Okay, I will bite, just this once. I did not mean what I said as an insult. I meant it as an observation based on the content of what you said.Sorry you feel that way. But I also don't care for the insults. I'm not oversimplifying anything. Each thing I've said you claim is more complex...really? So going for 1,000 years with a conciliar church in which all patriarchs were equal and where Rome had a primacy of honor and then suddenly 1,900 years later claiming that the Pope is infallible and universally supreme over the entire Church Catholic, you don't find that a tad odd? Ever heard of Keenan's Catechism? Ever hear of the Donation of Constantine forgery that was used to back up these bogus claims? I don't appreciate your charge that I'm speaking with polemics. I think maybe you're in a tender spot where you WANT to believe this stuff, but you don't want to really critically think about it, with all due respect. You may not like what I'm saying, but you need to hear it. If you have a church that takes 1900 years to finally proclaim a patriarch infallible and you need a host of anachronisms, forgeries, and PR to make it happen, you're in trouble.
Your first oversimplification is taking for granted that the Bishop of Rome's primacy was solely one of honor. The historical record is much more ambiguous on the issue and there is evidence both for and against your position. As for Rome's declaration of infallibility, it would not be the first time the Church, be it Roman or Orthodox, has declared something long after the origins of Christianity.
As for trying to force myself to be Roman Catholic, the opposite is probably true. I NEVER felt a spiritual pull to Orthodoxy like I did Catholicism. I actually chose Orthodoxy because, at the time, it was easier. I would be able to use contraception, I wouldn't feel so obligated to attend services every week, and because Orthodoxy isn't so quick to define all their doctrines and rules I had more flexibility in what I could and couldn't believe. Really what I am seeing is that I hardened my heart towards Catholicism and never gave it a fair chance.
As for not thinking critically, I spent 5 years seriously studying Orthodoxy before converting. How long did you study? Hell, I went and got a MA degree in Early Church History because I was so obsessed with the question. I don't re-enter this deliberation lightly. Thanks for the psychoanalysis though. How much do I owe you?
I understand that, historically, what sort of bread a church used was a regional thing and it was never dogmatically proclaimed that all churches have to used leavened bread. I am not sure what you are getting at.As an Orthodox Christian, do you understand WHY we used leavened bread for the Eucharist? Do you understand why it is absurdity to go back in time and how it's a step in the wrong direction making it back into unleavened bread? How is that polemical or oversimplified?
It is one thing to throw out words like "bad." It is another to actually engage with the sophisticated theological and philosophical efforts that have explored these topics. I would also be careful what you condemn. Orthodox churches haven't been free of supporting theological innovations either.What's polemical or oversimplified about bad theological nonsense like indulgences or purgatory?
It isn't that simple. I think you can find elements of both in the fathers and I think both modern Orthodoxy and modern Catholicism extend their dogmas and worship far beyond what the ECF's said.I'm assuming since you became Orthodox, you've read the Fathers. Would it be overly-simplistic of me to say that you won't find narry a word of most modern Catholic theology in their writings but you WILL read Holy Orthodoxy there?
Pot. Kettle. Black. Feel free to continue wearing rose colored glasses when you look at Orthodoxy, but in all fairness you should leave them on when considering Catholicism. Most of what you just mentioned I consider small-t traditions not essential to the church.Do you really want to enter into a modernistic mess like the Mass with all the hand-holding kumbaya, the priest facing the people instead of the altar, strumming guitars, communion in the hand by a bunch of "extraordinary ministers" of the Eucharist instead of only by a priest, seeing "altar girls" while there is no incense? Do you want to sit in a pew as a spectator at Mass or be using your entire body to praise God? Do you want to follow the scholastics of the middle ages or the Fathers?
I would like to see you throw these accusations at a seasoned Catholic thinker. That would be a show. See if you can arrange such a meeting. I will foot the bill.
Upvote
0