/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

>>612675

>Why the FUC is it so hard to choose between catholicism and orthodoxy?

It isn't.

Come to me, all you who labor and are burdened, and I will give you rest.

Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am meek and humble of heart; and you will find rest for yourselves.

For my yoke is easy, and my burden light.

>>612675

Follow Christ not a denomination

>>612678

Meme, pressuposes that belonging to the church He has founded isn't an essential part of following Him.

>>612683

>belonging to the church He has founded isn't an essential part of following Him.

Source?

>>612675

It's really not. The throne of st. Peter is the highest. Just look at what the Orthodox themselves used to say about it:

https://www.fisheaters.com/easternfathers.html

St. John Chrysostom, Patriarch of Constantinople (c. 387)

>Peter himself the Head or Crown of the Apostles, the First in the Church, the Friend of Christ, who received a revelation, not from man, but from the Father, as the Lord bears witness to him, saying, 'Blessed art thou, This very Peter and when I name Peter I name that unbroken Rock, that firm Foundation, the Great Apostle, First of the disciples, the First called, and the First who obeyed he was guilty …even denying the Lord." (Chrysostom, T. ii. Hom)

Emperor Justinian (520-533)

Writing to the Pope:

>Yielding honor to the Apostolic See and to Your Holiness, and honoring your Holiness, as one ought to honor a father, we have hastened to subject all the priests of the whole Eastern district, and to unite them to the See of your Holiness, for we do not allow of any point, however manifest and indisputable it be, which relates to the state of the Churches, not being brought to the cognizance of your Holiness, since you are the Head of all the holy Churches. (Justinian Epist. ad. Pap. Joan. ii. Cod. Justin. lib. I. tit. 1).

The Lord will guide you. Just stay honest with yourself in the meantime and do what you can. Isi Khodá, rahmat kon.

Oh and that Jay Dyer—Nick Fuentes debate might be worthwhile as part of your journey.

>>612714

You won't find a single Eastern Father expressing anything like Unam Sanctam. How you get from those quotes to Papal Supremacy is beyond me.

>>612694

Source: Re-read that post.

>Okay I did. So what is the source for THAT?

Source: 2 Thessalonians 2:15

>>612675

The Orthodox are in just as much anarchy as the Protestants. Come home to Rome.

>>612721

John VI, Patriarch of Constantinople (715)

>The Pope of Rome, the head of the Christian priesthood, whom in Peter, the Lord commanded to confirm his brethren. (John VI, Epist. ad Constantin. Pap. ad. Combefis, Auctuar. Bibl. P.P. Graec.tom. ii. p. 211, seq.)

St. Nicephorus, Patriarch of Constantinople (758-828)

>Without whom (the Romans presiding in the seventh Council) a doctrine brought forward in the Church could not, even though confirmed by canonical decrees and by ecclesiastical usuage, ever obtain full approval or currency. For it is they (the Popes of Rome) who have had assigned to them the rule in sacred things, and who have received into their hands the dignity of headship among the Apostles. (Nicephorus, Niceph. Cpl. pro. s. imag. c 25 [Mai N. Bibl. pp. ii. 30]).

Still not clear enough?

>>612724

First among Equals

It's obvious. If God favored one over the other would it show it's the true church? Christ fulfilled the prophecies, scriptures, and performed many miracles. We can argue about prophecies and scriptures and their meaning but there is no arguing over miracles. Research Fatima. If it's true the Catholic church is the church of Christ if it's not then it isn't. Because our lady promised the conversion of Russia if it was consecrated to the immaculate heart of Mary by the pope in union with the bishops (it hasn't been done yet). Another thing to ponder is. Why are Catholics responsible for 90% (protestant heretics + catholics) and why orthodox are 10%? Catholic heresies outnumber orthodox Christians 3x. Like st Paul said we labor and God gives the growth. Orthodox have not converted a country since the schism and all their evangelization efforts yield little results (Japan,alaska) And the reason there is orthodoxy outside eastern Europe is because of immigration.

God could not make it any more obvious just as He could not make it more obvious to the Jews but they still rejected Him. Ask yourself how could God make it obvious the Catholic church is His bride? Hasn't God already done it?

>>612732

Says you.

St. John Chrysostom

>And why, then, passing by the others, does He converse with Peter on these things? (John 21:15). He was the chosen one of the Apostles, and the mouth of the disciples, and the leader of the choir. On this account, Paul also went up on a time to see him rather than the others (Galatians 1:18). And withal, to show him that he must thenceforward have confidence, as the denial was done away with, He puts into his hands the presidency over the brethren.

>And He brings not forward the denial, nor reproches him with what had past, but says, 'If you love me, preside over the brethren …and the third time He gives him the same injunction, showing what a price He sets the presidency over His own sheep. And if one should say, 'How then did James receive the throne of Jerusalem?,' this I would answer that He appointed this man (Peter) teacher, not of that throne, but of the whole world. (Chrysostom, In Joan. Hom. 1xxxviii. n. 1, tom. viii)

>>612714

>the throne of Peter is the highest

>Throne of Peter

>not Throne of Christ

yeah ookay

>>612724

Keep in mind that at the time of writing, the seat of Peter was no throne.

The papacy invented universal temporal power in the 8th century and used forged decretals to justify it.

Also, the keys are in Antioch.

>>612732

He'd be prime if he wasn't apostate. But he is apostate both by Orthodox standards and Latin standards now.

>>612738

Did the Lord not say that His kingdom would reign for a thousand years? ie. 4th c.—14th c.

—

Orthos have no problem with the primacy of Peter. We have no problem with the primacy of Rome. But even the prime can fall into error. Love you guys, take care and guard your hearts and minds.

>>612747

On earth I meant.

>Keep in mind that at the time of writing, the seat of Peter was no throne.

Rome always was and is the throne of st. Peter.

>The papacy invented universal temporal power in the 8th century and used forged decretals to justify it.

Oh really? St. Theodore, who lived from mid 8th to mid 9th century wrote

Writing to Pope Paschal, who was pope from 817 to 824

>Hear, O Apostolic Head, divinely-appointed Shepherd of Christ's sheep, keybearer of the Kingdom of Heaven, Rock of the Faith upon whom the Catholic Church is built. For Peter art thou, who adornest and governest the Chair of Peter. Hither, then, from the West, imitator of Christ, arise and repel not for ever (Ps. xliii. 23). To thee spake Christ our Lord: 'And thou being one day converted, shalt strengthen thy brethren.' Behold the hour and the place. Help us, thou that art set by God for this. Stretch forth thy hand so far as thou canst. Thou hast strength with God, through being the first of all. (Letter of St. Theodore and four other Abbots to Pope Paschal, Bk. ii Ep. 12, Patr. Graec. 99, 1152-3)

Writing to Emperor Michael:

>Order that the declaration from old Rome be received, as was the custom by Tradition of our Fathers from of old and from the beginning. For this, O Emperor, is the highests of the Churches of God, in which first Peter held the Chair, to whom the Lord said: Thou art Peter …and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. (Theodore, Bk. II. Ep. 86)

>as was the custom by Tradition of our Fathers from of old and from the beginning

>>612738

OP here, I agree with all this and that is why I feel I should be catholic. But I don't know how to feel about Mary as co-redemptrix, about papal infaillibility, purgatory, etc..

>>612752

>feel

It's irrelevant how you feel. The Church is not a democracy.

Anyway, as for co redemtrix:

Here's what the head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith said about it:

>Ratzinger said, “ I do not think there will be any compliance with this demand, which in the meantime is being supported by several million people, within the foreseeable future. The response of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith is, broadly, that what is signified by this is already better expressed in other titles of Mary, while the formula “Co-redemptrix” departs to too great an extent from the language of Scripture and of the Fathers and therefore gives rise to misunderstandings.

>"The word 'Co-redemptrix,'" Ratzinger went on to say, "would obscure this origin. For matters of faith, continuity of terminology with the language of Scripture and that of the Fathers is itself an essential element; it is improper simply to manipulate language." (God and the World, Ignatius Press, San Francisco, 2000 )

Don't listen to protestants regarding Mariology.

Papal infallibility I'm sure you don't quite understand, Popes are infallible only when solemnly pronouncing dogma. To say that when a pope says 'in my Apostolic authority, I declare this and this'' he can be wrong is to not trust in God's promise to the Church.

And here you can read about purgatory

https://www.fisheaters.com/purgatory.html

>>612752

What do the number of people joining the Church have anything to do with its truth? That could be a sign that the end is near as most of the world will be converted to Antichrist.

>>612751

Firstly, I don't see St Theodore paying any lipservice to universal temporal power here.

Secondly, even if he did, the Orthodox don't hold anybody to be infallible.

And thirdly, considering St Theodore the Studite is not an early church father, and is not known for his address to the pope but rather for his labor against iconoclasm, this would bear little weight. But in fact, St Theodore was being very Orthodox when he wrote this. This is a far cry from universal temporal power.

>>612675

I'm Catholic, but I know what you mean…I wish we could find a way to come together, but alas! it won't happen easily. Of course I'd tell you to become Catholic, but…

>>612755

Why are you talking about temporal power? We're talking about the head of the Church, that's the whole point. The pope being the president of the Vatican or the Papal states has absolutely nothing to do with this.

Peter was the head of the Apostles, hence his successors are the heads of the successors of the Apostles. It's simple deductive logic.

>>612757

If the pope invents temporal power for himself, he is in error. If he dogmatizes it, he is a false prophet.

>>612757

You and the early church mean something very different when you say "head of the church". The early church would never expand headship into infallibility or universal temporal power. Note that I said universal temporal power. It is catholic dogma that the pope has temporal power over all of creation.

>>612760

How can he dogmatize a thing that does not concern a matter of faith or morals?

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05089a.htm

>But according to a long-standing usage a dogma is now understood to be a truth appertaining to faith or morals, revealed by God, transmitted from the Apostles in the Scriptures or by tradition, and proposed by the Church for the acceptance of the faithful.

You got your theology all mixed up.

>>612762

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temporal_power_(papal)

>The temporal power of the popes is the political and secular governmental activity of the popes of the Roman Catholic Church, as distinguished from their spiritual and pastoral activity.

>It is catholic dogma that the pope has temporal power over all of creation.

Patently false.

The doctrine goes like this:

>….in virtue of his office as supreme arbiter of faith and morals, for the spiritual protection and supernatural salvation of his flock, the Pope possesses indirect temporal authority to be exercised whenever the action of secular powers threatens the eternal welfare of the faithful. In modern times the doctrine was most extensively described in the Controversies of St. Robert Bellarmine. (1542-1621).

And there's nothing wrong with that.

As for infallbility, I seriously doubt any in the old Church would dare to say that when the pope of Rome and successor of st. Peter solemnly pronounces a dogma in virtue of his Apostolic authority can be wrong.

>>612752

>>612752

Have you checked out the discord yet? There's a lot of knowledgeable people there that might help you find it easier to accept. There's also apologetics books and prayer that might help you. Christ I want to believe help my unbelief.

But in conclusion we must believe things on the authority of the Church and not based upon our feelings towards things,we must be humble enough to realize we aren't the arbiter of truth. Myself I find it hard to believe in transubstiation but I believe it and affirm it against my flesh.

There's a parable I like from a book called the life of st Louis.

There was a man who was talking to a bishop about how hard he finds it to believe in the Eucharist. The bishop said to him, but you do believe it?

Yes

Would you die rather than deny this dogma of the Church?

Yes I would,

Then it is like this, a man is ordered by the king to guard a border town in war and another is ordered to guard a town away from warfare. Which is more meritorious?

The first of course

It is the same with you and I. I have no difficulty believing in this dogma, while it is harder for you so it is more meritorious.

>>612754

You don't find anything wrong with eastern orthodoxys evangelization? You don't find it worrying it doesn't exist and yields no converts? You're not concerned with orthodoxy being so small? Why would God grant through His divine providence so many saints, miracles and apparitions to a schismatic church and would evangelize the whole world through them while His true church decayed in importance since the schism. The early church converted the Mediterranean and more, the Catholic church converted the Americas, nations in Africa and asia and the orthodox church…?

>>612768

>it doesn't exist and yields no converts

You know that's a lie. Do your church more dignity by speaking the truth.

>>612770

Not charitable to say I'm lying, God's grace upon you.

>>612773

My mistake, I thought you were an expert on the Orthodox Church.

>>612775

Not an expert, and of course that passage is not to be interpreted literally and you could see that if your intellect wasn't clouded. Why would I say there are no converts when there's at least one from this board?

>>612778

>Not an expert

Then speak with more humility.

>and of course that passage is not to be interpreted literally

How do you know how to interpret it?

>you could see that if your intellect wasn't clouded

You should be more concerned with your own heart rather than others' intellects.

>Why would I say there are no converts when there's at least one from this board?

You tell me.

>>612675

>Both church has things the other is missing.

Wrong. "Orthodoxy" lacks ALOT of stuff, while the one true Catholic Church has literally everything. It's a false dichotomy built up by deluded schismatics that rather make up history than simply facing facts and admit that they'd rather comfort turkish genitalia for some worldly power than not tearing Christendom apart.

>>612763

> How can he dogmatize a thing that does not concern a matter of faith or morals?

Because his authority supercedes your lack of understanding, apparently. And you must have faith in his authority. You don't need me to keep talking about temporal authority. You have functional fingers and can look it up with a bit more depth than the wikipedia page.

Pope John VIII signed the council which forbade the filioque. And yet you have the filioque in your creed, by the whim of a later pope. How can you reconcile this without contorting the notion of truth itself?

According to papal encyclicals and the ancient councils and the Summa and etc etc etc.… According to catholic dogma, it's apostacy to pray at the tomb of mohammad, it's apostacy to celebrate hanukkah with the heebs, it's apostacy to do hindu rituals with markings on your face. Popes do this now, so popes are apostate according to catholic dogma. How can you reconcile this? The infallible seat of peter is apostate. So you want me to believe God has commanded you to submit to an apostate? Y'all like to repeat incessantly "The gates of hell will not prevail over it."

>>612768

Why is your whole post about the eucharist? Ofcourse I believe in the real presence and that the bread and wine is the true flesh and blood of Christ. Also the prayer you mentioned and realizing I am not the arbiter of truth, I also do. But which claim to autorithy is the right one? It all seems so over me, I am not the one to decide which one is the right church yet I must pick.

However I am thinking: even if I ""feel"" that orthodoxy got the right doctrine, why is it left in the dust? Why is most miracle catholic? Eucharistic miracles? Evangelization? Yet the door is thin, so maybe the size of the church isn't a good indication? I'm lost…

>>612794

There are plenty of miracles in Orthodoxy, maybe it's just that Orthodox people don't spend so much time bragging about them but I don't know. Demons can also perform miracles to deceive people and men can create hoaxes so don't put faith in them anyway, put your faith in Christ.

>Evangelization

Another thing that Orthodox people maybe don't brag about so much, but vid related. I would say that historical and geographical circumstances have limited Orthodox evangelization in the past, though things are now changing.

>maybe the size of the church isn't a good indication

You're right. Seek after the Truth, not what's popular. Arianism, Mithraism, Manicheanism, and other false doctrines were also very popular, but they were also very wrong.

>I'm lost

I pray that you find the way, friend.

>>612738

>Why are Catholics responsible for 90% (protestant heretics + catholics) and why orthodox are 10%?

Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life.

>>612716

>Oh and that Jay Dyer—Nick Fuentes debate might be worthwhile as part of your journey.

That wasn't a very good debate though. Nick clearly wasn't nearly as well read as Jay was. It was obvious Nick didn't do his own prep so whenever Jay pressed him about anything he couldn't really go any deeper besides Matthew and the keys. On the other hand Jay dodged that one question about why Corinth appealed to Rome on some heresy issue rather than the other sees. Then it just kind of devolved into pointing out the unfortunate behavior of post Vatican II popes.

>>613018

Wasn't a dodge. Just wasn't a good question. Jay answered it when he pointed out that St John was in exile on Patmos.

Just join whichever is relevent in your culture and pray for unity.

>>613042

mandella effect confrmed?

>>612675

The Catholic Church has been taken over by pedophile kikes, just look at Francis sucking the niggers' feet. Begoming Ordodox is 100% LARPing unless you descend from an Eastern European ethnicity that traditionally is part of it- such as Russian, Serbian, Bulgarian, Romanian or Greek.

Basically, >>612678. Read KJV, join your local Baptist church, and try to talk the Pastor or anybody else out of any heresies. It doesn't make sense that God would require you to be part of a physical "Church" run by mortal men and partake in ritualistic sacraments, it's idolatry. He wants you to have faith and repent for your sins, so that you can be close to Him.

>>612784

>Anglicanism isn't wrong as Roman Catholicism

Dude, weed lmao

>>612675

Do you want to follow the traditions of men or of christ

>>613273

It's not wrong