Why I'm Orthodox . . . and why others may want to be too.

[djns9437]

If they ain't got swords an' scalin' ladders, I think it is far from an attack.

And even in the face of an attack, the words of Saint Francis still hold true, wouldn't you agree?

One definition of the word attack (is to speak or write against in order to harm.)What does being an instrument of peace mean to you?

 

[injesuschrist]

One definition of the word attack (is to speak or write against in order to harm.)What does being an instrument of peace mean to you?

seems like he wants to be a man of peace ~ that seems like a man truly of Faith

 

[injesuschrist]

Where is the concrete proof these things were not taught from the beginning? Do you want me to cut and past the early Church fathers here? Read the writings of the earliest Church fathers, such as Saint Irenaeus, Saint Ignatius, Saint Clement of Rome, which you can find here: www.ccel.org/fathers2/ . Then compare that with a Roman Catholic Mass, or any catechismal work from the Roman Catholic Church.

very good Vashan - truth sometimes hurts -

 

[vanshan]

Vanshan . . .May I suggest that you take more care in choosing your sources.

This is a very weak rhetorical fallicy. If you can't answer the evidence, attack the source! This article appeared on the Orthodox Christian Laity's website, a well-established and even a little more "liberal" than the average Orthodox organization. Some take a stronger stance against the Roman Catholic religion, so this source is not taking a postion that is outside the Orthodox mainstream.

But that isn't to say that the title didn't -- and doesn't -- have a proper sense of which Gregory approved. If meant in the sense that the Bishop of Rome is the leader of all the bishops, the title is correct. If it means he is the only bishop and all the other "bishops" are not really successors to the apostles, it's false.

What Gregory condemned was the expropriation of the title Universal Bishop by Bishop John the Faster, the patriarch of Constantinople, who proclaimed himself Universal Bishop at the Synod of Constantinople in 588. Gregory condemned the patriarch's act because universal jurisdiction applies solely to the pope.

What you missed, if you read the full article, was that the title of Universal Patriarch, really is just a poor translation of the title Ecumenical Patriarch, which assumes no power over others, just honor for being the patrirach of the imperial city. This is the Orthodox view of the structure of the Church. Most protestants would also agree with this view from their readings in the scriptures. The apostles were equals, all fulfilling the role of bishops of Christ's Church. There was no universal Apostle, and has never been a Universal Bishop. The problem between the Patriarch of Constantinople and the Patriarch of Rome, was largely a semantic problem--the Patriarch in Constantinople was not suggesting Universal Supremecy, and from Saint Gregory's words, he clearly was not either. Just primacy in honor, not power.

You keep accusing me of attacking the Roman Catholic faith, and I am. That is granted. I, although weakly, am debating the assumptions you and others have about the Papacy and very nature of your faith. It is not Universal, so I have to say that to make my point. There is no malice in it, so please don't press your hand to your head and cry "victim" with each point I make. I am not being mean, although criticizing the apparent corruption of your church, hurts you to hear. No one wants to hear that, but if you're hanging out in GT, brace yourself. It's not for the weak.

Basil

 

[geocajun]

Very little is worth "fighting" for here. Arguing, yes. But not fighting or quarrelling. Far too much of what goes on here is quarelling or fighting, not arguing.

Lemme tell you something.

I'm good at arguing. Very, very good. I've done forensic debate since I was sixteen. I have been on national championship collegiate teams. I have judged out rounds at national tournaments.

I've practiced plaintiff's consumer protection law for more than a decade. Li'l ol' me tangles with the big downtown boys every day.

And you know what? It's fun. It's lots of fun.

But that, my friend, is argument.

What goes on at CF, I have learned, is something subtly different. Sure, the principles of Aristotle's Rhetoric still apply, but there is no decision, no judgment, no ballot at the end of the thread. Rather, we are surrounded by a great cloud of witnesses. And they, in the end and in their hearts, decide whether or not our performance has been edifying.

No one here wants to see my professional persona. That privilege is reserved for debt collectors, scam artists, and repo men. How would that be edifying here? Here is the home of my brothers and sisters. I will not treat them that way.

So, I confess that I poke some pompous bubbles. I spread some ice cream. I sing my little songs.

I'd prefer not to dance the same old dour dance of outrage. Too much blood has been spilt over it; too many people have been driven away by it.

Dan,
People here are trying to help others find the fullness of truth which can only be had within the Catholic Church. You may not find that important enough to argue about, but we are called the Church Militant for a reason. We are soldiers in a great spiritual battle for souls and there simply nothing in this world more important than finding the truth and spreading the word of God. If we wimp out from our duty under the premise of "way to much blood has been spilt..." then we may want to examine our own conviction of our faith. As it is, the only people I see CaDan arguing with are his "Brethren".

 

[vanshan]

This confusion may have fed the minds of those corrupt Patriarch's of Rome who wanted to grab power to themselves, which had never been given by Christ, to them. Their lust for power sealed their fate and led one of the ancient patriarchates to swerve off course and collide face to face with the One True Church, of which Christ alone is the Head. They were anathematized as history shows and are still outside the true Universal Church.

Basil

I am simply giving my interpretation of events, if it resonates with some of you great, if you dispute it, tell me why it's not true. We know the collision course is recorded fact. We know the larger communion of Patriarchs all stood up against, what they viewed as, a corrupted Patriarchate in Rome, having been deceived by the devil to assume power over all Christians. It seemed ludicrous to the bishops of the time, who followed centuries of collegial church governance, rather than the new authoritarian monarchy pushed by these later Popes.

This is recorded history I'm presenting to those who may not know the Eastern Orthodox view. This is concrete, so don't cloud our discussion by saying , "NO OBJECTIVE EVIDENCE." I'm not being mean here, I just expect an answer to my challenges, or no response. I don't mind your attacks, but it doesn't move our discussion forward and creates an unfairly tense atmosphere to those reading through the thread.

I step to leading people to the Church is tearing down the veils that hide the Church from them. One of those veils is the Roman Catholic faith, in the Orthodox view, of course. The west has been blinded for centuries by this monarchical powerhouse. Of course many good people are in the Roman Church, like yourself, Therese, so I am careful to attack the institution, not those under it. There is nothing personal in my posts here. I was deceived by slick charismatic preachers, when I was younger, so I don't hold anyones religious affiliation against them--unless they know better and are acting like wolves to deceive others.

Basil

 

[vanshan]

Dan,
People here are trying to help others find the fullness of truth which can only be had within the Catholic Church.

WHERE'S YOUR OBJECTIVE PROOF!!! Just kidding . . . it's an inside joke. See now that's the kind of candor I personally love. Thank you, Geo.

Basil

 

[CaDan]

Dan,
People here are trying to help others find the fullness of truth which can only be had within the Catholic Church. You may not find that important enough to argue about, but we are called the Church Militant for a reason. We are soldiers in a great spiritual battle for souls and there simply nothing in this world more important than finding the truth and spreading the word of God. If we wimp out from our duty under the premise of "way to much blood has been spilt..." then we may want to examine our own conviction of our faith. As it is, the only people I see CaDan arguing with are his "Brethren".

I have a slightly different view:

We are called brothers. We actually are brothers. We share a common destiny in this life and the next. Why, then, do we act as though we are foes and enemies? Why do we envy one another? Why do we stir up hatred? Why do we ready lethal weapons for use against our brothers?

There has already been enough warfare among men! Too many youths in the flower of life have shed their blood already! Legions of the dead, all fallen in battle, dwell within this earth of ours. Their stern voices urge us all to return at once to harmony, unity, and a just peace.

All men, then, should turn their attention away from those things that divide and separate us, and should consider how they may be joined in mutual and just regard for one another's opinions and possessions.​

But call me crazy.

 

[CaDan]

What you missed, if you read the full article, was that the title of Universal Patriarch, really is just a poor translation of the title Ecumenical Patriarch, which assumes no power over others, just honor for being the patrirach of the imperial city. This is the Orthodox view of the structure of the Church. Most protestants would also agree with this view from their readings in the scriptures. The apostles were equals, all fulfilling the role of bishops of Christ's Church. There was no universal Apostle, and has never been a Universal Bishop. The problem between the Patriarch of Constantinople and the Patriarch of Rome, was largely a semantic problem--the Patriarch in Constantinople was not suggesting Universal Supremecy, and from Saint Gregory's words, he clearly was not either. Just primacy in honor, not power.

What it comes down to, is what does this mean?

Christian leadership is a strange and contradictory thing. Mark 9 shows us the dilemna:

[bible]Mark 9:35[/bible]

It's more complicated than just "Who's the boss."

 

[jonas3]

...

 

[intricatic]

I like Orthodoxy, but it's a dream that I can't imagine falling into. The entire world is fragmented; we're all individuals. To think that anything is free of this problem because of our individuality is to blind oneself to the problem completely.

 

[vanshan]

We are called brothers. We actually are brothers. We share a common destiny in this life and the next. Why, then, do we act as though we are foes and enemies? Why do we envy one another? Why do we stir up hatred? Why do we ready lethal weapons for use against our brothers?

.​

"When God created us, He gave us life and breathed His Spirit into us. That Spirit is Love. When we lack love, we become corpses and are altogether dead." --Gerontissa Gavrielia

Basil​

 

[geocajun]

I have a slightly different view:

We are called brothers. We actually are brothers. We share a common destiny in this life and the next. Why, then, do we act as though we are foes and enemies? Why do we envy one another? Why do we stir up hatred? Why do we ready lethal weapons for use against our brothers?

There has already been enough warfare among men! Too many youths in the flower of life have shed their blood already! Legions of the dead, all fallen in battle, dwell within this earth of ours. Their stern voices urge us all to return at once to harmony, unity, and a just peace.

All men, then, should turn their attention away from those things that divide and separate us, and should consider how they may be joined in mutual and just regard for one another's opinions and possessions.​

But call me crazy.

Dan, we don't act as foes and enemies - we act as though we care too much to permit our fellow man to sit in the dark when our Lord has instructed us to spread the gospel.
You say we share a common destiny, and I say I thats a dangerous assumption. The cost of that assumption might just be the salvation of yourself and/or your brother. We cannot bury our talents in the sand, and we are in fact our brothers keeper.
Its been said that "if you wish to approach heaven, you better not come alone." I believe that Dan, and I don't presume that folks will be with me just because the world calls them 'good'. I do wish to approach heaven, and I plan to take some folks with me

 

[Benedicta00]

Glad to see you back Jason.

 

[geocajun]

Glad to see you back Jason.

Thanks

 

[CaDan]

Dan, we don't act as foes and enemies - we act as though we care too much to permit our fellow man to sit in the dark when our Lord has instructed us to spread the gospel.
You say we share a common destiny, and I say I thats a dangerous assumption. The cost of that assumption might just be the salvation of yourself and/or your brother. We cannot bury our talents in the sand, and we are in fact our brothers keeper.
Its been said that "if you wish to approach heaven, you better not come alone." I believe that Dan, and I don't presume that folks will be with me just because the world calls them 'good'. I do wish to approach heaven, and I plan to take some folks with me

Who says this?

Google is your friend!

 

[geocajun]

Who says this?

Google is your friend!

I'm referring to your comment

"We share a common destiny in this life and the next"

Man has 2 possible eternal destiny's: Heaven or Hell. To state we all go either way is an assumption, and as I said above, a dangerous one.

 

[Benedicta00]

CeDan,

All any of us ever have here is hope because we as baptized children have been washed clean of original sin and have been reconciled to God through Christ but we have to be willing to follow him all our lives if we will reach heaven. Following him includes following what his Church, that he left for us, teaches us.

I do hope at a person's death, someone who does have faith and true love for Jesus will be given the grace to have their eyes truly open and accept Christ’s bride, along with Christ. I hope and pray that God has not hardened their hearts and they will be open to accept him and his bride when they meet him.

You can’t deny his Church but accept him, and expect to dwell in heaven. His Church is his bride. Would you welcome in a person who blatantly denied your bride even after you gave them much grace to accept her?

I hope as you do for all Christians and that is all any of can do- hope and pray that all will come to the knowledge of god and be saved.

 

[AwesomeMachine]

"When God created us, He gave us life and breathed His Spirit into us. That Spirit is Love. When we lack love, we become corpses and are altogether dead." --Gerontissa Gavrielia

Basil

Without love we are nothing. The highest form of love is mercy. The highest form of mercy is to admonish the sinner, kindly. The world is a battlefield for ideas. God's Word is the supreme idea. It is created by God. But, words alone cannot describe the experiences people have with God.

Traditions such as Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism take into consideration the vast repository of experiences brought to us by the saints. These are our heroes, like superman, only in a Christian sense. The Roman Catholic Tradition is closest to the truth. Orthodoxy has some compromises, and incorrect doctrine. Although, it is stil a pretty good religion.

People need to realize, love is not only being kind to others in a way which makes them happy, it is also being kind in a way that removes deceit. That is what Jesus did. He stripped away the deceit. Many people were made very angry at this. Yet, many people accepted Jesus for this very reason.

If a person insists on believing an altered doctrine, there is not much anyone can do about it. Many churches offer a "fix" that is addictive. They preach an incorrect doctrine that imitates the real thing, but their joy, peace, and love do stay with them long after they leave a church gathering.

This is the danger of false doctrines. You can become addicted, and actually become more dependant on the church to entrance and fixate you for a time, only to be followed by a plunge in spirit, and the constant need to go to church gatherings.

This is the very principle at work in most churches today. The people get a fix off the pastor, like a drug. The music is repetitive rhythms meant to induce a sort of hypnosis. The message delivered is one meant to keep the members submissive, and dependant; always looking for the next fix.

Other Christian religions use deception to cover up sin. The Greek Othodox tradition of multiple marriages clearly does not have its root in Jesus Word. The idea we are all conceived immacualtely denies parts of scripture, and blinds people to the fact they are cursed by their ancestors sins. With this type of deceit there is no hope of forgiveness for "all" the sins one carries, even the sins of their dead ancestors. Denial is no better a solution than making things up.

Roman Catholicism has the advantage of being the first to have The Bible. The Holy Roman Catholic Church gathered together all the thousands of documents considered for inclusion in The Bible. Only a world power would have the resources to perform such a task. Then, they translated all the different languages into Latin so the Roman Catholic conference which decided what was going to be in The Bible, by Divine inspiration of The Holy Spirit, could read the documents. When The Bible was all finished, handwritten copies were made since there were no printing presses.

At that time The Bible was just another book, except to God. The Roman Catholics, started in the 300's, were blessed by God to be the ones who made The Bible. That was the official book of The Holy Roman Catholic Church. For centuries, The Roman Catholic Church was the only church with The Bible. It was written in Latin, which most people couldn't read, because Greek was the international language, and Catholic Churches wouldn't give it to anyone who refused to recognize The Roman Catholic Church as having authority.

"The Roman Catholic Church" means "The universal church of Rome" The word Catholic means universal. Many people do not know that, so they assume the universal church is different than The Roman Catholic Church.

When history talks about the universal church, the word universal is interchangable with catholic. It is all a matter of how the historian translated it. But, they mean the same thing. The universal church is The Holy Roman Catholic Church, and it always has been. Other churches have altered, or omitted some of the doctrines, but for the most part all Christian churches still follow Catholic teaching.

The Catholics made the Bible in the early 400's. Therefore, anyone who uses this book for worship is following what The Holy Roman Catholic Church laid down as doctrine for all Christians; The Holy Bible. If you are a Christian, but don't believe anything in The Bible, then you do not subscribe to Roman Catholic teachings. If you subscribe to the existence of The Holy Trinity being The Father, The Son, and The Holy Spirit; you are following Catholic teaching. That idea came out the tradition of Roman Catholicism.

Almost everything Christians believe is of Catholic origin. The official book of The Holy Roman Catholic Church, The Holy Bible, created by, and first used by Catholics; is what All Christians today use in worship. They are all following what Catholics laid down 1600 years ago in the form of a book called The Holy Bible.

 

[AwesomeMachine]

CeDan,

All any of us ever have here is hope because we as baptized children have been washed clean of original sin and have been reconciled to God through Christ but we have to be willing to follow him all our lives if we will reach heaven. Following him includes following what his Church, that he left for us, teaches us.

I do hope at a person's death, someone who does have faith and true love for Jesus will be given the grace to have their eyes truly open and accept Christ’s bride, along with Christ. I hope and pray that God has not hardened their hearts and they will be open to accept him and his bride when they meet him.

You can’t deny his Church but accept him, and expect to dwell in heaven. His Church is his bride. Would you welcome in a person who blatantly denied your bride even after you gave them much grace to accept her?

I hope as you do for all Christians and that is all any of can do- hope and pray that all will come to the knowledge of god and be saved.

This is the best post I ever saw here. This is exquisite prose. If I could ever write this well, I'd be famous. Best post award. And, The op sounds ok, but I disagree with some of it.