Redpill me on Catholicism pls

[Anonymous No.19427078]

I'm drawn towards Orthodoxy because the idea of an infallible Pope contradicts my basic view of the world (that only God is infallible), but I want to know more. Why do you choose Catholicism over Orthodox Christianity, lit?
>inb4 non-christians shit up the thread with atheist takes
Please don't.

[Anonymous No.19427082]

>>>/his/
You didn't even bother to add "books for this feel"

[Anonymous No.19427086]

>>19427078
both shit
islam>>>

[Anonymous No.19427093]

>>19427082
My bad, I knew I'd get dinged for that. Meant to add "any literature discussing the differences between the two"

[Anonymous No.19427161]

>>19427078
>(that only God is infallible)
This is meaningless unless you point out who is the living voice of God on Earth. In Catholicism that's the pope. In Orthodoxy that's the ecumenical council

[Anonymous No.19427166]

>>19427161
How do you distinguish the living voice of god from the messiah? And isn't it kind of odd that Pope's are elected before they become godlike?

[Anonymous No.19427190]

>>19427166
Popes*
>>19427161
Also, I don't understand how the basic principles of God's nature are "meaningless" unless there is a living voice of God on earth. I don't mean to dismiss tradition but I don't see how a Christian worldview is incomplete without a mere man who was elected by mere men being regarded as the voice of God. To me it seems entirely political but I want to suspend disbelief because I understand ritual is very important as it preserves the symbolic processes of worship.

[Anonymous No.19427234]

>>19427078
>Why do you choose Catholicism over Orthodox Christianity, lit?
Because I'm for mandatory vaccination
Because I think climate change and capitalism are the biggest issues facing humanity right now
Because I think refugees are welcome

[Anonymous No.19427250]

>>19427078
>I'm drawn towards Orthodoxy because the idea of an infallible Pope contradicts my basic view of the world (that only God is infallible)

Do you understand the basics of the doctrine of papal infallibility, i.e., the Church's self-understanding of the meaning of the doctrine (see: https://www.catholic.com/tract/papal-infallibility)), and the doctrine's biblical and historical basis (https://www.catholic.com/magazine/online-edition/the-papacy-in-scripture-no-rocks-required)?

>only God is infallible
Do you believe scripture is inerrant?

>Why do you choose Catholicism over Orthodox Christianity, lit?
I think the Catholic Church is the Church established by Jesus Christ. I think this belief is entirely reasonable, being well grounded both in scripture and in the history of the Church.

>>19427166
>And isn't it kind of odd that Pope's are elected before they become godlike?

Well, they're appointed to an office, the bishop of Rome, aka the seat of Peter or Petrine Ministry. The powers of the papacy arise from that appointment, which is consistent with biblical practice, e.g., Acts 1:15-26 (not an exact analogy to appointment to the papacy, but a scriptural example of the significance of being appointed to an 'office', and also of a somewhat surprising method for choosing the appointee (by drawing lots)).

[Anonymous No.19427380]

>>19427078
If you want to become a Christian you should walk to the nearest Christian church. Unless the church in question is more concerned with gay marriage than it is with Christianity, whether that is in a way that you disagree with or not, you should probably stay here for a while and get used to the liturgy. If your country is predominantly Catholic, just go to a Catholic church. All the theology makes no sense unless you have faith in Christ. I am making the assumption that you took no part to Christian worship and liturgy so far because this issue usually concerns people who are idling at the door of the three big churches. You could go on for years like this, should I be Orthodox, should I be Reformed, should I be Catholic, there will always be elements you dislike or even hate about any Church you join (as well as any local church you join), because everyone's just a man and men and their products are imperfect. You will never find a clergy that is 100% uncorrupt, but you may find an individual priest who has actual faith. The Pope isn't Jesus on Earth, the infallibility thing is about declarations ex-cathedra which are exceedingly rare. He's also probably swamped in politics. I don't like Francis very much but I admit that no Pope has faced times more difficult to navigate than these, where every single utterance or gesture can become a mediatic disaster.
You don't have to become the institution, you have to become a Christian first, then you will know if what you're doing is wrong and in that case you should move to another confession. IMO. It seems stupid to go to church without a perfect infallible convinction that every single point is right, because what if you change your mind and you don't believe in transubstantiation? The problem is that if this is keeping you out of the church and practicing a confession imperfectly then you might never actually get any deeper.
I hope this is somewhat helpful, and although I'm visiting a Catholic chapel right now I'm trying to speak as neutrally as possible. Just go to church, also get a study Bible but #1 is going to church and attending liturgy or at least praying, then #2 study and theology.

[Anonymous No.19427394]

>>19427234
lets be honest the papists only got as far as they did because the clerical power in Europe was the strongest and longest lasting force of extra-sovereign force in all of human history but by the time of the French revolution the gig was up.

[Anonymous No.19427418]

>he's not a unitarian universalist + jehovah's witness chad
The eucharist is pagan and all holidays are pagan. We do not subscribe to secular institutes like lgbt to get our ethics and we do not subscribe to christmas spirit to practice christian agape.

[Anonymous No.19427428]

>>19427250
Papism is what approved the so called "marian apparitions" that basically attributes a very strange role to the Theotokos and institute the literal worship of an organ of Christ, separating His heart from His person

no thanks buddy

[Anonymous No.19427437]

>>19427428
>he worships material things like a pagan

[Anonymous No.19427537]

>>19427437

[Anonymous No.19427546]

>>19427537
I'm not catholic either *smugs*

[Anonymous No.19427688]

>>19427428
>that basically attributes a very strange role to the Theotokos and institute the literal worship of an organ of Christ, separating His heart from His person

Based on your language and the distinctions you draw, it sounds like you are Orthodox? In any event, the Orthodox Marian apparitions are of interest in regards to your point. Here are a few.

- 1903 photograph on Mount Athos: https://www.johnsanidopoulos.com/2010/06/photo-of-virgin-mary-on-mount-athos.html

- Our Lady of Zeitoun (1968): https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Our_Lady_of_Zeitoun

- Virgin Mary's Cerement / Protection of the Mother of God: https://orthodoxwiki.org/Protection_of_the_Mother_of_God

- The All-Holy Bringer of Good News: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Our_Lady_of_Tinos

- Panagia Portaitissa / Iviron Theotokos: https://www.oca.org/saints/lives/2016/02/12/100512-icon-of-the-mother-of-god-iveron

- Theotokos of Bogolyubovo: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theotokos_of_Bogolyubovo

- Our Lady of Nourieh/Light: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Our_Lady_of_Nourieh

[Anonymous No.19427750]

>>19427380
>All the theology makes no sense unless you have faith in Christ
I have faith in Christ but I'm very skeptical of institutionalized Christianity, especially given that Christ said to worship in private.
>I am making the assumption that you took no part to Christian worship and liturgy so far because this issue usually concerns people who are idling at the door of the three big churches
I wasn't baptized but I went to church several times as a child.
>It seems stupid to go to church without a perfect infallible convinction that every single point is right, because what if you change your mind and you don't believe in transubstantiation?
I don't see my beliefs in the significance of ritual to go anywhere anytime soon. I don't have fundamentalist views but I see sacred traditions as psychologically transformative and not in a mere reductionist sense.
>The problem is that if this is keeping you out of the church and practicing a confession imperfectly then you might never actually get any deeper.
The only thing keeping me out of church is my fear of what I have to confess.

[Anonymous No.19427759]

>>19427078
In any country the orthodox church is just a stooge of the state. It's bullshit.

[Anonymous No.19427763]

>>19427759
>>19427078
not to mention, the Bible itself talks about the Catholic Church. which was founded by Paul.

non catholic christians are the biggest copers in the world. complete delusion thinking theyre right and catholics are wrong.

[Anonymous No.19427793]

>>19427750
>I have faith in Christ but I'm very skeptical of institutionalized Christianity, especially given that Christ said to worship in private

Different anon here. Christ established a Church, set up a hierarchy, and gave special powers to those at the top of the hierarchy (binding and loosing, Mt 18*), and in particular to Peter (the keys of the kingdom, Mt 16).

I mean, I understand your skepticism, but that's the reality. Part of that reality is that Christ well knew that the leaders of the Church would be sinners - for all men are sinners. And He surely knew of the problems that can arise in hierarchical structures over time. Nonetheless, and despite these matters, He clearly and deliberately established a hierarchical Church.

>I don't see my beliefs in the significance of ritual to go anywhere anytime soon.

A book called Evangelical Is Not Enough by Thomas Howard offers an explanation of the spiritual meaning and value of liturgical worship (Howard was an evangelical who converted to Catholicism).
*The meaning of "binding and loosing" is explained here: https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/3307-binding-and-loosing

[Anonymous No.19427801]

In short, I believe the strength of Catholicism is the retention of local traditions, rituals, and beliefs which have been present since time immemorial as part of the faith and also that the Catholicism of the Middle Ages represents a high point in Western culture and spiritualism.

[Anonymous No.19427812]

>>19427793
>A book called Evangelical Is Not Enough by Thomas Howard offers an explanation of the spiritual meaning and value of liturgical worship (Howard was an evangelical who converted to Catholicism).

Let me add to this: It's an *excellent* book. Also, liturgy is an ancient practice that is utterly alien to modern sensibilities. It's almost like getting into a time machine. With that said, once you understand the reasons for liturgy - primarily, the sacrality of liturgical action, the consecration of the Holy Eucharist - you may begin to understand why the solemnity of the liturgical form arose, and why it can become a special part of your spiritual life and prayers.

[Anonymous No.19427863]

>>19427688
Where is She teaching crypto-nestorian beliefs of "sacred heart"?
Nowhere.

Where is she saying that one HAS TO pray the rosary?
Nowhere.

[Anonymous No.19427893]

After thoroughly researching the issue I complete gave up on Christianity as an institution. I honestly doubt it's even supposed to exist in such a form. Anyone who acts like this is a simple historical or theological issue is naive or ignorant. The matter is incredibly complex and the idea that a layman should be responsible for working through it himself (which is required of any convert since the church is fractured), is ridiculous.

[Anonymous No.19427905]

>>19427078
I'm neither, but I'll put in for the Ortho boys:
> Better/less exaggerated mariology
> Better Eucharistic theology (doesn't depend on outdated aristotelian metaphysics)
> Slightly less obnoxious internet presence
> MUCH better liturgy
> Better food
> Less sophisticated but more accessible musical theology

[Anonymous No.19427914]

>>19427905
*Mystical theology

[Anonymous No.19427933]

>>19427078
Because orthodoxy runs into some of the issues protestants do.

With the loss of the Roman Empire they don’t have the ability to call councils and define dogma anymore, hence why there is much more ambiguity over a lot of practices like divorce and contraception. Likewise it means that they really struggle to determine what is a valid church council, who is a saint and who is church father.

[Anonymous No.19427954]

>>19427933
And yet they've kept themselves free from the novelties that plague Catholicism. The entire "single worldwide institutional church" concept is illegitimate and was always dependent upon there being a secular power (the emperor) to enforce it.

[Anonymous No.19427969]

>>19427954
>yet they've kept themselves free from the novelties that plague Catholicism

Like allowing for divorce up to three times or the use of contraception all of which changes based on each individual bishop?

[Anonymous No.19427977]

>>19427954
Christians should pray for a Christian emperor though. Catholics did until Pius XII, adding one to the many things he ruined.

[Anonymous No.19427983]

>>19427969
Show me a diocese where the mass is celebrated well.

[Anonymous No.19428001]

>>19427969
Don't even get started on the divorce shit. Any Catholic who wants to divorce and remarry can, they just have to get an annulment. Orthodoxy admits what's going on and justifies it under economia, whereas Catholicism has a Talmudic legalistic process where you allow the sin but pretend it's something else on paper.

[Anonymous No.19428002]

>>19427863
>Where is She teaching crypto-nestorian beliefs of "sacred heart"?

The Nestorian charge is ludicrous, and could as easily be made wrt Orthodox icons of the face of Jesus. Pic related.

[Anonymous No.19428038]

>>19428001
Not at all, and not allowing an invalid marriage is different than allowing multiple valid ones.

I noticed you don’t want to talk about divorce but how about contraception are Catholics also “Talmudic” with that ?

[Anonymous No.19428056]

>>19428038
Are you actually Catholic? I'm asking because if you were I assume you would know that the annulment process is heavily abused and is, in practice, given out to basically anyone who wants a divorce. You can have a husband and wife who have lived together for years and they can get an "annulment" on some legal technicality, which is what canon lawyers are there to help you with. If you're not aware of this there's no point discussing the rest with you as you are woefully misinformed or ignorant.

[Anonymous No.19428062]

>>19428038
Also spouses who have children can get annulments as well, if you didn't know.

[Anonymous No.19428108]

>>19428002
I am sorry, but icons of the Lord, miraculous or not, is not the same as worshipping separated organs of His body, which is a huge mistake.

Christ is One, you can't worship His heart as much as you can't worship His legs.

Also, Catholic consecrated humanity to the Heart of Jesus and Mary. Literal hearts.
If it was a figurative speech, I would be fine with it. But worshipping the literal heart is insanity.

[Anonymous No.19428137]

>>19427078
>infallible Pope contradicts my basic view of the world (that only God is infallible)
That's not what Papal Infallibility is. A pope can only use infallibility when speaking “ex cathedra” this is a very rare thing that most popes never even need to do for their entire papacies. It's only to ensure that the original doctrines are preserved when some confusion or heresy arises. Because of another Catholic doctrine, “Pastor Aeturnus” ensures that a Pope can never ever use infallibility to contradict scripture or make up new canon

[Anonymous No.19428155]

>>19428108
>Christ is One, you can't worship His heart as much as you can't worship His legs.

If the Sacred Heart image is a problem, the same conclusion should apply to the Image of Edessa, otherwise you're applying a double-standard, plain and simple.

[Anonymous No.19428193]

>>19428056
Can you understand the difference between a valid process that gets abused vs an invalid process?

[Anonymous No.19428241]

>>19427793
>I mean, I understand your skepticism, but that's the reality.
Thank you for that, I'll be reading into it.
>A book called Evangelical Is Not Enough by Thomas Howard offers an explanation of the spiritual meaning and value of liturgical worship
Thanks for the rec

[Anonymous No.19428297]

>>19428241
>>I mean, I understand your skepticism, but that's the reality.
>Thank you for that, I'll be reading into it.

Just to offer a suggestion or two as to books about the Catholic Church, as such, as distinguished from the Resurrection, or the meaning of the liturgy, I would recommend:

- Karl Adam, The Spirit of Catholicism
- Louis Bouyer, The Spirit and Forms of Protestantism (Bouyer was an ordained Lutheran minister who converted to Catholicism)
- Leo Trese, The Faith Explained

But there are many good and helpful such books out there.

[Anonymous No.19428324]

>>19427793
Im sure Jesus also laid the foundations for covering up child sexual abuse scandals and operating the Church as an army?

[Anonymous No.19428347]

>the Patriarch of Rome being infallible makes no sense
>but the Patriarch of [insert Eastern European shithole here] being infallible does
???

As predicted, the trend moves back to Evangelical Protestantism. Fags and LARPers will scratch their heads in amazement when people point out that Joel Osteen is the peak of Christianity, as if no one could open their eyes and look at the world around them.

[Anonymous No.19428463]

>>19428324
are you under the impression the Church is run by men without sin?

[Anonymous No.19428467]

>>19427078
Because the current Patriarch is a KGB major. Most Orthodox priests are very nihilistic people who hate their parishioners.

[Anonymous No.19428499]

>>19427078
Both Orthodoxy and Catholicism are false gospels. Both conveniently ignore all of Romans lol. Both are nothing more than neo-Judaism, same ritualistic/occult nonsense, same power structure run by globalist pedophiles

inb4 some dumb nigger quotes James completely out of context.

[Anonymous No.19428507]

>>19428463
Thats my point.

[Anonymous No.19428523]

>>19428137
>>19428002
>>19427905
>>19427863
>>19427688
>le Mariology xD
>le Eucharist xD
>LE BASED SAINTS xD
is it just me or do you dumb orth/cath niggers sound like you're playing dungeons and dragons or some shit lol. o wait, you basically are LOL

>>19427893
Have you exclusively looked at orth/cath garbage? No shit, it's completely incomprehensible gobblegook, every other paragraph is about excommunicating people and it all contradicts the bible.

Just read the bible ffs

[Anonymous No.19428601]

>>19427893
>The matter is incredibly complex and the idea that a layman should be responsible for working through it himself (which is required of any convert since the church is fractured), is ridiculous.

That's one of the reasons Jesus Christ established one and only one Church, and made it fairly easy to identify by its marks: One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic.

FOUR MARKS OF THE TRUE CHURCH
If we wish to locate the Church founded by Jesus, we need to locate the one that has the four chief marks or qualities of his Church. The Church we seek must be one, holy, catholic, and apostolic.

*** The Church Is One (Rom. 12:5, 1 Cor. 10:17)
Jesus established only one Church, not a collection of differing churches (Lutheran, Baptist, Anglican, and so on).

His Church teaches just one set of doctrines, which must be the same as those taught by the apostles (Jude 3). This is the unity of belief to which Scripture calls us (Phil. 1:27, 2:2).

*** The Church Is Holy (Eph. 5:25–27, Rev. 19:7–8, CCC 823–829)
By his grace Jesus makes the Church holy, just as he is holy. This doesn’t mean that each member is always holy. Jesus said there would be both good and bad members in the Church (John 6:70), and not all the members would go to heaven (Matt. 7:21–23).

But the Church itself is holy because it is the source of holiness and is the guardian of the special means of grace Jesus established, the sacraments (cf. Eph. 5:26).

*** The Church Is Catholic (Matt. 28:19–20, Rev. 5:9–10, CCC 830–856)
Jesus’ Church is called catholic (“universal” in Greek) because it is his gift to all people. He told his apostles to go throughout the world and make disciples of “all nations” (Matt. 28:19–20).

For 2,000 years the Catholic Church has carried out this mission, preaching the good news that Christ died for all men and that he wants all of us to be members of his universal family (Gal. 3:28).

Nowadays the Catholic Church is found in every country of the world and is still sending out missionaries to “make disciples of all nations” (Matt. 28:19).

The Church Jesus established was known by its most common title, “the Catholic Church,” at least as early as the year 107, when Ignatius of Antioch used that title to describe the one Church Jesus founded.

*** The Church Is Apostolic (Eph. 2:19–20, CCC 857–865)
The Church Jesus founded is apostolic because he appointed the apostles to be the first leaders of the Church, and their successors were to be its future leaders. The apostles were the first bishops, and, since the first century, there has been an unbroken line of Catholic bishops faithfully handing on what the apostles taught the first Christians in Scripture and oral Tradition (2 Tim. 2:2).

What the first Christians believed is still believed by the Catholic Church. No other Church can make that claim.

Source: https://www.catholic.com/tract/pillar-of-fire-pillar-of-truth

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AotDnQO8stM

[Anonymous No.19428604]

>>19428499
>Both conveniently ignore all of Romans lol
Protestants who believe in eternal security are the ones who discard Romans. Catholics and Orthodox are the ones who even gave you the New Testament canon that you think we discard.
"[The Jews] were broken off because of unbelief, but you stand by faith. Do not be arrogant, but be afraid. For if God did not spare the natural branches, He will certainly not spare you either.
Take notice, therefore, of the kindness and severity of God: severity to those who fell, but kindness to you, if you continue in His kindness. Otherwise you also will be cut off." (Romans 11:20-22)

[Anonymous No.19428657]

>>19428604
>but you stand by faith
lmfao. why do you dumb niggers continue to ignore this part? I shouldn't be surprised, considering you're the same retards who consider a decrepit fag to be holy

[Anonymous No.19428691]

>>19428523
>is it just me or do you dumb orth/cath niggers sound like you're playing dungeons and dragons or some shit lol. o wait, you basically are LOL

it is the opposite, dungeons and dragons were inspired on the reality of God's miracles on Earth

[Anonymous No.19428700]

>>19428657
Catholics and Orthodox both agree that initial justification comes through faith in Jesus through baptism. You are misrepresenting our position, and clearly missed the part where Paul says "YOU WILL ALSO BE CUT OFF". You can lose your salvation. Leave your false man-made heresy.

[Anonymous No.19428739]

>>19428700
>through baptism
there you go again, with your legalistic rituals. you do realize that Jesus criticized pompous faggots like you, right? You're no different from a pharisee.

>YOU WILL ALSO BE CUT OFF
Did you even read the fucking passage, nigger? IF IT WERE NOT FOR FAITH, we would be cut off. You're misinterpreting scripture to a whole new level of retardation, my guy.

[Anonymous No.19428764]

Orthodoxy is ethnic

[Anonymous No.19428771]

>>19428739
>there you go again, with your legalistic rituals
"In the ark a few people, only eight souls, were saved through water. 21And this water symbolizes the baptism that now saves you also— not the removal of dirt from the body, but the pledge of a clear conscience toward God— through the resurrection of Jesus Christ" (1 Peter 3:20-21)
>IF IT WERE NOT FOR FAITH, we would be cut off
Where does it say that? You are reading that in.
This is all very simple:
>[The Jews] were broken off because of unbelief, but you stand by faith
Okay, the Jews were cut off from salvation, but the Roman church stands by faith.
> Do not be arrogant, but be afraid
Why should we be afraid if we are already justified by faith?
>For if God did not spare the natural branches, He will certainly not spare you either.
Ah - just as the Jews were broken off from salvation, so too might we be cut off from salvation. But how would we be cut off from salvation?
>He will certainly not spare you either.
Okay, got it, we can be cut off.
> severity to those who fell, but kindness to you, IF you continue in His kindness
Oh, so if we do not continue in God's kindness, we will be cut off?
>Otherwise you also will be cut off.
Got it. We must stay in God's kindness, or else we will be cut off from salvation. That is why murderers, fornicators, and adulterers cannot go to the kingdom of heaven.

[Anonymous No.19428813]

>>19427893
I feel the same unfortunately
>read the gospels
wow im a protestant now, there's no mention of churches anywhere. who needs anything more than the bible?
>read acts and beyond
oh wait there is actually such a thing, i wonder how it relates to today
>spend the next 6 months reading about the Church via the fathers etc
realize that the protestant position is ridiculous due to the canon question (as if it wasn't obvious after reading the book after the gospels).
Also realize that the church fathers were full on Ken Ham creationists, believing in Genesis literally. Yet modern Orthodox reject it because 'it was all they knew at the time'
Also realize that the church as we know it wasn't passed down from Acts until now, but instead was more like the sperm that won the race against many other doctrines arising from Pentecost.
>dont even look at Roman Catholicism because I 'know them by their fruits'
>>19427759
Realize that Orthodox are hardly better in this regard due this..just look at Russia's new military Cathedral lol
>>19428601
>What the first Christians believed is still believed by the Catholic Church
yeah man early Christians totally believed in Marian apparitions and the sale of indulgences and thousands of other doctrines that arised since that time

There is just no way Christianity is supposed to be this clusterfuck of a religion. It is all just cope after cope after cope. I wish I was an 'ignorant' protestant again who only had faith

Meanwhile my normie Hillsong Charismatic girlfriend who has never read a book in her life casually recites Kierkegaard's concept of a knight of faith to me today in her own way, because her faith is so immensely strong. It almost felt like a parable to just have faith instead of being overly 'legalistic' like a Pharisee because everything else is literally shit (ignoring even the Protestant debate on doctrine/dogma). Anyways I'm going to Divine Lithurgy on Sunday as a last straw in hopes that I feel a certainty that this is the right path for me.

[Anonymous No.19428834]

>>19428813
>Anyways I'm going to Divine Lithurgy on Sunday as a last straw in hopes that I feel a certainty that this is the right path for me.

I wish you well, anon. Blessings.

[Anonymous No.19428836]

>>19428771
>21And this water symbolizes the baptism
SYMBOLIZES, you idiot. It's not a hard and fast rule for salvation that you lemmings can just blindly follow

>Where does it say that? You are reading that in.
Did you not read the rest of Romans, retard? Have you never read Romans 4, where the heading literally reads "Abraham Justified by Faith"? You're literally just cherrypicking verses without a clue in the world.

>We must stay in God's kindness, or else we will be cut off from salvation. That is why murderers, fornicators, and adulterers cannot go to the kingdom of heaven.
Absolutely fucking idiotic. Have you never heard of the concept of GRACE, you dumb nigger? Apparently, Jesus Christ's sacrifice means nothing to you. So again, you are just a stupid Jew who needs to ritually cleanse your sin because you have no savior.

[Anonymous No.19428843]

>>19428771
>>19428836
To add, what do you even need a savior for anyway? Apparently, you think you can save yourself. Go read Romans 2-3, it's literally about your faggot ass

[Anonymous No.19428853]

>>19428836
>SYMBOLIZES, you idiot.
I love how you cut the quote off, because of how obvious it is. "this water [of the flood] symbolizes the BAPTISM THAT NOW SAVES YOU".
>Have you never read Romans 4, where the heading literally reads "Abraham Justified by Faith"?
Again, Catholics and Orthodox all agree that we are initially justified by faith. The question is whether the man-made doctrine of justification by FAITH ALONE is true. Obviously, according to the New Testament, it is not: "You see that a man is justified by works and NOT BY faith alone."
>Have you never heard of the concept of GRACE
The ancient apostolic churches already articulated that we are saved by grace through faith, and we still hold that.
>Apparently, Jesus Christ's sacrifice means nothing to you.
Strawman, obviously.
>So again, you are just a stupid Jew who needs to ritually cleanse your sin because you have no savior.
There's a reason the early church was in unanimous agreement in baptismal regeneration. It is only your man-made tradition from 1500 years later than rejects what the Bible clearly teaches.
>>19428843
>Apparently, you think you can save yourself.
Strawman. Salvation is only available to humanity because of the grace offered to us through the sacrifice of Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ commanded us to be baptized, so that we could be born again of water and the spirit. Peter agrees - baptism into the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ now saves us. "Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved".

[Anonymous No.19428919]

>extreme bickering
literally just become Protestants. It solves every one of those discussions

[Anonymous No.19428936]

>>19428919
>literally just become Protestants. It solves every one of those discussions
Except for whether or not baptism regenerates you, whether Jesus is truly present in the Eucharist, whether females can be priests, whether free-will exists or not, whether you can lose your salvation, whether Jesus created an institutional church, etc. etc.

[Anonymous No.19428946]

>>19428936
Yes, No, Yes, Yes, Yes(not easy though), No.

[Anonymous No.19428983]

>>19428946
Baptismal regeneration would not go down well with Evangelicals, your view on the real presence would get you branded a heretic by Anglicans and Lutherans, your position on female priests would get you laughed out of most Protestant churches, your position on free-will would get you branded a heretic by Calvinists, and your last one, again, is at odds with Lutheranism and Anglicanism. I guess the idea of Protestant unity was a fantasy that arose out of lack of knowledge?

[Anonymous No.19428991]

>>19427086
this

[Anonymous No.19429006]

>>19428983
Every denomination has some fault or bias.
The alternative is the awful heretic "universalists"
is there a way out? Evangelical kinda works if it isn't those "wooo youre saved just by believing and you can sin all you want!" types
Actually going to change my first answer to a no aswell.

[Anonymous No.19429019]

>>19428813
>>19427893
I stopped caring about the broad institutional issues because these threads especially were poisoning me, and just thought about practicing. I go to a church I find comfortable to pray in and spend some time there praying, I leave an offer and leave. I know that eventually I'll have to form a more developed opinion about things but for the time being I know I believe in Jesus so that makes me a Christian. I like praying to Mary also, so I do that. I'm going to suspend the theology and focus on devotional reading as well as to stop acting like a sinner and more like a Christian.
Gonna postpone all the church shopping and faith hopping to next year.

[Anonymous No.19429099]

>>19429019
Pretty based and sound even despite praying to Mary. I suspect Christ approves and forgives any minor improprieties of doctrine/worship.

[Anonymous No.19429207]

>>19428193
In practice they are the same. If you are a Catholic and you have a wife and children but want to get dirvorced and remarry, you can. This is why people consider you legalists, because the primary thing you are concerned about is whether the issue is correct on paper. If the legal framework is sorted out, you aren't particularly concerned what sin it's enabling.

[Anonymous No.19429237]

Are Augustine's Confessions a good buy?
quick answers, book in hand

[Anonymous No.19429243]

>>19428813
>realize that the protestant position is ridiculous due to the canon question
There really isn't any issue regarding the Protestant view of the canon. It's the minimal canon that contains the book that all Christians would accept. The Fester Letter of Athanasius supports this canon, and is proof that even important bishops in the ancient world were not aware of the apocrypha being canon, and thus is was not a universal belief. The canon is just what was passed down to us and is in accord with our God-given sense of faith.

[Anonymous No.19429249]

>>19429243
>Fester Letter
Festal* Letter

[Anonymous No.19429255]

>>19428056
Has this changed in the past decades? My father couldn't get an annulment despite serious reasons and could not have a Catholic marriage again after divorce, until his ex wife actually died. I think this may have been around Vatican II.

[Anonymous No.19429260]

>>19429255
Yeah, you can compare the number of annulments post-VII to before and they have skyrocketed.

[Anonymous No.19429261]

>>19429237
It's foundational, go for it. I bought a copy today too>>19429237

[Anonymous No.19429262]

>>19429237
Yes, it's a classic. Really, a must-read.

[Anonymous No.19429267]

>>19429260
Meant pre-VII and afterwards. It indeed used to be a rare thing that was held to strict standards, but not anymore.

[Anonymous No.19429271]

>>19429261
>>19429262
It's bought. Thanks fellas.

[Anonymous No.19429305]

>>19428853
>this water [of the flood] symbolizes
So is it symbolic or not, you pedantic little shit?

>"You see that a man is justified by works and NOT BY faith alone."

I called it here >>19428499, an out-of-context quote of James. Do I win bingo? And of course you have no response for "For we maintain that a person is justified by faith apart from the works of the law". You have no response to Paul apart from trying to discredit him.

>muh baptism
you're an idiot if you think God is so legalistic to deny believers who haven't been physically baptized. Again, you haven't read Romans. Read Romans 2 and learn what the phrase "circumcision of the heart" means.

You worship rules and religion. You worship your ability to follow rules. You don't know God or Jesus at all, my guy.

[Anonymous No.19429324]

>>19427082
I ask these questions on /his/ and the jannies shit on me. Idk what people want.

[Anonymous No.19429351]

>>19429324
It's literally just angry tranners who are mad that people mention Christianity. Notice they never do this in Buddhism, neo-Pagan or whatever threads. They only bitch at Christianity. They don't even bitch at Muslims although Muslims just invade Christian threads to spam.

[Anonymous No.19429367]

>>19428155
If Orthobros didn't have double standards they'd have none at all. Not worth talking to them. Western Orthodox are 90% Protestants who realized the vacuity of the Protestant tradition but still wanted to hate the Pope

[Anonymous No.19429374]

>>19429351
The whole board is really bitter and miserable. I don't even read that much but I get way better answers to history and religious questions here, since every thread has to involve an actual book instead of some literal who's asspull.

Speaking of books, I found GK Chesterton's Orthodoxy to be a great Catholic for Dummies book, and enjoyed Benson's Confessions of a Convert for a practical examination of what it's like to actually go through the conversion process.

[Anonymous No.19429377]

>>19429351
No its because its a literature board you fag. You don't even pretend to talk about books, and its annoying when every fifth thread is some gay Orthodox/Catholic autistic screeching. And it's specifically catholics who are the most obnoxious about it, they go into actual literature threads and derail when they're bored of these ones, preaching their annoying trad larps constantly. You should go to your actual board and do this shit because you don't belong here. Fuck off.

>>19429374
>I don't even read that much
it shows

[Anonymous No.19429507]

>>19427933
and what fruit has the ability to call councils and define dogma yielded exactly?

[Anonymous No.19429517]

>>19429377
>forces "fag" and "gay" into the post
Ohhh missus madam ma'am you are totally not a tranny

[Anonymous No.19429520]

>>19429517
Ok, you're a nigger. Does that mean I'm black now?

[Anonymous No.19429529]

>>19429520
Being a nigger is a state of mind

[Anonymous No.19429534]

>>19429529
>le funny 4chan meme
You people are intolerable.

[Anonymous No.19429542]

>>19429534
What do you mean with "you people"??

[Anonymous No.19429545]

>>19429542
Underage Catholic larpers

[Anonymous No.19429579]

>>19427078
Catholics and all their rules and categories of sin and "oh if you do this and don't get shriven, straight to hell" is pretty Shylockian/Pharisaic. Orthodox don't claim to know the details of divine mysteries like the Eucharist or the time between death and resurrection day.

[Anonymous No.19429605]

>>19429579
If only the "Orthodox™" didn't leave only the book of Revelation out of being read in services, didn't pray to Ishtar, and didn't literally both begin and end their "liturgical year" with "celebrations" of Ishtar then they would be much closer to the ideal legitimate Church.

[Anonymous No.19429608]

>>19429019
which version of the Bible are you reading? I'm in a similar spot and this thread hasn't been very helpful.

[Anonymous No.19429619]

>>19429608
I'll shill the KJV because I hear it's great. Else, the Jerusalem Bible is also a nice one. (not that anon btw)

[Anonymous No.19429664]

>>19429619
Thank you.

[Anonymous No.19429690]

>>19429664
You're welcome. Hope you have a good time reading.
Don't forget to pray for understanding.

[Anonymous No.19429702]

>>19427078
Catholicism is anti-christ. read the gospels then invert the teachings and you get catholicism. then read revelation

[Anonymous No.19429703]

>>19429605
The fuck is Ishtar

[Anonymous No.19429717]

>>19427078
i have to confess when i see guys in that catholic priest outfit i really want to fuck them. why is it so hot? anime, movies, even that fucking book thornbirds with the absurdly hot priest. churchboys are like forbidden fruit. that outfit is so tight and shows off their chest and back so well. i really want to seduce and fuck a hot pastor.

[Anonymous No.19429718]

>>19427078
There's nothing contained in Orthodoxy that isn't contained within Catholicism, but in Catholicism there is also an unbroken chain of succession going all the way back to Peter and ultimately Jesus.
>an infallible Pope
The Pope is only infallible under very specific circumstances that usually only relate to minute theology rather than culture.

[Anonymous No.19429756]

>>19429703
>not knowing to whom thou prayest

[Anonymous No.19429770]

>>19429717
>t.reincarnated altar boy