Questions For Those Who Converted To Catholicism

[bonkers]

[quote name='HisChildForever' post='1721411' date='Dec 7 2008, 03:16 AM']Oh, well welcome. You certainly will come to understand that the Truth means a lot to us here.[/quote]

Thank you.

[TeresaBenedicta]

Honestly, no. Mostly because I didn't even know that the Orthodox existed until I was well into RCIA. And even then, I didn't consider it. It was just never a thought that crossed my mind.

At home, I will every so often go to a local Maronite parish, because I absolutely love their liturgy. I met a couple who had just been baptized and were now part of the Maronite Rite. I remember thinking to myself, "Man, I wish I would've thought of that." But I think that's about as far as my 'ever considering Orthodox or Eastern Catholic' has gone.

[desertwoman]

I'm stuck between orthodoxy and Catholicism now.

[Adrestia]

I did consider moving from Roman to Eastern (most likely Antiochene or Byzantine) Catholicism; but I chose not to because there are so few opportunities for fellowship outside of the Sacred Liturgy. (I had ruled out the Orthodox Christian churches because of Papal Primacy.)

[she_who_is_not]

yep

[Greg]

I come from a Southern Baptist background. I did consider the Eastern Orthodox Church. I thought about the OC because they to could trace their lineage back to the Apostles. The Catholic and the Orthodox agree on the marks of the Church, that she is One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic. And the Catholic Church agrees that the Orthodox churches are apostolic.

At that point I knew I had to explore the other three marks for them. If both the Catholic and the Orthodox had all four marks of the church I would have a real hard time defending any decision to become Catholic.

Is the Orthodox Church holy? It looks like both the Catholic and the Orthodox say basically the same thing on this point: the church is holy because God is holy. The church is made up of sinners and thus may appear at times sinful, but the Church at its core and in its essence - because it is the body of Christ - is holy.

Is the Orthodox Church catholic, that is, universal? The Orthodox do not have a significant presence outside the original Patriarchates (Alexandria, Antioch, Constantinople, etc.) and a few churches they established in neighboring areas (Albania, Cyprus, Czech-Slovakia, Estonia, etc.). They do have Archdioceses and Metropolis' in many areas around the world. However, according to the Ecumenical Patriarch himself, the Orthodox Church has failed "to constitute a single Orthodox Church in the so-called Diaspora in accor­dance with the ecclesiological and canoni­cal principles of our Church." In 2000 years, only a few new national churches. Thus, I found the claim that the Orthodox Church was "catholic" to be lacking.

Is the Orthodox Church one? This is really where it unraveled for me. The Orthodox claim to share a common faith, but there is no actual evidence that they do. There is no Catechism approved by all the Patriarchates. There is not even a Catechism approved by all the leaders of the canonical Orthodox leadership in the U.S.... They have not held an Ecumenical Council in over 1200 years. Since about the 1920's they have been planning for the next "Great and Holy Council of the Orthodox Church," but it has yet to happen... There is suppose to be only one Orthodox Church per country. The OC has been in the U.S. for over 200 years and, still, there are multiple jurisdictions here... In the U.S. they have institutionalized this jurisdictionalism, ethnic nationalism of the old country churches, in the SCOBA. New word: "Phyletism."

In short, they did not appear to me to have all the marks of The Church.

Greg

[philothea]

Great post, Greg.

And to Phatmass!

[Greg]

Thank you.

And here are some quotes from the Orthodox themselves:

"The Orthodox Church cannot claim to be the true, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church if she is actually divided into a plurality of mutually independent, competing, and overlapping jurisdictions. This division has long ago ceased to be justified by the peculiarities of Orthodox immigration in America, and has become an open scandal to the faithful, a source of demoralization and dissatisfaction in the laity, and an obstacle to any effort or progress."

Per SCOBA's Ad Hoc Commission on Unity. Meeting XI Minutes 1970. Cited in "Orthodox Reunion: Overcoming the Curse of Jurisdictionalism in America" by The Very Reverend Josiah Trenham, Ph.D. (2006) [url="http://www.orthodoxytoday.org/articles6/TrenhamUnity.php"]http://www.orthodoxytoday.org/articles6/TrenhamUnity.php[/url]

"In externals, Orthodox Christians in North America resemble Roman Catholics. They share a similar sacramental view of life; liturgical forms of corporate worship; traditional forms of piety such as fasting, prayer, monasticism; and generally "conservative" positions on contemporary moral issues. In administration the Orthodox in North America resemble Protestants and are splintered into distinct administrative "jurisdictions", divisions based on ethnic origin and politics, both secular and ecclesiastical. In self-identity, however, Orthodox Christians in North America are like Orthodox Jews; a people apart, unable and at time unwilling to separate the claims of race, religion, and politics: people for whom the Greek terms "diaspora" ("dispersion") has been an expression of enduring meaning"

Orthodox historian Mark Stokoe, [url="http://hirr.hartsem.edu/research/orthodoxpaper.html"]http://hirr.hartsem.edu/research/orthodoxpaper.html[/url]

"Despite administrational division, Orthodoxy remains united in faith, the Sacraments, etc. But is this sufficient? When before non-Orthodox we sometimes appear divided in theological dialogues and elsewhere; when we are unable to proceed to the realization of the long-heralded Holy and Great Council of the Orthodox Church; when we lack a unified voice on contemporary issues and, instead, convoke bilateral dialogues with non-Orthodox on these issues; when we fail to constitute a single Orthodox Church in the so-called Diaspora in accordance with the ecclesiological and canonical principles of our Church; how can we avoid the image of division in Orthodoxy, especially on the basis of non-theological, secular criteria?"

His All Holiness Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew at the October 2008 Synaxis of the Heads of All Orthodox Churches [url="http://www.goarch.org/news/observer/"]http://www.goarch.org/news/observer/[/url]

[kenrockthefirst]

No, simply because I didn't know about the various "flavors" of Catholicism at the time.

[Theosis3]

Greetings,

Welcome to the forum Greg. I am new myself. Thank you for your response to the question I posted. I read your post and it was very interesting. I wanted to respond to a few comments you made. Regarding the subject of the Orthodox and the understanding of being one, holy, catholic, and apostolic, there is a text online that might be worth reading: The Church is One by Khomiakov (an online version is available [url="http://www.fatheralexander.org/booklets/english/church_is_one_e.htm"]here[/url]).

[quote name='Greg' post='1722862' date='Dec 8 2008, 11:05 PM']Is the Orthodox Church catholic, that is, universal?[/quote]

You bring up a good point. Its something that I've questioned as well. If you look at those maps that show where different religious groups are, it's clear how geographically confined Orthodoxy has historically been. Christ said to go to all the world, yet Orthodoxy looks like it has only reached a small sliver of the world. But to this I would first say that no Church is truly "universal," if by that you mean having a large presence in every country. Even the largest Christian group (Roman Catholic Church) has a minimal size in some areas of the world. Adding all the Christian groups together, we can still see Christianity is still very much a minority in some parts of the world. Obviously if either the Roman Catholic or Eastern Orthodox Churches are what they claim to be, then being "universal" means something different than "having a large presence everywhere".

It is true that to be "catholic" does, in a sense, mean to be spread out or to be throughout the world. Regarding the geographical aspect of it, Khomiakov puts it this way: the Orthodox Church is catholic "because she belongs to the whole world, and not to any particular locality; because by her all mankind and all the earth, and not any particular nation or country, are sanctified; because her very essence consists in the agreement and unity of the spirit and life of all the members who acknowledge her, throughout the world". However, I would argue that being universal or "catholic" has also do with the faith being held, and cannot be limited to the geographical aspect. Being catholic also means holding to that faith which is catholic: which is whole and complete and which has a fullness to it.

Now, as to the geographical aspect of it and the lack of an Orthodox presence in many places, I think a couple things need to be kept in mind. Orthodoxy has done missionary work, just not on the same scale(and in the same manner) as Roman Catholicism. But Orthodoxy has done missionary work in the world. An example of this is Orthodoxy and how it managed to missionize Russia, which is not exactly a small place (I believe it makes up slightly over 11% of the world's land). Also, don't forget that much of the Orthodox world has been under Muslim oppression for most of it's existence. It is hard to send out missionaries to other countries when you're fighting for your very survival in your own country. Now this doesn't excuse Orthodoxy from doing missionary work, but I do think it puts a different slant on the volume of missionary work from the Orthodox Church through the centuries.

[quote name='Greg' post='1722862' date='Dec 8 2008, 11:05 PM']The Orthodox claim to share a common faith, but there is no actual evidence that they do. There is no Catechism approved by all the Patriarchates...[/quote]

This is something to think about: For how many hundreds of years did the Church manage to keep the one faith together without an agreed-upon catechism? For the matter, the Church managed to keep the same faith without even an agreed-upon Biblical canon for a few hundred years. Orthodoxy is a lot different from the Roman Catholic Church. To be sure that the Orthodox hold to the same faith just is a matter of researching Orthodoxy and seeing for yourself if they do indeed all believe the same thing when it comes to [i]dogmatic issues[/i] (of course there will be disagreements and diversity when it comes to non-dogmatic issues). Also, evidence for sharing the same faith is simply that Churches have kept in communion with each other, considering that the various local Churches have shown a propensity for cutting off communion over the smallest deviation from the true (dogmatic) faith.

One thing about Orthodoxy is that there aren't really many ready-made and easy answers to be had. Especially in Western society. You have to dig and dig, and learn and learn, when it comes to Orthodoxy. This is something I'm learning now. There is no one agreed-upon book to consult for matters of the faith, other than the Bible. Which is why I say again, you have to research things if you want to get answers. This is good and also this is bad, however for the most part it is good, especially in our age when we want all the answers right away and sometimes don't take the time needed to dwell on important decisions. In general, we live in a culture that is very impulsive. I'm not saying you are like this, I'm just responding with my thoughts in general over the comments you made.

[quote]They have not held an Ecumenical Council in over 1200 years.[/quote]

And even that is uncertain in Orthodoxy, as some modern theologians argue that there were 8th (Photian) and 9th (Palamite) Ecumenical Councils. But why there have been no more Ecumenical Councils is a subject unto itself (and one that would be hotly debated, I think).

[quote]Since about the 1920's they have been planning for the next "Great and Holy Council of the Orthodox Church," but it has yet to happen...[/quote]

From what I know about Orthodoxy, it is understood that things go slowly in Orthodoxy. But yes are right, the Orthodox have been planning this thing for along time. Maybe it's God's will that it hasn't taken place yet. Maybe the Orthodox don't want to make a mess of things and then need to have further councils to clean up the mess. Also, part of the reason that the great and holy council has not met since the 1920's is WWI and WWII. Not to mention the fact of communism in most of the Orthodox world for the next 50-60 years after that. Its clear how this would slow down the process. Most people in the West don't realize just how recently (since the 1990's) this change in Orthodoxy has been in regards to being able to freely maneuver. It is amazing that there is still talk about having a council!

[quote]The OC has been in the U.S. for over 200 years and, still, there are multiple jurisdictions here... In the U.S. they have institutionalized this jurisdictionalism, ethnic nationalism of the old country churches, in the SCOBA. New word: "Phyletism."[/quote]

I think the multi-jurisdictional problem is about a hundred years old, but it's still a scandal. I think it's one of those messes that will eventually get cleaned up, though. I personally wouldn't consider the situation akin to phyletism, though some individuals might fall into that error and give Orthodoxy as bad name.

[homeschoolmom]

[quote name='bonkers' post='1721397' date='Dec 7 2008, 02:01 AM']You know that thing when you think of evangelical christians and can't help but giggle and roll your eyes, I eventually adopted the same attitude towards all religion.[/quote]
No, I am not familiar with this arrogant attitude.

[Theosis3]

In response to your quotes...

[quote name='Greg' post='1722963' date='Dec 9 2008, 12:20 AM']"The Orthodox Church cannot claim to be the true, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church if she is actually divided into a plurality of mutually independent, competing, and overlapping jurisdictions. This division has long ago ceased to be justified by the peculiarities of Orthodox immigration in America, and has become an open scandal to the faithful, a source of demoralization and dissatisfaction in the laity, and an obstacle to any effort or progress."[/quote]

I would disagree with the first sentence of this paragraph. The Orthodox Church is still one, holy, catholic, and apostolic, in spite of having an uncanonical situation in place. It is clear that there is a problem with the way the jurisdictions are set up in America. And it is an "open scandal to the faithful,". However, I don't think that this irregular situation effects the very essence of the Church. The core of the Orthodox Church does not lie in administration. It is just an abnormal situation that needs to be remedied. This isn't the first time when there were competing groups in the same geographical region (e.g. in Antioch in the 4th century there were competing Patriarchs, with Rome/Alexandria supporting one Patriarch, and Cappadocia/the East supporting another Patriarch; both Antiochian communities were Orthodox, but the situation itself was uncanonical).

[quote]"In externals, Orthodox Christians in North America resemble Roman Catholics. They share a similar sacramental view of life; liturgical forms of corporate worship; traditional forms of piety such as fasting, prayer, monasticism; and generally "conservative" positions on contemporary moral issues. In administration the Orthodox in North America resemble Protestants and are splintered into distinct administrative "jurisdictions", divisions based on ethnic origin and politics, both secular and ecclesiastical. In self-identity, however, Orthodox Christians in North America are like Orthodox Jews; a people apart, unable and at time unwilling to separate the claims of race, religion, and politics: people for whom the Greek terms "diaspora" ("dispersion") has been an expression of enduring meaning"[/quote]

While I wouldn't put it like this, there is some truth to what he is saying. But I have a problem when its loosely portrayed that the Orthodox are splintered like Protestants. All I can say is that this is only true if you are merely taking a [i]glance at the situation[/i]. At the root, these "splintered" jurisdictions [b]are in communion[/b] with each other and are all part of the [b]same Church[/b]. The division is in [i]administration[/i], not in [b]faith[/b], and I think that that is an important distinction to make. The Orthodox are only like Protestants in appearance at first glance, but if you take a deeper look into the matter, I think the oneness of the faith among the Orthodox shines through, in spite of whatever external divisions might exist. It's basing the Church solely on human physicality and organization and not on the Faith that binds them.

[quote]"Despite administrational division, Orthodoxy remains united in faith, the Sacraments, etc. But is this sufficient? When before non-Orthodox we sometimes appear divided in theological dialogues and elsewhere; when we are unable to proceed to the realization of the long-heralded Holy and Great Council of the Orthodox Church; when we lack a unified voice on contemporary issues and, instead, convoke bilateral dialogues with non-Orthodox on these issues; when we fail to constitute a single Orthodox Church in the so-called Diaspora in accordance with the ecclesiological and canonical principles of our Church; how can we avoid the image of division in Orthodoxy, especially on the basis of non-theological, secular criteria?"[/quote]

I mostly agree with Pat. Bartholomew here. It's not that Orthodoxy is divided, but only "appears divided". However, it's true that the mission of the Orthodox Church is hurt because of the administrative divisions. The conflicts that have arisen over the years do not help. There is currently a certain lack of unity that I'm discovering about the Orthodox Church, but again, this is not a lack of unity in faith at all, but only a lack of administrative unity. It's clear how the Catholic Church would have the advantage over the Orthodox in matters of administrative tasks. One of the things Romans did best was administrative work and organization. Nonetheless, I don't think that God's will is thwarted because of these divisions, but rather he works through the church, helping to resolve the problems that have arisen due to worldly issues.

[mortify]

There is a book written by Stephen Neill, an Anglican writer, which is called _A History of Christian Missions_. He candidly admits that there is no comparing the efforts of the Catholic Church to spread Christianity throughout the world. The fact is for the first [b]19 centuries[/b] the Church was the absolute leader in all missionary activity in the world.

I forgot who, but there was a Church leader living in the Renaissance who used the Church's missionary activity as a proof for it's claim to be the true Church (Protestants had divided themselves in various national churches and showed no missionary activity... a bit like the Orthodox)

[mortify]

Peace Theosis,

[quote name='Theosis3' post='1724411' date='Dec 10 2008, 04:38 PM']I would disagree with the first sentence of this paragraph. The Orthodox Church is still one, holy, catholic, and apostolic, in spite of having an uncanonical situation in place.[/quote]

I'm not even sure what the "Orthodox Church" is, does it include Copts, for example?

I think whatever vague unity these particular churches have is based on the fact they were once ruled by Byzantium. As Constantinople grew in eminence it's customs and ideas spread throughout the Eastern empire, for this reason I think there is some similarity.

The West, on the other hand, was isolated from the East, and vice versa, and so Christianity uniquely sprouted on it's own in that part of the world. I always found the ways of the Latins admirable for this reason.

For Catholics visible unity is based on three things, holding on to the same faith, possessing the same channels of grace (sacraments), and being under the same authority.

[Theosis3]

A clear example of Unity among the Orthodox Christians is the funeral and burial of Patriach Alexis II. This is an excerpt from the list of Orthodox serving at his funeral:

The funeral service for the late Primate of the Russian Orthodox Church was celebrated by His Holiness Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople and the Patriarchal Locum Tenens of the Moscow Patriarchal Throne Metropolitan Kirill of Smolensk and Kaliningrad together with the Primates and representatives of the Local Orthodox Churches, members of the Holy Synod, and other archpastors of the Moscow Patriarchate.

Paying last respects to His Holiness Patriarch Alexy were delegations of all Local Orthodox Churches. The delegation of the Church of Constantinople was led by His Holiness Patriarch Bartholomew; the Church of Alexandria by metropolitan Peter of Aksum; the Church of Antioch by bishop Nifon of Philippopilis, representative of the Patriarch of Great Antioch and All the East in Moscow; the Church of Jerusalem by metropolitan Hesychios of Kapitolias; the Georgian Church by His Holiness and Beatitude Patriarch-Catholicos of All Georgia Iliya II; the Serbian Church by metropolitan Amfilohiy of Crna Gora and Primorje, chairman of the Holy Synod; the Romanian Church by His Beatitude Patriarch of Romania Daniel; the Bulgarian Church by metropolitan Dometian of Vidin; the Church of Cyprus by metropolitan Georgios of Paphos; the Church of Greece by His Beatitude Hieronymos of Athens and All Greece; the Church of Albania by His Beatitude Archbishop Anastasios of Tirana and All Albania; the Church of Poland by archbishop Szymon of Lodz and Poznan; the Church of the Czech Lands and Slovakia by His Beatitude Metropolitan Christopher of the Czech Lands and Slovakia; the Orthodox Church in America by archbishop Seraphim of Ottawa and Canada.

These were the Orthodox Hierarchs in attendance and participating in the funeral, an outward sign of inward communion. This communion has maintained a unity of faith for the past two thousand years--and for the past thousand years even without communion with a bishop claiming to be the head of the Church universal.

[Selah]

Yes, I did consider Eastern Orthodox, along with Anglican. What really drew me to the Catholic Church, though, was the history behind it, the beauty of their Mass, among other things.

Edited December 11, 2008 by Selah

[Greg]

[quote name='Theosis3' post='1725717' date='Dec 11 2008, 05:42 PM']A clear example of Unity among the Orthodox Christians is the funeral and burial of Patriach Alexis II...
These were the Orthodox Hierarchs in attendance and participating in the funeral, an outward sign of inward communion. This communion has maintained a unity of faith for the past two thousand years--and for the past thousand years even without communion with a bishop claiming to be the head of the Church universal.[/quote]

Theosis,

Perhaps, but not necessarily. Also attending were Russian President Medvedev, Russian Prime-Minister Putin, members of the Russian government, the State Duma deputies, members of the Russian Federation Council, and ambassadors from the U.S., Great Britain, France, Canada, Japan, Switzerland, Italy, Spain, Greece and other countries.

Is the Orthodox Church in communion with these people and groups? I don't believe so.

There was also a Catholic delegation:
Cardinal Walter Kasper, president of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity
Cardinal Roger Etchegaray, retired president of the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace and Pontifical Council Cor Unum
Archbishop Antonio Mennini, the Holy See's representative to the Russian Federation
Jesuit Father Milan Zust, an official of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity
Monsignor Ante Jozif, secretary of the nunciature in Moscow

Is the Orthodox Church in communion with the Catholic Church? No.

Just because someone is willing to sit in the same room with another person does not necessarily mean that they are "in communion."

Greg

References:
[url="http://www.mospat.ru/index.php?page=43577"]Funeral service for His Holiness Patriarch Alexy II[/url]
[url="http://www.zenit.org/article-24496?l=english"]Papal Delegation to Attend Funeral of Alexy II[/url]

[Greg]

Theosis,

A few comments:

[quote name='Theosis3' post='1724360' date='Dec 10 2008, 04:04 PM']... Khomiakov puts it this way: the Orthodox Church is catholic "because she belongs to the whole world, and not to any particular locality; because by her all mankind and all the earth, and not any particular nation or country, are sanctified; because her very essence consists in the agreement and unity of the spirit and life of all the members who acknowledge her, throughout the world".[/quote]

You are correct that catholic/universal has more than one meaning. The statement you quote could also be said of the Catholic Church.

[quote name='Theosis3' post='1724360' date='Dec 10 2008, 04:04 PM']... For how many hundreds of years did the Church manage to keep the one faith together without an agreed-upon catechism?[/quote]

What about The Didache, an early catechism, written about 100AD?

[quote name='Theosis3' post='1724360' date='Dec 10 2008, 04:04 PM']... the Church managed to keep the same faith without even an agreed-upon Biblical canon for a few hundred years.[/quote]

However, they did have Apostolic succession and when the early church recognized a threat from heretical sects also claiming to be Christian (Marcion being the first, I believe) it did two additional things: Developed a creed and established a biblical canon. Even today, however, the Orthodox Church does not agree upon the canon. Another reason I could not be Orthodox.

[url="http://www.orthodox-church.info/eob/eobintro.pdf"]Introduction to the Eastern Orthodox Bible[/url].

Greg

[Hassan]

[quote name='mortify' post='1720510' date='Dec 5 2008, 10:22 PM']The East's liturgy isn't as pure as one would think, just ask an Old Believer.[/quote]

I talk to them whenever I need some chain to secure my bike.

[Greg]

[quote name='Theosis3' post='1724360' date='Dec 10 2008, 04:04 PM']Maybe it's God's will that it hasn't taken place yet.[/quote]

Theosis,

Your comment here was about the Holy and Great Council, but would you also say that this might also apply to the as-yet realized unity of the various Orthodox jurisdictions in the Americas?

Greg

Edited December 13, 2008 by Greg