Starting to regret choosing RCC over Eastern Orthodox

It appears there is a lack of unity, which is one reason I chose RCC to begin with. There seems to be bishops, Cardinals and priests fighting each other or allowing homosexual married couples or non Catholics communion.
It seems the EO is sticking to the truth of the early church more. I’m worried and confused.

Any advice?
oneseeker2

The Church’s human element will always be to some extent broken, because we are fallen creatures. That is not to minimize the evils of the time we are in (though every age has its own evils), but we really should not be surprised by it. By all means pray about it.

As to the Orthodox, I’m afraid that you’re going to find divisions and in-fighting among them, too, as they too are mere men. And they are not all of one mind on matters of moral theology. The difference is that we have a divinely-established center of unity. It may not always seem like it’s working, but it definitely makes a difference, probably more than we realize.

I’m sure that there are disagreements among the EO. However, there aren’t priests inviting same sex couples on mortal sin to receive communion, among other things. I also realize no church is without human imperfections, but the RCC has the Pope as its earthly vicar. It seems that he is not making things any clearer, or disciplining errant priests. Note I said seems, since I’m not aware of every action he takes.

Just hard bc my cousin and family as well as two close friends are Orthodox. What are these moral issues thhe EO disagree on in theory or practice? I don’t see it play out at Divine Liturgy.

Oneseeker2

There is only One True Church. Our first pope denied Christ three times. Christ did not guarantee good popes. He promised that the gates of hell would not prevail over His Church, the Catholic Church. And since the Church is universal it could very well happen that the Church might fail in a particular geographical area but gain strength in another.

If they stuck to the truth of the Early Church which they didn’t, they’d be Catholic.

Here’s a condensed history of the first 400 years of the Church. All internal inks operational

The Church has been Catholic from the 1st century. The English word Catholic is a transliteration of the Greek katholikos which is a compound word from kata, which means according to, and holos, which means whole or universal. catholic.com/tracts/what-catholic-means

So one THEN can ask, where does kata holos appear in scripture and particularly kata holos ekklesia ?

Acts 9:31 the church throughout all ἐκκλησία,καθ’,ὅλης ,τῆς ,Judea and Galilee and Sama’ria…" = the Kataholos Church.

Ignatius, Martyr and Bishop of Antioch from ~69 a.d. to ~107 a.d. He was ordained by the apostles, and was a direct disciple of St John. It was in Antioch where the disciples were first called Christian Acts 11:26 . And Ignatius in his writings uses both “Christian” and “Catholic Church” in his letters.

[LIST]
*]St Ignatius, uses Christian in (ch 2) and Catholic Church in (ch 8) Epistle to the Smyrnæans
]of which schismatics won’t be going to heaven. *Epistle to the Philadelphians (ch 3) .
[LIST]
*]As an aside, where would Ignatius learn to teach that warning and corresponding consequence for one’s soul, for commiting and remaining in the sin of schism / division from the Catholic Church? Paul condemned division / dissention διχοστασίαι, ] from the Church. That Greek word is used in both Romans 16:17-20 , & Galatians 5:19-21 and that warning came from Jesus who does NOT approve of division in His Church John 17:20-23 , and since the HS only teaches what comes from Jesus John 16:12-15 no one can say the HS inspired THEM to divide from Our Lord’s Church, creating all the division we see today in Christianity. :tsktsk:There is no expiration date to that warning and condemnation. That is a huge warning and consequence that has been there from the beginning.
[/LIST]

[/LIST]

[LIST]
*]St Polycarp, Bp Smyrna, ~140 a.d., disciple of St John, called the Church the “Catholic Church” The Martyrdom of Polycarp
*]Muratorian canon ~180 a.d. earlychristianwritings.co…uratoria n.html uses authority of “Catholic Church” in determining the canon of scripture
*]Irenaeus ~180 a.d. wrote “Against Heresies” called the Church the “Catholic Church” Adversus haereses [Bk 1 [URL=“http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103110.htm”]Chapter 10 v 3], and also Irenaeus who was taught by Polycarp, (making Irenaeus 1 man away from an apostle) teaches all must agree with Rome [Bk 3, [URL=“http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103303.htm”]Chapter 3, v 2-3]. He also gives all the bishops (by name) from Peter in Rome, down to his day. Showing not only apostolic succession of ordinations, but succession to Peter in Rome is recognized from the beginning as necessary for Church authority.
*]Cyprian~250 a.d. calls the Church the Catholic Church Epistle 54
*]The Nicene Creed, 325 a.d., it’s a matter of faith in the creed to believe in the “One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church”
*]Augustine ~395 There are many other things that most justly keep me in her * bosom. . . . The succession of priests keeps me, beginning from the very seat of the Apostle Peter, to whom the Lord, after His resurrection, gave it in charge to feed His sheep, down to the present episcopate. And so, lastly, does the name itself of Catholic, which, not without reason, amid so many heresies, the Church has thus retained; so that, though all heretics wish to be called Catholics, yet when a stranger asks where the Catholic Church meets, no heretic will venture to point to his own chapel or house.Against the Epistle of Manichaeus Called Fundamental (ch 5 v6)
]etc
[/LIST]
The same Church Pope Francis is over today, 266th successor to St Peter.

As much as I respect the Eastern Orthodox Church, I know there is only One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, and I can’t jump ship when she gets persecuted from without or from within.

Think of Christ on the Cross, when He was arrested, when the disciples abandoned Him and St Peter denied Him thrice, do you want to leave Him too?

I hope this has helped

God Bless You

Thank you for reading
Josh

:popcorn:

What do you mean?
I see same sex couples taking communion in EO churches.
The EO church, in my experience, is much more* inclusive* regarding this issue than the Catholic church.

.

How do you know that?

Also as another poster has said if the EO had stuck to the truth of the early Church they would not be a schismatic part of the Catholic Church.

Which EO Church have you seen same sex couples taking communion, and is the relationship something the priest is aware of?

We are the Church catholic, but you can carry on calling us schismatics if it makes you feel better. It doesn’t make the claim any less false though.

I believe the Orthodox Church is very close to the Catholic Church, since I believe they have the real presence, which is why I respect them so much, but I believe they have schismed from the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, I would love to one day see them correct their errors on divorce and remarriage (marriage is such an important sacrament precisely because it cannot be broken, in sickness and in health, for better or worse, till death do they part, God is part of the marriage, and God cannot break His promises, even if people do), accept the filioque-clause and one day be reunited with the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.

I hope this has helped

God Bless You

Thank you for reading
Josh

There is overwhelming evidence supporting Roman Catholicism against Eastern Orthodoxy. I will run through the highlights:

  1. The Apostles Peter and Paul were martyred at Rome and commissioned successors there. Constantinople’s only claim to apostolic succession is that Saint Andrew visited there. But that doesn’t distinguish Constantinople from any of the other cities that were visited by the apostles.

  2. Constantinople had no significance for the first 300 years of the Church. Meanwhile the Bishop of Rome was settling church-wide disputes from the 1st Century.

  3. Constantinople’s only claim to importance is that the Roman Emperor chose it as the new imperial capital in 4th Century. The Byzantines even stated this expressly as their justification for trying to elevate Constantinople to a patriarchate in the 2nd and 4th ecumenical councils.

  4. Rome correctly rebutted every first millennium heresy. Constantinople fell for almost every first millennium heresy and had to be brought back each time by Rome.

  5. The first millennium Church universally acknowledged Rome as the head of all churches.

  6. Constantinople accepted reunion with Rome at the Council of Lyon in 1274 and at the Council of Florence in 1439. After Constantinople was conquered by the Ottomans, the Ottoman Sultan chose the patriarch of Constantinople, and chose the most anti-Catholic patriarch he could find.

  7. Constantinople falsely divides God into “essence” and “energies”, which is a denial of divine simplicity.

  8. The Eastern Orthodox is only one of many schismatic sects that broke off from the Catholic Church in the east. There are also the Oriental Orthodox and the Church of the East.

  9. The Filioque is the historic teaching of the eastern Church Fathers.

  10. Read “The Orthodox Eastern Church” by Father Adrian Fortescue.

  11. Saint Jerome said it best:

Since the East, shattered as it is by the long-standing feuds, subsisting between its peoples, is bit by bit tearing into shreds the seamless vest of the Lord, woven from the top throughout, since the foxes are destroying the vineyard of Christ, and since among the broken cisterns that hold no water it is hard to discover the sealed fountain and the garden inclosed, I think it my duty to consult the chair of Peter, and to turn to a church whose faith has been praised by Paul. I appeal for spiritual food to the church whence I have received the garb of Christ. The wide space of sea and land that lies between us cannot deter me from searching for the pearl of great price. Wheresoever the body is, there will the eagles be gathered together. Evil children have squandered their patrimony; you alone keep your heritage intact. The fruitful soil of Rome, when it receives the pure seed of the Lord, bears fruit an hundredfold; but here the seed grain is choked in the furrows and nothing grows but darnel or oats. In the West the Sun of righteousness is even now rising; in the East, Lucifer, who fell from heaven, has once more set his throne above the stars. You are the light of the world, you are the salt of the earth, you are vessels of gold and of silver. Here are vessels of wood or of earth, which wait for the rod of iron, and eternal fire.

newadvent.org/fathers/3001015.htm

I’ll just leave this here…

I can’t figure out how to quote, but one of the posters said they would like to see the EO have the same teachings on divorced/remarried and the indissoubility of marriage. However, in the RCC now, we have confusion over that very issue of divorced/remarried receiving communion. Now we have a priest in Sicily who is not allowed to say Mass or administer the sacraments bc he upheld traditional marriage and refused to give communion to those in adulterous relationships.

Oneseeker2

There have always been problems in the Church. Look at Paul’s letters to the Corinthians. The Catholic solution is to pray, do penance, petition our leaders with our grievances, and exhort one another to holiness.

The schismatic and heretical solution is to leave and join a different church.

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.