Heart is pulling me towards Orthodoxy


The Orthodox religion isn’t as such an option for anyone seeking the truth, as it goes against, real orthodoxy, in that they are not ‘orthodox’; they reject as such the ancient faith, but cling only to those aspects of it they agree with. To be orthodox is to cling to the entire faith; as it was handed down to us from the very beginning.

A good text detailing this very point is the well known commonitorium of st. Vincent of Lerins.


Here we go again. Eastern on the outside as long as we are Roman on the inside. Honestly, this is of zero concern with the Vatican. The only ones who care this much are amateur apologists.

I don’t find in the writings of Saint Pope John Paul II, Benedict XVI emeritus or the current Bishop of Rome anything that says we need to change our theology.



I did not say you need to change it but you can without changing fact you are Eastern. Theology is a science about God and supernatural things, roughly. Purgatory is part of those things that Theology, as science, cares about. As much as Palamite theology has not been there since Apostles (not necessarily that it was not believed in, but theology behind it was mostly Gregory’s job iirc), same way Purgatory has not been there before in East yet it may come. After all goal of Rites of Church is to enrich each other not to isolate from each other. This is what you seem to be missing. You do not need to be Roman inside, just be Catholics inside. There are decrees of Popes against Jansenism or Gallicanism- we do not hold them to be true. Those are now definitely heresies with proclamation of DOGMA (not doctrine) of Papal Infallibility, signed by Eastern Patriarchs aswell as Pope and Cardinals.


I didn’t mean to overstate it. But Islam was pushed back during the first Crusade and Asia Minor was given back to the Byzantines. Levantine Islam had become feudal by then and the Arab hold on the Levant was not as strong as it had been previously or would be again under the Ottomans.


Hmmm :thinking:

Again, it seems that Roman Catholics just wish us to be Eastern in our Liturgy. This sums it up:

Interestingly enough everything that Saint Pope John Paul II ever wrote about the East, whether in communion with Rome or not, goes against this.

Orientale Lumen:
~ “Since, in fact, we believe that the venerable and ancient tradition of the Eastern Churches is an integral part of the heritage of Christ’s Church, the first need for Catholics is to be familiar with that tradition, so as to be nourished by it and to encourage the process of unity in the best way possible for each.”
~ “Our Eastern Catholic brothers and sisters are very conscious of being the living bearers of this tradition, together with our Orthodox brothers and sisters. The members of the Catholic Church of the Latin tradition must also be fully acquainted with this treasure and thus feel, with the Pope, a passionate longing that the full manifestation of the Church’s catholicity be restored to the Church and to the world, expressed not by a single tradition, and still less by one community in opposition to the other; and that we too may be granted a full taste of the divinely revealed and undivided heritage of the universal Church(2) which is preserved and grows in the life of the Churches of the East as in those of the West.”
Note “together with our Orthodox brothers and sisters.” We, as Eastern Catholics are Orthodox in every way.
~ “In the study of revealed truth East and West have used different methods and approaches in understanding and confessing divine things. It is hardly surprising, then, if sometimes one tradition has come nearer to a full appreciation of some aspects of a mystery of revelation than the other, or has expressed them better. In such cases, these various theological formulations are often to be considered complementary rather than conflicting.”
~ “It has been stressed several times that the full union of the Catholic Eastern Churches with the Church of Rome which has already been achieved must not imply a diminished awareness of their own authenticity and originality. Wherever this occurred, the Second Vatican Council has urged them to rediscover their full identity, because they have ‘the right and the duty to govern themselves according to their own special disciplines. For these are guaranteed by ancient tradition, and seem to be better suited to the customs of their faithful and to the good of their souls.’”

This is just form one document and I could quote so much more from it as well as many others written by Saint Pope John Paul II when writing about the Eastern Churches.



In the 20th century Saint Gregory Palamas’ teaching was seen positively by Western Catholic theologians such as Henri de Lubac, Jean Danielou and Louis Bouyer. In the 1930s Danielou wrote how excited he was to read of Palamas’ “vision of humanity transfigured by the divine energies”.

In 1996 Saint Pope John Paul II writing about Hesychasm, "In the East hesychasm means a method of prayer characterized by deep tranquility of the spirit, which is engaged in constant contemplation of God by invoking the name of Jesus. There was no lack of tension with the Catholic viewpoint on certain aspects of this practice. However, we should acknowledge the good intentions which guided the defense of this spiritual method, that is, to emphasize the concrete possibility that man is given to unite himself with the Triune God in the intimacy of his heart, in that deep union of grace which Eastern theology likes to describe with the particularly powerful term of ‘theosis’ (‘divinization’). “Precisely in this regard Eastern spirituality has amassed a very rich experience which was vigorously presented in the famous collection of texts significantly entitled Philokalia (‘love of beauty’) and gathered by Nicodemus the Hagiorite at the end of the 18th century. … “How many things we have in common! It is time for Catholics and Orthodox to make an extra effort to understand each other better and to recognize with the renewed wonder of brotherhood what the Spirit is accomplishing in their respective traditions towards a new Christian springtime” (John Paul II, Eastern Theology Has Enriched the Whole Church ).

Saint Pope John Paul II has even referred to Saint Gregory Palamas as a Saint!



There is plenty in Catholic theology that affirms that the Orthodox do need to change their theology. The Church is much larger than 3 Popes. She goes back all the way to Christ. I know that might sound hard to believe :slight_smile:


I recommend before you make a change that you familiarize yourself with the debates within Orthodoxy and who they say are Schismatics.

On the one hand, you have the Greek Old Calendarists who severed communion with the Greek Church over the adoption of a New Calendar. The New Calendarists rightly condemned them as Schismatics for declaring the Greek Hierarchy deposed by the very fact of accepting a New Calendar. The Old Calendarists did not summon any bishops to a trial or deal with the issue in a canonical way at all and devolved into fanaticism, saying the New Calendarist Sacraments were invalid.

Now wait, if this is a schismatic act, then the Orthodox are self-condemned- for which Latin Bishop or Hierarchy did they canonically try in a court in order to condemn? When is the Papacy even first anathematized by NAME? 1583.

Moreover, in an Orthodox synod, you have the patriarch and his Metropolitans. Now, if the Metropolitans sever communion with the patriarch and declare him deposed without a trial are they Schismatics? Yes. Nikodemos of Athos talks about this in his commentary on the canons- no canonical penalty has any force unless a living council enacts it.

Again, what living council ever summoned and canonically tried and anathematized the Latins or the Pope? None.

As for Changes, just read about all the opinions of those who refused to accept the innovations of Gregory Palamas which are now standard Orthodoxy.

Why do the Orthodox always break up the reunion attempts first?

Schism. It won’t wash.


Interesting . . . I’m Byzantine Catholic and the Church accepts our theology as it is and as Saint Pope John Paul II put it, “Our Eastern Catholic brothers and sisters are very conscious of being the living bearers of this tradition, together with our Orthodox brothers and sisters .”

The Church is much lager than Rome :wink:

Again, I’m Byzantine Catholic, I think I know the Churches history pretty well, but thanks!



More like you seem to think that you can hide behind ‘Byzantine’ and claim that you don’t have to submit to the authority of the Church. Please give us a break . . .


Yeah, going to an Orthodox Church instead of a Latin Rite Catholic Church seems to be violating Sunday Obligation. I wonder if he/she moved to an area with only Latin Rite churches, if he/she would instead only go to the Orthodox Church and abandon the Church altogether.



Just being a good Byzantine and doing what Rome wants us to do.



Hm. . . I hope you find it amusing. . . But reality, well that is another thing.


Again, what does that mean? Will you embrace Akindynos or Palamas? Will you embrace Bekkos or lord Gregory of Cyprus? Will you accept the condemnation of Gregory Palamas, or his exoneration?

Most likely you are a Slavic Byzantine. So what about the practices of the Old Believers? Do you use a lestovka, since that was the prayer rope in use before the union of Brest? Do you follow Avvakum and the zealots of piety and his fight against hellenization of Russian customs? What about the pan-Orthodox synod of 1666?

And what about the Slavic anti-hesychasm? Or will you follow st Paisios velichkovsky? But what about St. Dimitri of Rostov and his devotion to the sacred heart, stations of the cross and the rosary?

Who does your bishop anathematize in the Synodikon of Orthodoxy? Heck, what about the Synodikon of the Holy Spirit meant to be read on the Monday after Pentecost and it’s anathemas?

So how Orthodox will you be?

How eastern is eastern enough? What are legitimate traditions? My personal answer would be let bekkos be your guide and ditch Palamas.


The anathemas from the Synodikon on The Holy Spirit- http://www.oocities.org/trvalentine/orthodox/spirit_synodikon.html

“ The Anathemas

So likewise do they who despise and disdain piety receive curses; wherefore, we all in unison, since we constitute the fullness of piety, lay upon them the curse which they have put upon themselves.

To those who do not deign to consent to the unaltered and unadulterated holy Symbol confessed by the Orthodox, that one, I mean, which was evangelically formulated by the First and Second Holy Synods and confirmed by the rest, but who rather amend it and distort it to support their own belief, thereby not only corrupting the synodal traditions of the Holy Fathers and of the holy and God-instructed apostles, but also the definitions of our true God and Saviour, Jesus Christ,


To those who do not confess that the Holy Spirit proceeds and has His existence from the Father with no intermediary in the same manner as the Son is begotten from the Father with no intermediary, according as God the Word Himself taught and as the Church has received from on high through the fathers, and who account as worthless the tradition of our God and Saviour Jesus Christ and accept impious and spurious doctrines which contend that the Son is related to the Father directly and with no intermediary, but that the Holy Spirit is distant and mediated, and who thus alienate the Holy Spirit from the Father’s hypostasis and introduce some sort of interval and boundary between the Father and the All-holy Spirit, and so fall into the gulf of tritheism,


Is this part of legitimate eastern Byzantine tradition or not?


Yes, I can relate well. However, I know that “where Peter is there is the Church”. We do not jump ship into a different one. We instead try to repair any holes or cracks letting water (or smoke, if you catch my drift) into the ship.
The form of the Mass is indeed different from the TLM, but the true dogmas and doctrine that are part of the extraordinary magesterium do not change, regardless of who wants to change them.
While we have a new “approach” it should not be a break from tradition but should be in light of it.

Also, it sounds like you have a Traditional Latin Mass near you. If you are sure it is valid and licit (ie not canonically suspect) but in obedience to Rome, then boom! There you go, tradition. If the priest gives good homilies that’s just extra icing on the cake.


The East does Not share the same view on this.

I, he, would go to an Orthodox Church and I wouldn’t be “abandoning” the faith. Canon 844-2 “Whenever necessity requires or genuine spiritual advantage suggests, and provided that the danger of error or indifferentism is avoided, it is lawful for the faithful for whom it is physically or morally impossible to approach a Catholic minister, to receive the sacraments of penance, Eucharist, and anointing of the sick from non-Catholic ministers in whose churches these sacraments are valid.”



Pray and think rationally and carefully. There are real philosophical, doctrinal, theological differences between the branches of the one holy catholic and apostolic Church. Find your place within it and all will be well with your soul. If a Roman Catholic were to say that you’d be damned or punished for rejecting the pope, than I’d say they’re nuts.


The Holy Roman Church “firmly believes, professes, and proclaims that those not living within the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics cannot become participants in eternal life, but will depart “into everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels” [Matt. 25:41], unless before the end of life the same have been added to the flock; and that the unity of the ecclesiastical body is so strong that only to those remaining in it are the sacraments of the Church of benefit for salvation, and do fastings, almsgiving, and other functions of piety and exercises of Christian service produce eternal reward, and that no one, whatever almsgiving he has practiced, even if he has shed blood for the name of Christ, can be saved, unless he has remained in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church.”

This is what happens if you choose to become a schismatic.


Wow that’s actually hilarious :joy::rofl::joy: . . . Pope Honorius was actually anathematized and condemned by Popes over theological issues. You’re acting as if Roman Catholic have never had disagreements.

What’s your point? He’s not the only Orthodox Saint who has had a private devotion to the rosary. There are Roman Catholics that I know who have private devotions to the Jesus Prayer or icons.

Interestingly enough we Byzantine Catholics will be celebrating his feast day on the second Sunday of Great and Holy Lent.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.