OrthodoxChristianity.net
September 01, 2014, 04:04:23 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: 1   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Conversion cold feet  (Read 1904 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
choy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,316


« on: August 01, 2012, 07:16:41 PM »

Everyday I seem to feel different.  One day I feel I'm on my way to Orthodoxy, and the next day I want to stay Catholic and make my situation work out.

I know the process is long but I long for that feeling of certainty of what I want to do and where I want to be.
Logged
jewish voice
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 471



« Reply #1 on: August 01, 2012, 07:34:50 PM »

Some people claim changing faith is like losing a loved one and you get the same feelings. I would say embrace them and take your time and go at your pace that is right for you.
Logged
choy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,316


« Reply #2 on: August 01, 2012, 07:37:53 PM »

Some people claim changing faith is like losing a loved one and you get the same feelings. I would say embrace them and take your time and go at your pace that is right for you.

Yes, it does feel like going through a divorce or something.  You feel like you should stick with the one you have and make it work at all costs.  But then again the reality is that there is an opportunity to increase your spirituality in the other (dropping the marriage metaphor here) so you can't just forget about it.
Logged
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Online Online

Faith: Agnostic
Posts: 29,575



« Reply #3 on: August 01, 2012, 07:53:23 PM »

I think many people have some feelings of uncertainty for a time. I can't say which way to go, but I do think it's not abnormal.
Logged
fasteddy64
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 34



« Reply #4 on: August 02, 2012, 09:47:34 AM »

I understand fully.

I was an inquirer for 10 years before becoming a Catechumen.
I have been a Catechumen for nearly a year, and should be accepted into the Church in about two weeks.  I felt this was something not to be taken lightly, so I let the journey happen at it's own pace.

I pray that you do as well, wherever it ends up taking you.
Logged
gzt
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA, then GOA, now OCA
Posts: 109


WWW
« Reply #5 on: August 02, 2012, 09:58:30 AM »

There is certainly a spectrum, just like with marriage and whatever. On the one hand, you do have an existential imperative to act. On the other, it's a momentous decision with perhaps eternal consequences, so you should not make it lightly. The only thing I would say is that doubt and uncertainty can be made into a powerful tool for exploring and deepening your faith, increasing your knowledge both of yourself and of God. It takes discipline, and that can only be had within a tradition.
Logged
Nephi
Section Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Miaphysite Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Church of Antioch
Posts: 4,253



« Reply #6 on: August 07, 2012, 11:50:43 PM »

If you read the stories of ex-Mormons, you'll see they have these sorts of feelings existing past the point of no return. It's completely natural - just keep truckin' on.
Logged
choy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,316


« Reply #7 on: August 08, 2012, 01:13:10 AM »

Okay, I know people here will say, "its Orthodoxy, the devil will not pull you into Orthodoxy."  But I am worried also that what if this pull to Orthodoxy is just the devil disguised as an angel of light?  I mean, even if Orthodoxy is the true faith, the true Church, if I come in for the wrong reason then I do not get the benefits of it, correct?
Logged
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Online Online

Faith: Agnostic
Posts: 29,575



« Reply #8 on: August 08, 2012, 04:23:53 AM »

It's good to convert for the right reasons, I agree. I think here "the right reasons" has to be reasons that are sincere and of some substance. By "some substance" I mean not just stuff like "the pastor was mean to me" or "the carpet was an ugly color". I would hope anyone serious about converting already would go along with that though. I think that if you're sincere, and pray, and study, and do all that stuff, and are truly seeking the best place to "work out your salvation with fear and trembling," well then eventually you just have to make a decision and trust to it--or, hopefully, trust that God is guiding somehow. I say that as someone who has struggled mightily to follow that advice, but I'm trying, and IMO it's a good and proper way of looking at things.
Logged
katherineofdixie
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 3,246



« Reply #9 on: August 08, 2012, 10:52:10 AM »

Okay, I know people here will say, "its Orthodoxy, the devil will not pull you into Orthodoxy."  But I am worried also that what if this pull to Orthodoxy is just the devil disguised as an angel of light?  I mean, even if Orthodoxy is the true faith, the true Church, if I come in for the wrong reason then I do not get the benefits of it, correct?

I'm not so sure. God works in mysterious ways, after all. Who really knows completely what their motivations are? I believe that He uses our mistakes and wrong reasons to draw us closer to Him as well. We often give ourselves too much credit. I'm a great ditherer myself: on the one hand this, but on the other hand that... But even if I did join the true Church for the wrong reasons, I can receive the benefits.
Logged

"If but ten of us lead a holy life, we shall kindle a fire which shall light up the entire city."

 St. John Chrysostom
choy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,316


« Reply #10 on: August 09, 2012, 11:01:54 PM »

I guess St. Peter inside his boat is a good metaphor here.  I see Christ there in the water, do I jump out and meet him?  I've been on this boat (Catholicism) for a long time and I've been comfortable and dry and safe.  I see the fullness of Christ off in the distance (in Orthodoxy) but I am afraid to jump onto the water.
Logged
Seraphim98
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 562



« Reply #11 on: August 10, 2012, 07:19:54 PM »

I do not know it this is true for everyone, but I think there is virtue to coming to a "Lord, to whom shall we go…" place.  When I began actively researching the Orthodox faith in 1995, piece by piece I found myself convinced about the Orthodox faith…but came to a wall, a  point I was not sure about…not convinced. But there I was…theologically ruined for any type of Protestant faith. I could not go back but saw no immediate way forward. So…I faced that "hard saying" moment…and the only response that seemed right was "Lord to whom shall I go?"  I surrendered my need to have every tee crossed and i dotted before I would admit all those trees probably added up to a forest. The next day I received the answer for the last question that had me hung up between worlds.

The virtue of the "Lord to whom shall we go" moment is that you know whatever is ahead going back is simply not possible. If you are Roman Catholic and feel the call of Orthodoxy be sure you are not dealing with a flirtation or infatuation. Be sure that even if you don't know the way forward…there is no more back to go to.
Logged
Tikhon.of.Colorado
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Ruthenian Greek Catholic
Jurisdiction: Eparchy of Pheonix
Posts: 2,362



« Reply #12 on: August 12, 2012, 05:32:31 PM »

Make sure to take all of the time you need to decide what is right for you.  It's important for you to remember that, though we Orthodox believe that our Church is the best for us, it may not be the best for you. 

Go where you believe God wants you to go, and you will be fine.  Just trust Him to guide you, and you will know what path to take.  Smiley
Logged

"It is true that I am not always faithful, but I never lose courage, I leave myself in the Arms of Our Lord." - St. Thérèse of Lisieux
Alpo
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox. With some feta, please.
Posts: 6,647



« Reply #13 on: August 12, 2012, 05:46:22 PM »

I didn't convert until I felt that I theologically couldn't nor wanted to go to any other chuch anymore. It took couple of years of more or less active theological pondering for things to evolve to that point.
Logged
choy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,316


« Reply #14 on: August 12, 2012, 08:05:47 PM »

Make sure to take all of the time you need to decide what is right for you.  It's important for you to remember that, though we Orthodox believe that our Church is the best for us, it may not be the best for you. 

Go where you believe God wants you to go, and you will be fine.  Just trust Him to guide you, and you will know what path to take.  Smiley

I do believe that Orthodoxy is right for me right now.  But I guess I am worried that it may be just pride that is talking and not authentic love.  I said the same thing about the Ukrainian Catholic Church not too long ago, and now I am looking at leaving it.  I'm afraid if I go to Orthodoxy only to feel the same way not too long from when I convert.  I guess that is where most of my hesitation is coming from today.
Logged
Tikhon.of.Colorado
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Ruthenian Greek Catholic
Jurisdiction: Eparchy of Pheonix
Posts: 2,362



« Reply #15 on: August 12, 2012, 08:30:54 PM »

Make sure to take all of the time you need to decide what is right for you.  It's important for you to remember that, though we Orthodox believe that our Church is the best for us, it may not be the best for you. 

Go where you believe God wants you to go, and you will be fine.  Just trust Him to guide you, and you will know what path to take.  Smiley

I do believe that Orthodoxy is right for me right now.  But I guess I am worried that it may be just pride that is talking and not authentic love.  I said the same thing about the Ukrainian Catholic Church not too long ago, and now I am looking at leaving it.  I'm afraid if I go to Orthodoxy only to feel the same way not too long from when I convert.  I guess that is where most of my hesitation is coming from today.
How will you know unless you try?

If I were you, I would just go to Church.  Go to an Orthodox Church.  Meet the priest, get to know the parish.  Take all of the time you need until you are certain that the OC is for you.  This way, if you find that it's not where you're meant to be after all, you can just say your goodbyes.  After all, you haven't converted.  No harm, no foul. 
Logged

"It is true that I am not always faithful, but I never lose courage, I leave myself in the Arms of Our Lord." - St. Thérèse of Lisieux
jerry
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA (catechumen)
Posts: 58



« Reply #16 on: August 12, 2012, 08:34:10 PM »

Quote
I do believe that Orthodoxy is right for me right now.  But I guess I am worried that it may be just pride that is talking and not authentic love.  I said the same thing about the Ukrainian Catholic Church not too long ago, and now I am looking at leaving it.  I'm afraid if I go to Orthodoxy only to feel the same way not too long from when I convert.  I guess that is where most of my hesitation is coming from today.

I'm new to Orthodoxy myself.  I recognize in your words something that reminds me of myself in my search.  I tried a few churches and each one I was hesitant about going and at each one it still seemed as though something was missing.  After a few failed attempts I began to not focus on churches and focus on Truth.  I began to research the early church, sacraments, and just a general since of peace in my research and prayer.  In Orthodoxy I found truth that filled that sense of emptiness.  Others who've converted to Orthodoxy that I spoke to had that same sense of something missing and have sense had the void filled.

My God be with you in your search....
Logged
choy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,316


« Reply #17 on: August 12, 2012, 08:35:48 PM »

How will you know unless you try?

Well, if it doesn't work out, its a walk of shame back to the Catholic Church.  I am very close to my current community including the bishop.  They may feel slighted by my abandonment.  And of course there is that other thing that I am considered and apostate and excommunicated.

If I were you, I would just go to Church.  Go to an Orthodox Church. 

I've been to one.

Meet the priest, get to know the parish. 

I've been meeting with the priest several times already.  I've seen the people in the parish and at least on the surface it is the kind of parish I like.  Lots of young families, lots of kids. Perfect for myself and my family.  Unlike my current parish, I think not counting my two kids, myself and my wife are the two youngest regular attendees.

Take all of the time you need until you are certain that the OC is for you.  This way, if you find that it's not where you're meant to be after all, you can just say your goodbyes.  After all, you haven't converted.  No harm, no foul. 

Which is true.  I might make a once a month Sunday trip to that parish.  We'll see how that goes.
Logged
Great8
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Othrodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 17



« Reply #18 on: August 13, 2012, 02:06:03 AM »

I do not know it this is true for everyone, but I think there is virtue to coming to a "Lord, to whom shall we go…" place.  When I began actively researching the Orthodox faith in 1995, piece by piece I found myself convinced about the Orthodox faith…but came to a wall, a  point I was not sure about…not convinced. But there I was…theologically ruined for any type of Protestant faith. I could not go back but saw no immediate way forward. So…I faced that "hard saying" moment…and the only response that seemed right was "Lord to whom shall I go?"  I surrendered my need to have every tee crossed and i dotted before I would admit all those trees probably added up to a forest. The next day I received the answer for the last question that had me hung up between worlds.

The virtue of the "Lord to whom shall we go" moment is that you know whatever is ahead going back is simply not possible. If you are Roman Catholic and feel the call of Orthodoxy be sure you are not dealing with a flirtation or infatuation. Be sure that even if you don't know the way forward…there is no more back to go to.

This is how it happened for me as well. I realized one day that there was no going back, it was Orthodoxy or nothing, the only thing I could do was go forward. "Lord to whom shall we go?" I asked that a lot and there was only ever one answer.Smiley I will even admit that sometimes I wished I could go back (for reasons of family unity) back to that time when I had never heard of Orthodoxy and we all went to church as one big happy family and the church was nearby. I was the only one interested in my family and my parish is far away but I had to keep going and I couldn't even explain it but I had to do it. I'm a recent convert and it can still be awkward (because of family issues) but I'm so glad I found the Church.
« Last Edit: August 13, 2012, 02:06:16 AM by Great8 » Logged

Deanna
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,114



« Reply #19 on: August 13, 2012, 12:52:58 PM »

How will you know unless you try?

Well, if it doesn't work out, its a walk of shame back to the Catholic Church.  I am very close to my current community including the bishop.  They may feel slighted by my abandonment.  And of course there is that other thing that I am considered and apostate and excommunicated.

I was a little puzzled myself by that "How will you know unless you try" comment; but the rest of trevor's post made it clear that he meant "try" in the sense of visiting without joining.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
choy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,316


« Reply #20 on: August 13, 2012, 06:36:42 PM »

I was a little puzzled myself by that "How will you know unless you try" comment; but the rest of trevor's post made it clear that he meant "try" in the sense of visiting without joining.

That is the plan!  However the worry also is that it took 2 years for me to realize that we are out of place in the Ukrainian Catholic Church.  It seemed to work in the beginning but in the long run reality set it.  I'm afraid this might happen with the Orthodox Church.  I guess the experience is haunting me a bit.  I'm afraid that it might turn out the same way that I thought at the beginning is the only thing I ever want to be, then I realize its probably just the honeymoon period or that I overlooked some of the realities at the beginning which started to weigh on me in the long run.
Logged
Colm Chille
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Rome
Posts: 7


« Reply #21 on: August 15, 2012, 08:56:25 AM »

I've been following this forum for quite a long time, but it is this thread that has prompted me to join.

I have been Catholic my whole life, and for the past thirteen years or so I have been going to the SSPX almost exclusively.  Certain political matters within the SSPX and the Catholic Church as a whole over the past year have led me to start to question things.  I have had to look at some very difficult questions of late.

I have always had a great affinity for Eastern Liturgical traditions.  I have been reading up on many Orthodox spiritual writers, and I find myself thinking that there is something different about Orthodox spirituality.  There is something very simple yet profound, that I think sometimes is lacking in the Western Church, which can often be either legalistic or sentimental.

There are elements of theology where the Catholics and the Orthodox differ.  I am not a theologian or some great mystical writer.  I don't understand most of the differences, and the problem I have is that both Churches claim the same things- the Seven Sacraments, Apostolic Succession etc, and both claim that they are the they are the true Church, and the other is in schism.  On differences in theology, for every Orthodox apologist, there seems to be an equally convincing Catholic one saying the opposite!  I don't know where to start!  So I have decided to just focus on my own sanctification at this time, to pray and humbly ask for guidance from the Holy Ghost.

Despite that, I have to admit that there is something that draws me to Orthodoxy.  I am not naive.  I know that there are real problems in Orthodoxy.  Modernism and corruption are everywhere.

I hope I haven't written anything untoward.  I hope to use this forum to ask questions, and if I say anything that appears polemical, it's because I want to know the truth and not because I am an internet troll or want to pick a fight with my Orthodox hosts.

God bless you all and happy Feast of the Assumption/Dormition!
Logged
elephant
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOAA
Posts: 586



« Reply #22 on: August 16, 2012, 09:00:25 AM »

Dear Colm Chille ,

Welcome!

I agree there is something different about the Orthodox Church.  I believe it is Heavenly. 

Of course the Church is full of sinners.  If we look to Christ, maybe those problems will  stay in proper perspective.

Love, elephant
Logged
VarangianGuard
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 79


« Reply #23 on: August 17, 2012, 01:35:03 PM »

Like Colm Chille, I have also followed this forum for a good while now and again like CC, I am also an SSPX'er and have been for 10 years.
Unlike CC, I am a convert to Catholicism, but stayed only a short while in the Novus Ordo church before I became a traddie.

When I read CC's post, it prompted me  to write my first post here, particularly since our "stories" are so much alike.

My own affinity for the East and the Orthodox principled view of tradition has been there for several years, but only for the last year or so have I started questioning certain Catholic teachings, particularly the ultramontanism which was so prevalent ( and which the SSPX adheres to in principle) and its culmination, papal infallibility. If this falls...what is left to believe of the particularly Catholc doctrines which differs from Orthodoxy?
The way I see it, is that this doctrine (or the consequences of the doctrine) led to the revolution at VaticanII, since that was backed by a pope and all subsequent popes have praised the "fruits" of VaticanII. Of course, infallibility was not invoked regarding that council, but the psychological consequences of its existence led the whole hierarchy  (with a few exceptions, notably archbishop Lefebvre) and most of the faithful into following the revolution.
Furthermore, it was the centralisation of the Catholic Church which made the revolution so easy to pull through. Had the ecclesiology been different, more like the Orthodox, it would not have been possible to revolutionize the whole church so fast, if at all.
In addition, it is today impossible to actually ask "what does the Catholic Church really teach?", because there would be as many answers as there are bishops and priests. Heck, even popes gives answers which are dubious.
Has the church teachings really changed? If so, none of the teachings are true, since truth does not change.
Father Damick's "Orthodoxy and Heterodoxy" has further lead me to question things and I have serious doubts now about the development of doctrine, as described by Cardinal Newman.
Has this teaching led to the whole distaster?

Popes praying with Hindus, Muhammedans and Animists, pagan services in Catholic churches, "dialogue" with B'nai B'rith and Abe Foxman, and popes pray that may St. John the Baptist bless the Quran and the Muhammedan faith....and bishops/cardinals/popes receives "blessings" from pagans, such as JPII received from worshippers of the "Great Thumb" in Benin.

All this devastation has made me doubt the RCC's claims...and now I don't know what to do, except pray and ask for guidance, like CC is doing.

God bless,
VG
Logged
Colm Chille
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Rome
Posts: 7


« Reply #24 on: August 18, 2012, 11:04:59 AM »

VG and Elephant

Thank you for your replies!

VG, you've summed up for me exactly what I've been thinking.  Ultramontanism has had disastrous consequences for the Church.  At Vatican II we had all of the world's bishops who had been trained in the old ways, and knew the Faith.  They had all read the great encyclicals against Modernism and many at least, must have known that the Council contradicted many of them.  but the attitude is that if it comes from Rome and seems to have the Pope's approval, it must be true even if it contradicts what the Church has always taught.

As Catholics, we must submit to the Pope.  But what do we do when the pope endorses a Council that we can't go along with, publishes encyclicals that I would not agree with, worships with Pagans etc?  I would not use his catechism, attend his Mass, follow his example or read any of his writings (I've read enough of them!)  I could not allow the pope or any bishop in the Concilliar Church teach catechism to my five year old.   Is this acceptable for Catholics?

For me, this raises the question that most SSPXers throw their hands up in the air at- Sedevacantism.  But then, as you say, sedevacantists are Ultramontanists by definition, and it's Ultramontanism that has helped to turn the Church upside down overnight, and we have to look at the circumstances surrounding Vatican I, to see how that can about.  So I think the problems in the Church go back further than 1962.

I agree with you that the less rigid Orthodox ecclesiastical structure may be better placed to absorb Modernism.  We have the Tradition of the Church, the Councils, and Holy Scripture.  I certainly don't think things are fantastic in Orthodoxy either, but it seems to be different.  The Patriarch of Constantinople has done many of the things the pope has done, but no-one says that it must be alright because the Patriarch does it.

I'm not about to cross the Bosphorus just yet!  But I do have many questions, and there are so many things I don't understand.
Logged
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,114



« Reply #25 on: August 18, 2012, 03:11:59 PM »

Good post, Colm Chille.

but the attitude is that if it comes from Rome and seems to have the Pope's approval, it must be true even if it contradicts what the Church has always taught.

Or, in some case, the attitude is that even if I disagree with Rome, that must mean that I don't really disagree with Rome, but that I just express the same thing in a different way.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
VarangianGuard
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 79


« Reply #26 on: August 19, 2012, 07:32:44 AM »

CC,

Thanks for an interesting reply.
I think many traddies are questioning things these days...and as you rightly point out, sedevacantism would be the conclusion for many, unless they are also questioning Ultramontanism.

As you say, we must as Catholics submit to the Pope. "Resist him to his face" would be the immediate answer to your question , but that can only be a short-term solution and would further reinforce Ultramontanism, since appealing to the Pope's authority actually confirms this authority. And at this time I am seriously doubting that there is such an authority.
I agree also that the problems in the Church go back way further than 1962.
In terms of liturgy, for example, the SSPX is insisting on the '62 Missal, with the novusordoised Holy Week and so on. Even the changes authorised by Pius XII had the seeds of revolution in them.
In fact, I am starting to think it might be that the insertion of the Filioque in the Creed started it and that the insertion of St. Joseph into the Canon of the Mass was the culmination. If even the Canon could be tampered with, then nothing was sacred anymore and we got all the changes which led to the bastardly and man-made "liturgy" of the NO.
Not that Filioque  is wrong in and of itself(one of the things I am currently struggling a bit with), but the introduction of it into the liturgy which was condemned harshly on doctrinal grounds by Pope John (I think it was him) in the 9th(?) century, was suddenly totally ok with his successor. Development of doctrine?
Anyway, my point is that as soon as you start tampering with something, there is no end to what can be done with it.

 It is certainly not the case that the grass is greener on the Orthodox side of the fence and that things there are so fantastic. Like you, I am a realist about that. However, something is indeed different.
It seems that the submission to Traditional Doctrine is never questioned and that the Liturgy is seen as something sacred and given by God and is not for man to tamper with.
The militancy of many Orthodox believers and priests when it comes to defence of the Faith and Christian traditional values, is impressive.
I remember vividly the footage of Russian priests and babushkas among the crowds clearing the area of homosexual activists togetherwith the police during the attempt to stage a Moscow "Pride" festival.
In addition, the mystical tradition is really fascinating me. The rationalist Western desire to over-explain everything bothers me enourmously.
And, after reading The Way of a Pilgrim, a desire was planted in my heart to know and practise this prayer and the Tradition in which it came about. This is something I cannot help but to long for....
Like you, I am not yet ready to cross the Bosphorus and it will definitely take time to study further and pray for the necessary guidance.

I have a question for you... Have you brought this up with your confessor or any traddie friends?
As for myself, I have not done so because I fear that it will only be met by the standard attitude and answers (i.e "you will go to hell for thinking about this") which bears witness to that most have never looked into these things themselves. (A bit strange since the current Catholic teaching is that conscience is the ultimate arbiter...)
The attitude of an Orthodox priest I have spoken with, is very different. He advised me to study, pray and seek counsel and to absolutely not make any rash decisions either way.

Blessed Sunday!
VG

Logged
Colm Chille
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Rome
Posts: 7


« Reply #27 on: August 19, 2012, 10:56:19 AM »

VG,

I have not brought this up with any of my SSPX friends.  I don't think they would be able to deal with that.  I had a few heated exchanges over the discussions with Rome, and as many of my friends were unable to cope with the fact that I disagreed with Bp Fellay over the Rome discussions, I think they would most likely issue me with a Bull of Excommunication on the spot if I said that I had any interest whatsoever in Eastern Orthodoxy.  My wife knows, and I can't say she's exactly happy about it, but she is supportive, and she understands my rationale for looking into this.

I have to say, however, that my experience of SSPX priests is different.  Normally they are prepared to listen and answer questions.  I have no intention of converting at this point, and I would not do so until I have researched all of the issues thoroughly, and spoken to many people who know better than I do.  What I would like to do is discuss things with an Orthodox priest, and then an SSPX priest.  I think the advice the Orthodox priest gave you was very sound.  I think I'll try to get a copy of The Way of the Pilgrim, and try to get a better handle on what the differences between us are.

Abp Lefebvre insisted on the use of the 1962 missal, and this was one of the factors leading to "The Nine" breaking away (or being expelled depending on which version you listen to!)  As you say, the 1962 missal already had the changes to Holy Week and the Triduum.  Many people think we should go back to the pre-1955 missal, but my question is why go back that far, and why not further?  The Roman Liturgy has been getting altered for centuries, to the point where today's "Traditional" liturgy would probably be unrecognizable to St Gregory the Great.  And then there are all the other Western liturgies that have been suppressed over the centuries- why can't we use any of them?

It's a lot to think about!  If Our lord wants me to follow the True Church, He's going to have to let me know which one that is!

Peter,

Thank you for your comment.  It would require some mental acrobatics to reconcile what I believe with what the previous few popes seem to believe!  Saying that we all believe the same thing, just in different ways seems to be the modern way of believing contradictory things at the same time!
Logged
VarangianGuard
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 79


« Reply #28 on: August 19, 2012, 01:00:53 PM »

CC,

I have to point out that I did not mean the SSPX priests when I mentioned "standard attitude". That referred to my fellow traddies, so that Bull of Excommunication would probably come my way too Smiley
My experience with the SSPX priests is like yours. Sorry for being imprecise in my former post.

On the discussions with Rome, I was initially positive but after a very short while, I became very, very negative. In our chapel, most folks have been negative so we have not had many heated debates about the subject. I hear that over in the UK District, most folks are certainly negative.
I'm happy to hear that your wife is at least supportive of your inquiries. As for myself, I am not married so I don't have that potential problem.

Regarding the liturgical changes... I agree totally with you when you ask why we should stop at the pre-1955 missal.
That was more or less my overall point with what I wrote, at least liturgically.

Are you able to attend any Divine Liturgies where you are?




Logged
Colm Chille
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Rome
Posts: 7


« Reply #29 on: August 19, 2012, 04:05:49 PM »

CC,

On the discussions with Rome, I was initially positive but after a very short while, I became very, very negative. In our chapel, most folks have been negative so we have not had many heated debates about the subject. I hear that over in the UK District, most folks are certainly negative.
I'm happy to hear that your wife is at least supportive of your inquiries. As for myself, I am not married so I don't have that potential problem.




In my experience, opinion was quite divided on the whole thing, and both sides of the debate got very heated for a while.  It seems to have mostly died down now, and no-one really wants to talk about it.  This has been difficult for me, as I do want to talk about it.  The SSPX appears to have taken a slightly different direction towards Vatican II and the, and I need something more to go on than simply, "Trust Bp Fellay!"  I'm struggling a bit with the whole thing to be honest, and it has forced me into asking other difficult questions about the causes of the current crisis, and the role of the Papacy itself within the Tradition of the Church.  Tu es Petrus... is interpreted by Catholics as meaning that the Apostle Peter and all of his successors, are unable to err on issues of Faith and Morality when speaking Ex Cathedra.  However, we still have the Ordinary Magisterium of the Church, and the Church teaches that the pope cannot be a heretic.  If he becomes a heretic, he stops being pope.  Now here we have a Successor of Peter who appears to be in error.  After exhausting all of the usual excuses (diplomacy etc), I can only see two possible explanations for this:

1.  Our interpretation of Tu es Petrus... is flawed (the Orthodox standpoint); or,
2.  The Man in White is not the Successor to Peter (the Sedevacantist standpoint.)

Even under to Ultramontanist philosophy papal infallibility still has its limitations.  This is what the SSPX has always maintained regarding the previous five popes and the Council.  However Recognise and Resist can only go on for so long, and if the SSPX does make a deal with Concilliar Rome there will be no-one left who does hold that position, so where are the Faithful left?  How do we understand the current situation?

These are just my thoughts, and as I said earlier, I am not a theologian.  If the best and brightest theologians of the past thousand years cannot agree on the interpretation of Tu es Petrus then what hope have I got?  I hope people reading this would feel free to contradict me if they feel I am wrong- it has happened before!  I just want to know the Truth.
Logged
GabrieltheCelt
Hillbilly Extraordinaire
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,988


Chasin' down a Hoodoo...


« Reply #30 on: August 19, 2012, 04:20:06 PM »


I'm not about to cross the Bosphorus just yet!  But I do have many questions, and there are so many things I don't understand.
First, welcome to the Forum!  BTW, as you might imagine, I love your name!  Wink  Second, although God will answer your questions, and I have no doubt that He can do so with this forum, just be forewarned that much of what you read here is opinion and conjecture.  Oh, and things can get heated and ugly from time to time.  Forgive us.  Smiley
Logged

"The Scots-Irish; Brewed in Scotland, bottled in Ireland, uncorked in America."  ~Scots-Irish saying
Colm Chille
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Rome
Posts: 7


« Reply #31 on: August 19, 2012, 04:25:23 PM »

CC,


Are you able to attend any Divine Liturgies where you are?




In my city there are Greek and Russian Divine Liturgies every Sunday.  There are no Uniate Liturgies that I could find.  I attended a Greek Orthodox Mass recently, but I didn't have the bottle to speak to anyone!  I just wanted to observe.  It was a beautiful liturgy, even though it was all in Greek and my Greek is limited to Kyrie Eleison!  But I couldn't understand the TLM the first time I went to that- I soon picked it up.  I was able to follow most of the Liturgy- the main parts etc.

It has been difficult.  The times of the Orthodox Masses clash with the SSPX Mass, and my wife is a bit worried about me.  Remember that the Catholic Church believes that it is a mortal sin to attend non-Catholic religious ceremonies.  However, it draws a distinction between active and passive participation.  I was just there to observe.  
Logged
Colm Chille
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Rome
Posts: 7


« Reply #32 on: August 19, 2012, 04:33:50 PM »


I'm not about to cross the Bosphorus just yet!  But I do have many questions, and there are so many things I don't understand.
First, welcome to the Forum!  BTW, as you might imagine, I love your name!  Wink  Second, although God will answer your questions, and I have no doubt that He can do so with this forum, just be forewarned that much of what you read here is opinion and conjecture.  Oh, and things can get heated and ugly from time to time.  Forgive us.  Smiley

Thanks for that Gabriel!  I can live with heated debate! Angry
Logged
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,114



« Reply #33 on: August 20, 2012, 07:27:10 AM »

Hi Varangia and Colm Chille. Good discussion. Although I sometimes describe myself as “traditional Catholic”(you may not have seen that in my profile, b/c it's been a few months since I've had it there) I tend to find myself at odds with the “standard” traditional Catholic thinking. For example, the way so many traditional Catholics have no interest in even the possibility of saying the creed in its original form, and often are flat-out opposed to it. There are other examples, but I'll just stop here.

Anyhow, I'll keep following your discussion with much interest. In a way, all this is part of the reason that I'm an inquirer into Orthodoxy.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
VarangianGuard
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 79


« Reply #34 on: August 20, 2012, 10:41:24 AM »

CC,

Good for you that you have the access!
I work mostly abroad and as far as I know, there is no DL where I travel to and stay most of the time.
However, I do have access at home and will start attending as an observer soon.
I've attended the DL in Eastern Europe before, though.

Peter J,

Thank you.
Interesting that you too are more or less in the same position as CC and I.
Are there possibly more disgruntled traddies out there who are questioning things..?

How anyone could be opposed to saying the Creed in its original form, is beyond me.
I mean, the Catholic Church teaches that filioque is just more precise, right? Besides, the original was agreed on by an Ecumenical Council of the Church.
I hope to have a fruitful discussion about this and other topics in the future.
 
Logged
choy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,316


« Reply #35 on: August 20, 2012, 01:36:32 PM »

Hi Varangia and Colm Chille. Good discussion. Although I sometimes describe myself as “traditional Catholic”(you may not have seen that in my profile, b/c it's been a few months since I've had it there) I tend to find myself at odds with the “standard” traditional Catholic thinking. For example, the way so many traditional Catholics have no interest in even the possibility of saying the creed in its original form, and often are flat-out opposed to it. There are other examples, but I'll just stop here.

Anyhow, I'll keep following your discussion with much interest. In a way, all this is part of the reason that I'm an inquirer into Orthodoxy.

The problem I have with "traditional" Roman Catholicism is that they make it seem Trent is so perfect and that it seems there was no Church before Trent.  Save for a few references to pre-Trent saints like St. Thomas Aquinas, the whole theology revolves around Trent up until the day before Vatican II.

I have formed an opinion that perhaps even Trent is one of the problematic councils of the Catholic Church.  Not that it is heretic or modernist, but the fact that it was a counter-Reformation council.  The downward spiral of the Catholic Church in terms of her spirituality and faith began when we started adjusting to the Reformers.  Today even the whole theology is geared towards answering Protestant tracts rather than ignoring them and just staying true to what the Church teaches from day 1.  I find that very lacking in the Catholic Church, the references to early teaching and early belief.  A lot of the First Millennium seems to be a big questionmark to most, no one can even give me a conclusive source on what the Roman Mass was like in the First Millennium.  Whereas in the East, we have documented the development of the Divine Liturgy from it's early days to where it is today.
Logged
VarangianGuard
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 79


« Reply #36 on: August 22, 2012, 06:09:49 AM »

Choy,

That goes to the heart of what we are talking about.
Is the RCC really "Traditional" at all? "Traditional" as in "True", since Tradition is Truth.  I guess that is the basic question we are asking ourselves these days and it is the reason we are making inquiries into Orthodoxy.

It is true that there is a lot of talk about Trent (far too much for my tastes), but I would not agree that this is the case everywhere and with everyone.
I have heard many, many sermons from Society priests where they don't even mention Trent and all the anathemas et al, in spite the sermon being about the modern crisis. Generally, I would have to agree that most of the theology revolves around Trent and what came after it, up to Vatican II.

Your thought about Trent is quite similar to what we dicussed earlier with CC. The centralisation that followed has been catastrophic, in my opinion.
Very interesting that the East has documented the development of the Liturgy from it's early days!!!
Can you give me any sources or recommend scholarly works about just that?




Logged
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,114



« Reply #37 on: August 22, 2012, 09:27:14 AM »

Choy,

That goes to the heart of what we are talking about.
Is the RCC really "Traditional" at all? "Traditional" as in "True", since Tradition is Truth.  I guess that is the basic question we are asking ourselves these days and it is the reason we are making inquiries into Orthodoxy.

It is true that there is a lot of talk about Trent (far too much for my tastes), but I would not agree that this is the case everywhere and with everyone.
I have heard many, many sermons from Society priests where they don't even mention Trent and all the anathemas et al, in spite the sermon being about the modern crisis. Generally, I would have to agree that most of the theology revolves around Trent and what came after it, up to Vatican II.

Your thought about Trent is quite similar to what we dicussed earlier with CC. The centralisation that followed has been catastrophic, in my opinion.
Very interesting that the East has documented the development of the Liturgy from it's early days!!!
Can you give me any sources or recommend scholarly works about just that?

Forgive me if this is a little random, but something I was thinking just now while reading your post: I have, occasionally, put "traditionalist" or "traditional Catholic" in my profile; but I don't think I would do that again at this point. I just think that the impression that would give people about me isn't very accurate.

Anyhow ... now back to your regularly scheduled discussion.  angel
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Colm Chille
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Rome
Posts: 7


« Reply #38 on: August 22, 2012, 12:49:15 PM »

These are all very interesting points.  I feel a bit overwhelmed by this whole situation.  I had said earlier that I had attended a Greek Orthodox Mass recently, but I have decided that for the time being, I will not attend any more until I have done more research into the theological issues that separate us.  I fully believe that with prayer and study, I will come to know the Truth.
Logged
choy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,316


« Reply #39 on: August 22, 2012, 01:06:19 PM »

Choy,

That goes to the heart of what we are talking about.
Is the RCC really "Traditional" at all? "Traditional" as in "True", since Tradition is Truth.  I guess that is the basic question we are asking ourselves these days and it is the reason we are making inquiries into Orthodoxy.

It is true that there is a lot of talk about Trent (far too much for my tastes), but I would not agree that this is the case everywhere and with everyone.
I have heard many, many sermons from Society priests where they don't even mention Trent and all the anathemas et al, in spite the sermon being about the modern crisis. Generally, I would have to agree that most of the theology revolves around Trent and what came after it, up to Vatican II.

Your thought about Trent is quite similar to what we dicussed earlier with CC. The centralisation that followed has been catastrophic, in my opinion.
Very interesting that the East has documented the development of the Liturgy from it's early days!!!
Can you give me any sources or recommend scholarly works about just that?


Currently I am reading Father Lawrence Farley's book, "Let us attend!"  It is a simple explanation of the Divine Liturgy backed with some of the historical practices from the time of St. John Chrysostom all the way to about the 12th century where the Divine Liturgy has reached the form we have today.  It's a cheap book and you can get it from Conciliar Press or Amazon.  Last time Conciliar Press put it on sale for less than $5.

There is another one online from a Ukrainian Orthodox website, but I have to dig out the link from my old emails.
Logged
VarangianGuard
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 79


« Reply #40 on: August 23, 2012, 05:09:08 AM »

Choy,

Thanks for providing those sources.
I'll order Father Farley's book asap.
If you can find the other one in your old emails, I'd appreciate it very much.

VG
Logged
VarangianGuard
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 79


« Reply #41 on: August 23, 2012, 05:12:46 AM »

These are all very interesting points.  I feel a bit overwhelmed by this whole situation.  I had said earlier that I had attended a Greek Orthodox Mass recently, but I have decided that for the time being, I will not attend any more until I have done more research into the theological issues that separate us.  I fully believe that with prayer and study, I will come to know the Truth.

CC,
As we are all in different situations, there can always be more than 1 solution.
Your course will probably serve you well. I am on a similar course, although I attend the DL (observer) when I have the chance but not at the expence of the TLM on Sundays.
Logged
DanM
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 249


« Reply #42 on: August 23, 2012, 09:55:29 AM »

if I come in for the wrong reason then I do not get the benefits of it, correct?

Wrong.  I became Orthodox for cold, rational reasons and then fell utterly in love. 
Logged
choy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,316


« Reply #43 on: August 24, 2012, 12:57:50 PM »

if I come in for the wrong reason then I do not get the benefits of it, correct?

Wrong.  I became Orthodox for cold, rational reasons and then fell utterly in love. 


My apprehension is maybe when the ill feelings have died down, I might regret what I did.
Logged
Tags:
Pages: 1   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.141 seconds with 70 queries.