Christian bronies: meet, greet, and mingle!

[Steel Accord 6,660]

What's that?

 

You've never heard of that expression?

 

It means you realize the fault of a situation when looking back on the mistakes you or others made. In this context, I'm referring to how we can look at the text of the Bible more objectively and fairly in the present than when it was closer to being contemporary. At least that's what I think.

 

To convert to the Christian faith. I left Christianity at the age of 15 because i didn't feel like a Christian. And i just assumed it wasn't true. It was when i studied the monotheistic faiths, in terms of archeaological, theological and all that stuff that i realised Christianity is true. So i am just glad that i can just believe it due to the fact that i simply cannot disprove it. It also removed the fear of death in me, because i know i will eventually perish either way. But God however lives forever.

 

Oh right I forgot you said how you rediscovered your faith. I'm really glad, it's so depressingly common that those who leave leave for good. If they ever really believed in the first place.

Edited December 7, 2015 by Steel Accord

[Sunwalker 981]

That's interesting. But sometimes i feel catholics literally believe the saints live in those statues. Which in epistles of Paul said "God does not dwell in temples". I am just wondering what catholics responds to that. Or if there are any verse that says god is in stuff that for his divine purpose or something.

 

Ah never mind. I found it ^^.

 

Thanks either way for being so kind to answer.

 

http://biblehub.com/interlinear/romans/1-7.htm

http://biblehub.com/greek/40.htm

 

Also Revelation 5:8 says the saints take their prayers up to god. And then interceding stuff existed "Romans 8:27"

So its not so far fetched as i thought to be honest at first

 

With over a billion of followers the chances of existing someone who does things wrong are considerable. But like one does not blame the entire medicine for the mistakes of some medics, this is not representative of Catholicism. What the church officially teaches is that images must not be worshiped.

 

What is forbidden to do is specifically statues of idols, other types of statues are OK and even God himself ordered some to be built (more on that later). Statues are supposed to be the representation of that person, a reminder of who he was and how he dedicated his life to Christ. People sometimes need some visual cues in order to help to remind about something, it is easier when you have an image than when you do everything on your imagination. Religious imagery are not different from the picture of your relatives that you might have on your desk. No reasonable person would mistake the representation of an object for the object itself.

 

If someone is going to the beach and find a sign saying "Beach in 10 km", one will never get to the beach if he stops at the sign and stay there . The sign is supposed to help to reach the destination. A couple of years ago I did the Prayer and Life Workshop, and one of its exercise was the "visual prayer", you kept looking at an image, at first you tried to see which positive traits you could notice at it (like serenity, confidence, faith, etc), then afterwards you try to internalize those traits in you, and ask God for them. That's one way that images can help you to pray.

 

This is what the Catechism of the Catholic Church says about images (§1162):

"The beauty of the images moves me to contemplation, as a meadow delights the eyes and subtly infuses the soul with the glory of God." Similarly, the contemplation of sacred icons, united with meditation on the Word of God and the singing of liturgical hymns, enters into the harmony of the signs of celebration so that the mystery celebrated is imprinted in the heart's memory and is then expressed in the new life of the faithful.

 

Now some passages in which God himself ask people to build images (my emphasis):

 

Numbers 21:4-9

 

⁴ From Mount Hor they set out by the way to the Red Sea, to go around the land of Edom; but the people became impatient on the way. ⁵ The people spoke against God and against Moses, “Why have you brought us up out of Egypt to die in the wilderness? For there is no food and no water, and we detest this miserable food.” ⁶ Then the Lord sent poisonous serpents among the people, and they bit the people, so that many Israelites died. ⁷ The people came to Moses and said, “We have sinned by speaking against the Lord and against you; pray to the Lord to take away the serpents from us.” So Moses prayed for the people. ⁸ And the Lord said to Moses, “Make a poisonous serpent, and set it on a pole; and everyone who is bitten shall look at it and live.” ⁹ So Moses made a serpent of bronze, and put it upon a pole; and whenever a serpent bit someone, that person would look at the serpent of bronze and live.

 

And this:

 

Exodus 25:10-22

 

The Ark of the Covenant

¹⁰ They shall make an ark of acacia wood; it shall be two and a half cubits long, a cubit and a half wide, and a cubit and a half high. ¹¹ You shall overlay it with pure gold, inside and outside you shall overlay it, and you shall make a molding of gold upon it all around. ¹² You shall cast four rings of gold for it and put them on its four feet, two rings on the one side of it, and two rings on the other side. ¹³ You shall make poles of acacia wood, and overlay them with gold. ¹⁴ And you shall put the poles into the rings on the sides of the ark, by which to carry the ark. ¹⁵ The poles shall remain in the rings of the ark; they shall not be taken from it. ¹⁶ You shall put into the ark the covenant that I shall give you.

 

¹⁷ Then you shall make a mercy seat of pure gold; two cubits and a half shall be its length, and a cubit and a half its width. ¹⁸You shall make two cherubim of gold; you shall make them of hammered work, at the two ends of the mercy seat. ¹⁹ Make one cherub at the one end, and one cherub at the other; of one piece with the mercy seat you shall make the cherubim at its two ends. ²⁰ The cherubim shall spread out their wings above, overshadowing the mercy seat with their wings. They shall face one to another; the faces of the cherubim shall be turned toward the mercy seat. ²¹ You shall put the mercy seat on the top of the ark; and in the ark you shall put the covenant[h] that I shall give you. ²² There I will meet with you, and from above the mercy seat, from between the two cherubim that are on the ark of the covenant, I will deliver to you all my commands for the Israelites.

Edited December 7, 2015 by Sunwalker

[Lithophila 291]

I just think of saints as a reminder of God in general. To help your spirital growth.

 

And when i think of our prayers to the saints, i think of it like voices singing, that they deliver to God. I think of it like this. Beautiful voices, like they are spoken of in Revelation 5:8-9 KJV

And when he had taken the book, the four beasts and four and twenty elders fell down before the Lamb, having every one of them harps, and golden vials full of odours, which are the prayers of saints. And they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation;

 

Catholic bible Revelation 5:8-9

⁸ and when he took it, the four living creatures prostrated themselves before him and with them the twenty-four elders; each one of them was holding a harp and had a golden bowl full of incense which are the prayers of the saints.

They sang a new hymn: You are worthy to take the scroll and to break its seals, because you were sacrificed, and with your blood you bought people for God of every race, language, people and nation

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YgRX5BFfV6M

 

 

And i also find this really beautiful. Heaven must be a wonderful place ^^.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pezG75UHecY

Edited December 7, 2015 by Lithophila

[I used to be a stranger 7,993]

This post has been redacted by the author.

Edited May 10, 2021 by Blue

[DANUTERCISD 204]

I'm a christian too, and people who don't like the bible, and try to ridicule its teachings, well, since i'm southern, they can kiss my ass.

I'm a christian too, and people who don't like the bible, and try to ridicule its teachings, well, since i'm southern, they can kiss my ass.

[Steel Accord 6,660]

I'm a christian too, and people who don't like the bible, and try to ridicule its teachings, well, since i'm southern, they can kiss my ass.

I'm a christian too, and people who don't like the bible, and try to ridicule its teachings, well, since i'm southern, they can kiss my ass.

 

Well I think that's kind of the wrong attitude to take. I mean I understand your frustration and gratitude at being surrounded by peers but one should not be wrathful against non-believers.

[Reading Heart 167]

I am entirely with Steel Accord here, I don't mind that you disagree with them, and I am glad to hear that you embrace Jesus as the savior, that's no reason to be disrespectful of anyone else's viewpoint, even when you believe they are wrong.  How is that loving the lost that Jesus wishes to save?   Let's extend love and respect, even when we disagree with them on every point..  is love not what the Lord commanded?  And are we not asked to be as wise as serpents and as harmless as doves?  Insults are not harmless, brother.  

 

"A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another"  John 13:34

 

Beloved, Let us love one another, for love is of God and knows God, he that loves not, does not know God, for God is love. 1 John 4:7-8

 

Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves.  Matthew 10:16

 

But let us consider words we use themselves a moment

 

The tongue of the rightous is like choice silver, but the heart of the wicked is of little worth - Proverbs 10:20

 

Luke 6:45 "A good man out of the good treasure of his heart brings forth that which is good; and an evil man out of the evil treasure of his heart brings forth that which is evil: for of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaketh."

 

Choice silver means good words are scarce, precious and valuable, but silver and gold are also spoken of in the scripture as refining, as in purifying and if anything needs it, it's our words and our heart.  Also we are called to guard our tongue.. and as Jesus teaches there in Luke, what comes out of our lips is indicative of our hearts. 

Edited December 7, 2015 by Reading Heart

[Princess_Bellalatanya 1,053]

hello,im a christian brony who goes to a christian school

[DANUTERCISD 204]

Well I think that's kind of the wrong attitude to take. I mean I understand your frustration and gratitude at being surrounded by peers but one should not be wrathful against non-believers.

No not like that, i don't want to do violence onto others, i'm just saying that i don't care if the bible is old or not, atheists who ramble will not get their way. i'm just saying it the southern way. Its a southern thing . Okay, case closed.

[Reading Heart 167]

Brother, in the spirit of love, I know you didn't mean anything harmful about it, and I think Steel Accord didn't either, both of us were talking about attitude, and it's importance, wrath isn't entirely about violence, it's about attitude...

 

Also just because something is customary, doesn't mean it's a good one, or that it honors God.  I'm talking from experience here, by the way, I've learned this lesson the hard way, and I would much rather you, and anyone else learn this the easier way..  your words and thoughts come from whats in your heart, but you can redirect them, and God is always willing to give us a fresh start.. those whose lives we've hurt along the way though.. may become forever out of out reach because of our words in the past.

 

That said.. part of the reason God has so much to say about the tongue, and about guarding our words, is that it is the most dangerous, damaging, and deadly thing in existence.  Words, said intentionally or unintentionally, have done more damage over history then anything else.   You can unintentionally fall into sinful behavior, that's why God calls us to renew our minds and our hearts so often.  

 

Now, it's not just your statement, it's an attitude I think both Steel and I wanted to address,(if that's not what you were speaking of Steel, I apologize, please correct me), not just to you, but to anyone rushing into make certain statements.  That said, may you and anyone else reading this be blessed.

Edited December 8, 2015 by Reading Heart

[DANUTERCISD 204]

Brother, in the spirit of love, I know you didn't mean anything harmful about it, and I think Steel Accord didn't either, both of us were talking about attitude, and it's importance, wrath isn't entirely about violence, it's about attitude...

 

Also just because something is customary, doesn't mean it's a good one, or that it honors God.  I'm talking from experience here, by the way, I've learned this lesson the hard way, and I would much rather you, and anyone else learn this the easier way..  your words and thoughts come from whats in your heart, but you can redirect them, and God is always willing to give us a fresh start.. those whose lives we've hurt along the way though.. may become forever out of out reach because of our words in the past.

 

That said.. part of the reason God has so much to say about the tongue, and about guarding our words, is that it is the most dangerous, damaging, and deadly thing in existence.  Words, said intentionally or unintentionally, have done more damage over history then anything else.   You can unintentionally fall into sinful behavior, that's why God calls us to renew our minds and our hearts so often.  

 

Now, it's not just your statement, it's an attitude I think both Steel and I wanted to address,(if that's not what you were speaking of Steel, I apologize, please correct me), not just to you, but to anyone rushing into make certain statements.  That said, may you and anyone else reading this be blessed.

AMEN DUDE, MAY JESUS BE WITH YOU ALL!!!

[Steel Accord 6,660]

No not like that, i don't want to do violence onto others, i'm just saying that i don't care if the bible is old or not, atheists who ramble will not get their way. i'm just saying it the southern way. Its a southern thing . Okay, case closed.

 

No disrespect meant to my Southern brethren. I suppose it's just my Yankee sense of formality which treads the line between being sincere and a bullshit pretense of civility depending upon who you are talking to.

 

(Actually, quick question, does anypony actually still refer to northerners as "Yankees?")

Brother, in the spirit of love, I know you didn't mean anything harmful about it, and I think Steel Accord didn't either, both of us were talking about attitude, and it's importance, wrath isn't entirely about violence, it's about attitude...

 

Also just because something is customary, doesn't mean it's a good one, or that it honors God.  I'm talking from experience here, by the way, I've learned this lesson the hard way, and I would much rather you, and anyone else learn this the easier way..  your words and thoughts come from whats in your heart, but you can redirect them, and God is always willing to give us a fresh start.. those whose lives we've hurt along the way though.. may become forever out of out reach because of our words in the past.

 

That said.. part of the reason God has so much to say about the tongue, and about guarding our words, is that it is the most dangerous, damaging, and deadly thing in existence.  Words, said intentionally or unintentionally, have done more damage over history then anything else.   You can unintentionally fall into sinful behavior, that's why God calls us to renew our minds and our hearts so often.  

 

Now, it's not just your statement, it's an attitude I think both Steel and I wanted to address,(if that's not what you were speaking of Steel, I apologize, please correct me), not just to you, but to anyone rushing into make certain statements.  That said, may you and anyone else reading this be blessed.

 

Apology accepted for speaking for me. I would certainly say I sympathize with DANUT's intent to stick to his guns and that he won't tolerate any censoring of his faith.

[ASGARDIANBRONY 128]

hello,im a christian brony who goes to a christian school

hello and welcome to the Christian forums!

[Lithophila 291]

So 1 Corinthians 14:34 in the Catholic bible says Assemblies/assembly. But the old greek manuscript says church/es..

 

 

Yeah suddently now i don't wanna become a catholic afterall. I mean i understand that church is a place for theology so thats ok. But not to disclose women's role to the whole Christian world.... That's just something i cannot accept. Especially since the greek word is clearly, churches, church and not assembly.

 

Frown face : (

 

 

Edit: Or i just took it out of context. Since its refering to a church assembly...

 

Aha.

Edited December 8, 2015 by Lithophila

[Steel Accord 6,660]

So 1 Corinthians 14:34 in the Catholic bible says Assemblies/assembly. But the old greek manuscript says church/es..

 

 

Yeah suddently now i don't wanna become a catholic afterall. I mean i understand that church is a place for theology so thats ok. But not to disclose women's role to the whole Christian world.... That's just something i cannot accept. Especially since the greek word is clearly, churches, church and not assembly.

 

Frown face : (

 

 

Edit: Or i just took it out of context. Since its refering to a church assembly...

 

Aha.

 

Yeah the ladder. Especially since there is nothing in the Catholic teachings that makes a prejudice against women in all of the years I've been going to mass.

 

I'm sure @@Sunwalker, would have more to say in our defense as well.

Edited December 8, 2015 by Steel Accord

[Lithophila 291]

 

Yeah the ladder. Especially since there is nothing in the Catholic teachings that makes a prejudice against women in all of the years I've been going to mass.

 

I'm sure @@Sunwalker, would have more to say in our defense as well.

Although i've heard orthodox is more true in christianity from what i've heard. Scism that Roman Catholicism did, so the orthodox have their traditions back to the apostles. While Catholics have changes, like "Big boss pope" and "You cant marry ever if you are a priest" which is different in orthodox because not all priest can marry but its not forbidden, example is if one becomes a monk then a bishop. So this might explain why protestantism started to awake due to the reaction of catholic christianity

 

I mean the problem is pedophilia in catholic church just to mention example purely due to sexual repression. Not trying to provoke or anything. But in orthodox christianity its that you can get married and be priest, but its just that you have to be married before you become a priest, otherwise you cant and you have to live life without a wife basically. So Orthodox has more or less a much more fair stuff involved than catholic christianity, its like in my view. Mindfulness they kinda work like protestants, but in traditions they share some stuff with the catholics "Except that big boss pope stuff" they usually have priests who they call father but not like a big boss who is in charge of everything. Just mainly priests.

 

But then again the orthodox christianity is not around where i live, only in big cities... so thats too bad. But interesting in a way.

[Steel Accord 6,660]

Although i've heard orthodox is more true in christianity from what i've heard. Scism that Roman Catholicism did, so the orthodox have their traditions back to the apostles. While Catholics have changes, like "Big boss pope" and "You cant marry ever if you are a priest" which is different in orthodox because not all priest can marry but its not forbidden, example is if one becomes a monk then a bishop. So this might explain why protestantism started to awake due to the reaction of catholic christianity

 

Actually Martin Luther started his reformation not because of marriage or even really issues with the Pope, but because of the corruption within the Church. It wasn't the office of the Pope itself it was the abuse of the office and similar clerical ranks. For instance the monetary purchasing of "indulgences." Literal "get into Heaven free cards."

 

The Church was indeed in a mess when Martin Luther started his revolt, and I thank him for it as a Catholic. But his 95 theses were NOT about chastity. 

 

 

I mean the problem is pedophilia in catholic church just to mention example purely due to sexual repression. Not trying to provoke or anything. But in orthodox christianity its that you can get married and be priest, but its just that you have to be married before you become a priest, otherwise you cant and you have to live life without a wife basically. So Orthodox has more or less a much more fair stuff involved than catholic christianity, its like in my view. Mindfulness they kinda work like protestants, but in traditions they share some stuff with the catholics "Except that big boss pope stuff" they usually have priests who they call father but not like a big boss who is in charge of everything. Just mainly priests.   But then again the orthodox christianity is not around where i live, only in big cities... so thats too bad. But interesting in a way.

 

You say you don't wish to provoke, but then you make a claim about my Church and that one of the greatest evils that has been committed by men of it in the modern world is because of "sexual repression," and then claim not just your own but two sects as being morally superior to it on an organizational level let alone the implicit individual level. 

 

Do you see me showing anything but respect for ALL Christian sects? I make not claims to the Catholic Church being perfect, in fact I think it's very flawed in some ways.

 

Not that I mean to say these things as an attack against you personally but it is my sect and it's how I've been raised to worship so I feel that I should speak in its defense. I was taught that doubt was good and to question my Church, question the Pope even. One could say it's a Protestant inflected "bottom up" approach, and I thank Protestantism for the lesson, but it is a lesson at least the Churches I've been to have incorporated. 

 

I can give a litany of complaints and decrees by the Church that I disavow and think are not of God, but that doesn't make me any less of the Church and ultimately the action of reform comes from within by those who see the errancy of their country, faith, organization, what have you and wish to set it right.

Edited December 8, 2015 by Steel Accord

[Sunwalker 981]

I am typing this on my phone, which makes nearly impossible to quote specific fragments, so I am quotient all of the posts at once.
 

So 1 Corinthians 14:34 in the Catholic bible says Assemblies/assembly. But the old greek manuscript says church/es..


Yeah suddently now i don't wanna become a catholic afterall. I mean i understand that church is a place for theology so thats ok. But not to disclose women's role to the whole Christian world.... That's just something i cannot accept. Especially since the greek word is clearly, churches, church and not assembly.

Frown face : (


Edit: Or i just took it out of context. Since its refering to a church assembly...

Aha.

Yes you are taking it out of context, but your explanation is still completely wrong.

The Bible doesn't explain much of the historical and cultural context in which it was written, and there are a lot of things that will not make sense and will go over of your head if you don't know the society in which it was written. Just "praying and reading the Bible" will not do, your studies have to go further.

In the society of that time, women weren't allowed to do almost nothing. They were not allowed at temples and they couldn't study. However, when Paul said that they could be at the church and learn, it was more than what the society of the time allowed women to, it was a step forward. Call it "progressive", if you want, but keep in mind that here this term doesn't have the same meaning as in today's politics.

Also keep in mind that it was a man made rule, which is changeable, unlike God made rules. The leader of a particular church community can make rules that suit the needs of that specific community at that time, but those rules doesn't necessarily apply or are necessary for other communities or times. Paul's rules for women are a discipline for his time, not an eternal doctrine, and are not to be applied today.

What is that discrimination of the Catholic Church for women you speak off? I don't like having to guess what a vague criticism was supposed to mean? Plus vague questions sounds like asking "have you stopped beating your wife?". No matter how one replies, he is going to compromise himself. Please, be clear on what you meant and I will explain it to the best of my knowledge.

I will also address your post right above, but right now I am busy. I will either update this post later or post again with my reply. Either way you should get notified.

 

Edit: My next reply is here.

Edited December 8, 2015 by Sunwalker

[Lithophila 291]

Actually Martin Luther started his reformation not because of marriage or even really issues with the Pope, but because of the corruption within the Church. It wasn't the office of the Pope itself it was the abuse of the office and similar clerical ranks. For instance the monetary purchasing of "indulgences." Literal "get into Heaven free cards."

 

The Church was indeed in a mess when Martin Luther started his revolt, and I thank him for it as a Catholic. But his 95 theses were NOT about chastity. 

 

 

 

You say you don't wish to provoke, but then you make a claim about my Church and that one of the greatest evils that has been committed by men of it in the modern world is because of "sexual repression," and then claim not just your own but two sects as being morally superior to it on an organizational level let alone the implicit individual level. 

 

Do you see me showing anything but respect for ALL Christian sects? I make not claims to the Catholic Church being perfect, in fact I think it's very flawed in some ways.

 

Not that I mean to say these things as an attack against you personally but it is my sect and it's how I've been raised to worship so I feel that I should speak in its defense. I was taught that doubt was good and to question my Church, question the Pope even. One could say it's a Protestant inflected "bottom up" approach, and I thank Protestantism for the lesson, but it is a lesson at least the Churches I've been to have incorporated. 

 

I can give a litany of complaints and decrees by the Church that I disavow and think are not of God, but that doesn't make me any less of the Church and ultimately the action of reform comes from within by those who see the errancy of their country, faith, organization, what have you and wish to set it right.

Even if i have some conflicted views. I still think it has some good stuff in it. So i am not anti catholic or anything.

Mythology and faith goes hand in hand for example

[Steel Accord 6,660]

 

 

Even if i have some conflicted views. I still think it has some good stuff in it. So i am not anti catholic or anything.

 

Glad to hear it, but I would re-emphasize that "the big boss Pope" is not the center of a Catholic's life anymore than he is yours, and I have my own conflicted views of the Church. As a Catholic, I am allowed to have them and still be among the Church. Dissension is not punished with excommunication.

 

 

 

Mythology and faith goes hand in hand for example

 

Indeed it does, I've always said that mythology is a crucial part to many religions as it allows them to contextualize their lessons. 

[Sunwalker 981]

Although i've heard orthodox is more true in christianity from what i've heard. Scism that Roman Catholicism did, so the orthodox have their traditions back to the apostles.

 

An interdenominational debate is something that I really want to avoid, so I will try my best to keep things just an objective description of the Catholic Church's position.

 

To understand the implications of the schism, I have to first explain some basics about Catholicism. The Catholic faith has three pillars, they have authority to determine what is valid or not in terms of doctrine:

• Tradition: That is the oral teachings of Jesus Christ, transmitted from one generation to the next until today. Since Christ himself left no writings, and the books of the New Testament didn't start to be written until some years after Christ ascended to Heaven, for some time Tradition was the only doctrinal source. Add to that until the 4^th century, there were no official list of canon books of the Bible, so Tradition was crucial in determining what teachings were valid.
• Magisterium: Those are the Apostles and their successors. The Apostles were the first bishops, while Peter in special was the first pope (the Pope is also the Bishop of Rome, by the way). Before Christ rose, he left the Holy Spirit to guide them, and since the Spirit itself cannot make mistakes, so cannot those who are being guided by them. In case of conflicting interpretations of the Christian doctrine, the Magisterium have the final word on what is valid or not, and they are infallible while doing so under certain circumstances. They are still fallen humans, so they can still sin like anyone else, but they cannot err when it comes to doctrinal matters because the Spirit itself is assisting then. In order for a declaration of the Pope to fall under infallibility it must:

  - Be about a doctrinal matter (disciplinary or moral matters doesn't count here)

  - Be addressing the whole Church

  - To explicitly invoke the Holy Spirit and His inerrancy

  If it does not fall under all those three conditions, it does not fall under the principle of infallibility, but it does not necessarily means that it is wrong. For Bishops to be under infallibility, add to those three conditions that they need to be acting together in a ecumenical council. Bishops alone are not under infallibility, they must be in a council.

• Scriptures: The canon books of the Bible. Those are the word of God written by people who were inspired by Him, so they also cannot err. The list of canon books was established in the ecumenical council of Nicea. The Magisterium used Tradition to determine which books were inspired and in accordance to Christ's word. In the Catholic Church, the Magisterium have the final word when it comes to say which interpretation of the Scriptures is valid.

The main difference between the Orthodox Church and the Catholic Church, is that the orthodox doesn't accept the authority of the Pope. They accept Tradition and Scriptures, but do not fully accept the idea of Magisterium. For the orthodox, the Pope is not the vicar of Christ, but the Patriarch of Rome (they have their own Patriarchs).

 

The orthodox still accept (and kept) Apostolic Succession, which is the concept that the lineage of bishops can be traced back to the twelve Apostles. Both their priests and bishops are validly ordained in the eyes of the Catholic Church, as she requires a valid bishop in order to make ordinations, and those series of ordinations can be followed back to the Apostles, who in turn were ordained by Christ himself.

 

For the Catholic Church, Peter was the first leader of the Church, the one who Christ left the keys of his Church until he returns, the first Pope. According to historical tradition, Pope Peter was succeeded by Pope Linus, who in turn was succeeded by Pope Cletus, who was followed by Pope Evaristus, and so on until present days' Pope Francis.

 

 

 

 

In doctrinal matters, the the matter of the Pope's authority currently is pretty much the only major difference between the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church. Apart from that point, both churches can be easily mistaken by each other. Eastern Catholicism, specifically, in terms of customs and rites, is nearly the same as the Eastern Orthodox.

 

The difference between Catholics and Protestants is much bigger, however. From those three pillars I listed, Protestants only accept Scriptures, that is, they do not accept Tradition and Magisterium. They also broke apostolic succession, this happened back at the 16th century with Queen Elizabeth of England, who replaced all the bishops from those determined by her own, and she became the leader of the Church of England.

 

 

While Catholics have changes, like "Big boss pope" and "You cant marry ever if you are a priest" which is different in orthodox because not all priest can marry but its not forbidden, example is if one becomes a monk then a bishop.

The Catholic church haven't changed a single doctrine in all its history. That's because they are supposed to have come from God, whose Laws are immutable and infallible.

 

Man made rules can change, though. Every human group need rules to work, be those written or not. Those rules might vary from place to place and time to time, because each group has its specific needs, that might change over time. Disciplinary rules of the Catholic Church can, and have, changed over time. Its doctrine has not.

 

Celibacy is not a doctrine, it is a discipline. This means that, at least in theory, it can change. The Catholic Church has chosen to adopt this discipline for quite a few reasons, here are some that I remember from the top of my head:

• It is more Christ-like. Jesus himself has never married, and dedicated all of his life to God.
• It requires sacrifice to do it. By giving up such a big part of human life on this world, it both requires and show determination. It is pretty easy to say to not gather treasures on this world but rather on the Heaven, but by giving up the things of this world you show that you are really serious about what you say.
• The tasks of the priest are time-consuming. If one are going to dedicate to full extent to them, he will not have time to properly dedicate itself to a family. If one are going to fully dedicate itself to a family, one will not have time to fully dedicate itself to priesthood.

Orthodox Church and Eastern Catholicism, however, both allow married priests provided they marry before ordination. Yes, you read it right, there are some portions of the Catholic Church that do allow married priests. However, their tasks are more limited in comparison with non-married ones, and they also cannot become bishops.

 

 

I mean the problem is pedophilia in catholic church just to mention example purely due to sexual repression. Not trying to provoke or anything.

The extent of this "problem" in the end of the day isn't not even close to be as some people make to appear. The number of confirmed cases of pedophilia in the Church, the ones that actually got people convicted, can be counted in the fingers of the hands, and this was in the span of DECADES. Which are less cases than in... pretty much everywhere. Still for unfathomable reasons, people focus too much on the Church, maybe because of sensationalism or something.

 

An, no, it wasn't what you called "sexual repression" that caused it. Actually, it was the other way around. The priests who were convicted for pedophilia were formed during the time of sexual revolution, in other words, they didn't learn to control their sexual impulses. Actually, the so-called sexual revolution taught to let the impulses run loose. The results are predictable.

 

In other words, the cases of pedophilia in the Church weren't caused by her sexual morals, but rather by the lack of of those morals. By the way, most of the pedophilia cases happen in family, within home, and there celibacy isn't an excuse to attempt to explain them.

 

 

But then again the orthodox christianity is not around where i live, only in big cities... so thats too bad. But interesting in a way.

Well, you can also look for a Catholic parish of Eastern rite, if there are some there. The rites of Eastern Catholicism and of the Orthodox Church are pretty much the same. The Catholic doctrine is the same regardless of it being from the western or the eastern world, however the discipline and forms of celebration might be different.

[Lithophila 291]

I will read the rest soon Sunwalker. I love informative stuff ^^. But i just wanted to say. There are some stuff that wasn't originally from the beginning of roman catholicism in terms of tradition, which i just want to add. And that is praying to rosary. Which is reason why orthodox doesn't have it. I read it came in 15ht century or something(Atleast in terms of using Mary to it. Maybe there were some ropes to Jesus prayer, but that's some unknown tradition i read on wiki). I just thought i'd mention it. Either way, i just believe that if one understand the core principle and find the truth they will be rewarded for it i think. But faith itself is strong like a rock

Edited December 8, 2015 by Lithophila

[Steel Accord 6,660]

Hey, one thing I would like to point out, is that ever notice how sometimes you'll have an atheist brony thread or a Wiccan brony thread . . . that doesn't even have a lot of genuine Wiccans on it, that crops up but they always seem to loose steam and just fade away? Yet this thread has attained mega thread status?

[Once In A Blue Moon 895]

The difference between Catholics and Protestants is much bigger, however. From those three pillars I listed, Protestants only accept Scriptures, that is, they do not accept Tradition and Magisterium. They also broke apostolic succession, this happened back at the 16th century with Queen Elizabeth of England, who replaced all the bishops from those determined by her own, and she became the leader of the Church of England.

 

I would like to expand on that particular point.

 

To quote 'Anglican Communion', Anglican (Church of England and related churches worldwide) belief stems from three sources: Scripture, Reason and Tradition. 

 

Scripture means the Holy Bible. 

 

Tradition is what it says on the tin - "the practices and beliefs of the historical church". 

 

Reason is defined as "intellect and experience of God". 

 

There is also the minor point that rather than identifying as 'protestant' the Anglican church identifies as 'catholic' in that it is part of God's one Church run by bishops (note the lower case c - a capital C in catholic refers exclusively to the Catholic Church in Rome, at least in this context) and 'reformed' in that it shares many of the principles of the other Christian Churches that broke away in the 16th century. As such, it refers to itself as 'catholic and reformed' and views itself as something of a middle way between Catholicism and Protestantism (certainly my experience of it is that it is a very broad church, for better or for worse.) 

 

There are other items referred to as 'secondary statements of faith' such as the Thirty-Nine Articles  but these are more ... contentious, at times (37 is an interesting one in particular.)

 

 

As a footnote, to clarify that none of this should in any way be considered a rebuke or condemnation of other churches, the Church of England also recogonises the importance of working with other churches as:

• We belong to one another in the body of Christ
• We have so much to receive from and offer to one another
• By working together, we have a greater impact in our communities and on public affairs
• By sharing what we have, we make best use of the precious resources

[Reading Heart 167]

Ah, while I have a number of problems with the catholic church, I believe they give too much place to men and not enough to Christ, and that they have placed tradition too highly, and elevated their priests too highly, even more so when one gets to the pope and bishops.  I'm not really eager to go into it, because to be fair, I have issues with just about all of the various christian sects these days, and like Sunwalker I want to avoid divisive issues, we are meant to be one in spirit and unity, not divided as we are today.  But, while some doctrine is questionable, I don't have any issues with their faith in and love for Jesus, or desire to serve God, nor their core doctrine, which at the depth of it, is found in the Apostle's Creed.  

 

We are human beings, only God is perfect, and only the Spirit can truly guide us into understanding of God's heart and thoughts with regards to scripture.  As in what he meant by it, the Spirit is the oil of the Lamp, without the oil, there is no light, and you will have no idea of what God means.   But without the Lamp, the word of God, you can and will end up forming ideas from your own spirit, that may sound good to you, but is not of the heart and mind of God.  Or the enemy will slip in ideas that contradict, either directly or subtly, the word, because not being in the word will leave you stumbling in the dark.

 

You have no idea how many times incorrect doctrine has entered the church (and I'm talking the church in general, not the catholic church in particular), either because of people applying their own spirit, their own thoughts and ideas, rather then seeking, in prayer, the leading of the Holy Spirit.. or the enemy sneaking in to add his own lies, all of which amount to 'Oh, God didn't really mean that'  or 'You don't really think God meant it that way'  or 'God really meant this, not that' and how many splits between various sects that exist today because of this.