what if ?

[GBTWC]

what if you get charismated and you return to a protestant church for a time then decide to return to Orthodoxy are you still part of the Church?

 

[Protoevangel]

You would be received back through the Sacrament of Confession.

Depending on the situation and the priest, there may be some sort of epitemia (therapeutic penance) applied, but not always.

 

[Michael G]

You would be received back through the Sacrament of Confession.

Depending on the situation and the priest, there may be some sort of epitemia (therapeutic penance) applied, but not always.

It must be noted that the therepeutic penance which an Orthodox priest gives under certain circumstances is NEVER given as a punishment but rather as an act or time of healing to the repentents soul.

 

[Protoevangel]

It must be noted that the therepeutic penance which an Orthodox priest gives under certain circumstances is NEVER given as a punishment but rather as an act or time of healing to the repentents soul.

Yes indeed. That's what I meant when I said "therepeutic penance", but it is better to be more clear, than to allow a misunderstanding by assuming that what I intended to say would be understood the some way I meant it.

Thank you!

 

[Michael G]

Yes indeed. That's what I meant when I said "therepeutic penance", but it is better to be more clear, than to allow a misunderstanding by assuming that what I intended to say would be understood the some way I meant it.

Thank you!

When I went through a divorce 4 years ago I was given a 3 month penance of not receiving the Eucharist. Fr. Mike told me at the time he gave me the penance that it was not punishment for what had happened but rather was a time for my soul to begin to heal from the pain the divorce brought upon me. I make this point because there is a difference in attitude between the Orthodox view of penance and the Catholic view. The Catholic view is that penance is punishment for your sins whereas the Orthodox view is that penance is therapy for your soul. Another example of this is about 10 years ago a different priest gave me a penance of writing a specific icon of the Theotokos and praying the akathist that goes along with it while painting the icon. This penance was given due to some really stressful relationships I had early in life. Again, the attitude of the priest giving me the penance, or as he called it "holy labor", was for my soul to reach some form of healing by doing the work and was not to punish me.

 

[Reader Antonius]

It must be noted that the therepeutic penance which an Orthodox priest gives under certain circumstances is NEVER given as a punishment but rather as an act or time of healing to the repentents soul.

Yes we wouldn't want any popish understandings of penance.

 

[Michael G]

Yes we wouldn't want any popish understandings of penance.

Before you bash me, let me remind you that I did grow up Roman Catholic and did spend a year in a major seminary run by the Benedictine Order. I do know what I am talking about when I say there is a huge attitudinal difference between the Orthodox approach to pennance and the one that is commonly taken by your average Roman Catholic priest.

Next time be more careful before you assume all Orthodox are ignorant of the way Rome functions and the way it actually believes.

 

[Reader Antonius]

Before you bash me

let me remind you that I did grow up Roman Catholic and did spend a year in a major seminary run by the Benedictine Order.

I am well aware of that brother Michael. I have read the entire text of your testimony here on CF.

Next time be more careful before you assume all Orthodox are ignorant of the way Rome functions and the way it actually believes.

You are the one assuming my brother. As I said, I am well aware of your past as a Roman Catholic. I am also well aware that there are a good number of Orthodox who do understand Roman Catholic theology (but one perspective of Catholic theology mind you).

This is what I often find myself running into when I talk (or try to share a joke) to converts to Eastern Orthodoxy, particularly former Roman Catholics. The fact is you can never really win. Either you are a big bad Latin schismatic bashing them, or you don't "understand" them (regardless of how well formed you might be in Orthodox theology). The truth is, as you well know brother Michael, most Roman Catholics couldn't tell a prokimenon from a trapeza, and Orthodox converts tend to take advantage of that. Most Latin Catholics will feel guilty in listening to Orthodox descriptions of Occidental Christianity, remembering the injunctions of our hierarchy to be "nice", and be fascinated with the fact that the Orthodox seem like such exotic and delightful creatures. But some of us (especially us former Evangelicals who seriously studied and considered Orthodoxy before becoming Catholic) know the Orthodox Church better than that, and if we dare try to show that the East is no Shingri-La, they bring out the usual response (or a variant of it):

"We are not you and you don't understand us because you're Western."

 

[Michael G]

I am well aware of that brother Michael. I have read the entire text of your testimony here on CF.



You are the one assuming my brother. As I said, I am well aware of your past as a Roman Catholic. I am also well aware that there are a good number of Orthodox who do understand Roman Catholic theology (but one perspective of Catholic theology mind you).

This is what I often find myself running into when I talk (or try to share a joke) to converts to Eastern Orthodoxy, particularly former Roman Catholics. The fact is you can never really win. Either you are a big bad Latin schismatic bashing them, or you don't "understand" them (regardless of how well formed you might be in Orthodox theology). The truth is, as you well know brother Michael, most Roman Catholics couldn't tell a prokimenon from a trapeza, and Orthodox converts tend to take advantage of that. Most Latin Catholics will feel guilty in listening to Orthodox descriptions of Occidental Christianity, remembering the injunctions of our hierarchy to be "nice", and be fascinated with the fact that the Orthodox seem like such exotic and delightful creatures. But some of us (especially us former Evangelicals who seriously studied and considered Orthodoxy before becoming Catholic) know the Orthodox Church better than that, and if we dare try to show that the East is no Shingri-La, they bring out the usual response (or a variant of it):

"We are not you and you don't understand us because you're Western."

I am sorry, but no matter how much you look into Orthodoxy and study it, you really do not understand Orthodoxy until you have lived it for a number of years. As for Shangri-La, Orthodoxy might have some organizational issues, but I would much rather be Orthodox than be under the all knowing, all seeing, all everything controll that Rome pretends to have over its subjects.

 

[Michael G]

KW,
You should be glad the mods in TAW always have been tolerant of OBOB members in an Orthodox forum because I highly doubt I would get away with making the comments to you that you have made to me in OBOB.

 

[rusmeister]

I am well aware of that brother Michael. I have read the entire text of your testimony here on CF.



You are the one assuming my brother. As I said, I am well aware of your past as a Roman Catholic. I am also well aware that there are a good number of Orthodox who do understand Roman Catholic theology (but one perspective of Catholic theology mind you).

This is what I often find myself running into when I talk (or try to share a joke) to converts to Eastern Orthodoxy, particularly former Roman Catholics. The fact is you can never really win. Either you are a big bad Latin schismatic bashing them, or you don't "understand" them (regardless of how well formed you might be in Orthodox theology). The truth is, as you well know brother Michael, most Roman Catholics couldn't tell a prokimenon from a trapeza, and Orthodox converts tend to take advantage of that. Most Latin Catholics will feel guilty in listening to Orthodox descriptions of Occidental Christianity, remembering the injunctions of our hierarchy to be "nice", and be fascinated with the fact that the Orthodox seem like such exotic and delightful creatures. But some of us (especially us former Evangelicals who seriously studied and considered Orthodoxy before becoming Catholic) know the Orthodox Church better than that, and if we dare try to show that the East is no Shingri-La, they bring out the usual response (or a variant of it):

"We are not you and you don't understand us because you're Western."

Hello KnightWolfLord (Can I call you "KW"?)
Thanks for your thoughtful comments!
Yes, the differences between us ARE quite complex - otherwise the schism would've ended soon after it began.

One thing I do have to say Michael is right on (and I'm aware that you could also claim this for Catholicism):

no matter how much you look into Orthodoxy and study it, you really do not understand Orthodoxy until you have lived it for a number of years.

It's one thing to study it as theory. It's quite another to live and experience it.

 

[Reader Antonius]

Hello KnightWolfLord (Can I call you "KW"?)
Thanks for your thoughtful comments!
Yes, the differences between us ARE quite complex - otherwise the schism would've ended soon after it began.

One thing I do have to say Michael is right on (and I'm aware that you could also claim this for Catholicism):
It's one thing to study it as theory. It's quite another to live and experience it.

Thank you for your most charitable response my brother.

I agree that faith is first and foremost experential, not intellectual or merely dogmatic (and believe it or not, this was stressed immensly in my formation as a Roman Catholic).

However I feel that there are things that belie Orthodoxy that are sufficient for someone to choose not to become Orthodox, rather than simply converting (a serious matter) and living it and then making a decision, not that this is what you are suggesting, of course.

For example. I wanted to become an Apostolic Christian in the fullest sense. I wanted to follow a Church that had maintained the faith I had discovered in the writings of the Holy Fathers. It became very clear (to me and my heart) that while the Holy Orthodox Church truly is Apostolic and truly is orthodox, it lacks some things spoken of by the Fathers and the Bible.

For example, the Orthodox understanding of divorce, I felt at least, was completely incompatible with the Biblical and Patristic information on the subject. Only in the Catholic Church, that includes all the 23 self-governing churches in communion with Rome, would I find the Patristic and Biblical understanding of divorce kept uncompromised.

....Now....this is obviously a debatable subject my brother, LOL. But my point is that when one is looking (as in my case) for a "New Testament Church" (to quote my Orthodox Study Bible's notes), there are things that can be ascertained through study without actually experiencing them.

To that point, I know of Protestant converts to Orthodoxy who also read the Holy Fathers as I did, and they concluded that Catholic Christianity hadn't kept the Apostolic Faith undefiled. Still being an avid reader of Patristics and Church history, I find that belief to be somewhat unbelievable (and of course I would), HOWEVER the point of study being sufficient on some levels remain.

One final point (as you predicted). I would also contend that like Orthodoxy, Catholicism must also be lived if a full understanding of it is to be truly found. Growing in my walk with the Lord in the bosom of the Latin Catholic Church, and at times the Melkite Greek Catholic Church, I can most certainly tell you that there were things "hidden" from me during the period of catechesis...things that only became truly understood when I began to live my faith.

This point is something that my spiritual father, a Roman deacon, constantly teaches me.



In the end I think we agree on more than both of us realize, LOL. Just the other day I was finding myself disagreeing with the model of ecclesiology present in the writings of Nicholas Afanasieff. I thought of a "eucharistic, local church ecclesiology" as something totally out there.

BUT then I read the official teachings of the Catholic Church on the subject and discovered that we too (even in the Roman Church!) have a strong concept of local church ecclesiology, although we don't accept some of the implications that Afanasieff made. We put it into the perspective of a universal Church in which each particular church contains fully in itself the marks of the whole Body of Christ.

But I digress. My point is that as a Roman Catholic, and one quite proud of the Occidental Christian tradition, I have a duty nonetheless to understand as much as possible about Orthodox theology as well. And while I may never be able to fully understand Holy Orthodoxy since I will not experience it (unless reunion comes, LOL), I will understand it to the best of my ability.

I likewise believe this about Orthodox Christians concerning Roman Catholic theology (or even Byzantine Catholic, Coptic Catholic, and/or Syriac Catholic theology).

There is no doubt in my mind that there is truly some sort of imperfect communion between all of us, especially between Catholics and Orthodox. This communion has been grievously wounded, but it persists still. If all of us strive to overcome the biases and misconceptions, whether perpetrated by church leaders or by historical circumstance, the eventual healing of the wounds in this fragile communion will come about.

And so I repeat the prayer that I pray each morning and evening when I use my Melkite Byzantine Catholic prayerbook:

"Remember, O Lord, also all our fathers and brethren, and sisters, and those that lie here, and all Orthodox Christians that departed in the hope of resurrection and life eternal, and settle them with Thy saints, where the light of Thy countenance shall visit them, and have mercy on us, for Thou art good and the Lover of mankind. Bow."



Peace be with you always, and may the day come swiftly when we may partake of the Holy Mysteries together!

 

[Michael G]

In the end I think we agree on more than both of us realize, LOL.

Sorry, but I can not agree with this statement. There is a fundamental difference between Eastern and Western Christianity. Catholicism is far closer to Protestantism than it is to Orthodox Christianity. Having lived BOTH faiths, I can tell you this is clearly the case.

 

[E.C.]

It's one thing to study it as theory. It's quite another to live and experience it.

St. Nektary of Optina agrees!

"Orthodoxy is life. One can not talk about it; one must live it" (English language butchering is mine )

 

[Michael G]

St. Nektary of Optina agrees!

"Orthodoxy is life. One can not talk about it; one must live it" (English language butchering is mine )

Did you take classes on how to butcher the English language? If so, what is your instrument of choice?

 

[Philothei]

Thank you for your most charitable response my brother.

I agree that faith is first and foremost experential, not intellectual or merely dogmatic (and believe it or not, this was stressed immensly in my formation as a Roman Catholic).

Any religion is more of what you read in the text book .... naturally.

However I feel that there are things that belie Orthodoxy that are sufficient for someone to choose not to become Orthodox, rather than simply converting (a serious matter) and living it and then making a decision, not that this is what you are suggesting, of course.

? Like?

For example. I wanted to become an Apostolic Christian in the fullest sense. I wanted to follow a Church that had maintained the faith I had discovered in the writings of the Holy Fathers. It became very clear (to me and my heart) that while the Holy Orthodox Church truly is Apostolic and truly is orthodox, it lacks some things spoken of by the Fathers and the Bible.

Like what? That we do not need to have a "high pontiff" to teach us what to believe? How is it that Orthodoxy lacks of by the Fathers and the bible?

For example, the Orthodox understanding of divorce, I felt at least, was completely incompatible with the Biblical and Patristic information on the subject. Only in the Catholic Church, that includes all the 23 self-governing churches in communion with Rome, would I find the Patristic and Biblical understanding of divorce kept uncompromised.

What Patristic information you looked in? Fathers in the East do talk about "ecomomia" and as far as we know "divorce" already was taking place during Patristic times in the East... How do you explain that?

Anulment on the other hand leaves you with other more serious problems... such as the children of such marriages that are anulted ....(that is zaped) never existed??? What God does not recognize them as "legit"?

....Now....this is obviously a debatable subject my brother, LOL. But my point is that when one is looking (as in my case) for a "New Testament Church" (to quote my Orthodox Study Bible's notes), there are things that can be ascertained through study without actually experiencing them.

Yeah for you lol.... Not us as we are in tune with the Patristic thought and praxis...Like I said you need Church praxis...

To that point, I know of Protestant converts to Orthodoxy who also read the Holy Fathers as I did, and they concluded that Catholic Christianity hadn't kept the Apostolic Faith undefiled. Still being an avid reader of Patristics and Church history, I find that belief to be somewhat unbelievable (and of course I would), HOWEVER the point of study being sufficient on some levels remain.

Advocating "inner knowledge" of any system is a fallacy! Reading the Fathers as per Catholic apologetics is not reading the Fathers objectivivly rather reading them to prove RC dogma... cherry picking and etc.... We do not cherry pick in EO we allow the Councils and the Fathers IN CONTEXT to speak to us....period

One final point (as you predicted). I would also contend that like Orthodoxy, Catholicism must also be lived if a full understanding of it is to be truly found. Growing in my walk with the Lord in the bosom of the Latin Catholic Church, and at times the Melkite Greek Catholic Church, I can most certainly tell you that there were things "hidden" from me during the period of catechesis...things that only became truly understood when I began to live my faith.

True. Any faith would do that to you. More likely Orthdoxy since we are using all our senses... to experience it... taste, touch, smell, hearing, seeing...

This point is something that my spiritual father, a Roman deacon, constantly teaches me.



In the end I think we agree on more than both of us realize, LOL. Just the other day I was finding myself disagreeing with the model of ecclesiology present in the writings of Nicholas Afanasieff. I thought of a "eucharistic, local church ecclesiology" as something totally out there.

Nicholas Afanasieff is way out there my friend!!!

You cannot take him to account from a layman perspective... Even serious hierarchs do not even go anywhere close to him.... His idea is "way out there" indeed and MOST EO churches would never even bother looking into him... He is way above anyone's head believe me... Now if you like to read "fringe" theology your perogative just do not advertize it as a legitamate source...it is not!!

BUT then I read the official teachings of the Catholic Church on the subject and discovered that we too (even in the Roman Church!) have a strong concept of local church ecclesiology, although we don't accept some of the implications that Afanasieff made. We put it into the perspective of a universal Church in which each particular church contains fully in itself the marks of the whole Body of Christ.

In theory that model would not fit the RC no matter what. Again you are reading and taking Afanasieff to refer to something he does not....

His reference to Universal Church has no weight on the idea of the "
catholic Church" of Roman Catholicism...Afanasieff would more be acceptable as a model and would agree with modern time Congregationalism than RC model... YOu are reading it wrong again

But I digress. My point is that as a Roman Catholic, and one quite proud of the Occidental Christian tradition, I have a duty nonetheless to understand as much as possible about Orthodox theology as well. And while I may never be able to fully understand Holy Orthodoxy since I will not experience it (unless reunion comes, LOL), I will understand it to the best of my ability.

You make your critisism and then you say you will never understand it fully but to the best of your ability...A good starting point then will be to start reading it trying to be as "unbiased" as you can... Stop compairing it to RC and try to read it for what it says... I know it is hard to do... but still in order for someone to appreciate something you need an open mind...

I likewise believe this about Orthodox Christians concerning Roman Catholic theology (or even Byzantine Catholic, Coptic Catholic, and/or Syriac Catholic theology).

There is no doubt in my mind that there is truly some sort of imperfect communion between all of us, especially between Catholics and Orthodox. This communion has been grievously wounded, but it persists still. If all of us strive to overcome the biases and misconceptions, whether perpetrated by church leaders or by historical circumstance, the eventual healing of the wounds in this fragile communion will come about.

Striving to overcome the biases is not an easy job. We do overcome them everytime we do pray for each other and unity like we do every Sunday.
There are things and dogma that cannot be "bridged" as it was added on in later years. There are false teachings that the Orthodox Church will never accept. Instead of that I think it is wise to see our differences and accept them and educate our laity to recognize them so that we do not give each other false hopes of unity...that will end up in "false unity"....

And so I repeat the prayer that I pray each morning and evening when I use my Melkite Byzantine Catholic prayerbook:

"Remember, O Lord, also all our fathers and brethren, and sisters, and those that lie here, and all Orthodox Christians that departed in the hope of resurrection and life eternal, and settle them with Thy saints, where the light of Thy countenance shall visit them, and have mercy on us, for Thou art good and the Lover of mankind. Bow."

Amen

Peace be with you always, and may the day come swiftly when we may partake of the Holy Mysteries together!

Amen to that too

 

[Hoankan]

Closing for staff review.

Edit by FreeinChrist: The thread will stay closed.

Flaming, baiting, trolling, or feeding trolls is not allowed. This also applies to groups. In other words, play nice, don't hurt others, nor call them names.

If you think you are being flamed, choose *not* to be offended, but instead take a break, and communicate, rather than escalating or accusing others.

Threads which are off topic for the individual forums are not allowed, and substantial derails of threads are not looked upon in a favorable fashion.