I Can't Deal Anymore,

[cheryl]

I have been plagued by a couple of issues that I really need to discuss. As you know, I want to become Roman Catholic, but there are things that are holding me back--theologically speaking. My beliefs, conscience ect has been formed not only by Roman Catholicism, but also by Eastern Orthodoxy. As such I find that I am not able to agree with everything the Roman Catholic Church teaches (as I had previously hoped). I suppose I had pushed this fact to the back of my mind, hoping that I would be okay with everything---eventually. The reason I cannot agree is both practical and theological---theological, because I find myself affirming the Eastern Orthodox position rather than the Roman Catholic position and practical because it's effects on my personal life is something I must continual fight rather than embrace. In other words, these Roman Catholic positions (positions not unique to them, but shared to some degree by Protestantism) have had a negative effect on my relationship with Christ. They have proved detrimental and damaging.
--------------------
The first pertains to the afterlife. Bishop Hilarion of the Russian Orthodox Church states it better than I could, if you wouldn't mind reading what he wrote, for my sake. Here's the link, "[url="http://orthodoxeurope.org/page/11/1/5.aspx"]Christ the Conqueror of Hell[/url]". In short I find myself in direct opposition to catechetical statements such as:

CC: 633: "...Jesus did not descend into hell to deliver the damned, nor to destroy the hell of damnation, but to free the just who had gone before him."

Although for brevity's sake, I'll refrain from elaborating on why the Roman Catholic position is so hurtful to me, suffice to say, I feel as if I'm being plunged back into a sort of evangelical fundamentalism --for me, a very dark place to be.
---------------------
The second issue I struggle with is the distinction of mortal and venial sin (which is something else, fairly alien to Eastern Orthodox thought). This (in it's modified Lutheran form), and now in it's Roman Catholic manifestation, has given rise to scrupulosity among other more serious spiritual struggles in me. It forms no genuine part of my relationship to God, but instead distracts me from progressing forward as if it weren't enough just to work out one's salvation, but that Divine punishment must become a factor. In this too, I align myself more closely with the Eastern Orthodox in that, I perceive sin as a disease needing to be healed. It's difficult to see Christ in everyone, even sinners, and at the same time try to incorporate such distinction of sins into one's theological worldview. When I look at people, I see suffering, sickness and a crucified Christ, not individuals potentially on their way to hell or potentially devoid of saving grace. What else is saving grace than the crucified Christ and what is stronger the disease (Adam's rebellion) or the cure (Christ's obedience). Freewill for me is irrelevant. Of course I believe in freewill! But freewill for me is a gift, a grace, not a means by which we can tie God's hands saying, "Oh God really wants to save them...but alas.....". Nothing is impossible with God. Freewill does not diminish God's power to save. How can I say that anyone is devoid of saving, sanctifying grace, when I see Christ, the author of that grace in everyone?
------------------------
In conclusion, I don't really want to argue. My heart can't take that right now. But if anyone has any constructive thoughts I'd greatly appreciate them! What do you do with a person that is not fully Roman Catholic and not fully Eastern Orthodox, but a mixture. (If they had a child, I'd be it lol). I am in desperate need of the Sacraments---that's the clincher---that's what makes trying to assent to this or that Church such a priority for me . I've written to the Eastern Byzantine Catholic Church in the hope of putting these issues to rest, but they have yet to respond.

[philothea]

I'm willing to concede ignorance, but I was under the impression that the Catholic Church and Eastern Orthodoxy held substantially the same beliefs, except for primacy of the Pope.

I think you might be seeing differences in traditional phrasing or perspective, not actual differences in doctrine. Those "Eastern" saints which the Bishop is quoting have always been considered Catholic saints. He's picking and choosing words to try to make it seem like there's a disagreement, but I don't believe there is.

[tinytherese]

Just to clarify if you didn't know but, Eastern Catholic and Eastern Orthodox are not the same thing. Eastern Catholic is another lung in Catholicism but the Orthodox are schismatic. Sometimes the terms can be mistakingly interchangable.

[Ziggamafu]

What is it about the teaching regarding Christ's descent into Hell that you have a problem with? Is it that you believe in universal salvation? Remember that although the Church teaches that it is a sin to presume universal salvation, it is likewise a sin to despair of anyone's damnation. We are to hope that everyone is saved and entrust to God's mercy those who don't [i]appear [/i]to have died in a state of grace. Remember that God loves everyone infinitely and eternally. God is capable of - and has before - worked extraordinary miracles of grace to win over the hearts of the most stubborn of unbelievers. And even the normal conversions of heart are only achieved by the motivating grace of God. Think heavily on that whenever you are worried about someone's salvation. Just don't let it keep you from evangelizing.

Regarding mortal sin: scrupulosity usually results from the feeling that you can fall into mortal sin by accident (lack of full awareness) or by weakness (lack of full consent). But the Church teaches precisely the opposite. Remind yourself of this from time to time. Mortal sin is always a deliberate and direct rejection of God's Word in either his Person or his Teaching. The Early Church CONFIDENTLY expected Christians to NEVER fall into mortal sin after baptism, which is why penances usually lasted years or even lifetimes. If mortal sin was a matter of mere accident or weakness then how could such an expectation be made? If you would like further help in this matter, PM me your email address and I will send you a fairly exhaustive and fully researched essay on the topic (authoritative citations and footnotes included).

Live the Love,

Z

[cheryl]

[quote name='tinytherese' post='1740850' date='Jan 1 2009, 07:43 PM']Just to clarify if you didn't know but, Eastern Catholic and Eastern Orthodox are not the same thing. Eastern Catholic is another lung in Catholicism but the Orthodox are schismatic. Sometimes the terms can be mistakingly interchangable. [/quote]

Yes, I know.

[cmotherofpirl]

What do you actually perceive to be the differences?

The is the ancient homily in the Office for Holy Saturday:
" He [Jesus] has gone to search for our first parent, as for a lost sheep. Greatly desiring to visit those who lie in darkness and in the shadow of death, he has gone to free from sorrow the captives Adam and Eve, he is is both God and son of Eve. The Lord approached them bearing the cross, the weapon that had won him the victory...."Awake, O sleeper, and rise from the dead, and Christ will give you light." I am you God, who for your sake have become your son. Out of love for you and for your descendants I now by my own authority command all who are held in bondage to come forth, all who are in darkness to be enlightened, all who are sleeping to arise. "

[cheryl]

[quote name='philothea' post='1740832' date='Jan 1 2009, 07:33 PM']I'm willing to concede ignorance, but I was under the impression that the Catholic Church and Eastern Orthodoxy held substantially the same beliefs, except for primacy of the Pope.[/quote]

No, there are other differences as well, due to the development of doctrine in the west that the east was not a part of. A famous example is the doctrine of the immaculate conception (something I believe btw).

[quote]I think you might be seeing differences in traditional phrasing or perspective, not actual differences in doctrine. Those "Eastern" saints which the Bishop is quoting have always been considered Catholic saints. He's picking and choosing words to try to make it seem like there's a disagreement, but I don't believe there is.[/quote]

The fact that these are catholic saints is part of why this issue is so troublesome to me. How can the catechism et al, exclude what they have to say on the matter?

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='cheryl' post='1741380' date='Jan 2 2009, 11:52 AM']No, there are other differences as well, due to the development of doctrine in the west that the east was not a part of. A famous example is the doctrine of the immaculate conception (something I believe btw).



The fact that these are catholic saints is part of why this issue is so troublesome to me. How can the catechism et al, exclude what they have to say on the matter?[/quote]
Please remember the Catechism is a teaching tool for Bishops, not the end all and be all of Catholic theology. Its a summary, not a thesis on any one topic.

[cheryl]

[quote name='Ziggamafu' post='1741343' date='Jan 2 2009, 09:56 AM']What is it about the teaching regarding Christ's descent into Hell that you have a problem with? Is it that you believe in universal salvation? Remember that although the Church teaches that it is a sin to presume universal salvation, it is likewise a sin to despair of anyone's damnation. We are to hope that everyone is saved and entrust to God's mercy those who don't [i]appear [/i]to have died in a state of grace. Remember that God loves everyone infinitely and eternally. God is capable of - and has before - worked extraordinary miracles of grace to win over the hearts of the most stubborn of unbelievers. And even the normal conversions of heart are only achieved by the motivating grace of God. Think heavily on that whenever you are worried about someone's salvation. Just don't let it keep you from evangelizing.[/quote]

I don't understand why God's grace is being limited. As if this world, was the only place where, "grace abounds all the more". As if, "he comes to make his blessing flow...far as the curse is found." is not on its face, a true statement. I very much believe in freewill...but I think it's been taken to an extreme...just like belief in the providence of God can be taken to the opposite extreme...ie double-predestination. It's created for me, a dualistic world-view where other creatures can permanently thwart God's will. As if some things are outside the realm of divine providence. Why pray, "Thy will be done..." when we know that in some things, at the very least it won't be....which caste doubt on everything...so when bad things happen...one is forced to cry, "God where are you?" in the sense that God has been defeated. As for universal salvation, I'm still working through the issue of salvation in general....so I don't have an opinion, other than actively praying that all will be saved.

[quote]Regarding mortal sin: scrupulosity usually results from the feeling that you can fall into mortal sin by accident (lack of full awareness) or by weakness (lack of full consent). But the Church teaches precisely the opposite. Remind yourself of this from time to time. Mortal sin is always a deliberate and direct rejection of God's Word in either his Person or his Teaching. The Early Church CONFIDENTLY expected Christians to NEVER fall into mortal sin after baptism, which is why penances usually lasted years or even lifetimes. If mortal sin was a matter of mere accident or weakness then how could such an expectation be made? If you would like further help in this matter, PM me your email address and I will send you a fairly exhaustive and fully researched essay on the topic (authoritative citations and footnotes included).

Live the Love,

Z[/quote]

Oh, that would be wonderful...thank you!

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='Ziggamafu' post='1741343' date='Jan 2 2009, 09:56 AM']you would like further help in this matter, PM me your email address and I will send you a fairly exhaustive and fully researched essay on the topic (authoritative citations and footnotes included).

Live the Love,

Z[/quote]
THe fully researched essay would be a good addition to our directory here [ hint ]

[cheryl]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' post='1741379' date='Jan 2 2009, 11:48 AM']What do you actually perceive to be the differences?

The is the ancient homily in the Office for Holy Saturday:
" He [Jesus] has gone to search for our first parent, as for a lost sheep. Greatly desiring to visit those who lie in darkness and in the shadow of death, he has gone to free from sorrow the captives Adam and Eve, he is is both God and son of Eve. The Lord approached them bearing the cross, the weapon that had won him the victory...."Awake, O sleeper, and rise from the dead, and Christ will give you light." I am you God, who for your sake have become your son. Out of love for you and for your descendants I now by my own authority command all who are held in bondage to come forth, all who are in darkness to be enlightened, all who are sleeping to arise. "[/quote]


The difference that I see (not reflected in the above citation), is that for the East, hell/sheol is not compartmentalized to such a degree, that it can be said that Christ merely descended in a "limbo of the fathers". Rather he descended into hell to free from bondage not only the Old Testament saints, but all who were there, including those "who disobeyed long ago when God waited patiently in the days of Noah while the ark was being built." 1 Peter 3:18-22

[cheryl]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' post='1741381' date='Jan 2 2009, 11:54 AM']Please remember the Catechism is a teaching tool for Bishops, not the end all and be all of Catholic theology. Its a summary, not a thesis on any one topic.[/quote]

But a good catholic shouldn't disagree with the Catechism right?

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='cheryl' post='1741396' date='Jan 2 2009, 12:23 PM']But a good catholic shouldn't disagree with the Catechism right?[/quote]
I think one uses the Catechism as the starting point for understanding a teaching, not neccessarily an endpoint.
What exactly is your difficulty?

[cheryl]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' post='1741400' date='Jan 2 2009, 12:26 PM']I think one uses the Catechism as the starting point for understanding a teaching, not neccessarily an endpoint.
What exactly is your difficulty?[/quote]
I'm not ignoring you, I just have to get ready to go to church. I'll be back later.

[Ziggamafu]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' post='1741386' date='Jan 2 2009, 12:09 PM']THe fully researched essay would be a good addition to our directory here [ hint ][/quote]


I'm not a mod. If you want, I can send it to your email. I don't know how to paste the document without losing all of the footnotes.