Why R. Catholic and not E. Orthodox?

[The Squalid Wanderer]

Today at 06:15 PM Karpousi said this in Post #19

How is this possible?

Eastern Rite Catholics profess the faith of the Catholic Church (ie, they believe in the Immaculate Conception, the Assumption, Purgatory) as well as Papal supremacy and the filioque (even if they don't have to say it.  Basically, they have to agree with everything the Roman Catholic Church teaches, but they don't have to practice everything the Roman Catholic Church practices.

That is how this is possible.  Not to throw cold water on ecumenicism, but it's basically a capitulation to Catholicism clothed in the veneer of Eastern praxis.

 

[vanshan]

I think one incorrect perception many Catholics hold is that the Orthodox Church is somehow disadvantaged or weakened by the fact that we are not led by a sole "vicar" of Christ or one leader. I think the opposite is true, as can been seen historically. I think the Roman Church since it's break from the other four patriarchs have suffered greater misguidance precisely by the fact the so much authority is held by a single person (many new teachings have sprung up, countering apostolic teachings). When you have a collection of bishops all who keep each other in check and renounce any among them who begin teaching novel and strange things that has a way of slowing heresy and perserving the Apostolic faith in a way that the Roman Church has failed to do. Whenever false teachings sickened the Church a defender could always be found to steer the Church back on course. The true Apostolic Faith headed by no man, but Christ himself is the ark of salvation.

 

[St. Tikon]

In our opinion, the Eastern churches split off from the original Church, which is headquartered in Rome. Ergo, they are in schism. They, of course, have a differing viewpoint, which is that the Pope had no jurisdiction over them; he only had jurisdiction over the Patriarchate of Rome. So to them, we are the ones in schism.

In my own personal opinion, the Eastern churches are a shade stagnant; I do not mean this as an indictment, merely as an observation. They still adhere to the idea that only the Roman Emperor can call for a council, and there hasn't been a Roman Emperor for a considerable number of years now. As a result, they haven't advanced much, theologically speaking, from the 9th century. The first eight ecumenical councils all had a Roman Emperor or Empress working in conjunction with the Pope, the last being the 4th Council of Constantinople in 869.

That's where the Orthodox councils ended. Situations arose in the West which had to be dealt with; however, the Byzantine (Eastern, Roman) Emperors did not see the importance of the problems, and ergo decided that calling a council to deal with them was not important; so it was left to the Pope to call a council to deal with them, the first of which was the 1st Lateran Council in 1123.

There have been thirteen councils between 1123 and 1962, all of which have dealt with some pretty weighty issues. The Orthodox have not had a council to deal with any issue since 869, since no Emperor called one after then, and since 1453, there hasn't been an Emperor to call one. As a result, as I said, they seem to be a shade stagnant, mired in history of some 1100 years ago.

I do not mean any disrespect for the Orthodox by saying this; this is merely my own personal opinion, and it carries no more or no less weight than anyone else's opinion. I have the greatest of respect for the Eastern Orthodox, and I think that in many ways, their conservatism is to be admired and emulated by we Catholics. However, you asked me why I am a Catholic and not an Orthodox, and I answered.

The bottom line is that I personally believe that the One Holy Roman Catholic and Apostolic Church is the most complete repository of revealed Truth; the Eastern Orthodox Churches (in my humble personal opinion), are not.

This forum is for EASTERN ORTHODOX. Read the forum rules. I for one would appreciate it if you would take Roman Catholic Theology elsewhere. As Orthodox, we disagree, and you know it. We don't want to even go there.

 

[nyj]

Uh St. Tikon, that post by Wolseley was made a year and a half ago. Back then, this forum didn't even have forum specific rules, was brought into existance in no small part by Catholic staff petitioning Erwin on behalf of the Orthodox, and moderated by Catholics for the Orthodox (which numbered maybe three or four) until the Orthodox posters fit the required specifications for moderating their own forum. Back then, none of the Orthodox took offense, so why, a year and a half later, should you?

 

[Orthodox Andrew]

This thread is quite old, and I think it would be best if it was closed.