Catholic ping!
Why only Catholics? There are many Christians of many faith.
Can of worms, meet Opener. Opener, Can of Worms.
I am Russian Orthodox. I married a Catholic. During our conversations on this topic we have come to this understanding: they are both the true church because they are of the same past ( before the Schism). My church decided to go in one direction, his in another. They share the same history so the answer is either both are, or neither. A little simple, but sometimes simple is best (at least for us).
I am Russian Orthodox. I married a Catholic. During our conversations on this topic we have come to this understanding: they are both the true church because they are of the same past ( before the Schism). My church decided to go in one direction, his in another. They share the same history so the answer is either both are, or neither. A little simple, but sometimes simple is best (at least for us).
I attended Catholic grammar and high schools. The high school, run by an Italian based order of priests and brothers (Salesians of Don Bosco), would often invite the local Greek Orthodox church to celebrate Mass in our school. I always enjoyed those services, and didn’t see much difference between either (save married Orthodox priests.)
I would respectfully suggest that the writer of the article go and enroll in an inter-denominational Christian missionary endeavor in some remote back woods in the world, and, after keeping to that call for a decade or more, serving G-d with Christians from different confessions, come back and tell us how serious this question is to them, as a Christian.
I wish the caucus designation was respected.
Although most Orthodox posters seem to have left this site, I was still hoping for an interesting discussion.
It seems unlikely that there will be one now.
The patriarchs of Constantinople and Moscow, nor any other grouping of Orthodox bishops, pretend to possess the charism of infallibility.
Thus, the one who makes the claim is the one, true church...HaHaHa...
The truth is that Christ’s headship of the entire Church is disclosed in the supreme and universal authority granted Peter and his successors, the Bishops of Rome, who were considered in the first millennium to be the sole heir of Peter’s singular privileges as Rock, bearer of the keys of the Kingdom, confirmer of the brethren, and chief pastor of the flock, and, thus, rendered infallible in the teaching of faith and morals to the entire Church.
Any one who is willing to read the scriptures can easily see that Peter was NOT a rock of any sort...
Want to see a rock in the New Testament...Look no further than Paul...Paul never denied Jesus...Paul never had to be reprimanded for teaching sound doctrine...And Paul was more than willing to give up his life for Jesus while Peter lied to save his hide and even ran away from the site of the Crucifixion for his own safety...Peter was a rock??? What a joke...
What is glaringly obvious is that what is now the Orthodox church did not part with Rome over a thousand year dispute over doctrine...These false doctrinal issues would have come into play closer to the thousand year mark of the union when the split took place...Therefore it's obvious that the Catholic religion split from the Orthodox with their new phoney doctrines and not the other way around...
Certainly, well-informed Catholics are able to present formidable arguments drawn from the Scriptures, Fathers, and Councils in favor of the Roman Pontiff’s universal authority in the Church, the legitimacy of the doctrine of the Filioque, purgatory, and the Immaculate Conception, not to mention other doctrines questioned or denied by Eastern Orthodox, who assume they constitute the “one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church,” signified in the Nicene-Constantinople Creed of 381 A.D., indulglng themselves with the repeated assertion made to Catholics.
Isn't that funny...Not a single Catholic on FR has ever presented a formidable argument from the scriptures to defend their unGodly doctrines...