology.
 
Upvote 0

~Anastasia~

† Handmaid of God †
Dec 1, 2013
31,133
17,452
Florida panhandle, USA
✟922,745.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
I think it would generally be more helpful to consider what the Church believes, and what tools and help it offers to the faithful to help them follow those ideals, and to use that as a means of comparison, than it is to look for individual examples of shortcomings within individuals associated within the Church (clergy, laity, or monastics) or extreme examples within the Church in order to find a basis for comparison.

Surely every Church and denomination has it's poor examples and extremists which could make every one of them seem unsuitable if evaluated on that basis. Unless we plan to be part of the poorest example ourselves, that seems irrelevant.
 
Upvote 0

ArmyMatt

Regular Member
Supporter
Jan 26, 2007
41,469
20,026
41
Earth
✟1,455,706.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
well, it's not the lukewarmness of certain members of the Roman confession, it's that they are outside of the Church and believe in heresy. I am sure there are many devout members who trump me on the piety scale, but that does not cover the heresies or that they are outside the Church.
 
Upvote 0
A

aChildOfMary

Guest
I went for a while to private catechese entertained by a father in the Russian Church and as we approached some of the reasons for the schism he said that on certain theological matter the Orthodox Church simply couldn't find any support as for why Rome believes as she does and therefor shared communion was unacceptable.

I took notice as for how he seemingly avoided the use of terms as heretics and heretical when speaking of the CC and her in his mind corrupted teachings.
At some point I had to ask why he didn't speak of the RCC as heretical and he replied:-
"It's about faith, not about knowledge, we should all be very humble when approaching such abstract matters".

The great differ from his answer to yours really makes my point about differences within a church quite undeniable.


His answer is the sort of answer that may one day bring me to the Orthodox communion.
To be humble is to be wise:)

My real life experiences with Orthodoxy has been very warm and good, where my online experience really hasn't.
I wonder why it differs so greatly...
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

ArmyMatt

Regular Member
Supporter
Jan 26, 2007
41,469
20,026
41
Earth
✟1,455,706.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
oh you are not a heretic by any stretch, but our Church does say that certain things that Rome believes in are heresy.

we approached some of the reasons for the schism he said that on certain theological matter the Orthodox Church simply couldn't find any support as for why Rome believes as she does and therefor shared communion was unacceptable.

which means heresy. that is the definition of the word.
 
Upvote 0

dzheremi

Coptic Orthodox non-Egyptian
Aug 27, 2014
13,500
13,648
✟426,076.00
Country
United States
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Who is or is not within the boundaries of the Church in this life is not even a matter of humility. It's a matter of who is actually there. I could make a list of all the names who are part of the Church at my location. I'm sure Matt could do the same. At a street level (so, I suppose, away from "such abstract matters"), this is all very clear, and with good reason.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Gxg (G²)

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)
Supporter
Jan 25, 2009
19,765
1,428
Good Ol' South...
Visit site
✟160,220.00
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
Both Orthodoxy and Catholicism have historical and apostolic legs to stand on. Theologically I stand with the Orthodox church (otherwise I wouldn't be here!) but I see problems in our ecclesiology among other things (things that would take quite a while to explain here, so I'll refrain from doing so).
On what you were saying, I think it's worth noting that Orthodoxy offers the most comprehensive means of completion and historical consistency that the RC church needs to have. Growing up with a Catholic family and going to Catholic schools, I'm not of the mindset that all things Catholic are negative or that others cannot live out what the Faith teaches even if in ignorance on the fullness found in Orthodoxy - the Lord works in a myriad of places. And I've seen the Lord work in many aspects of the Catholic Church (including in regards to Eastern Catholics, more shared here and here ) so I am not one who will ever be an activist against it.

Additionally, I do think that honoring Orthodoxy does entail remembering the primacy that the seat of Rome did actually have in the early Church - as said before here:

There are many, including clergy, who do not regard all of them as being outside of the body of Christ even though the their organization is not formally in communion with ours. Both the Orthodox Church and the Roman Catholic Church are institutions which exist as physical organizations in this world, and as such are by there very nature self-Serving (that is, they must retain and gain members if they are to continue to exist). This is the real reason behind the ecclesiological exclusivity that is often insisted upon by each. The reality is, however, that they are our brothers and sisters if both we and they abide in Christ. This is a personal choice and is not dependent upon any patriarch. So there are many members of the Church who understand that the Pope can indeed be a patriarch of the Church, while there were some Orthodox Patriarchs who chose rather to fill the much repeated role of Judas Iscariot. Some Popes too, of course. Our Tradition may be the purest expression of Faith in Christ, but to regard those others as totally lacking in validity of Grace is either the result of ignorance of the truth or else a deliberate withholding of it.
Gxg (G²);65877140 said:
Some of what you said reminded me of John 11....in regards to the principle of "Respect the Office" and knowing that the Lord still works through it. It is fascianting to see the ways that even those who harrassed the Messiah were still used by the Lord to do Divine things.

John 11:45-52

The Plot to Kill Jesus
45Therefore many of the Jews who had come to visit Mary, and had seen what Jesus did, put their faith in him. 46But some of them went to the Pharisees and told them what Jesus had done. 47Then the chief priests and the Pharisees called a meeting of the Sanhedrin.

"What are we accomplishing?" they asked. "Here is this man performing many miraculous signs. 48If we let him go on like this, everyone will believe in him, and then the Romans will come and take away both our place[a] and our nation."

49Then one of them, named Caiaphas, who was high priest that year, spoke up, "You know nothing at all! 50You do not realize that it is better for you that one man die for the people than that the whole nation perish."

51He did not say this on his own, but as high priest that year he prophesied that Jesus would die for the Jewish nation, 52and not only for that nation but also for the scattered children of God, to bring them together and make them one.

The phrase "die for the people" invokes the memory of the Maccabean martyrs (II Macc, 7:37-38). With a typical Johannine double meaning, Caiaphas's pronouncement anticipates Jesus's substitutionary atonement. IMHO, the man's actions do not mean that Caiaphas — like one who was mad, or out of his senses — uttered what he did not understand. For he spoke what was his own opinion. Rather, a higher impulse guided his tongue, because God intended that he should make known, by his mouth, something higher than what occurred to his mind. What Caiaphas said at that time was done in 2 senses.....one which dealt with the wicked design of putting Christ to death, which he had conceived in his mind...and the other concerning what God had in mind when it came to how the Lord wanted Christ to die ( Acts 2:22-24 ), thus making Caiphas's words a prediction. Its similar to what occurred when God intended to bless his people by the mouth of Balaam, on whom he had bestowed the spirit of prophecy...even though Balaam's intentions were to curse (Numbers 22-25).

It is highly significant to consider Caiphas's words in light of how it makes clear that he was HIGH priest that year when he stated what he did. As said best by Oskar Skarsaune in his book In the Shadow of the Temple: Jewish Influences on Early Christianity when speaking on the ways the priesthood was set up, "The Prophetic Gift Folowed the Office - not the man."

To see the reality of how the offices others occupied were respected by the Lord - even in spite of corruption and showing a lack of any qualification for that office - is a principle in showing how the Lord can still use others who have a legal position even though they lack the morality to do the Legal job as commanded.

And as it concerns the subject of Roman Catholicism, there are PLENTY of things which the Pope may do that I have always disagreed with - as have many within Catholicism and OUTSIDE of it. But as was the case in the Early Church, it is NOT for us to determine his salvation since that is overstepping the bounds the Lord has given us....and ANYTIME such has occurred, we directly place ourselves outside of the jurisdiction that the Lord has given us and we ourselves are on dangerous ground.

Many in RC forget that the basis they have for the Pope doing as he did is based on a misunderstanding of ecclesiology - for when they look to Matthew 16, they forget that Matthew 16 has to do with the episcopate, not the papacy. In Orthodox (and Scriptural and Patristic) theology, the Church is the Eucharist assembly gathered around the bishop in a particular city, and the Church has a visible head - the bishop who represents the icon of the Father. The mindset is that it is better to NOT have one point of success and failure (the Pope) IN FAVOR of a network of self-balancing and self-correcting Churches/Bishops in sacramental communion. The latter as a system is more likely to preserve stability and the Apostolic Deposit unchanged..

The Patriarchate of Rome is one of the five historic patriarchates of the Church, the others being Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem. The Orthodox accorded the Pope of Rome the respect due the “first among equals” prior to the Great Schism. The Orthodox agree that, historically, there was a primacy accorded the Pope of Rome. However, Orthodoxy holds that primacy was always understood as a primacy of honor and coordination rather than a primacy of sovereign authority. The Bishop of Rome had always been considered the First in the order of hierarchy and this was a natural consequence of the position of Rome as the capital of the Roman Empire. When Constantinople became the new capital of the Byzantine State its Bishop assumed the second position in the ranks of the hierarchy. And the third canon of the Second Ecumenical Council (381) designates the position of honor of the Bishop of Constantinople as second only to that of the Bishop of Rome. This decision of the Council is based on the premise that Constantinople is new Rome, and, incidentally, it has been retained among the titles of the Patriarch of Constantinople. And this indicates, as was brought out at the Council, that the political importance of the city defined the honorary status of its hierarchy.


For the Orthodox, all bishops are fundamentally equal. While Roman Catholic theologians would counter that the understanding of the special status of papacy evolved over time in the West under the influence of the Holy Spirit, Orthodoxy would insist that the authority granted the first bishops, the apostles, was granted once and for all, and that the revelation of authority in them within the Body of Christ does not evolve over time - and Orthodoxy also believes that all Orthodox bishops are the successors of Peter and that Rome’s pope cannot hold this status uniquely.

And for the RC Pope, one thing that would need to be realized in order to be in line with the Church is that the Church of Rome was out of communion from the ancient Eastern Churches (in external schism) and made some bad choices which have affected the Churches in communion (in this case obedience) to the Church of Rome. ....including Churches that were in Rome which were Western in location and yet never agreeing with all aspects of what the Church of Rome did. For these bad choices make spiritual life less "assured" (bebeia in Greek, as used by St. Ignatius), such as bad (if not false) liturgics, mutilated sacramental life, misleading doctrines (infallibility), etc., and eventually led to the tragedy of the Protestant Reformation...


For good review on the matter, one can go here and here - as well as "The Problem with Papal Infallibility. God has used Catholics repeatedly throughout the history of the Body of Christ - be it in social activism, helping out widows/orphans, feeding the poor or preaching Christ in consistency with what he noted when it came to love for others PHYSICALLY manifested as God commanded in I John 2 and James 2 with not simply saying "I wish you warm/well fed" rather than truly being a good Samaritan (Luke 10:25-39).

And the same goes with the Pope - seieng how there have been MANY godly popes who have done much for the Kingdom of God. It's already a basic fact that there are MANY Popes of Rome who have been Orthodox Saints - and outside of that, there have been many popes who may have been in very bad error - but to dismiss them as not being saved simply because they are Roman Catholic is not within the bounds of what Christ or scripture noted..
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

CJtheSearcher

Newbie
Aug 13, 2014
44
3
34
Hefei, China
✟7,679.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
In Relationship
Gxg (G²);67230961 said:
Additionally, I do think that honoring Orthodoxy does entail remembering the primacy that the seat of Rome did actually have in the early Church - as said before here:

Thank your for the charitable post! Indeed, thank EVERYONE who has posted here.

Being in China, and somewhat separated from the church for now, I can actually afford to think about things and take my time. In some ways, it is refreshing in a way: I can just pray, focus on Jesus Christ (who always seems to get lost in the mix!), and take things slowly.

Saying that, I AM missing the worship and fellowship of the church, and most especially the sacraments. Speaking of which, everyone, please pray that my company will give me Pascha off so I can travel to Beijing to the only Orthodox church in the country! Lord have mercy!
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

~Anastasia~

† Handmaid of God †
Dec 1, 2013
31,133
17,452
Florida panhandle, USA
✟922,745.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Thank your for the charitable post! Indeed, thank EVERYONE who has posted here.

Being in China, and somewhat separated from the church for now, I can actually afford to think about things and take my time. In some ways, it is refreshing in a way: I can just pray, focus on Jesus Christ (who always seems to get lost in the mix!), and take things slowly.

Saying that, I AM missing the worship and fellowship of the church, and most especially the sacraments. Speaking of which, everyone, please pray that my company will give me Pascha off so I can travel to Beijing to the only Orthodox church in the country! Lord have mercy!

Prayes!!!
 
Upvote 0
A

aChildOfMary

Guest
Thank your for the charitable post! Indeed, thank EVERYONE who has posted here.

Being in China, and somewhat separated from the church for now, I can actually afford to think about things and take my time. In some ways, it is refreshing in a way: I can just pray, focus on Jesus Christ (who always seems to get lost in the mix!), and take things slowly.

Saying that, I AM missing the worship and fellowship of the church, and most especially the sacraments. Speaking of which, everyone, please pray that my company will give me Pascha off so I can travel to Beijing to the only Orthodox church in the country! Lord have mercy!


Lord have mercy.
 
Upvote 0

CJtheSearcher

Newbie
Aug 13, 2014
44
3
34
Hefei, China
✟7,679.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
In Relationship
Well as far as having Pascha off: at this point, I don't know if they'll give me the weekend off so I can travel to Beijing. work at a small center so the classes are spread out in such a way that no one person has too many classes (not only do we teach regular classes, but we have 'demos' aimed at prospective parents/students).

Soo....if I can't secure Pascha, I'll try to travel to Beijing the week or so after Pascha on one of my actual days off so I can see the priest and at least go to confession and receive the Eucharist (the last time I visited the church before I left Beijing the priest offered me communion after hearing my confession since he knew I wouldn't be able to attend church in quite a while).
 
Upvote 0

Gxg (G²)

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)
Supporter
Jan 25, 2009
19,765
1,428
Good Ol' South...
Visit site
✟160,220.00
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
I was RC until 2012, when I was received into the Orthodox Church via the OCA (December 16, 2012 to be exact).

Since then, as some of you may know, I returned (briefly) to the RCC early last year for various theological reasons. I then made confession to my local Orthodox priest back home and returned to Orthodoxy (for, again, theological reasons).

Fastforward seven months later: I'm living in China, and in the Orthodox Church. But, I still feel the 'tug' to return once for all to Catholicism. Making a decision between Orthodox (or Catholicism) versus Protestantism is quite easy since Protestantism has no historical legs to stand on. However, when it comes to choosing between Orthodoxy and Catholicism things get quite 'tricky'.

Both Orthodoxy and Catholicism have historical and apostolic legs to stand on. Theologically I stand with the Orthodox church (otherwise I wouldn't be here!) but I see problems in our ecclesiology among other things (things that would take quite a while to explain here, so I'll refrain from doing so)..
If I may say...

There was an excellent presentation on the journey of one Eastern Catholic that stood out to me when seeing his story - and how it ties in with things you've lived out:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mQbLDAI_f-s
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums