converting?

[henrikhankhagnell]

Pax et bonum!
Should I convert to an orthodox church or should I convert to one of the 23 catholic churches? and should it be the coptic church (orthodox or catholic)?


I have heard people who argue that St. Anthony the Abbot was a Coptic Orthodox Christian and therefore it is very weird that the Catholic Church view him as a Catholic saint. For me it is very difficult to understand how both Orthodox and Catholics can have the same saints. The eatly saints seem to be important to all different churches. Not just the church that they belonged to. What would you say to to about this?  How do we know which church is oldest and can claim that St Anthony belonged to their church?

[Benjamin the Red]

The churches known today as the "Roman Catholic Church", "Eastern Orthodox Church" and "Oriental Orthodox Church" all have a common history, and originate historically from the same source.

These three churches were united until the Council of Chalcedon in the 5th century, which taught that Christ is one person made of two natures (divine and human). The Oriental Orthodox (Coptic, Armenian, Ethiopian, Syriac, etc.) rejected this teaching, saying that Christ is one person made of one united nature that is both divine and human. The first schism occurs.

Then, several centuries later, the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches (as they are known today) had grown apart culturally and theologically. A traditional date for this schism is 1054, but that's more like a central date than anything else, the separation occurred over a period of several centuries over various reasons. Chief among the theological reasons would be the additional of the Filioque clause into the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed ["Who proceedeth from the Father and the Son."] and the growing trend of papal supremacy and the universal jurisdiction of Rome. Later disagreements would be over papal infallibility, the immaculate conception and the substitutionary atonement...among others.

St. Anthony the Great is a very early saint, and lived prior to all of these schisms, and so each church recognizes him as a saint. This is true of MANY saints. The Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox and Roman Catholic share all saints glorified up until the schism at Chalcedon. The Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic share saints glorified up until about 1054. And, there's also some post-schism crossover, because, unlike what we all learned in grammar school, history is never cut and dry.

[LizaSymonenko]

Pax et bonum!
Should I convert to an orthodox church or should I convert to one of the 23 catholic churches? and should it be the coptic church (orthodox or catholic)?

You should convert to the Eastern Orthodox Church.    

[Jason.Wike]

Pax et bonum!
Should I convert to an orthodox church or should I convert to one of the 23 catholic churches? and should it be the coptic church (orthodox or catholic)?

You should visit them all many times and see what they are yourself and not let people on the Internet tell you what you should do. Making a decision to convert to anything without actually having experienced it and learned about it yourself does not make any sense, and you are invariably going to en up unhappy. You are going to develop an idea of what whichever church you pick is that is majorly flawed if you do not actually experience it.

I have heard people who argue that St. Anthony the Abbot was a Coptic Orthodox Christian and therefore it is very weird that the Catholic Church view him as a Catholic saint. For me it is very difficult to understand how both Orthodox and Catholics can have the same saints. The eatly saints seem to be important to all different churches. Not just the church that they belonged to. What would you say to to about this?  How do we know which church is oldest and can claim that St Anthony belonged to their church?

Simply anyone that claims that doesn't know what they are talking about. All the Saints before the schisms were in communion with eachother - you cannot retroactively apply later developments to them which they had nothing to do with. Saint Anthony, in this example, was ethnically Coptic (and he was a Roman politically at least) - but he lived before the "Oriental Orthodox" concept arose.

[LizaSymonenko]

Pax et bonum!
Should I convert to an orthodox church or should I convert to one of the 23 catholic churches? and should it be the coptic church (orthodox or catholic)?

You should visit them all many times and see what they are yourself and not let people on the Internet tell you what you should do. Making a decision to convert to anything without actually having experienced it and learned about it yourself does not make any sense, and you are invariably going to en up unhappy. You are going to develop an idea of what whichever church you pick is that is majorly flawed if you do not actually experience it.

I recommend the Church that I know is True.  I wouldn't want him to waste his time anywhere else.  Therefore, I suggest visiting an Orthodox Church. 

If you do go elsewhere, and find something appealing, don't convert until you visit the Orthodox....because I'm certain you will love Orthodoxy the best!

[Jason.Wike]

I recommend the Church that I know is True.  I wouldn't want him to waste his time anywhere else.  Therefore, I suggest visiting an Orthodox Church. 

If you do go elsewhere, and find something appealing, don't convert until you visit the Orthodox....because I'm certain you will love Orthodoxy the best!

I'm not saying I don't think he should become Orthodox, but he needs to see it and spend time learning about it before he makes the decision. If the first time he shows up he says he wants to convert and he's going on what people on the internet told him he's going to seem brash and it might make it harder for him probably.

[henrikhankhagnell]

The churches known today as the "Roman Catholic Church", "Eastern Orthodox Church" and "Oriental Orthodox Church" all have a common history, and originate historically from the same source.

These three churches were united until the Council of Chalcedon in the 5th century, which taught that Christ is one person made of two natures (divine and human). The Oriental Orthodox (Coptic, Armenian, Ethiopian, Syriac, etc.) rejected this teaching, saying that Christ is one person made of one united nature that is both divine and human. The first schism occurs.

Then, several centuries later, the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches (as they are known today) had grown apart culturally and theologically. A traditional date for this schism is 1054, but that's more like a central date than anything else, the separation occurred over a period of several centuries over various reasons. Chief among the theological reasons would be the additional of the Filioque clause into the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed ["Who proceedeth from the Father and the Son."] and the growing trend of papal supremacy and the universal jurisdiction of Rome. Later disagreements would be over papal infallibility, the immaculate conception and the substitutionary atonement...among others.

St. Anthony the Great is a very early saint, and lived prior to all of these schisms, and so each church recognizes him as a saint. This is true of MANY saints. The Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox and Roman Catholic share all saints glorified up until the schism at Chalcedon. The Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic share saints glorified up until about 1054. And, there's also some post-schism crossover, because, unlike what we all learned in grammar school, history is never cut and dry.

there are 23 churches in union with the pope and one of them is the roman-catholic church and the other are the oriental/eastern catholic churches which share the liturgical tradition of the orthodox churches. and of course, all 23 churches accept the catholic dogmas.
 

[henrikhankhagnell]

You should visit them all many times and see what they are yourself and not let people on the Internet tell you what you should do. Making a decision to convert to anything without actually having experienced it and learned about it yourself does not make any sense, and you are invariably going to en up unhappy. You are going to develop an idea of what whichever church you pick is that is majorly flawed if you do not actually experience it.

what if the priest in an orthodox church are rude, should i then stay away from their orthodx tradition or should not be afraid of such thing?

[LizaSymonenko]

If the priest is rude, that should not reflect upon Orthodoxy.  Neither priest, nor laypeople, are not supposed to be rude.  Maybe he's just having a bad day.
Don't let it turn you off of Orthodoxy. 

[Jason.Wike]

Is this completely hypothetical about the priests or something you've actually experienced? If it is hypothetical don't worry about it.

Also, I know not all Scandinavian people are the same but I've met a lot of Norwegians and Swedes and what they consider being "friendly" is to me often "too-much too soon" - they start being very friendly sometimes where I think we haven't known each other long enough. If all the priests you meet are non-Scandinavian consider that they have a different idea of things we don't actually even think about normally, if they aren't being explicitly rude it could just be that you are operating according to different ideas of how people are supposed to relate to one another. (Does that make any sense?)

[Melodist]

You should visit them all many times and see what they are yourself and not let people on the Internet tell you what you should do. Making a decision to convert to anything without actually having experienced it and learned about it yourself does not make any sense, and you are invariably going to en up unhappy. You are going to develop an idea of what whichever church you pick is that is majorly flawed if you do not actually experience it.

what if the priest in an orthodox church are rude, should i then stay away from their orthodx tradition or should not be afraid of such thing?

You will find examples of those anywhere you go. Clergy are people too and face the same struggles as anyone else. Everyone has their shortcomings.

[henrikhankhagnell]

Is this completely hypothetical about the priests or something you've actually experienced? If it is hypothetical don't worry about it.

Also, I know not all Scandinavian people are the same but I've met a lot of Norwegians and Swedes and what they consider being "friendly" is to me often "too-much too soon" - they start being very friendly sometimes where I think we haven't known each other long enough. If all the priests you meet are non-Scandinavian consider that they have a different idea of things we don't actually even think about normally, if they aren't being explicitly rude it could just be that you are operating according to different ideas of how people are supposed to relate to one another. (Does that make any sense?)

are scandinavian too friendly  

[Jason.Wike]

Definitely not, everyone just has different cultures. I was just trying to say, sometimes people seem rude when they are not actually being rude in their mind.

[Benjamin the Red]

there are 23 churches in union with the pope and one of them is the roman-catholic church and the other are the oriental/eastern catholic churches which share the liturgical tradition of the orthodox churches. and of course, all 23 churches accept the catholic dogmas.

There are churches that follow an Eastern Rite which are in communion with Rome, yes. Not all of them share the Roman Rite, but they all share, as you pointed out, communion with Rome and acceptance of the Roman dogmas, which means they accept the supremacy of the Pope of Rome and are therefore "under Rome." This makes them Roman...whether they use the Roman Rite or not. They would disagree, but that's the whole "history isn't so cut and dry" thing I mentioned earlier. 

[Cognomen]

and of course, all 23 churches accept the catholic dogmas.

There's your warning sign.   

[henrikhankhagnell]

There are churches that follow an Eastern Rite which are in communion with Rome, yes. Not all of them share the Roman Rite, but they all share, as you pointed out, communion with Rome and acceptance of the Roman dogmas, which means they accept the supremacy of the Pope of Rome and are therefore "under Rome." This makes them Roman...whether they use the Roman Rite or not. They would disagree, but that's the whole "history isn't so cut and dry" thing I mentioned earlier. 

they are not Roman according to the catholic church. but they are called catholic. if they follow the coptic rite for example, then they are called coptic catholic.

[Alveus Lacuna]

they are not Roman according to the catholic church. but they are called catholic. if they follow the coptic rite for example, then they are called coptic catholic.

And does the Pope of Rome allow them to call their own patriarch "Pope"? NOPE! Do his vestments resemble that of the Coptic Non-Chalcedonian Pope? NOPE! (Actually, I think he is a cardinal.) Do most Copts in communion with Rome keep the traditional Coptic liturgy? NOPE!

[henrikhankhagnell]

they are not Roman according to the catholic church. but they are called catholic. if they follow the coptic rite for example, then they are called coptic catholic.

And does the Pope of Rome allow them to call their own patriarch "Pope"? NOPE! Do his vestments resemble that of the Coptic Non-Chalcedonian Pope? NOPE! (Actually, I think he is a cardinal.) Do most Copts in communion with Rome keep the traditional Coptic liturgy? NOPE!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qobnAQrtr6A
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZcPZu02_RsI
http://all.gloria.tv/?media=102120

[Carl Kraeff (Second Chance)]

Pax et bonum!
Should I convert to an orthodox church or should I convert to one of the 23 catholic churches? and should it be the coptic church (orthodox or catholic)?


I have heard people who argue that St. Anthony the Abbot was a Coptic Orthodox Christian and therefore it is very weird that the Catholic Church view him as a Catholic saint. For me it is very difficult to understand how both Orthodox and Catholics can have the same saints. The eatly saints seem to be important to all different churches. Not just the church that they belonged to. What would you say to to about this?  How do we know which church is oldest and can claim that St Anthony belonged to their church?

Greetings! What are you converting from exactly? If you are a Protestant, you have only two (technically three) choices in matters of theology and ecclesiology: The Roman Catholic Church that includes the 23 churches you cited and the Coptic Church and the Eastern Orthodox (and the Oriental Orthodox Churches that are apart from the Orthodox at this time but God willing we will be reunited soon). If you are a Roman Catholic, you are not really converting from Catholicism if you start attending an Eastern Rite Catholic Church.

Regarding which Church is oldest, it is clear that the Church of Jerusalem is the oldest, followed closely by Antioch, which was founded by Apostles Peter and Paul, and (in no particular order) Alexandria, Rome, the Churches in Asia Minor, Middle East and the Balkans. Today, most of these churches are part of the Eastern Orthodox/Oriental Orthodox communions.

In any case, may the Lord bless your spiritual journey.

[Iconodule]

they are not Roman according to the catholic church. but they are called catholic. if they follow the coptic rite for example, then they are called coptic catholic.

And does the Pope of Rome allow them to call their own patriarch "Pope"? NOPE! Do his vestments resemble that of the Coptic Non-Chalcedonian Pope? NOPE! (Actually, I think he is a cardinal.) Do most Copts in communion with Rome keep the traditional Coptic liturgy? NOPE!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qobnAQrtr6A
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZcPZu02_RsI
http://all.gloria.tv/?media=102120

They're wearing EO style headgear. Weird.

[henrikhankhagnell]

Pax et bonum!
Should I convert to an orthodox church or should I convert to one of the 23 catholic churches? and should it be the coptic church (orthodox or catholic)?


I have heard people who argue that St. Anthony the Abbot was a Coptic Orthodox Christian and therefore it is very weird that the Catholic Church view him as a Catholic saint. For me it is very difficult to understand how both Orthodox and Catholics can have the same saints. The eatly saints seem to be important to all different churches. Not just the church that they belonged to. What would you say to to about this?  How do we know which church is oldest and can claim that St Anthony belonged to their church?

Greetings! What are you converting from exactly? If you are a Protestant, you have only two (technically three) choices in matters of theology and ecclesiology: The Roman Catholic Church that includes the 23 churches you cited and the Coptic Church and the Eastern Orthodox (and the Oriental Orthodox Churches that are apart from the Orthodox at this time but God willing we will be reunited soon). If you are a Roman Catholic, you are not really converting from Catholicism if you start attending an Eastern Rite Catholic Church.

Regarding which Church is oldest, it is clear that the Church of Jerusalem is the oldest, followed closely by Antioch, which was founded by Apostles Peter and Paul, and (in no particular order) Alexandria, Rome, the Churches in Asia Minor, Middle East and the Balkans. Today, most of these churches are part of the Eastern Orthodox/Oriental Orthodox communions.

In any case, may the Lord bless your spiritual journey.

I am neither catholic nor protestant. I was baptized in a lutheran church but I hate when people then call me protestant. Iam just a christian now but soon I may convert to a church. it is said that in the oldest mass/liturgy non-converts were not even allowed to be present at the eucharist. they were forced to leave the church. and they say that's why we have the words "ite missa est" in the roman rite.  anyway, why are we supposed to look for a church instead of just looking for Jesus?

[mike]

anyway, why are we supposed to look for a church instead of just looking for Jesus?

You can't look for Jesus without the help of the Church.

[bogdan]

We say Protestant because it is an accurate description of the many various confessions that left the Church of Rome in protest. Then those confessions broke apart in protest, until today, when we have tens of thousands of denominations. Individual Protestants may have no beef with us, but their separation indicates the protest continues in some form.

We seek the Church because it is the means to union with Christ. We cannot accomplish this without being a member of his Body (through Baptism and Chrismation), and that is the Church. We also need the true sacraments, which are found in the Church. The Church is a testament to the Incarnation--just as Christ is a physical man, the Church is a physical organism.

The Protestant understanding of the Body is very different. It requires stripping everything away until "Christian" has little meaning. A Christian is one who follows Jesus, and what that looks like is a matter of opinion. But that hardly sounds like the robust Church that grew out of it, and remained until people were swept away by schism. We hold that a body which is held together by threads of tissue is not a healthy body.

We believe the Orthodox Church is the Body. Those who have broken away are severed from the life's blood of the body, just like an amputated limb. That does not mean outside the Orthodox Church there aren't good and saintly Christians, but this is the way Christ wants things to be. He wants us brothers to dwell together in unity. That is the first mark of the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.

[Benjamin the Red]

There are churches that follow an Eastern Rite which are in communion with Rome, yes. Not all of them share the Roman Rite, but they all share, as you pointed out, communion with Rome and acceptance of the Roman dogmas, which means they accept the supremacy of the Pope of Rome and are therefore "under Rome." This makes them Roman...whether they use the Roman Rite or not. They would disagree, but that's the whole "history isn't so cut and dry" thing I mentioned earlier. 

they are not Roman according to the catholic church. but they are called catholic. if they follow the coptic rite for example, then they are called coptic catholic.

Like I said, they would disagree.

We say Protestant because it is an accurate description of the many various confessions that left the Church of Rome in protest. Then those confessions broke apart in protest, until today, when we have tens of thousands of denominations. Individual Protestants may have no beef with us, but their separation indicates the protest continues in some form.

We seek the Church because it is the means to union with Christ. We cannot accomplish this without being a member of his Body (through Baptism and Chrismation), and that is the Church. We also need the true sacraments, which are found in the Church. The Church is a testament to the Incarnation--just as Christ is a physical man, the Church is a physical organism.

The Protestant understanding of the Body is very different. It requires stripping everything away until "Christian" has little meaning. A Christian is one who follows Jesus, and what that looks like is a matter of opinion. But that hardly sounds like the robust Church that grew out of it, and remained until people were swept away by schism. We hold that a body which is held together by threads of tissue is not a healthy body.

We believe the Orthodox Church is the Body. Those who have broken away are severed from the life's blood of the body, just like an amputated limb. That does not mean outside the Orthodox Church there aren't good and saintly Christians, but this is the way Christ wants things to be. He wants us brothers to dwell together in unity. That is the first mark of the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.

Great summation, bogdan!

[Alveus Lacuna]

They're wearing EO style headgear. Weird.

Trust me, they're just as confused as you are.

[henrikhankhagnell]

They're wearing EO style headgear. Weird.

Trust me, they're just as confused as you are.

http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=502703

[leap of faith]

We say Protestant because it is an accurate description of the many various confessions that left the Church of Rome in protest. Then those confessions broke apart in protest, until today, when we have tens of thousands of denominations. Individual Protestants may have no beef with us, but their separation indicates the protest continues in some form.

We seek the Church because it is the means to union with Christ. We cannot accomplish this without being a member of his Body (through Baptism and Chrismation), and that is the Church. We also need the true sacraments, which are found in the Church. The Church is a testament to the Incarnation--just as Christ is a physical man, the Church is a physical organism.

The Protestant understanding of the Body is very different. It requires stripping everything away until "Christian" has little meaning. A Christian is one who follows Jesus, and what that looks like is a matter of opinion. But that hardly sounds like the robust Church that grew out of it, and remained until people were swept away by schism. We hold that a body which is held together by threads of tissue is not a healthy body.

We believe the Orthodox Church is the Body. Those who have broken away are severed from the life's blood of the body, just like an amputated limb. That does not mean outside the Orthodox Church there aren't good and saintly Christians, but this is the way Christ wants things to be. He wants us brothers to dwell together in unity. That is the first mark of the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.

This post is so well-written that it brought this lurker into the fold to say thank you.  I have been serious in my study of Holy Orthodoxy for a year now and thanks to the perseverance of a cradle Orthodox and a newer convert clearing the fog of my misperceptions for nearly 3 years prior to that, I have officially begun my journey home. The grace, humility, discipline and quiet confidence that is the result of the Orthodox Church's teachings is one of the many reasons that the Lord used to convince me she is, indeed, the One True Church of Jesus Christ, our Lord and Savior.

(I will ask right now for forgiveness when my terminology or understanding is lacking.  Although I have spent countless hours learning and studying, I do recognize that I have only begun to make a dent in the iceberg.)     

[Cognomen]

Welcome aboard, from the frigid waters of lurkiness. 

The grace, humility, discipline and quiet confidence that is the result of the Orthodox Church's teachings is one of the many reasons that the Lord used to convince me she is, indeed, the One True Church of Jesus Christ, our Lord and Savior.

Well stated.  While we occasionally find exceptions, I noticed this as well.

[ialmisry]

they are not Roman according to the catholic church. but they are called catholic. if they follow the coptic rite for example, then they are called coptic catholic.

And does the Pope of Rome allow them to call their own patriarch "Pope"? NOPE! Do his vestments resemble that of the Coptic Non-Chalcedonian Pope? NOPE! (Actually, I think he is a cardinal.) Do most Copts in communion with Rome keep the traditional Coptic liturgy? NOPE!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qobnAQrtr6A
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZcPZu02_RsI
http://all.gloria.tv/?media=102120

They may look Coptic to you, but there are a number of Latinizations and other non-Coptic traditions portrayed in the videos.

[leap of faith]

To the OP, while I am new to the pursuit of Holy Orthodoxy, I am not new to critically analyzing the truth claims of belief systems...including Christianity.  I am not implying that this was your intention, but it comes across as if you are choosing what pair of jeans to purchase.  I believe that a wise choice is based upon the validity of the truths that are being claimed.  It isn't about a possibly rude or pleasant encounter.  Nor is it about the convenience or appeal of the message.  When a Church claims to be the One True Church, it's time to analyze the evidence for that claim.  When there is more than one laying claim to that, it's really time to analyze the evidences, not opinions.  One must be willing to follow where the evidence leads.  For example, when I was analyzing the evidences for Christianity (I was Methodist and was studying Christian apologetics), I studied other belief systems as well and, as I was taught, used the same measuring stick for one that I used for the others.  I had to be willing to go where the evidence led.  If the claims of Christianity had not held up to scrutiny, I would have walked away.  I took that same measuring stick and applied it to the "signs on the lawn" of churches claiming Christianity.  I studied their histories, first and foremost, and learned to identify "red flags."  I followed where the evidence led...to the doors of Orthodoxy. I confess that it took me awhile to get comfortable with that.  It wasn't the conclusion that I was expecting, but that doesn't make it any less true.  And now, I know that it is MY responsibility to accept what She teaches as also being equally true and correct.  Surprisingly, thus far, that has been quite easy.  Why?  Because I based my initial decision on weighing the historical evidences.

I suppose that my point is, while people can and are willing to assist, the primary responsibility for that analysis lies with the individual.  Simply put, you have to be willing to do the legwork. As a person who has recently walked that section of the path, I suggest that you dig as best as you are able into the historical claims.  As one studies the history, the teachings begin to take shape...things that have been added or have been regarded as heresy and why, etc.. My library consists of just as many books (and bookmarks) regarding Catholicism's viewpoints as it does Orthodoxy's. It also includes their responses to one another's claims.  I had to learn in as balanced a manner possible in order to make the most informed decision.  When my studying raised a specific question, I asked 2 or 3 trusted people.  In the end, no person is responsible for the decision I made. I never once asked an individual, "Should I convert to this, that or the other?" Following the evidences wasn't always easy, but, the lessons I learned are invaluable and a part of me now.  Don't miss out on that blessing!!

[Leisa]

I'm not sure if this is the right place to ask this question, but what is the main difference between the Eastern Orthodox and the Oriental Orthodox churches?  (I mean, what teachings of the E. Orthodox do the Oriental O reject, ie: what specifically about the councils after the 3rd ecumenical council, did the Orthodox accept, but the Oriental Orthodox did not?)

And one more question, I hope it is ok to ask it here.  I am a baptized Catholic.  Am I considered a heretic or schizmatic from the Orthodox perspective or the Coptic perspective?

Would I need to be re-baptized if I converted to the Orthodox or Oriental Orthodox church?

From the E. Orthodox and the Oriental Orthodox perspective, are Roman Catholics saved?

Leisa

[Leisa]

Pax et bonum!
Should I convert to an orthodox church or should I convert to one of the 23 catholic churches? and should it be the coptic church (orthodox or catholic)?


I have heard people who argue that St. Anthony the Abbot was a Coptic Orthodox Christian and therefore it is very weird that the Catholic Church view him as a Catholic saint. For me it is very difficult to understand how both Orthodox and Catholics can have the same saints. The eatly saints seem to be important to all different churches. Not just the church that they belonged to. What would you say to to about this?  How do we know which church is oldest and can claim that St Anthony belonged to their church?

To answer your question, as a Catholic I would not recommend someone to convert to the Catholic church.  It is a sinking ship.

[henrikhankhagnell]

Pax et bonum!
Should I convert to an orthodox church or should I convert to one of the 23 catholic churches? and should it be the coptic church (orthodox or catholic)?


I have heard people who argue that St. Anthony the Abbot was a Coptic Orthodox Christian and therefore it is very weird that the Catholic Church view him as a Catholic saint. For me it is very difficult to understand how both Orthodox and Catholics can have the same saints. The eatly saints seem to be important to all different churches. Not just the church that they belonged to. What would you say to to about this?  How do we know which church is oldest and can claim that St Anthony belonged to their church?

To answer your question, as a Catholic I would not recommend someone to convert to the Catholic church.  It is a sinking ship.

[Tags:]

OrthodoxChristianity.net > Moderated Forums > Orthodox-Other Christian Discussion > Topic: converting?