/christian/ - Christianity

Discussion of Christianity, the Church, and theology

(You probably don't need to) SAVE THIS FILE (any more): Anon.cafe Fallback File v1.1 (updated 2021-12-13)

Anon.cafe will shut down as of 00:00 UTC on 15 March 2024. Announcement here.

Max message length: 20000

Drag files to upload or
click here to select them

Maximum 5 files / Maximum size: 20.00 MB

Board Rules

(used to delete files and postings)

John 3:16 KJV: For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

Open file (170.71 KB 2448x3264 Pope.jpg)
Catholic/Protestant Slapfight Thread christianjanny Board volunteer 11/05/2022 (Sat) 15:40:18 ID: 5f869a No.20996
Due to several threads being dragged wildly off-topic by some anons' inability to hold themselves back whenever someone says the Pope is the antichrist or that Martin Luther destroyed Christianity, this thread will serve as a pseudo-containment thread for dialogue between Catholics and Protestants. Rules still apply in here, keep the thread on topic, do not make one-liner insults or ad hominems, keep it civil and respectful. Posts that try to start fights between Churches and drag the OP off-topic in other threads will be deleted, no matter how many there are.
>>23219 >You literally espoused on how modern Catholics have departed from the original earlier Catholic faith Yes. And so did protestants. Are you throwing stones? I believe in the Catholic faith, even the parts I don't know yet. What religion are you? You should state it if you've believe it. I didn't say "reformed". I said they're not catholic if they don't believe the catholic faith. That means they're not IN the church to reform it. I said they need to be Catholic. What religion are you? Which of the many protestant (or Jewish) religions teaches you to say these things as pleasing to the eyes of God?
>>23219 > I literally just paraphrased You changed the meaning of what I said, so you didn't "paraphrase". That you had to change the words means that you twisted them.
>>23224 >>23225 Reform, in this context. literally means to change something back to what it originally was. You're literally a Protestant in denial, and you'll engage in whatever mental gymnastics it will take to run away from this ugly truth: Protestant Reformation: "The Catholic church has departed from the original faith and we need to change it back to that original faith." Sedevacantists: "The Catholic church has departed from the original faith and we need to change it back to that original faith."
>>23213 There are no Catholics since the word Catholic itself means universal and the universal church has been broken by heresy.
>>23228 Reminder that the word protest literally meant to be a faithful witness during the Reformation: >protest (n.) >c. 1400, "avowal, pledge, solemn declaration," from Old French protest, from protester, from Latin protestari "declare publicly, testify, protest," from pro- "forth, before" (from PIE root *per- (1) "forward," hence "in front of, before") + testari "testify," from testis "witness" (see testament). >Meaning "statement of disapproval" is recorded by 1751.  https://www.etymonline.com/word/protest
>>23232 Nice resource site Anon, thanks. One of the problems with human history is that it's professionally directed by human liars. Thankfully the Internet is a thing now. If we can record and preserve our current history, then hopefully the Globohomo will be exposed in their lies in the future.
>>23228 Not a single protestant wanted to change it back to what it was. Divorce was never allowed by the Church, King Henry wanted divorce. The Church always said give to the poor, Martin Luther didn't want good works, faith alone he said. The Church always said Bible and Popes, as the Lord said in Matthew 16. Martin Luther said God was wrong about that too and said Bible alone, which is insane because the Church, under divine inspiration of the Holy Ghost, created the Cannon of the Bible and selected which of the ancient text were correct and which had errors. For a millinia, the Latin Vulgate was ONE AND ONLY HOLY BIBLE. And Luther, in trying to appeal to the Jews and get their favor, butchered the Holy Bible and threw several books out. So no protestant wanted to return to the original faith. Each and every one wanted to Change the faith to their own liking. Luther even wanted to allow polygamy, having blessed a double marriage for one prince. >>23230 "Catholic" in this case is just a proper name for the true Church founded by Jesus Christ. You're talking little "c", catholic, a quality of the Church founded by Jesus Christ. It's sort of like Democrats being the name of a party while democracy being a form of government characterized by mob rule. And the Church didn't spring from nothing in the 16th century. God created it, see Matthew 16. The Lord didn't say "Simon, thou art Peter, and I'll build my church upon the rock of Martin Luther in over a thousand years. Until then, everyone's damned." I tried to have a discussion on when protestants thought that the Church lost legitimacy, as a way to find common ground in the early Papal encyclicals. General consensus was it was never legit. Christ did not create a wicked Church, that's just wrong.
>>23202 Vatican 2 was a necessary and positive change, man. Nowhere do you even say why it's bad except that it is. Nobody speaks Latin any more and the mission of the Church is to spread the faith. What is wrong with you weird LARPers? I agree the Latin mass has its value, for those who can and wish to receive it. But there's no use expecting it from everyone, and those that do tend to just be muh tradition types.
>>23243 Vatican II changed the words that the Catholic religion was "THE Church of Christ", meaning there was one true Church created by Christ and to "A Church of Christ." That is damnable heresy. No one who believes in that will see heaven. This is infallible and indefectible ex cathera teachings of the Popes. Have a nice day! Pope Pelagius II (A.D. 578 – 590): “Consider the fact that whoever has not been in the peace and unity of the Church cannot have the Lord. …Although given over to flames and fires, they burn, or, thrown to wild beasts, they lay down their lives, there will not be (for them) that crown of faith but the punishment of faithlessness. …Such a one can be slain, he cannot be crowned. …[If] slain outside the Church, he cannot attain the rewards of the Church.” (Denzinger 246-247) Pope Saint Gregory the Great (A.D. 590 – 604): “Now the holy Church universal proclaims that God cannot be truly worshipped saving within herself, asserting that all they that are without her shall never be saved.” (Moralia) Pope Innocent III (A.D. 1198 – 1216): “With our hearts we believe and with our lips we confess but one Church, not that of the heretics, but the Holy Roman Catholic and Apostolic Church, outside which we believe that no one is saved.” (Denzinger 423) Pope Leo XII (A.D. 1823 – 1829): “We profess that there is no salvation outside the Church. …For the Church is the pillar and ground of the truth. With reference to those words Augustine says: `If any man be outside the Church he will be excluded from the number of sons, and will not have God for Father since he has not the Church for mother.'” (Encyclical, Ubi Primum) Pope Gregory XVI (A.D. 1831 – 1846): “It is not possible to worship God truly except in Her; all who are outside Her will not be saved.” (Encyclical, Summo Jugiter) Pope Pius IX (A.D. 1846 – 1878): “It must be held by faith that outside the Apostolic Roman Church, no one can be saved; that this is the only ark of salvation; that he who shall not have entered therein will perish in the flood.” (Denzinger 1647) Pope Leo XIII (A.D. 1878 – 1903): “This is our last lesson to you; receive it, engrave it in your minds, all of you: by God’s commandment salvation is to be found nowhere but in the Church.” (Encyclical, Annum Ingressi Sumus) “He scatters and gathers not who gathers not with the Church and with Jesus Christ, and all who fight not jointly with Him and with the Church are in very truth contending against God.” (Encyclical, Sapientiae Christianae) Pope Saint Pius X (A.D. 1903 – 1914): “It is our duty to recall to everyone great and small, as the Holy Pontiff Gregory did in ages past, the absolute necessity which is ours, to have recourse to this Church to effect our eternal salvation.” (Encyclical, Jucunda Sane) Pope Benedict XV (A.D. 1914 – 1922): “Such is the nature of the Catholic faith that it does not admit of more or less, but must be held as a whole, or as a whole rejected: This is the Catholic faith, which unless a man believe faithfully and firmly, he cannot be saved.” (Encyclical, Ad Beatissimi Apostolorum) Pope Pius XI (A.D. 1922 – 1939): “The Catholic Church alone is keeping the true worship. This is the font of truth, this is the house of faith, this is the temple of God; if any man enter not here, or if any man go forth from it, he is a stranger to the hope of life and salvation….Furthermore, in this one Church of Christ, no man can be or remain who does not accept, recognize and obey the authority and supremacy of Peter and his legitimate successors.” (Encyclical, Mortalium Animos) Pope Pius XII (A.D. 1939 – 1958): “By divine mandate the interpreter and guardian of the Scriptures, and the depository of Sacred Tradition living within her, the Church alone is the entrance to salvation: She alone, by herself, and under the protection and guidance of the Holy Spirit, is the source of truth.” (Allocution to the Gregorian, October 17, 1953) https://www.scripturecatholic.com/papal-declarations-no-salvation-outside-church/
>>23243 About the Mass.... Yes, "trad caths" as they are known call it "The Latin Mass" There are two rites the the Mass in the Church: The Tridentine Mass, and the Dominican Mass. What they get in the FSSP and the SSPX is the changed mass of 1964, and that's forbidden by the Council of Trent and Pope Pius V. Any mass that wasn't 200 years old at the time of the Council of Trent was forbidden, and those who say such a mass are anathemas. These rules were put in place to prevent exactly what happened with the New Supper service that they say is a mass. They did it to get protestant money in the collection basket. The Protestants didn't fall for that!
>>23248 >There are two rites... Taht should be "There are two Latin rites in the Roman Rite..." there are a number of catholic masses in other languages, like Greek and Armenian...
Open file (184.63 KB 944x630 cyrilmetod.jpg)
>>23243 Reminder that while the counterfeit Germanic "Romans" were being autistic about keeping the scriptures in dead languages the real Romans in the East were creating Old Church Slavonic to spread the faith to the pagans
>>23234 FACT: the word Catholic isn't in the Bible tryhard.
>>23250 >>23250 >Reminder that while the counterfeit Germanic "Romans" were being autistic about keeping the scriptures in dead languages the real Romans in the East were creating Old Church Slavonic to spread the faith to the pagans Race, of course, has nothing to do with it. Being Germanic makes no difference, we're all supposed to be brothers in Christ The Bible was kept in two languages, Latin and Greek, so that it the divine inspired word of God could not be corrupted by a "translation" as the protestants do. A dead language has the advantage that it does not change like vernacular languages do. And what good is it to have a bible if you're going to reject Matthew 16 and John 21 and make yourself false Pope?
>>23251 >FACT: the word Catholic isn't in the Bible tryhard. Why would it be? Before the East/West Schism where the East rejected the word of God where the keys were given to Saint Peter, the Church was called the "Church of Christ" or "Christian Church". Then at the schism, it became necessary to have a name for the two now separate religions: One took the proper name "Catholic", which means universal, and "Orthodox" which means conforming to established doctrine. Both churches claim to be universal and conforming to established doctrine. It's like how Republican and Democrat are the names of two political parties while republican means someone who supports a republic and democrat supports direct voting of the people. The party names have little to do with the meaning of their word that they're derived from. Sort of like how Lutheran is one who worships Luther, Anglican is one who worships the King of England, Calvinist is one who worships Calvin, etc. All claim to be Christian tho.
>>23247 You're one mentally ill cunt.
>>23252 Your tradition is illegitimate.
What religion are you?
The Apostle Paul says the Church has traditions. Which ones do you feel is wrong, and which Apostle are you?
Open file (2.20 MB 3370x957 Jesus_and_apostles.jpg)
>>23265 Christian. >>23266 >Which ones do you feel is wrong Those imposed from without the scriptures. "Beware lest anyone cheat you through philosophy and empty deceit, according to the tradition of men, according to the basic principles of the world, and not according to Christ." Colossians 2:8 >and which Apostle are you? Apostles are made by Christ, not men: "Paul, an apostle (not from men nor through man, but through Jesus Christ and God the Father who raised Him from the dead)" Galatians 1:1 The Holy Spirit teaches those abiding in Christ: "But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all things that I said to you." John 14:26 "But the anointing which you have received from Him abides in you, and you do not need that anyone teach you; but as the same anointing teaches you concerning all things, and is true, and is not a lie, and just as it has taught you, you will abide in Him." 1 John 2:27 Every Christian is an appointed priest of the Lord Jesus Christ: "you also, as living stones, are being built up a spiritual house, a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. Therefore it is also contained in the Scripture... you are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, His own special people, that you may proclaim the praises of Him who called you out of darkness into His marvelous light;" 1 Peter 2:5, 9
>>23271 What denomination of Christian? Why so coy? Are you ashamed of what your faith is? >Those imposed from without the scriptures Scripture tells you that not everything is written in the Bible. Do you deny 2 Thes 13-14? How does that work? Bible only then throw out the parts of the Bible that you don't like as well as all the traditions and the words of the Apostles. >Apostles are made by Christ Ah. Here I thought you were speaking as an authority on the traditions of the Church when you said they were illegit. You deny the Church traditions, and you deny the part of the Bible that says you need to hold to not just the writing of the Bible, but the word and traditions.
>>23256 What denomination or religion teaches you to talk religion like that? Are you Jewish? Islamic? Some other type of Pagan? Do you think you're Christian? If you think you're christian, what denomination?
>>23280 I wonder if asking them what denomination allows or even teaches them to use such language in supposed defense of the Lord, that they become ashamed and don't say. Who knew?
>>23279 >What denomination of Christian? Why so coy? Are you ashamed of what your faith is? A Protestant who testifies of the true faith in defiance of the Babylonian corruption of Rome. >Scripture tells you that not everything is written in the Bible. Do you deny 2 Thes 13-14? How does that work? Bible only then throw out the parts of the Bible that you don't like as well as all the traditions and the words of the Apostles. Everything authoritative concerning the faith is written in the Bible. Your wicked tradition invalidates the scriptures like the Pharisees: "making the word of God of no effect through your tradition which you have handed down. And many such things you do.” Mark 7:13 >Ah. Here I thought you were speaking as an authority on the traditions of the Church when you said they were illegit. You deny the Church traditions, and you deny the part of the Bible that says you need to hold to not just the writing of the Bible, but the word and traditions I speak by the authority of the infallible word of God as preserved by the Holy Spirit in scripture. Your pagan pontiffs are no authority.
>>23293 >preserved by the Holy Spirit in scripture Holy Spirit didn't translate the Bible and misuse words
>>23293 >A Protestant Yes. What denomination. I get that you hat Catholics. Do they preach that or is that of your own invention? >Everything authoritative concerning the faith is written in the Bible Bible says not everything concerting faith is in the Bible. So, not everything concerning faith is in the Bible. 2 Thessalonians 13-14 2 Peter 1:20 2 Peter 3:16 What you say is "wicked tradition" is literally Biblical, right out of 2 Thessalonians. >Your pagan pontiffs are no authority. Not sure about the pagan popes, as that is an oxymoron, but the Lord Jesus Christ created to head of his Church. Ezekiel 34:23 John 21 Matthew 16 Note that it says " I will place over them one shepherd, my servant David, and he will tend them; he will tend them and be their shepherd." The Lord Jesus Christ is the Lord Our God, we serve Him. He's not "David". David was a leader chosen by God to lead His faithful. I really hope this helps you to at least understand that Catholics are trying to follow the Bible so you stop hating them as Christ told us to love our neighbors
>>23294 >Holy Spirit didn't translate the Bible and misuse words This is true. The Holy Spirit descended upon the Christian Church at the Council of Nicaea and guided them to determine what the books of the Bible were true, and which version of those books. For over a thousand years, it was the Christian Bible. Then this Martin Luther fellow threw out some of the Books to please the Jews. One would have to believe the Christian Church didn't exist until Martin Luther, which is absurd.
>>23295 Ib4 the Lord was making the Lord our shepherd. You know, I get the drift of that, but clearly it was the Lord who was speaking in Ezekiel 34:23. it doesn't say "I will place over them as on Shepherd, myself..." It says SERVANT. Servants are angels (can't put an angel over humans) and humans (like... King David in the scripture). So, yes, Ezekiel says there will be a human head of the Christian Church, and gave him the keys (faith and morals) to heaven We call that head "The Pope". That's just a name. Had to give the position a name. There are requirements to be a Pope: 1) Have to be ordained. 2) have to be Christian (what the Protestant's would call "Roman Catholic") 3) Cannot have been a Heretic before hand. As every "Pope" since Pope Pius XII has claimed that it is admissible for the laity to take the Eucharist in the hand, they're all anathemas (worse than a heretic) and the faithful must shun them. As every "Pope" since Pope Pius XII has claimed that the Holy Mass, the Sacrifice of Christ, can be said in the local vernacular they're all anathemas and the faithful must shun them. As every "Pope" since Pope Pius XII, and Pope Pius XII himself* has said that it is permissible to change the Holy Mass, they're all anathemas and the faithful must shun them.
Open file (209.64 KB 1400x1050 hills_of_rome_revelation.jpg)
>>23295 >posts prevarications "...from childhood you have known the holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for SALVATION through faith which is in Christ Jesus. All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work." 2 Timothy 3:15-16 How is it so hard for you to understand that the traditions he speaks of are the ones that have been documented in the canon of the Bible? The canon is closed because its books are the only uniquely inspired by the Holy Spirit with authority to accomplish the salvation and sanctification of mankind. Or do you think God somehow gave an incomplete word to the world when Jesus Christ was the fulfillment and conclusion of the scriptures? >I get that you hate Catholics. Do they preach that or is that of your own invention? Everyone who has read Revelation despises the Romish deception: "The woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet, and adorned with gold and precious stones and pearls, having in her hand a golden cup full of abominations and the filthiness of her fornication. And on her forehead a name was written, MYSTERY: BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND OF THE ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH. I saw the woman, drunk with the blood of the saints and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus. And when I saw her, I marveled with great amazement." Revelation 17:4-6 There is no point arguing with you. At every occasion you love to lie without shame, and are the snake in the garden of this board, deceiving the innocent to their own destruction. Repent of your error or face the judgement: "Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to sin, it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he were drowned in the depth of the sea. Woe to the world because of cause for sin! For causes for sin must come, but woe to that man by whom the cause comes!" Matthew 18:6-7 "When they opposed him and blasphemed, Paul shook his garments and said to them,  'Your blood be upon your own heads; I am clean'" Acts 18:6 The Lord Jesus is ever merciful to the remorseful sinner. Amen.
>>23301 Well, at least you admit to hating Catholics. Just got to get you to accept all the Bible as the word of God. God did not make you his editor.
Open file (65.78 KB 1000x500 2-maccabees-15-39.png)
>>23302 The Apocrypha is not the word of God. Neither did its authors consider themselves to be writing doctrinal scripture. Unless you think that Moses would have ended the Ten Commandments at nine and went "Lol, I dunno, drink some wine while reading this if it was poorly written."
>>23305 You're not even making sense now.
>>23280 >Do you think you're Christian? Are you serious? You people are so annoying, all you care about is putting others down and excluding them. >>23288 I have a life.
>>23310 I'm Catholic btw, since that seems to be so important to you (you love dividing, don't you?)
>>23293 The tweet in your image is cute and reaches out to young people. Why do you hate everything?
>>23308 You shall not understand until you forsake the abominations of Rome. May you be led to repentance. Amen.
>>23310 I'm not trying to put others down. That's only in your mind. >I have a life. Would you like an eternal one? Why won't you say which denomination you belong to. Btw, that's not scripture. It references scripture, but its not, and it's taking things out of context.
>>23311 Ah! Catholic! Which one? Novus Ordo? FSSP (Novus Ordo lite), SSPX, SSPV? Sandbornist? >you love dividing, don't you? No, I hate dividing. That the issue. There is ONE Catholic faith, and the divine revelations are found in the Bible, where we see Our Lord Jesus Christ founding ONE CHURCH on Saint Peter the Rock and giving him the keys to heaven (faith and morals). Thus, the Bible and the Popes become the true Catholic Faith. And by Saint Paul, we know that Church tradition, e.g. the form of the various valid Holy Masses per the Council of Trent, are part of the faith. So, why are there 5 different "Catholic" religions, and most importantly, why do none of them keep the Catholic faith?
>>23313 I donno. It may be because he put a pagan idol on the Alter of Saint Peter. On that day, the Alter of Saint Peter was desecrated. He's not even a heretic. He'd have to have been a Christian to be a heretic. He's more in line with Freemason beliefs, like John Paul II. Problem with that is if you're a Freemason, you absolutely cannot be Catholic, and a Pope has to be Catholic. And a Pope, being a Vicar of Christ, can't be an anathema either. True Catholics must shun an anathema. Every "Pope" since Pope Pius XII has said that the mass can be changed, that the Holy Eucharist can be taken in un- ordained hands, that the mass can be said in the Local venacular. Because Bergoglio made the FSSP become an anathema too. The Council of Trent has to be true, thus the Vatican has lost all legitimacy. Yeah, crazy me. I don't think Popes should be popular. That is a quality of the anti-Christ.
Open file (16.95 KB 480x360 hqdefault.jpg)
>>23321 >Btw, that's not scripture. Wow, I had no idea. >It references scripture, but its not, and it's taking things out of context. My bad for preferring a Catholic theologian in the process of canonisation over some random on the Internet. >>23322 >division through unity You need to understand you're not doing anybody any favours with your black and white thinking. Good riddance you're not listened to. Also meds. >>23323 Meds here too. There's nothing wrong with syncretism to spread the faith so long as it isn't replaced/diluted. Those aren't pagan idols any more. The Andes is one of the most devoutly Christian regions but you lose your shit over handicrafts.
>>23321 You do realize that there have been at least two other people in this thread?
>>23327 >My bad for preferring a Catholic theologian in the process of canonisation over some random on the Internet. Catholic faith is that divine revelations come from the Bible and the Popes, not Saints. And the naming of saints a matter of fact. Popes, even speaking from the chair, are not infallible on matters of facts. I don't trust Saints. Saints have been wrong. For example, the Lord told the Apostles not to kill those who wouldn't convert, while some Saints, like Saint Louis, was saying run them throught with a sword. So... I like to go back to the Bible and Popes, those you HAVE to believe, and only by understanding them first can you detect what errors the saints made. >You need to understand you're not doing anybody any favours with your black and white thinking. Good riddance you're not listened to. Also meds extra ecclesiam nulla salus The Catholic faith, as taught in the Bible and the true Popes, IS black and white. You have to believe it all. If that seems crazy to you, you are what Catholics have named as the invincibly ignorant. Sorry if that seems unfair to you, but I trust the perfect Justice of the Lord Our God.
Open file (13.57 KB 273x184 download (58).jpeg)
Why isn't everyone who knows about the Orthodox Church not part of it honest question because the more research i do on Orthodoxy Roman Catholicism and Protestantism the more it truly seems like the only faith that is fully biblical and respects all the traditions of the church fathers and apostles and im not trying to rag on everyone else i just want to know why you are not orthodox i dont even really get being a traditional roman Catholic like SSPX because at the end of the day you have to submit to the Pope even though he says clearly heretical things and personally i just see Sedevacantism as complete cope please stop the cope joojn Orthodoxy all our churches have a reverent liturgy we have all 7 sacraments we have a valid priesthood we have apostolic succession we have the traditions of the apostles and church fathers we have infant communion and Chrismation stop submitting to a obviously heretical pope or believing in one mans interpretation of the bible and join the church founded by Christ
The obvious answer that must surely have occurred to you is that I still believe my church is the Church. Putting that aside, I have some more reasons. Some of them are better that others. My lesser reasons are: >I would want to make sure that I wasn't just joining because it's popular Self-explanatory. The Church is not a club for cool kids. You should be resolute in your commitment. >I am not sure if the grass is really greener on the other side Every church is going to have problems. There's no point running from one set of problems only to get hit by another. Furthermore, you can be sure that the same infiltrators are aiming at EO if they're not already inside already. The idea of running away from your problems and hoping they don't follow you doesn't sound very wise to me. You see this attitude all the time. Just keep retreating until you have nothing left to defend. This is why they keep taking things from you. >The Church has been in this situation before There was a time (pre-Schism so this applies to you too) when the vast majority of bishops were Arian heretics. The Church has faced dreadful heresies before and will continue to do so. The fact that we live in such a time does not prove anything about the Church's validity. >I just haven't interacted much at all with EO people More of a practical reason than anything but I should add it for completeness' sake. My biggest reason is hard to explain. I sympathise with your viewpoint very much but I think you're slightly mistaken on something. If you go around choosing which church you want to belong to based on what you think the Church is, how are you not a Protestant? At the very least, you're a giant hypocrite when you criticise them for doing what you have done. Now this is not the part where you're wrong. This is just to explain that the attitude of "I know what the Church is and I will judge my father on whether he conforms to it" is not how it works. The Church has wisdom and we receive it from our spiritual fathers. What then can we say about the situation? If we are to receive from our fathers but our fathers have gone astray, how can I say that it's not correct to judge them unworthy and to seek new ones? This is the part where you're mistaken: You have judged based on a thin slice of history as if all the saints who have come before us are dead and gone and no longer matter. You have judged that in this present moment, your former church has departed from the faith without considering that the innovators of today are a tiny minority in the face of generations of faithful Christians who are alive and praying for us in Heaven. And you are privy to no knowledge about how many future generations there may be. If you do claim that then show us a sign or submit to stoning. This is why I put my lesser reasons first. Because they are not really lesser reasons but are part of a whole reason. I have not converted to another church because I have decided to trust in God. Correct doctrine is important but Christianity is not about being right per se, it's about learning to be God's sons. It's about humility and taking up our crosses and all the rest about which you should already know. Christianity is a religion that's done not a religion that's debated. It's a practical religion not an intellectual one. There may come a day when I convert to EO (or some other church). God has already led me to change my beliefs before and I would hardly be the first Anglican in my situation to cross the Tiber or Bosphorus. But I will leave that to God's providence. I will not let the evils of this age shake my faith but rather follow the psalmist when he says, >Fret not thyself because of the ungodly: neither be thou envious against the evil doers. >For they shall soon be cut down like the grass: and be withered even as the green herb. God may want me to move to another church or He may want me to stay here or He may want me to move but on His own timing. Where He leads me, I pray that I will have the grace to follow. >we have all 7 sacraments It was my understanding, and correct me if I'm wrong, that EO didn't follow the same list of seven defined sacraments but rather the viewed the whole life of the believer as a sacrament. It was only when pressed by Rome that they agreed these seven might be considered special. >cope The real cope is running away from evil instead of fighting back.
>>25867 I wasn't part of any denomination before I became Orthodox so I can't touch too much on this. It makes sense to us because we are already Orthodox but to other Christians "off the internet" they see things a lot differently. I was somewhat super duper zealot when I first became Orthodox and thought all my other Christian friends would automatically understand our positions and immediately convert. But that just isn't how things work. Some people just are not interested in learning how old Orthodox liturgy is and want instead to practice the old worship services that their own family members have always done. They are not interested in theological or scriptural debate, and honestly that is fine. We are still such a small fraction of Christians in the West, so we should be cautious in assuming that our side of the fence must appear enticingly green to everyone else.
>Fiducia supplicans ("Supplicating Trust")[1] is a declaration on Catholic doctrine that allows Catholic priests to bless persons in same-sex relationships and certain other relationships.[2] It was published in December 18, 2023 by the Catholic Church's Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith (DDF) and approved by Pope Francis.[3] It was the first declaration by the DDF since Dominus Iesus in 2000.[4] While the declaration does not change Catholic doctrine on marriage, which the Church reserves for heterosexual unions, Fiducia supplicans was interpreted by Francis's supporters and opponents as a stepping stone to a future recognition of same-sex marriage by the Church. Francis advised that Vatican bureaucrats should avoid "rigid ideological positions" shortly after the declaration was made.[5] It overturned a 2021 policy by the Vatican's doctrine office, which had forbidden such blessings.[5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiducia_supplicans catholics plz
>>26158 Be me. Open my Catholic Missal. Lists sodomy as one of the sins that cries out to heaven for vengeance. Remembers that the Catholic faith is infallible (never wrong) and indefectible (never changes). Reads about "Pope" blessing sodomite marriages. How do you bless a sin? The faith is the Bible and the Popes, but the Lord himself said Matthew 19:4-5. How can a real Pope say the Bible is wrong and bless sodomy? Oh well...
>>26160 IMO you already know the answer inside, Anon. Do you honestly think the problem is either with Jesus & His words, or with the faithful recording of them within the Holy Scriptures?
Open file (41.04 KB 688x360 1703437445647-0.jpg)
>Luke9:49“Master,” said John, “we saw someone driving out demons in Your name, and we tried to stop him, because he does not accompany us.” >50“Do not stop him,” Jesus replied, “for whoever is not against you is for you.” I actually asked God through a Bible generator and picture related is what he said. The infighting of Christians is so tragic, correction is fine but we should work together even if we disagree on a lot.
>>26221 >The infighting of Christians is so tragic, correction is fine but we should work together even if we disagree on a lot. Amen brother

Report/Delete/Moderation Forms

no cookies?