Traditional Orthodoxy

[ChristosVoskrese]

I don't know if this is the right place to post this, but I'll go ahead anyway.

I am currently a catechumen in the Greek Orthodox Church of Antioch in New Zealand. I was previously a traditional Roman Catholic, attending SSPX Masses once a month. I feel that I'm an Orthodox traditionalist, but I'm not going to join one of the Greek Old Calendar Churches. I've thought about joining ROCOR when I move away from my home town, though. While I prefer the Old Calendar, I'm quite happy to accept the New Calendar because my church does.

I'd like to know a traditional Orthodox perspective on some of the following.

What is the traditional Orthodox position on Roman Catholicism? My priest said that the Church accepts them as Christian and recognizes their baptism, and that it is all right to attend a Roman Catholic Mass. However, he also lent me Alexander Kalomiros' Against False Union which states that the Papists have no priesthood and that there are no sacraments outside the Orthodox Church. I later read that the Canons forbid praying in "a synagogue of Jews, or of heretics". My priest also said that, even though I am a catechumen in the Orthodox Church, I should still be going to a Catholic priest for confession. Why would he send me to Catholic confession on one hand, and on the other hand lend me a book saying that their priesthood and sacraments are not valid?
So what is the traditional Orthodox stance on Roman Catholics? Christians or heretics?

What is the traditional Orthodox understanding of hell? I've read differing views among the Orthodox - some say it is an actual place of fiery torment (and have even experienced it as such) while others say that God Himself is both heaven and hell - the righteous will experience God's presence as bliss, while the unrighteous will experience it as torment (see http://aggreen.net/beliefs/heaven_hell.html) What is the traditional Orthodox understanding of hell?

[GOCPriestMark]

The Orthodox Church sees Roman Catholicism as a 1,000 year old schism which also has developed a number of heretical doctrines. It is not part of Christ's Church and therefore has no grace from God in its mysteries.

As a sweeping statement, the church of which you are a catacumen and all those it is in communion with, all more or less recognize the Pope and RCs as your priest has clearly shown you. They also recognize other non-orthodox and it for all this that they are not worthy of the title orthodox and therefore are no better than Eastern rite catholics. ROCOR also falls into this category as they are all in communion.

[drewmeister2]

The book Against False Union is right. Im surprised your priest gave you that book after saying very ecumenistic things. The problem with what your priest said is this: it basically says you dont need to convert if you can still receive Confession in Catholicism. The Mysteries do not exist outside Orthodoxy, and as such, you should avoid heretical "mysteries".

[Pravoslavnik]

The Roman Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church were, of course, one and the same Church for a thousand years, and their basic theology is virtually identical, predicated on the Nicene Creed and Apostolic Succession. I have been obsessed with the issues surrounding the Great Schism and the mysteries of Christian history of many years. I was in a Western Rite (Gregorian) Antiochian parish for several years, and moved to the ROCOR ten years ago. In all of my years within the Orthodox Church, I have never met people as kind, sincere, and generous as the Protestants that I grew up with as a young boy, and my Roman Catholic relatives. Christ God said, "By this all men will know that you are my disciples, that you love one another, even as I have loved you."

Code: Select all

   Of course, almost anyone will tell you that their own view is absolutely correct, and that everyone outside of their own ecclesiastical circle is a heretic, and/or damned for all time.  However, a wise, widely respected Orthodox hieromonk once told me that the ultimate fate of those outside of the correct confession is something of a mystery.  I know perfectly "kosher" Orthodox clerics and parishioners who follow the correct rituals and procedures to a "t", but lack charity, somewhat like the Pharisees that Christ reproached so tirelessly during his earthly ministry--e.g., "the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath,etc."  Then there is the Orthodox story about the lazy, careless monk who was seen in paradise by his abbot--gaining "admission" because "he never judged anyone."
        
    Father Thomas Hopko, the Dean of St. Vladimir's Seminary, once told me that "the Orthodox Church offers the fullness of the faith," and that this is evident to those Christians outside of Orthodoxy when they see it.  That was certainly true for me.  I left the Western Rite partly because I came to believe that some important Orthodox experiences were missing from the Western praxis--the stricter ascesis, standing during prayers, iconography, and focus on the process of theosis. St. Gregory Palmas, the 14th century "pillar" of Orthodox mystical theology, and his teachings, embody some of these aspects of Orthodox theoria and praxis that are missing from the Western Apostolic tradition.
      
    The ROCOR is in serious trouble, in my opinion, following the recent merger with the Moscow Patriarchate.  My family and i are still trying to figure out where to go, but we will not be remaining in the ROCOR, which, at least in our community, appears to be devolving into a Soviet nationalist extension of the Moscow Patriarchate.
      
  Alexander Kalomiros has written a brief monograph on the Orthodox concept of hell.  As I recall, he describes hell as the painful experience of the absence of God.  I also recall hearing that blessed Father Seraphim Rose taught that the relationship that we have with Christ in this life is the relationship that we will have with Him, and the Undivided Trinity, in the next world.  When Christ spoke of those "blessed of (His) Father," He mentioned those who fed the hungry, clothed the naked, visited the sick, etc."  I don't recall his mentioning much about how people perform the specific rituals of the Eastern or Western praxis...

[Anastasios]

Why wouldn't you want to join the Greek Old Calendarists? We are the coolest

[joasia]

First of all, I find it difficult to address you when you call yourself Christ is Risen. It's not an appropriate name. This should be reserved for the greeting during Pascha. What is your first name? We can address you by that.

I feel that I'm an Orthodox traditionalist, but I'm not going to join one of the Greek Old Calendar Churches. I've thought about joining ROCOR when I move away from my home town, though. While I prefer the Old Calendar, I'm quite happy to accept the New Calendar because my church does.

An Orthodox traditionalist does not support the new calendarists and their ecumenical ways. So, since you are a catechumen, I believe that you still have a long ways to go in understanding Orthodoxy. I say this because I am a convert and had to come to understand what it means to be Orthodox.

Some may say that I sound arrogant. But, I am not. I am dead serious. I take the Orthodox faith very seriously and I take salvation very seriously.

ROCOR is old calendar, but the recent events of them joining the MP is very wrong. The MP are not an Orthodox Church, they are a bolshevik establishment that want to have power over the rest of the Russian Orthodox. They are ecumenists, hard-core. They are not the ones to go to.

If you are truely serious about being in the true Orthodox Church then you should pray to God, with all your heart, and he will guide you. If you want comfort and just socialization, then you can go wherever you want.

You say that you are quite happy to accept the New Calendarists because that is the church you go to. Then, as I said, you have alot to learn about Othodoxy.

What is the traditional Orthodox position on Roman Catholicism?

The Papists created the Great Schism in 1054 A.D. They wanted their own authority and defied Christ as the Head of the Church. They seperated from the other four Patriarchs and established their own rules. They left the true Church of Christ, of Apostolic Succession. They are heretics of the most significant kind.

The Pope considers himself infallible in the dictates of Christ's Church. He considers himself the intercessor of God to the people, whereas the Orthodox Patriarchs considered themselves the intecessors of the Orthodox faithful to God. The Popes, in a word, raised themselves to the same level as God. That is blasphemy, and the Orthodox faith teaches that this is a sin that can never be washed away, even by their blood as martyrs. Lucifer fell because he believed he could have the same authority as God, and look where that got him. And the angels that followed him, received the same fate of damnation.

The Papists wanted authority outside of God's order, but they also started teaching heresies. They defied one line from the Nicene Creed, which is against Canon Laws. They teach that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and Son. Read it in your prayer book. The Nicene Creed which was established in the first and second Ecumenical Councils, established, by the blessing of the Holy Spirit, that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father. And with the Father and the Son is worshipped and glorified by the phrophets.

These are the two main issues that seperated the See of Rome from the rest of the Orthodox Church.

And then there follows all the other innovations and lies. We can go on and on.

The main important factor is that we have to recognize the truth Orthodox church as base on the legitimate Apostolic successions. This is the true Chruch of Christ.

My priest said that the Church accepts them as Christian and recognizes their baptism, and that it is all right to attend a Roman Catholic Mass.

The baptism of those in the Papist Church are false. They sprinkle on the forehead. This is not a baptism. Neither is it a baptism in the New Calendar Greek Church when they pour water on the head of a baby or an adult convet. Baptism, in Greek is Vaptiso, which means to submerge and with the implication that it is repetitive. In the New Testament, when Christ met with the Apostles, after His Ressurection, He instructed them to baptize in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. Basically, he was instructing them on immersion, as St. John the Baptist performed it, but He added the triple immersion method, by saying it in the name of the Holy Trinity. So the Papists sprinkle on the head.

This concept of immersion was not unknown to the Greeks, which became their standard, because as pagans, they were quite familiar with the story of Achilles who was dipped in water. It's as if God had prepared their souls and mind-set to understand that water was sacred and that if a tiny portion was not submerged, as Achilles' heel then death would surely come upon him. When a baby or adult is baptised, he/she should be submerged, fully in the water, in order to be fully protected. In the Church, the immersion signifies dying with Christ and being ressurected as a new man/women...all sins washed away, but if a portion is not submerged, then the fullness of Grace is not fulfilled.

You're priest either doesn't understand the fullness of the Holy Mystery of Baptism or he is a pure ecumenist.

My priest also said that, even though I am a catechumen in the Orthodox Church, I should still be going to a Catholic priest for confession

Well, that makes no sense. When an adult, for example, is made a catechumen..he has to participate in the exorcism which requires that he blows to the West, three times in order to reject satan and his former faith. Once a person does that, he is forbidden to partake of that former faith, especially going to confession to the priest. He has renounced that faith. How can he continue to participate in it?

Why would he send me to Catholic confession on one hand, and on the other hand lend me a book saying that their priesthood and sacraments are not valid?

He's messed up. And he probably hasn't read the book. He was probably told an exerpt of it, by someone and didn't realize what the rest was about. Or, he knows better but doesn't know how to guide you. Either way, he is not someone who can guide you properly.

What is the traditional Orthodox understanding of hell? I've read differing views among the Orthodox - some say it is an actual place of fiery torment (and have even experienced it as such) while others say that God Himself is both heaven and hell - the righteous will experience God's presence as bliss, while the unrighteous will experience it as torment (see http://aggreen.net/beliefs/heaven_hell.html) What is the traditional Orthodox understanding of hell?

I don't believe that saints have different views. They just express it in different ways. You see..the saints get their information from the same source, so the source is true. They just focus on one aspect or the other, but it doesn't oppose the Orthodox stance. The Holy Bible has 4 Gospels, right? They don't explain the exact same thing about the same event, but they lend their view of what happened. If you put them all together...you will get the full picture, but they don't contradict. They just see it from different angles. One person may have showed up later and saw something from the outside, whereas another Apostle may have been there at the beginning.

The explanation of the Ressurection is a perfect example. There seems to be different versions, with one angel or two or these women or that, but the fact is that they all happened, but not everybody came to the tomb at the same time. It was a matter of coming and going and the events that happened during those times.

Now, what is hell? There are different versions, but they all tell the same conclusion...it is a place where the soul is tormented. Tormented, why? Because, they are not with God. Leave it at that and pray you don't end up there.

In Christ, Joanna

[ChristosVoskrese]

First of all, I find it difficult to address you when you call yourself Christ is Risen. It's not an appropriate name. This should be reserved for the greeting during Pascha. What is your first name? We can address you by that.

My full name is Scott Michael Inglis. Call me Michael.

An Orthodox traditionalist does not support the new calendarists and their ecumenical ways. So, since you are a catechumen, I believe that you still have a long ways to go in understanding Orthodoxy. I say this because I am a convert and had to come to understand what it means to be Orthodox.

Some may say that I sound arrogant. But, I am not. I am dead serious. I take the Orthodox faith very seriously and I take salvation very seriously.

ROCOR is old calendar, but the recent events of them joining the MP is very wrong. The MP are not an Orthodox Church, they are a bolshevik establishment that want to have power over the rest of the Russian Orthodox. They are ecumenists, hard-core. They are not the ones to go to.

If you are truely serious about being in the true Orthodox Church then you should pray to God, with all your heart, and he will guide you. If you want comfort and just socialization, then you can go wherever you want.

You say that you are quite happy to accept the New Calendarists because that is the church you go to. Then, as I said, you have alot to learn about Othodoxy.

Like you say, I have a lot to learn, but I thought that the Russian Orthodox Church was the most conservative. I heard that when Patriarch Alexei heard that a priest had performed a same sex marriage, he defrocked the priest, ordered the church where he had done it destroyed and had it rebuilt.

I do want to find the true Orthodox Church.

What is the traditional Orthodox position on Roman Catholicism?

The Papists created the Great Schism in 1054 A.D. They wanted their own authority and defied Christ as the Head of the Church. They seperated from the other four Patriarchs and established their own rules. They left the true Church of Christ, of Apostolic Succession. They are heretics of the most significant kind.

The Pope considers himself infallible in the dictates of Christ's Church. He considers himself the intercessor of God to the people, whereas the Orthodox Patriarchs considered themselves the intecessors of the Orthodox faithful to God. The Popes, in a word, raised themselves to the same level as God. That is blasphemy, and the Orthodox faith teaches that this is a sin that can never be washed away, even by their blood as martyrs. Lucifer fell because he believed he could have the same authority as God, and look where that got him. And the angels that followed him, received the same fate of damnation.

The Papists wanted authority outside of God's order, but they also started teaching heresies. They defied one line from the Nicene Creed, which is against Canon Laws. They teach that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and Son. Read it in your prayer book. The Nicene Creed which was established in the first and second Ecumenical Councils, established, by the blessing of the Holy Spirit, that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father. And with the Father and the Son is worshipped and glorified by the phrophets.

These are the two main issues that seperated the See of Rome from the rest of the Orthodox Church.

And then there follows all the other innovations and lies. We can go on and on.

The main important factor is that we have to recognize the truth Orthodox church as base on the legitimate Apostolic successions. This is the true Chruch of Christ. [/quote]

I know most of this, and so does my priest.

The baptism of those in the Papist Church are false. They sprinkle on the forehead. This is not a baptism. Neither is it a baptism in the New Calendar Greek Church when they pour water on the head of a baby or an adult convet. Baptism, in Greek is Vaptiso, which means to submerge and with the implication that it is repetitive. In the New Testament, when Christ met with the Apostles, after His Ressurection, He instructed them to baptize in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. Basically, he was instructing them on immersion, as St. John the Baptist performed it, but He added the triple immersion method, by saying it in the name of the Holy Trinity. So the Papists sprinkle on the head.

This concept of immersion was not unknown to the Greeks, which became their standard, because as pagans, they were quite familiar with the story of Achilles who was dipped in water. It's as if God had prepared their souls and mind-set to understand that water was sacred and that if a tiny portion was not submerged, as Achilles' heel then death would surely come upon him. When a baby or adult is baptised, he/she should be submerged, fully in the water, in order to be fully protected. In the Church, the immersion signifies dying with Christ and being ressurected as a new man/women...all sins washed away, but if a portion is not submerged, then the fullness of Grace is not fulfilled.

You're priest either doesn't understand the fullness of the Holy Mystery of Baptism or he is a pure ecumenist.

First, I was not baptized by sprinkling. I had water poured over my head, and the priest (who is a notorious modernist) said "I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit."

When an adult, for example, is made a catechumen..he has to participate in the exorcism which requires that he blows to the West, three times in order to reject satan and his former faith. Once a person does that, he is forbidden to partake of that former faith, especially going to confession to the priest. He has renounced that faith. How can he continue to participate in it?

I never blew to the West three times to reject Satan and my former faith, and neither did my girlfriend when she was made a catechumen.

It doesn't make sense to go to Catholic confession now I'm an Orthodox catechumen. Leaving the Catholic Church, renouncing Papal infallibility and attending Orthodox services are all serious sins in the Roman Catholic Church. I left them out of my confessions, because 1) I didn't believe they were sins, and 2) the priest would have given me absolution if he'd known I no longer held the Catholic faith. If you knowingly omit a sin, then none of your sins are forgiven. That would make the whole thing a waste of time.

Prompted by a traditional Catholic friend of mine, I asked my priest what he would do if an Orthodox who had decided to convert to Papism came to him and asked him to hear their confession just because he couldn't receive Papist confession yet. He said he wouldn't hear their confession.

I don't believe that saints have different views. They just express it in different ways. You see..the saints get their information from the same source, so the source is true. They just focus on one aspect or the other, but it doesn't oppose the Orthodox stance. The Holy Bible has 4 Gospels, right? They don't explain the exact same thing about the same event, but they lend their view of what happened. If you put them all together...you will get the full picture, but they don't contradict. They just see it from different angles. One person may have showed up later and saw something from the outside, whereas another Apostle may have been there at the beginning.

The explanation of the Ressurection is a perfect example. There seems to be different versions, with one angel or two or these women or that, but the fact is that they all happened, but not everybody came to the tomb at the same time. It was a matter of coming and going and the events that happened during those times.

Now, what is hell? There are different versions, but they all tell the same conclusion...it is a place where the soul is tormented. Tormented, why? Because, they are not with God. Leave it at that and pray you don't end up there.

In Christ, Joanna

I understand what you're saying, but there seems to be two conflicting views. One is that hell is a place where God isn't (even though the Scriptures are quite clear there is no place where God isn't) and the other is that everyone will be with God, and His presence will be bliss to those that love him and torment to those that hate him.

If, however, everyone will be with God, then what is wrong with ecumenism? If everyone is going to see God in the next life, what's wrong with praying with others who sincerely seek God? And since there is no salvation outside the Orthodox Church, does that mean that everyone who isn't Orthodox will be tormented by God's presence? I'd say that there are very few people out there today who actively hate God. Does this mean that most people are saved?

Also, a Serbian guy I talk to on Yahoo Messenger told me that he's heard Old Calendarists say "Those who accept the new papal calendar will have boiling lead poured in their throats in Hell". How could someone even say this if hell is the way sinners experience God's love?