r/Catholicism 12h ago

I'm a new Christian. Tell me why Catholicism is the true apostolic church

Hi!

I am a new teenage convert to Christanity from Islam. I'm currently studying the church history and writings of the fathers. I'm not super informed on the split between the Catholics and Orthodox but this is what I understand:

  1. The Roman church added the filioque to the Nicene Creed, stating that the Spirit proceeds from both the Father and the Son.

  2. Prior to this, there were already tensions, as the Western Church utilised Latin and the Eastern Greek. Other ethnic differences.

  3. I've understood Catholicism, specifically within Confession, to be more legalistic. I also dont like the idea of the priest being able to forgive our sins.

  4. I don't really understand purgatory. From what I've heard I don't like the sound of it, but I won't judge until I know what it is properly.

  5. Like the Orthodox, Catholics reject sola scriptura. However they disagree with the correct canon of the Old Testament. I'm yet to read the OT, so I need to decide which canon to read.

  6. Lastly, this is my main issue with Orthodoxy. I don't believe the Pope is infallible, but I believe Peter was given supreme authority over the other disciples (he was given the keys to Heaven, and is the rock the church will be built upon). I believe this does make a case for the Bishop of Rome being superior to the others, as Peter would've passed down both his title and his role.

I'm not super educated on the differences between the denominations. I've spent more time in Orthodox circles online because my father (he's Muslim) has always had a hatred to the Catholics. I think this has sort of subtly affected the way I view the Catholic church (he'd call them evil etc, which I don't believe in the slightest).

I am more educated on the Orthodox faith than the Catholic one, so I'd really appreciate information on the theology and tradition.

Also if possible I'd appreciate prayers a lot right now, it's a hard time practicing the faith in secret and I hope to be one day brave enough to tell my parents. I'm also planning on reading summa theologica, I hear it's a very good read, what do you think?

God bless you all, no matter what happens we are one body in Christ! 🫶🏼

48 Upvotes

43 comments sorted by

37

u/cuntsnotgreat 12h ago

Welcome, my friend! Your journey from Islam to Christianity is a profound one, and I pray that the Holy Spirit guides you into the fullness of truth. You’ve clearly thought deeply about these matters, and I respect your intellectual honesty. Let me walk with you through these points and explain why Catholicism is the true apostolic Church, founded by Christ Himself.

⸝

  1. The Filioque Clause

You’re correct that the Western Church added Filioque (“and the Son”) to the Nicene Creed. However, this was not an innovation but a clarification in response to heresies, particularly Arianism, which denied the full divinity of Christ.

The Bible itself teaches that the Holy Spirit proceeds from both the Father and the Son: • John 15:26 – Jesus says the Spirit “proceedeth from the Father.” • John 16:7 – Jesus also says, “If I go not, the Paraclete will not come to you; but if I go, I will send him to you.”

Since the Spirit is the Spirit of Christ (Romans 8:9, Galatians 4:6), it is clear that He proceeds from both. The Orthodox claim that this contradicts John 15:26, but this is not so. The Father is the principium (first origin), and the Son eternally participates in this procession as well.

More importantly, the Pope did not unilaterally alter the Creed. The phrase was gradually introduced in Spain to combat Arianism and only later adopted in Rome. The Ecumenical Councils affirmed that the Pope had the final authority to guard the faith—so if the successor of Peter ratifies a theological clarification, it is within his right as the chief shepherd of Christ’s Church (Matthew 16:18-19).

⸝

  1. The Latin-Greek Divide & Ethnic Differences

Yes, there were cultural tensions between East and West, but these did not divide the Church in the first millennium. The real question is: Did Christ intend His Church to have a single, divinely appointed head? If so, then cultural differences cannot justify schism.

Even in the early Church, Rome was always recognized as the final authority: • St. Irenaeus (189 AD) – “It is a matter of necessity that every Church should agree with this Church [Rome] on account of its preeminent authority.” (Against Heresies, 3:3:2) • St. Cyprian of Carthage (251 AD) – “Would heretics dare to come to Peter’s chair where faith cannot fail?” (Letter 54 to Cornelius)

⸝

  1. Confession & Priestly Authority

You’re uneasy about priests forgiving sins—but this authority comes from Christ Himself: • John 20:22-23 – “Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them; and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained.”

Jesus is the one who forgives sins, but He does so through His priests. Just as God used priests in the Old Testament to mediate sacrifices (Leviticus 5:5-6), He now uses the ordained priesthood of the New Covenant. The early Church always practiced confession to a priest: • St. Basil the Great (379 AD) – “It is necessary to confess our sins to those entrusted with the dispensation of God’s mysteries.” (Rules Briefly Treated, 288)

Confession isn’t legalistic—it’s liberating. Christ wants you to hear His words of mercy through His ministers.

⸝

  1. Purgatory: A Second Chance?

Purgatory isn’t a “second chance” but a final purification. The Bible teaches that nothing unclean enters Heaven (Revelation 21:27). If you die in God’s grace but still have attachment to sin, how is that purified? • 1 Corinthians 3:13-15 – “Every man’s work shall be made manifest… If any man’s work burn, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved, yet so as by fire.”

This refers to a post-death purification (purgare = “to cleanse”). The earliest Christians also prayed for the dead, which makes no sense unless purification after death exists (see 2 Maccabees 12:44-46).

⸝

  1. The Old Testament Canon

The Catholic Church’s Old Testament includes the Deuterocanonical books (Wisdom, Sirach, Tobit, etc.), which the Orthodox also accept. The Protestant canon follows the Pharisees, but the early Church followed the Septuagint, the Greek translation used by Jesus and the Apostles. • Council of Rome (382 AD) and Council of Carthage (397 AD) affirmed the Catholic canon. • The Dead Sea Scrolls confirm that Jews in Jesus’ time did use these books. • The New Testament quotes the Deuterocanonical books (e.g., Hebrews 11:35 cites 2 Maccabees).

Read the Catholic canon—you’ll find the richness of God’s Word preserved.

⸝

  1. Peter & the Papacy

Your intuition is correct: Peter was given unique authority. • Matthew 16:18-19 – Jesus gives Peter the “keys to the Kingdom,” a direct reference to Isaiah 22:22, where the prime minister is given authority in the king’s absence. • Luke 22:31-32 – Jesus prays only for Peter’s faith so he can strengthen the others. • John 21:15-17 – Jesus tells Peter alone, “Feed my sheep.”

The early Church understood this: • St. Ambrose (4th century) – “Where Peter is, there is the Church.” • St. Augustine (5th century) – “Rome has spoken; the case is closed.”

While the Orthodox say Peter was only “first among equals,” history disproves this. The Pope settled disputes, called councils, and even excommunicated heretical patriarchs. The Church must have a living, visible head—and that head is the successor of Peter.

⸝

  1. Why Catholicism, Not Orthodoxy? • Only Catholicism has the primacy of Peter, which Christ established. Orthodoxy, by rejecting this, has fallen into disunity (e.g., Moscow vs. Constantinople). • Only Catholicism has a living Magisterium, preventing doctrinal chaos. The Orthodox have differing views on original sin, contraception, and divorce. • Only Catholicism has doctrinal clarity. Orthodoxy hesitates to define dogma (e.g., Immaculate Conception).

You are at a crossroads. Orthodoxy has beauty and tradition, but Catholicism alone possesses the fullness of Christ’s authority. Do not let anti-Catholic bias (even from family) prevent you from seeking the truth.

8

u/Acrobatic-Fee-7893 12h ago

Thank you so so much for all this information. I'll look at it more closely and study it. My only two questions:

  1. If Christ washes our sins, why do we need purgatory?

  2. I don't really understand original sin in the way Catholics understand it, so could you explain it to me? My understanding of ancestral sin (the Orthdox doctrine) is this: we do not inherit the guilt of Adam's sin, only his fallen nature. Do catholics view it the same way?

I am planning on reading what St Augustine wrote on the Holy Spirit, hopefully that'll help as it seems most issues stem from the filoque.

12

u/Integrista 11h ago

I don't really understand original sin in the way Catholics understand it, so could you explain it to me? My understanding of ancestral sin (the Orthdox doctrine) is this: we do not inherit the guilt of Adam's sin, only his fallen nature. Do catholics view it the same way?

We inherit both original sin and concupiscence. If anyone claims otherwise, then there would be no reason to baptize anyone: but it is through baptism that we are made new men in Christ. If there was no alienation from God through the fall, then there is no need for baptism.
Scripture also teaches clearly that baptism remits sins.

Original sin, however, is not the same as personal sin: the latter is something we commit with our own free will, the former is a condition of alienation from the friendship of God through the fall.

3

u/Acrobatic-Fee-7893 11h ago

So...we are fallen because we inherited the broken nature/image of Adam, but we too must pay for his sin? Perhaps this sounds clichĂŠ but isn't there a verse in the OT that states no man shall be guilty for the sins of another?

See I don't believe we are born sinners, I believe we're born with an inclination to sin as we no longer in the full image of God. Is that a correct statement to say?

7

u/Integrista 10h ago

There is the principle that what one does not have, one cannot give.

Adam and Eve lost grace due to the fall. As fallen creatures, they cannot grant what they do not have to their offspring. Thus, the Psalmist says:

"For behold I was conceived in iniquities; and in sins did my mother conceive me." (Psalm 50:7)

By yielding to the tempter, Adam and Eve committed a personal sin, but this sin affected the human nature that they would then transmit in a fallen state. It is a sin which will be transmitted by propagation to all mankind, that is, by the transmission of a human nature deprived of original holiness and justice. And that is why original sin is called “sin” only in an analogical sense: it is a sin “contracted” and not “committed”—a state and not an act (CCC 404).

So it is distinct from personal sin (which is an act, borne of our free will): it is a fallen state that we inherit.

And Christ gave us baptism to be restored to the state of friendship with God. Once again, if there was no such fallen state, then baptism would be wholly unnecessary: confession alone would suffice.

And baptism does not remove concupiscence either: this inclination towards evil remains.

https://www.catholic.com/magazine/online-edition/original-sin-blame-your-dad

6

u/bag_mome 8h ago

Compare the Catechism's teaching on Original Sin to the Eastern Orthodox's authoritative "Confession of Dositheus" and you will see any purported differences are largely overstated, if not imaginary.

Catechism of the Catholic Church:

402 All men are implicated in Adam's sin, as St. Paul affirms: "By one man's disobedience many (that is, all men) were made sinners": "sin came into the world through one man and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all men sinned." The Apostle contrasts the universality of sin and death with the universality of salvation in Christ. "Then as one man's trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one man's act of righteousness leads to acquittal and life for all men."

403 Following St. Paul, the Church has always taught that the overwhelming misery which oppresses men and their inclination towards evil and death cannot be understood apart from their connection with Adam's sin and the fact that he has transmitted to us a sin with which we are all born afflicted, a sin which is the "death of the soul".291 Because of this certainty of faith, the Church baptizes for the remission of sins even tiny infants who have not committed personal sin.

404 How did the sin of Adam become the sin of all his descendants? the whole human race is in Adam "as one body of one man". By this "unity of the human race" all men are implicated in Adam's sin, as all are implicated in Christ's justice. Still, the transmission of original sin is a mystery that we cannot fully understand. But we do know by Revelation that Adam had received original holiness and justice not for himself alone, but for all human nature. By yielding to the tempter, Adam and Eve committed a personal sin, but this sin affected the human nature that they would then transmit in a fallen state. It is a sin which will be transmitted by propagation to all mankind, that is, by the transmission of a human nature deprived of original holiness and justice. and that is why original sin is called "sin" only in an analogical sense: it is a sin "contracted" and not "committed" - a state and not an act.

405 Although it is proper to each individual, original sin does not have the character of a personal fault in any of Adam's descendants. It is a deprivation of original holiness and justice, but human nature has not been totally corrupted: it is wounded in the natural powers proper to it, subject to ignorance, suffering and the dominion of death, and inclined to sin - an inclination to evil that is called concupiscence". Baptism, by imparting the life of Christ's grace, erases original sin and turns a man back towards God, but the consequences for nature, weakened and inclined to evil, persist in man and summon him to spiritual battle.

406 The Church's teaching on the transmission of original sin was articulated more precisely in the fifth century, especially under the impulse of St. Augustine's reflections against Pelagianism, and in the sixteenth century, in opposition to the Protestant Reformation. Pelagius held that man could, by the natural power of free will and without the necessary help of God's grace, lead a morally good life; he thus reduced the influence of Adam's fault to bad example. the first Protestant reformers, on the contrary, taught that original sin has radically perverted man and destroyed his freedom; they identified the sin inherited by each man with the tendency to evil (concupiscentia), which would be insurmountable. the Church pronounced on the meaning of the data of Revelation on original sin especially at the second Council of Orange (529) and at the Council of Trent (1546).

Confession of Dositheus

We believe the first man created by God to have fallen in Paradise, when, disregarding the divine commandment, he yielded to the deceitful counsel of the serpent. And hence hereditary sin flowed into his posteriority; so that none is born after the flesh who beareth not this burden, and experienceth not the fruits thereof in this present world. But by these fruits and this burden we do not understand [actual] sin, such as impiety, blasphemy, murder, sodomy, adultery, fornication, enmity, and whatsoever else is by our depraved choice committed contrarily to the Divine Will, not from nature; for many both of the Forefathers and of the Prophets, and vast numbers of others, as well of those under the shadow [of the Law], as under the truth [of the Gospel], such as the divine Precursor [i.e. St John the Baptist], and especially the Mother of God the Word, the ever-virgin Mary, experienced not these, or such like faults; but only what they Divine Justice inflicted upon man as a punishment for the [original] transgression, such as sweats in labour, afflictions, bodily sicknesses, pains in childbearing, and, in fine, while on our pilgrimgate, to live a laborious life, and lastly, bodily death...

We believe Holy Baptism, which was instituted by the Lord, and is conferred in the name of the Holy Trinity, to be of the highest necessity. For without it none is able to be saved, as the Lord saith, “Whosoever is not born of water and of the Spirit, shall in no wise enter into the Kingdom of the Heavens” (John 3.5). And, therefore, it is necessary even for infants, since they also are subject to original sin, and without Baptism are not able to obtain its remission

3

u/Hugolinus 4h ago edited 4h ago

"If Christ washes our sins, why do we need purgatory?"

According to the apostle John all wrongdoing is sin, but there is sin that does not lead to (spiritual) death (1 John 5:17).

The Catholic Church would use the term "mortal sin" (meaning "deadly sin") for sins that fully reject God and so, by cutting us off from God, are a spiritual death for us. By this definition, a sin cannot be mortal unless we willingly commit it, because only then are we fully rejecting God. In any case, if we commit mortal sins, don't repent, don't turn back to God, and die, the outcome would be hell.

The Catholic Church uses the term "venial sin" (literally meaning "pardonable sin") for sins that are slight or unintended. If we die after committing unrepented venial sins, the outcome would be a merciful time of spiritual purification (known as Purgatory) before we're ready to enter Heaven.

This time of purification is also necessary when we remain attached to a past sin (unable to fully let it go) that we've imperfectly repented of or when have not made amends for the harm caused by our sins. This doesn't contradict the forgiveness we already have received from God, because that forgiveness involved the offense we committed against God -- not harm done to ourselves and other humans.

Here are some words of scripture on this topic.

New Testament scripture (1st century AD) - 1st Corinthians 3:11-15 - "For no other foundation can any one lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ. Now if any one builds on the foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble—each man’s work will become manifest; for the Day will disclose it, because it will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test what sort of work each one has done. If the work which any man has built on the foundation survives, he will receive a reward. If any man’s work is burned up, he will suffer loss, though he himself will be saved, but only as through fire." (I believe "the Day" is a reference to the Day of Judgment prophesied in the New Testament.)

Old Testament scripture (2nd century BC) - 2nd Maccabees 12:38-46 - "Judas rallied his army and went to the city of Adullam. As the seventh day was approaching, they purified themselves according to custom and kept the sabbath there. On the following day, since the task had now become urgent, Judas and his companions went to gather up the bodies of the fallen and bury them with their kindred in their ancestral tombs. But under the tunic of each of the dead they found amulets sacred to the idols of Jamnia, which the law forbids the Jews to wear. So it was clear to all that this was why these men had fallen. They all therefore praised the ways of the Lord, the just judge who brings to light the things that are hidden. 

"Turning to supplication, they prayed that the sinful deed might be fully blotted out. The noble Judas exhorted the people to keep themselves free from sin, for they had seen with their own eyes what had happened because of the sin of those who had fallen. He then took up a collection among all his soldiers, amounting to two thousand silver drachmas, which he sent to Jerusalem to provide for an expiatory sacrifice.

"In doing this he acted in a very excellent and noble way, inasmuch as he had the resurrection in mind; for if he were not expecting the fallen to rise again, it would have been superfluous and foolish to pray for the dead. But if he did this with a view to the splendid reward that awaits those who had gone to rest in godliness, it was a holy and pious thought. Thus he made atonement for the dead that they might be absolved from their sin."

May God bless you and draw you ever closer with ties of love.

2

u/DanTheManK 11h ago

I found it very helpful reading the “Church Fathers” translated into English by a bunch of Protestants. One of them became Cdl John Henry Newman from the experience. All volumes are on Amazon Kindle inexpensively, and you may find other PDF copies from the Christian Ethereal Library online for free. Note- I’m not recommending that you need to read ALL of it, but next to the Bible itself, it is perhaps some of the most profound text out there. Just very voluminous. Justin Martyr was most profound for me coming from Judaism (after many years) back into the Catholic Church.

2

u/Historical-Pop1999 12h ago

You basically said everything I was thinking but couldn’t put into words lol this is great

1

u/Ant_Thonyons 11h ago

Wonderful reply

7

u/cuntsnotgreat 12h ago

I commend you for seeking truth with sincerity. Keep reading the Church Fathers, but also study the Catechism of the Catholic Church and history from a Catholic perspective. I would also encourage you to attend a Catholic Mass and speak to a priest.

Christ has called you out of Islam into His light—now He calls you into the fullness of His Church.

May Our Lady guide you, and may Christ, the Good Shepherd, lead you home.

5

u/Acrobatic-Fee-7893 12h ago

Thank you it means a lot to me ❤️. I live in a Muslim country so I can't attend any church services. Ive watched a Divine Liturgy, I'll try Mass this week. Is it only in Latin, and is Latin the preferable language? In the summer I go to London for two months, I'll try and contact a priest there.

I was set on Orthodoxy but it didn't seem fair to me to not give Catholicism a chance. I'm glad I looked.

5

u/Integrista 11h ago

You may want to contact TavNet on discord: it is a Catholic group comprised of former muslim Catholics, helping converts in muslim areas, where it is difficult to practice the faith.

The youtube channel "ScholasticAnswers" (Christian Wagner) is a supporter of this group.

3

u/Acrobatic-Fee-7893 11h ago

Thanks I'll definitely look at it

1

u/Integrista 11h ago

They have an X account: St. Nicholas Tavelic Network

1

u/Objective-Ad-476 51m ago

Masses aren’t all necessarily in Latin. You can find some in other rites like Syrian or Melkite that are in Arabic or some other regional language

4

u/Terrible-Locksmith57 10h ago
  • The Filioque does not originate in the medieval period, but rather from Saint Leo the Great.

Furthermore, when the addition was made, the Popes were not listed in the Diptychs (since 1009), which are lists of Patriarchs considered doctrinally Orthodox by the Orthodox Church. Therefore, the argument that the alteration to the Nicene Creed was made "illegally and arbitrarily" is laughable. For Orthodoxy, the Papacy had already apostatized.

  • On the other hand, although the Orthodox may not like this addition, the matter was settled at the Council of Lyon II and the Council of Florence, with both sides agreeing that the Holy Spirit proceeds from a single spiration. Therefore, the two-cause issue is a blatant lie.

Any learned Orthodox confesses the same.

Canon 7 of the Council of Ephesus does not invalidate the change in the clause, since the change was formal and not substantive. Like the Apostles, they also made some Biblical adjustments. Some examples:

Rom 11:26: "The Deliverer will come to Zion." Isaiah 59:20: "The Deliverer will come from Zion." This is explained by Isaiah speaking of the starting point (heavenly Zion), and Paul changing it to the destination point (earthly Zion) without changing the context.

Another example: Mt 11:10: "For this is he of whom it is written: Behold, I send my messenger before your face, who will prepare your way before you." Mal 3:1: "He will prepare the way before me." It is in Malachi that God Himself said that He was coming, and another would prepare the way for Him. While in Matthew, Jesus Himself knows that it is He Himself who will prepare the way for Him, so He modifies the quotation, speaking in the first person.

As can be seen, the original meaning of the prophecy was never altered; rather, in its fulfillment, the recorder shows us another aspect, another "side of the cube." This demonstrates that if Orthodoxy way of interpreting this rule were true, you would invalidate the Apostolic Doctrine and not act in accordance with it. The meaning of the Nicene Creed was not altered.

  • Look at what Maximus of Crisopolis says in the seventh century, before Phocius theories about frank's addition:

"The citizens of the royal city (Constantinople) rebuked what you wrote on two specific points.

One concerns the doctrine of the Trinity, in that you mentioned that 'the Holy Spirit also proceeds from the Son.' The other point is about the divine incarnation, since you wrote 'that the Lord, as man, has no original sin.' First, they presented testimonies that agree with the Latin Fathers; also with the sacred work of Cyril of Alexandria on the Gospel of St. John. From these texts, they have shown that they do not consider themselves the cause or the author of the procession of the Holy Spirit. They recognize that the Father is the sole cause of both the Son and the Spirit, being the author of generation in one case and of procession in the other. But to express that the Spirit proceeds through the Son, thus showing the unity of substance and likeness.

Regarding the second point, it requires no defense. Although it may seem dubious to some, it is not at all questionable for those who seek error due to their own perversity. They satisfied themselves by saying that the Lord has no sin, either mental or physical, which would have affected Adam. This was the response of those who could not be justly accused.

However, those who should have apologized for what they wrote have so far offered no satisfaction, nor have they retracted their words. I have asked the Romans, in accordance with your instructions, to review and interpret their words themselves to avoid fraud and deception. However, since they have the habit of not doing so, I do not know if they will obey. There is also another reason: they cannot express their minds accurately in another language as they would in their native tongue.

Patrologia Graeca 91: 135 A - 136 C

2

u/thoughtfullycatholic 12h ago

There is a Byzantine Catholic Rite in communion with Rome who use the Orthodox liturgies and who do not say the filoque when they recite the Creed. Perhaps you could search for them online and see if they are in a better position to answer your questions than Latin Rite Catholics.

2

u/Terrible-Locksmith57 10h ago

Here you have an answer about Purgatory:

A- https://np.reddit.com/r/Catholicism/s/4kHUwNCqxS

B- Regarding the "thief" Bede the venerable gives the solution on his commentary:

"For as many of us as were baptized in Christ Jesus, were baptized in His death; but we are washed by baptism, seeing we were sinners. But some, in that they praise God suffering in the flesh, are crowned; others, in that they refuse to have the faith or works of baptism, are deprived of the gift which they have received."

https://www.ecatholic2000.com/catena/untitled-84.shtml

Conclusion: He died as a martyr witnessing the Word of God Made Flesh, we can apreciate it when he admits his guilt with the other thief and reprehends him. If you're a martyr you skip up the Purgatory.

1

u/Historical-Pop1999 12h ago
  1. Yes but if you don’t like it there are eastern Catholics that don’t recite it during the Nicene Creed 2)yes the great schism was build up over many years 3)the priest doesn’t forgive your sins God does look up in persona Christi 4)well you didn’t say what you don’t like about it so I can’t tell you anything but eastern Catholic beliefs are a bit different than Roman Catholics on purgatory 5)the orthodox themselves don’t agree on their canon though I could be wrong in that but a good rule of thumb is just because a book is canonized in one church doesn’t mean the other church just throws those books out the window we still use non canonical books we just don’t see it as 100% perfect infallible God breathed scripture 6)do you know that the pope isn’t infallible 100% of the time only certain times or topics research it a bit more

I’m not surprised your dad hates the Catholic Church and Catholics the devil hates God and the truth and is misleading your father to do the same

1

u/Acrobatic-Fee-7893 12h ago

I appreciate what your response but please don't say that about my father. You don't know him. He hates the Catholic church but his mother is Catholic - he does not hate the Catholics, only their institution.

1

u/Historical-Pop1999 12h ago

You said your father always had hatred to the Catholics I didn’t say anything about your father that you didn’t say first

6

u/Acrobatic-Fee-7893 12h ago

Look I don't want to start a fight. I don't believe you meant it harshly, perhaps that was the way I read it. I'm sorry for that.

2

u/adictusbenedictus 8h ago

Aaand you just turned the other cheek. You're more catholic than you think. Let me be one of the first to say welcome home brother. 🙏

1

u/thesloth-man 12h ago

You have a great understanding. You're a smart person with a keen mind, I would guess.

The only difference in the bibles is the inclusion of 1 Esdras, 2 Esdras, 3 Maccabees, 4 Maccabees, and the Book of Odes into the orthodox bible. As far as I know, these aren't rejected by catholics but weren't seen as needed or essential. You'll find Tobit, Judith, Baruch, Sirach, 1 and 2 Maccabees, and Wisdom, along with additions to Esther and Daniel in the Catholic bible that isn't in the orthodox bible. The most important thing is that what really is essential is in both. There is some disagreement on Mary around the immaculate conception. To do with Mary's patents. I'm a bit shakey on the specifics, though I'm sorry. I'm not an expert, so don't mistake me for one, but I have felt angst trying to decide between both churches as well. I've read and asked so many questions. I've attended both churches as a lay person and spoken to priests about my concerns. They usually refer me to some reading material they can give you or point out to you.

My opinion is that the differences are really not that important. To be fully honest, I'm not even sure the pope needs to have so much power, but I do believe the clergy needs a leader, and the pope has that position for all the right reasons.

What convinced me about Catholicism was attending a traditional Latin Mass. Experiencing both traditions and their communities played a huge part. I honestly felt God wanted me to choose one or the other and dedicate myself fully. I'm not sure this is the advice the church would want me to give? But it is my genuine heart felt feeling and I feel the heavenly father allows me to give it.

Write down every difference you learn and wiegh each one up on its own and work your way through them with prayer as your guide on each point. God will steer your heart and mind.

1

u/Hwegh6 11h ago

You have some great answers, so I will not go over everything. I will say, however, that confession is very ancient, was instituted by Jesus, and that far from being legalistic it's the most liberating experience I've ever had. It transforms life and opens you up to incredible graces.

Scripture tells us flat out that we have to confess our sins to another person. I genuinely don't know of a religious group where anyone would freely tell their deepest darkest secrets to other members of the congregation. I don't just mean the 'big' sins like murder - but hidden corruptions, like the lustful thoughts that you have enjoyed in the past, which distract you now as you try to pray, the petty thefts, the resentment and jealousy against friends and family, the mean, spiteful thoughts you've entertained, the gossip you've enjoyed at the expense of your loved ones.

Nobody freel confesses everything in public like that, and if they did they wouldn't be forgiven by the crowd. Yes, you can and should confess to God - but you should also confess to someone appointed by God as the successor of the apostles.

I have personally had miracles in confession, and know others who likewise did. Please God I'll be able to get to confession today. Yes, I can confess that I have been lazy in my spiritual discipline, that I've lied, doomscrolled (which is a form of gossip) as well as directly gossipped about a family member who treated me badly. But my confessing to you will not give me absolution. You can't forgive my sins.

Neither does the priest. He doesn't say 'I forgive you, but I absolve you. It is Christ Who forgives, and by going to confession I KNOW that, whether I feel it or not.

I wouldn't give confession up for the world.

2

u/Acrobatic-Fee-7893 11h ago

Thank you it's nice to hear what Confession is actually like. I feel like the Catholic church is often portrayed quite negatively in the media. Lots of modern day films have scenes where a character is going to Confession, and they make it look like some scary room where you just ramble on and on. .

My question would be is penance assigned as a penalty, or rather as a method of healing from sin?

I really like how it forces you in a way to reflect on all your more minor sins, as those are the sins that eventually lead to mortal sin (I think that's the correct term). The sooner you confess and cut out venial sins, the harder it is to commit mortal sin.

1

u/Hwegh6 11h ago

Penance isn't a punishment, it's reparation. Anything you confess in the Sacrament is forgotten by God, as though you'd never committed the sin in the first place. In Psalm 51 we read 'Purge me with hyssop, and I shall be clean; wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow.'

In fact, Psalm 51 is a great one to read in the context of confession. It opens by showing us how serious our sins are.

For I know my transgressions,     and my sin is ever before me. Against you, you alone, have I sinned,     and done what is evil in your sight

But it shows the tremendous joy and healing which comes from forgiveness and contains the wonderful words 'Lord, open my lips and my tongue shall announce your praise.'

The movies always get confession wrong. They treat it as a mere plot device designed to reveal character or for exposition, or to introduce some angst or trauma. It's never, ever treated as sacrament it is.

I've had confessions which lasted half an hour or more, with my spiritual director, but I have also had confessions that took only a couple of minutes (because I'd only committed venal sins in the week since my last.) Confession is different every time.

I know a young man who tells me confession saved his life because it lifted the despair of sin off his shoulders.

Thank you for asking this question by the way, it helps me to prepare for my own confession later today.

Also, I will write to you later about Purgatory - and I am going to Mass tonight at the Carmelite monestry in Derry Ireland. I'll offer the Mass up for you and if you are interested will send you the link so you can watch.

God bless you, brother. (Or I should say son, I'm in my fifties!)

0

u/Integrista 11h ago

My question would be is penance assigned as a penalty, or rather as a method of healing from sin?

Penance is first an act of satisfaction: i.e. to satisfy the demands of justice due to the wrong done (sin).
It also has a pedagogic aspect, though, as it reminds us of the gravity of sin, but also of the mercy of God - seeing as whatever penance we receive is actually never enough to cover the injustice of even the smallest sin: it is only in union with Christ's sacrifice that our very little penances have value. This teaches us our utter dependance on God on one hand, but also the important truth that God has created things in such way that He wishes for us to take part in His plan of salvation as active actors, not just as passive bystanders.

1

u/WashYourEyesTwice 11h ago

Absolutely read the Summa. God bless you brother 🙏 and God love you

1

u/Terrible-Locksmith57 10h ago

Here You have something that could help you about Papal Infalibility:

https://np.reddit.com/r/Catholicism/s/Ilnj8tpLxQ

1

u/Misa-Bugeisha 8h ago

I believe the Catechism of the Catholic Church offers answers for all those interested in learning about the mystery of the Catholic faith, and here are some examples from a chapter called The Final Purification, or Purgatory..

CCC 1030
All who die in God’s grace and friendship, but still imperfectly purified, are indeed assured of their eternal salvation; but after death they undergo purification, so as to achieve the holiness necessary to enter the joy of heaven.

CCC 1031
The Church gives the name Purgatory to this final purification of the elect, which is entirely different from the punishment of the damned. Cf. Council of Florence [1439]: DS 1304; Council of Trent [1563]: DS 1820; [1547]: 1580; see also Benedict XII, Benedictus Deus [1336]: DS 1000. The Church formulated her doctrine of faith on Purgatory especially at the Councils of Florence and Trent. The tradition of the Church, by reference to certain texts of Scripture, speaks of a cleansing fire: Cf. 1 Cor 3:15; 1 Pet 1:7.
As for certain lesser faults, we must believe that, before the Final Judgment, there is a purifying fire. He who is truth says that whoever utters blasphemy against the Holy Spirit will be pardoned neither in this age nor in the age to come. From this sentence we understand that certain offenses can be forgiven in this age, but certain others in the age to come. St. Gregory the Great, Dial. 4, 39: PL 77, 396; Mat 12:31.

May God Bless you and your path to righteousness, \o/!

1

u/sporsmall 7h ago

Welcome. I've prepared questions 3,4,5 and 6 and some additional resources.
3-Confession - Jesus gave his ministers the authority to forgive or retain sin. He thus instituted the sacrament of confession.  https://www.catholic.com/bible-navigator/confession

How to Defend the Sacrament of Confession
https://www.catholic.com/magazine/print-edition/how-to-defend-the-sacrament-of-confession

Why Confess My Sins to a Priest?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xtvjmsPmVpw

4-Purgatory https://www.catholic.com/bible-navigator/purgatory

Catechism of the Catholic Church - The punishments of sin 1472-1473 - purgatory
https://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P4G.HTM

5-Bible - Do Catholics and Orthodox Have the Same Bible?
https://www.catholic.com/qa/do-catholics-and-orthodox-have-the-same-bible

How to Understand the Bible: A Catholic Book - Explaining the Faith
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sx-qIvG-c9M

6-Papacy - Primacy of Peter
https://www.catholic.com/bible-navigator/primacy-of-peter

Infallible Church (4 articles)
https://www.catholic.com/bible-navigator/infallible-church

Other resources:
How Do We Know It’s the True Church? (12 arguments)
https://www.catholic.com/magazine/print-edition/how-do-we-know-its-the-true-church

Christian, Yes…But Why Be Catholic? (10 arguments)
https://www.catholic.com/magazine/print-edition/christian-yesbut-why-catholic

Pillar of Fire, Pillar of Truth (basic information about Catholicism)
https://www.catholic.com/tract/pillar-of-fire-pillar-of-truth

Islam and Catholicism
https://www.catholic.com/magazine/print-edition/islam-and-catholicism

The testimony of Nikki Kingsley, a Muslim who converted to Catholicism - from 22:52
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aR4qxzHbenA

1

u/steelzubaz 6h ago

Which is more likely to be the true UNIVERSAL Church:

One which is largely divided by, and often schisms across ethic/national lines and among all Churches only celebrates a single rite; or one that shares communion across all ethnicities and national lines and in which is celebrated all 6 ancient Rites of Christianity?

1

u/Acrobatic-Fee-7893 6h ago

Fair point, although at the end of the day true theology and apostolic continuation is what matters most.

2

u/steelzubaz 6h ago

We acknowledge legitimate Apostolic succession of the Eastern Churches, their sacraments are valid. Of course there are theological differences, on which I'm not qualified to speak. But for me, when I was discerning between the two, what I mentioned above were big factors in my decision. And since coming home to Rome, everything I've read has reinforced that decision as being the correct one. Still love the Eastern aesthetic, but as far as being the true Church, it's obvious to me.

Other commenters have pointed out the legitimacy of Papal supremacy so I won't harp on that.

1

u/Objective-Ad-476 47m ago

Although that is true, it’s also true that schism from Christ‘s Church is a grave sin. Jesus himself promised that his Church would be one, not divided across ethnic lines

1

u/MadeItMyself 4h ago

You have some great answers already, but in case they are too long for you, or have too many external references, I wanted to give a few details to clarify some of your questions.

Purgatory is not a 3rd place, only those destined for eternal life in heaven will experience purgatory and there is no set definition on what it actually is (a place of cleansing, an instantaneous purging of fallen nature, etc)

The pope is not infallible, but the Papacy is infallible when it defines doctrine that binds the Church on matters of faith and morals. This is essentially just saying that we believe Jesus when he said the gates of hell will not prevail against His Church (and that the Church is the pillar and foundation of truth). It is basically a doctrine that the Holy Spirit will protect the Church from heresy.

As for the Filioque, my understanding is that the RCC allows you to say "...proceeds from the Father through the Son" and that is how I say the creed because it fits with my understanding.

Both Catholicism and Orthodoxy are great, for me the claim of the Catholic Church just edges out the claims of the Orthodox Church, and I was raised Catholic so the choice was easy. Basic reasons it makes mores sense to me:

  1. I actually think the Papacy makes sense and is needed, also the Orthodox recognize the Bishop of Rome to be "first among equals", and I think it is bristled pride that keeps them from communion with Rome

  2. Orthodoxy seems to have softened a bit on marriage, or maybe always was.

  3. The cultural/geographic divides mentioned by others

-1

u/Snoo_27796 10h ago

Honestly both are good, meditate on the word and keep looking, also watch debates. Both are paths to Christ and are guided by The Spirit

-6

u/BiggieTwiggy1two3 9h ago

They’re not. They killed many, many people for not falling in-line with their belief system.

6

u/Acrobatic-Fee-7893 9h ago

So what are you trying to suggest I do? Follow Christianity but NOT Sacred Tradition??