What if the catholic church is true?

[dzheremi]

I agree with Gurney. Why does it matter what you call it if we all agree on what actually happens? The Coptic Orthodox Church doesn't use this term, either, but we certainly agree with the Latins that the Eucharist is truly the body of Christ our God.

This is a Protestant disagreement with Roman Catholics over a term we don't even use. It doesn't belong in this thread.

 

[Nik0s]

I mean, they say they have the faith like it should be kept, they have the right, and they are based on the fact that Peter founded their church:

18 "I also say to you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My church; and the gates of Hades will not overpower it".

I like the roman-catholic church, I received a catholic education even if my family was orthodox because we lived in Spain and at school I chose to take religion classes. But I also think our Orthodoxy holds the truth and is right, but not only that, it makes you feel in love with this faith, but that doesn't make me not feel like they may say something true... What do you think?

http://www.ancientfaith.com/podcasts/orthodoxyheterodoxy/orthodox_and_roman_catholic_differences

http://www.ancientfaith.com/podcast...thodox_and_roman_catholic_differences_-part_2

A very good listen if you have the time.

 

[ArmyMatt]

The Roman Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation is unbiblical. In John 6:63 it is clear that Yeshua speaks of why it is the spirit that quickens and that the flesh profits nothing, that His words are spirit and life. I realize Catholic priests believe they can literally consecrate the literal flesh, blood and soul of Yeshua in what they call the Holy Eucharist, but how is this possible when Yeshua clarified that it is the Spirit that quickens, the flesh profits nothing. Yes I believe there are Catholics who take Yeshua literally when He states "My flesh is real food and My blood is real drink." But he did furthermore state that it is the spirit that quickens and that the flesh profits nothing. If this is true, which it is according to the King James Version Bible of John 6:63-64, then how can the priest consecrate the literal flesh of Yeshua in a wafer of bread during the Liturgy of the Eucharist? I realize there are very good catholics in this world, my mom is one of them, but how can a Christian worship Yeshua in spirit and in truth (John 4:23) if they are part of a religious system that preaches a false doctrine? Transubstantiation was discovered in 1214 AD and was mandated in all Catholic Churches in 1215 AD. So if one has to be saved through partaking in the Eucharist under the Paschal Mystery, what happened to Catholic Christians before 1214 AD when Transubstantiation didn't exist?

you really need to read more if you think that transubstantiation only came about in 1214. that is as silly as saying Constantine invented Christ's Divinity at Nicaea. the RC is true to use that phrase. the problem is in their understanding.

 

[GregConstantine]

@AndreaSuzanna,

We are not Roman Catholics!

 

[~Anastasia~]

I like most of the responses in this thread as well.

@AndreaSuzanna - first of all, welcome to CF.

Since you have only posted a couple of times, you might not have found your way around yet. That's ok - you'll get it.

You should know though that this is an Orthodox forum. We are not Catholic, and we do not teach transubstantiation. We do partake of the Eucharist - the Holy Mysteries - as the Church has done since it first began. It's interesting that you bring out criticism against the priests' belief that they change the bread and wine into the Body and Blood of our Lord. I am not sure if that is an accurate statement of Catholic belief or not, but I can tell you that in our Church, we pray for the HOLY SPIRIT to change the bread and wine into the Body and Blood of our Lord. We need the priest because we need human hands to minister the Eucharist to us, but the Holy Spirit is indeed the source of the Eucharist. We don't try to explain it beyond that.

As a matter of fact, do you know what I found interesting when I learned it? If the priest was the only one who showed up, and there was no one to give the "Amen" when we pray for the Holy Spirit to change the Eucharist - there is no Eucharist. The priest can't do it alone. He doesn't have that power. We are very aware that the Holy Spirit is the Giver of Life (and we recite that fact too, as part of the Creed, before we receive the Eucharist).

God bless you, and welcome to CF!

The Roman Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation is unbiblical. In John 6:63 it is clear that Yeshua speaks of why it is the spirit that quickens and that the flesh profits nothing, that His words are spirit and life. I realize Catholic priests believe they can literally consecrate the literal flesh, blood and soul of Yeshua in what they call the Holy Eucharist, but how is this possible when Yeshua clarified that it is the Spirit that quickens, the flesh profits nothing. Yes I believe there are Catholics who take Yeshua literally when He states "My flesh is real food and My blood is real drink." But he did furthermore state that it is the spirit that quickens and that the flesh profits nothing. If this is true, which it is according to the King James Version Bible of John 6:63-64, then how can the priest consecrate the literal flesh of Yeshua in a wafer of bread during the Liturgy of the Eucharist? I realize there are very good catholics in this world, my mom is one of them, but how can a Christian worship Yeshua in spirit and in truth (John 4:23) if they are part of a religious system that preaches a false doctrine? Transubstantiation was discovered in 1214 AD and was mandated in all Catholic Churches in 1215 AD. So if one has to be saved through partaking in the Eucharist under the Paschal Mystery, what happened to Catholic Christians before 1214 AD when Transubstantiation didn't exist?

 

[GregConstantine]

That's a great irenic response Kylissa, but really, in this day and age, there is no excuse for that kind of ignorance, with the internet at our disposal, knowing that Orthodoxy and Catholicism are not the same things are at our fingertips.

 

[~Anastasia~]

That's a great irenic response Kylissa, but really, in this day and age, there is no excuse for that kind of ignorance, with the internet at our disposal, knowing that Orthodoxy and Catholicism are not the same things are at our fingertips.

I think somewhere up there, someone made the point that infighting between Catholics and Protestants kept the attention focused on those two, to the exclusion of the East. It may depend on where one lives, but to be honest with you, I had never heard of Orthodox Christianity before I came to CF a little over a year ago. When I asked my husband (who is very devout) about it, he had no idea what it was either. I asked my daughter (who has taken an interest in comparative religion) and she had never heard of it either.

If you know what to look for, the information is certainly available online, thank God. That has been a tremendous benefit to me. But if you don't even know the Church exists, it's certainly possible to know nothing about it.

I hope that changes in the future, for the sake of everyone.

 

[Wryetui]

Well, Kylissa has a point there. After the great schism, the roman-catholic church took the power in western Europe, the Inquisition, the Crusades, the fights... And then Luther came up, and the West had another revolution, now Catholicism is fighting another enemy than Orthodoxy, Protestantism! And then Calvin appears, and then the New World, and then the puritans, and so until now... The western religious history went seriously crazy... And there we have it, yes! right there, at the right side of the map, the Orthodox Church. Silent, quiet, still, patient and conservative, never fighting, never changing, never having troubles, just... THERE! The same as it was on 1054, and the same it was before then, and the same it is now, it didn't change, our church remained the same, in peace...

That's a question to think about!

 

[billvelek]

SNIP ...

... the Orthodox Church. Silent, quiet, still, patient and conservative, never fighting, never changing, never having troubles, just... THERE! The same as it was on 1054, and the same it was before then, and the same it is now, it didn't change, our church remained the same, in peace...

That's a question to think about!

That's been the big selling point with me in considering leaving the RCC to joint an Orthodox Church, ... along with my disillusionment with the post-Vatican II Catholic church and its modernist teachings. I really enjoyed the thread and article: "Forty Excuses For Not Joining The Orthodox Church". I've been slowly studying material on many different websites, but I'm still a bit confused between the Oriental Orthodox and the Eastern Orthodox, as well as which Orthodox Churches are in communion with the Vatican, and which ones are not. But in any event, I'm definitely going to stick with one of the Apostolic churches.

May the peace of the Lord be with you all.

Your brother in Christ,

Bill Velek

 

[Wryetui]

You don't have to convert, you are baptised already (I suppose), while the catholic baptism isn't accepted by the OC, you can simply go to one of our churches and see if you like it, enjoy the atmosphere, the peace and etc... You don't have to convert or so, just feel the peace and fall in love with Orthodoxy!

 

[~Anastasia~]

That's been the big selling point with me in considering leaving the RCC to joint an Orthodox Church, ... along with my disillusionment with the post-Vatican II Catholic church and its modernist teachings. I really enjoyed the thread and article: "Forty Excuses For Not Joining The Orthodox Church". I've been slowly studying material on many different websites, but I'm still a bit confused between the Oriental Orthodox and the Eastern Orthodox, as well as which Orthodox Churches are in communion with the Vatican, and which ones are not. But in any event, I'm definitely going to stick with one of the Apostolic churches.

May the peace of the Lord be with you all.

Your brother in Christ,

Bill Velek

I don't believe any Orthodox Churches are in communion with Rome, if by that you mean we offer/receive the Eucharist between parishes. Our beliefs are not the same as theirs on certain things, and that separates us.

There are however Eastern Catholic Churches which by appearances, Liturgy, and istm most or all practices are essentially like the Orthodox, but they are under the jurisdiction of Rome, subject to the Pope, and the dogmas of the Catholic Church are binding upon them. I don't want to say too much and be wrong.

The major difference, afaik, between Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox is that the OO does not accept Chalcedon, and has a different view of the nature of Christ. As a result of the early schism, I suppose none of the later Councils are binding on them either. Again, I don't want to say too much and be wrong.

The EO, OO, and Eastern Catholics cannot as a rule share communion amongst themselves. There are some nuances there, but the simple answer us that we do not share full/open communion among any of the three.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Oriental Orthodox are churches that broke off from the Church early on over the 4th Ecumenical Council. The are miaphysites, believing that Christ's humanity and divinity are united in one single nature. The Council decided that Christ is one person in two natures. The Orientals are the Ethiopians, Coptics, Armenians, etc.

There are no Orthodox churches in union with Rome. Some call them uniates, others call them Eastern Catholics. They prefer to be called Eastern Catholics. They are obviously no longer Orthodox since breaking with Orthodoxy to join Rome's lead.

I truly pray someday the Oriental Orthodox will reunite with us. The differences between us are virtually paper thin these days!

That's been the big selling point with me in considering leaving the RCC to joint an Orthodox Church, ... along with my disillusionment with the post-Vatican II Catholic church and its modernist teachings. I really enjoyed the thread and article: "Forty Excuses For Not Joining The Orthodox Church". I've been slowly studying material on many different websites, but I'm still a bit confused between the Oriental Orthodox and the Eastern Orthodox, as well as which Orthodox Churches are in communion with the Vatican, and which ones are not. But in any event, I'm definitely going to stick with one of the Apostolic churches.

May the peace of the Lord be with you all.

Your brother in Christ,

Bill Velek

 

[~Anastasia~]

Oriental Orthodox are churches that broke off from the Church early on over the 4th Ecumenical Council. The are miaphysites, believing that Christ's humanity and divinity are united in one single nature. The Council decided that Christ is one person in two natures. The Orientals are the Ethiopians, Coptics, Armenians, etc.

There are no Orthodox churches in union with Rome. Some call them uniates, others call them Eastern Catholics. They prefer to be called Eastern Catholics. They are obviously no longer Orthodox since breaking with Orthodoxy to join Rome's lead.

I truly pray someday the Oriental Orthodox will reunite with us. The differences between us are virtually paper thin these days!

Oh! I was not aware that was the history of Eastern Catholics. Learn something new every day. I had planned to look into it sooner or later but I always had another question (or three) on my plate!

 

[dzheremi]

Edit: I see Gurney got to the Eastern Catholics before I was done writing my reply. Good summary.

Though of course from an Oriental Orthodox perspective, we have nothing to "return" to as we never left the faith in the first place, but hey...tomato, tomahto, Leo, Nestorius. If God wills it, it doesn't matter what anyone says, and of course we also pray for an end to the schism. When I read the actual texts of the Eastern Orthodox liturgy, with precious few exceptions that I'm not even sure are liturgical (like calling the Armenians heretics for abstaining from cheese when the EO are still eating it...hahaha; I'll never not find that funny), I don't see anything that we would disagree with. Heck, I don't even see anything that we don't already say. This is why I have hope in our talks with the EO, but less so with others. Check out the priest's confession before the Eucharist in the Coptic liturgy of St. Basil, for instance. I am really simple, but I cannot find fault with any of this, and it is the essence of our faith:

"Amen. Amen. Amen. I believe, I believe, I believe and confess to the last breath, that this is the life-giving body that your only-begotten Son, our Lord, God and Savior Jesus Christ took from our lady, the lady of us all, the holy Theotokos Saint Mary. He made it one with his divinity without mingling, without confusion and without alteration. He witnessed the good confession before Pontius Pilate. He gave it up for us upon the holy wood of the cross, of his own will, for us all. Truly I believe that his divinity parted not from his humanity for a single moment nor a twinkling of an eye. Given for us for salvation, remission of sins and eternal life to those who partake of him. I believe, I believe, I believe that this is so in truth. Amen."


</damnable non-Chalcedonian soapbox>

 

[GoingByzantine]

It should be noted that 2 Eastern Catholic Churches never left communion with Rome, the Maronites who got horribly latinized and the Italian Byzantine Church which was latinized to an extent but then returned fully to Byzantine traditions over the past Century.

 

[~Anastasia~]

It should be noted that 2 Eastern Catholic Churches never left communion with Rome, the Maronites who got horribly latinized and the Italian Byzantine Church which was latinized to an extent but then returned fully to Byzantine traditions over the past Century.

Maybe that's the source of my confusion, because I thought the Italian Byzantine Church was basically the history of Eastern Catholics.

 

[GoingByzantine]

Maybe that's the source of my confusion, because I thought the Italian Byzantine Church was basically the history of Eastern Catholics.

Well it is an important component of Eastern Catholicism, based at Grottaferrata which was the home monastery of St. Nilus the Younger who is venerated by both the EO and CC.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

But some of the churches like in Ukraine were a political marriage with Catholicism, formerly Orthodox, right?

It should be noted that 2 Eastern Catholic Churches never left communion with Rome, the Maronites who got horribly latinized and the Italian Byzantine Church which was latinized to an extent but then returned fully to Byzantine traditions over the past Century.

 

[michaeldimmickjr]

I mean, they say they have the faith like it should be kept, they have the right, and they are based on the fact that Peter founded their church:

18 "I also say to you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My church; and the gates of Hades will not overpower it".

I like the roman-catholic church, I received a catholic education even if my family was orthodox because we lived in Spain and at school I chose to take religion classes. But I also think our Orthodoxy holds the truth and is right, but not only that, it makes you feel in love with this faith, but that doesn't make me not feel like they may say something true... What do you think?

It's not... it's a deception from the enemy. The Roman Catholic church mocks the One True Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church and I think very soon the charade will be up. Don't let the enemy confuse you. You have found the True Faith.

In Christ,

Michael

 

[GregConstantine]

"I think very soon the charade will be up"

What does this mean? What makes you say this?

I'm genuinely curious