www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Convert Question

The number, if my memory doesn't fail was that about 75% were Arian.

Furthermore, it's been too many years also, but in the early centuries of the Church, almost every apostolic seat of the East was presided by some heretical bishop or patriarch. With a careful examination only Peter's was preserved and guaranteed by Jesus this possibility. The whole filioque, has been accepted and understood by many of the Eastern Churches, although some are allowed (from what I have come to understand) to say it or not in the Creed.

Today I am Catholic for a reason: The promise of Jesus to Peter, and its verifiable endurance through many great and also a few bad popes. My take on it is that ONLY God could have made such a promise and keep it.

All dogmas make perfect sense and are Scriptural to me, with the exception of the Perpetual Virginity of Mary, which is not readily found in Scripture, but I understand and embrace wholeheartedly.

For example, I explain sin and Purgatory based primarily on Scripture and my own experiences. After years of pondering and praying over this, I found that my whole understanding of this topic does not fit well with the Eastern theology as I am understanding it, yet, it aligns very well with the Catholic Church's teaching.

In the end, this desire to hop ship is complex, unless going into another Eastern Catholic Church. If someone feels in their heart called to become a Muslim, as it has been happening like crazy since 9/11, is that person going into the light or darkness, yet, it may feel like the right thing in their heart.

The fact is that REASON needs to transcend personal FEELINGS. You never abandon the ship. Where the head is, there is the body. Orthodox are not Protestants by a mile. Protestants only have 2 sacraments, while the Orthodox have all 7. I see them as our equal. Brethren who are not at home. Protestants are similar, but more deficient in some areas.

So let's pray that the prayer the Lord Jesus that "we may be One just as He and the Father are ONE" may come to fruition.

"The promise of Jesus to Peter" I don't see where that has any connection with the choice of any particular city like Roma as the capital of the church and it seems to be pretty accidental that Peter landed in Rome, the political capital of the pagan empire. Could have just as easily been Antioch for that matter.

In fact, Peter was in both Antioch and Rome - precisely because these were the great cities of the pagan empire.

The Church subsumed many pagan traditions etc. and Christianized them.

Rome became what it is today not only because of the relics of STS Peter and Paul, the Chiefs of the Apostles who were martyred their, but also because Rome was the capital of the empire.

It became the capital of the Church as a result (and Antioch also held a pre-eminence as a patriarchate for a similar reason(s)).

Alex

bergschlawiner

I agree with you regarding the choice of city, but I don't agree with the ACCIDENTAL part. God does not do things in random. His Infinite Wisdom defined Rome to be the city where the Apostle of Our Union sat and presided over the whole church.

One thing that is critical today is the unity of the Christian world. What is the link that binds us all together; Jesus Christ. But that link has proven to be insufficient in the broken world that we live on, as the centuries past and the present times' diversity of truth proves it. God never abandoned His people in the Old Testament. The Church is the New and Everlasting Covenant, the One that will endure until the End of Time. So where is our unity in Truth?

I believe with every fiber in my being that it happens to be the Bishop of Rome. It could have been the Patriarch of Constantinople, or Jerusalem, or Antioch, or Alexandria, etc, but it is not. My beliefs and feelings are that I, wanting to be totally faithful to the Lord, would seek His Church, whether in Moscow or New York, Rio de Janeiro or Athens, etc... because I am eager to participate in a positive way to the Prayer of the Lord for Unity.

bergschlawiner

One more thing to add about St Peter. At the end of his ministry, according to tradition (not Sacred Tradition), when things got dangerously hot in Rome and he was leaving the city, Jesus appeared to him. Do you remember this one?

Based on this incident, I see it as a twofold thing. First one is that it was time for Peter to suffer martyrdom, and the second is that it was to be done in Rome, as per Jesus' wishes.

Hence, we must deduce that at least some things are not as random for God as we may want them to be.

Blessings!

Toninho CF:

Christ is in our midst!!

If what I've highlighted is truly what you believe, you're in serious trouble spiritually and theologically. According to your profile, you state that you have interest in theology. Maybe before you post anything more at this forum you'd better go back to your studies as well as do some serious praying and some serious consulting with your spiritual father.

In any event, I invite you to go to Town hall and read the thread entitled "Who We Are." We are not in need of any more Latins coming here to preach to us about the Latin view of things spiritual, theological, or liturgical. The Eastern Churches have suffered enough over the centuries by this "Latin is Superior/Latin is the Yardstick" attitude. This attitude is what, in large part, caused the Great Schism and continues to be the major roadblock to finding full communion among the Churches today. This forum is an Eastern Christian forum with many members not in communion with the Bishop of Rome and other members who want to learn about the Christian East and how the various Eastern Christian Churches view the three areas I mentioned above.

Bob
Moderator

Dear Toninho,

As Bob has said, you have presented a one-sided Latin view of things which we don't need to go into again here except with respect to some assmptions you make which are really old hat and, well, nonsensical.

The fact that there were heretical churchmen in the East during the various periods in the early Church rather points to the vibrancy of theological debate in the Christian East - and this at a time when Rome had long ceased to be anything resembling a theological centre.

Pope Honorius was indeed condemned as an heretic (however one wishes to define the circumstances) and his excommunication was pronounced against him by his predecessors until the 12th century.

The Latin theological views you present are just that - Latin and EC:s are not bound to adhere to them _ indeed, Rome bids us to return to our authentic Eastern Christian traditions instead.

We are Catholic for a reason too. We follow the traditions of our Eastern Fathers in Christ, including our Particular traditions regarding communion with Rome.

As Bob has said, we will not be preached at by any Latins as our Orthodoxy and Catholicism has been defined in the blood of our new martyrs and confessors.

Alex

Toninho. Bob's response to this covered it well, but if I might chime in an additional point, I would call your approach an ultramontanist one (as opposed to just calling it a Latin approach).

Dear Peter,

What's the difference?

Alex

Christ is in our midst!!

Please forgive me for pasting in this section--essentially quoting myself. If Jesus Christ is not a sufficient link to pull us all together, nothing and no one is. It seems to me that this is so basic that all else is not worth even talking about. He is the beginning, the center, and the end of my life. That is my foundation. Apart from Him all else is nothing and worth nothing.

Bob

[Linked Image]