<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: About</title>
	<atom:link href="http://cathedraunitatis.wordpress.com/about/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://cathedraunitatis.wordpress.com</link>
	<description>An Eastern Orthodox Christian Looks at the Church of Rome</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 09 Feb 2009 09:51:19 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: john</title>
		<link>http://cathedraunitatis.wordpress.com/about/#comment-3111</link>
		<dc:creator>john</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Oct 2008 07:03:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-3111</guid>
		<description>Orthodoxy and Catholicism are rthe two true churches inthe worldseparated by a political argument between the pope of rome and patriarch of constantinople.  i&#039;m an orthodox christian who has debated the issue of the churches with a catholic friend for 2 years.  we read theb ooks written by both churches saw the misquotations taken by both churches to show their point of view.  the funny thng is how roem tries to ascribe a special place to it self because peter was its bishop, but they seem to neglect the fact that paul did more work in rome than peter and that peter was the main cause of the ancient churches of jeruslame, antioch, alexandria and then rome where he died.  To say the orthodox are lacking inthe fullness of the truth because we don&#039;t hold the pope as supreme head of the church on earth is false. the church has only one head and that is christ.  one conclusion i came unto is that peter is the archetype of all bishops to claim an exclusive right to him by one church cannot stand. both churches differ int hat the catholics liek to define things while the orthodox leave things to myystic understanding.   Read the history and don&#039;t let the politicvs give you a hateful understanding of either church they both have the fullness of the faith but out of romes actions to make the orthodox submit to the pope it gave it self the negative view alot of the orthodox have.  the church will be one the cup will be one, someday.  the world corrts and as both patriarchs wanted absolute power the church suffered, open your heart and your mind and the truth will be clear.

thank you and good luck on your journey</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Orthodoxy and Catholicism are rthe two true churches inthe worldseparated by a political argument between the pope of rome and patriarch of constantinople.  i&#8217;m an orthodox christian who has debated the issue of the churches with a catholic friend for 2 years.  we read theb ooks written by both churches saw the misquotations taken by both churches to show their point of view.  the funny thng is how roem tries to ascribe a special place to it self because peter was its bishop, but they seem to neglect the fact that paul did more work in rome than peter and that peter was the main cause of the ancient churches of jeruslame, antioch, alexandria and then rome where he died.  To say the orthodox are lacking inthe fullness of the truth because we don&#8217;t hold the pope as supreme head of the church on earth is false. the church has only one head and that is christ.  one conclusion i came unto is that peter is the archetype of all bishops to claim an exclusive right to him by one church cannot stand. both churches differ int hat the catholics liek to define things while the orthodox leave things to myystic understanding.   Read the history and don&#8217;t let the politicvs give you a hateful understanding of either church they both have the fullness of the faith but out of romes actions to make the orthodox submit to the pope it gave it self the negative view alot of the orthodox have.  the church will be one the cup will be one, someday.  the world corrts and as both patriarchs wanted absolute power the church suffered, open your heart and your mind and the truth will be clear.</p>
<p>thank you and good luck on your journey</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Christophorus McAvoy</title>
		<link>http://cathedraunitatis.wordpress.com/about/#comment-3092</link>
		<dc:creator>Christophorus McAvoy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 Feb 2008 23:25:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-3092</guid>
		<description>Dianes comment reminds me of some of my own feelings about being attracted to the Latin Church because it is so large and powerful around the world, much like Wal-mart. However I realize that much of its spread is due to both the colonialism of western europe and the freedom and wealth that western europe had to proselytize throughout the world. The Eastern Churches, except for Russia, were usually too poor and focused on surviving in their own land so that missionary activity was not able to be focused on.

I think more people should read Fr John Romanides work which shows that the many of the western churches problems stem from the corruption by the Frankish Church during the 800&#039;s to 1200&#039;s which had a limited understanding of Christianity as it had so recently adopted it from an oppressed mediterranean roman society who was at there mercy to do their bidding. 

Any emphasis on the Church of Romes strengths must also mention its disadvantages and need to revive it&#039;s most ancient liturgical practices as the norm in order to be fully Orthodox.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dianes comment reminds me of some of my own feelings about being attracted to the Latin Church because it is so large and powerful around the world, much like Wal-mart. However I realize that much of its spread is due to both the colonialism of western europe and the freedom and wealth that western europe had to proselytize throughout the world. The Eastern Churches, except for Russia, were usually too poor and focused on surviving in their own land so that missionary activity was not able to be focused on.</p>
<p>I think more people should read Fr John Romanides work which shows that the many of the western churches problems stem from the corruption by the Frankish Church during the 800&#8217;s to 1200&#8217;s which had a limited understanding of Christianity as it had so recently adopted it from an oppressed mediterranean roman society who was at there mercy to do their bidding. </p>
<p>Any emphasis on the Church of Romes strengths must also mention its disadvantages and need to revive it&#8217;s most ancient liturgical practices as the norm in order to be fully Orthodox.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: dianeski2</title>
		<link>http://cathedraunitatis.wordpress.com/about/#comment-2692</link>
		<dc:creator>dianeski2</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Nov 2007 18:42:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-2692</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;Who cares about which Church has correct historical claims?&lt;/i&gt;

I do. Because God gave me a brain along with a soul. We are not disembodied wraiths, utterly abstracted from the world. We are flesh-and-blood human beings living in the midst of the flux and messiness of human history. 

The Second Person of the Trinity became Man--took on our flesh and blood--in precisely such a context: humanity, history, in all its grit and messiness. The Church, too, must be &quot;incarnate&quot;--in the world while not of it. And this means she must not separate Faith and Reason, Soul and Body, lest she lapse into the error of Docetism.

The Catholic Church, IMHO, is the most fully Incarnational of all the churches and communions. Does she have more than her share of great saints and ascetics, of awesome Eucharistic miracles, weeping icons, incorruptibles, and more? Yes. Does she have numerous orders of cloistered monks and nuns who live in ceaseless prayer? Yes. Does she have holy men and women who adore Christ with their whole beings in sacred solitude? Yes.

But she also has dedicated (and no less Spirit-filled) members who minister to the poorest of the poor in squalid slums all over the globe. She has saintly scholars (I know one, a very holy Benedictine at a local university) and Spirit-led social workers and pious parents. She has people who realize that one must occasionally come down from Mount Tabor in order to feed the hungry, clothe the naked, shelter the homeless, and visit the prisoners...not to mention to preach the Gospel to all nations.

If you want a purely spiritual religion, utterly untouched by the grossness of human flesh or the exigency of human needs, then I suggest you try Buddhism. Christianity cannot escape the Incarnation. And one implication of the Incarnation is that history matters, and so does historical truth, and so does our ability to grasp it.

With all respect and best wishes,

Diane</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>Who cares about which Church has correct historical claims?</i></p>
<p>I do. Because God gave me a brain along with a soul. We are not disembodied wraiths, utterly abstracted from the world. We are flesh-and-blood human beings living in the midst of the flux and messiness of human history. </p>
<p>The Second Person of the Trinity became Man&#8211;took on our flesh and blood&#8211;in precisely such a context: humanity, history, in all its grit and messiness. The Church, too, must be &#8220;incarnate&#8221;&#8211;in the world while not of it. And this means she must not separate Faith and Reason, Soul and Body, lest she lapse into the error of Docetism.</p>
<p>The Catholic Church, IMHO, is the most fully Incarnational of all the churches and communions. Does she have more than her share of great saints and ascetics, of awesome Eucharistic miracles, weeping icons, incorruptibles, and more? Yes. Does she have numerous orders of cloistered monks and nuns who live in ceaseless prayer? Yes. Does she have holy men and women who adore Christ with their whole beings in sacred solitude? Yes.</p>
<p>But she also has dedicated (and no less Spirit-filled) members who minister to the poorest of the poor in squalid slums all over the globe. She has saintly scholars (I know one, a very holy Benedictine at a local university) and Spirit-led social workers and pious parents. She has people who realize that one must occasionally come down from Mount Tabor in order to feed the hungry, clothe the naked, shelter the homeless, and visit the prisoners&#8230;not to mention to preach the Gospel to all nations.</p>
<p>If you want a purely spiritual religion, utterly untouched by the grossness of human flesh or the exigency of human needs, then I suggest you try Buddhism. Christianity cannot escape the Incarnation. And one implication of the Incarnation is that history matters, and so does historical truth, and so does our ability to grasp it.</p>
<p>With all respect and best wishes,</p>
<p>Diane</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andrew P.</title>
		<link>http://cathedraunitatis.wordpress.com/about/#comment-2684</link>
		<dc:creator>Andrew P.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Nov 2007 06:39:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-2684</guid>
		<description>One cannot investigate the &quot;claims of Orthodoxy.&quot;  You have to live it.  It is an ontological matter, not one you can work out with your reason and decide to go with Brand O over Brand R.  The Orthodox Church is the Body and Blood of Christ, evident in the thousands of deified men and women who have transfigured the world, upholding us in their prayers.  The Church consistently creates saints and relics... when people live fully within the Church, they are transfigured.  It is a proven means to the presence of Paradise within the heart of man right here, right now, not in some distant ethereal kingdom.  The Kingdom of Heaven can reside within you.  If you want this, then the Orthodox Church is the place for you.  If you want intellectual certainty, maybe go somewhere else.  

&quot;Deny yourself and follow me.&quot;  Which group consistenly fasts?  Which group produces men who are literally ceaseless prayer?  Which group has men whose faces glow like Christ on Mount Tabor, or the like the Prophet Moses?  Which group has men who see the Uncreated Light of God?  Which group converses with the Apostles, and values her Liturgy?  Which group has a blossoming revival of monasticism, &quot;vocations&quot; to the priesthood, and conversion?  

Who cares about which Church has correct historical claims?   This is not the problem of man.  The problem of man is the division between created and uncreated, man and woman, mind and heart, soul and body, life and death, etc... the problem is Death!  Sin!  And the Orthodox Church has a way of fixing all of this, no matter what station of life you are in.  There are saints walking among us today, and you have the possibility of becoming one.  And sanctity is something ontological, not psychological or some predestined merit.

If you submit your logic to the Church, and try to gain a drop of humility in living the ascetical-sacramental life in obedience to a spiritual father through prayer, fasting, almsgiving, pilgrimage, and frequent confession and communion, you will see much fruit.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>One cannot investigate the &#8220;claims of Orthodoxy.&#8221;  You have to live it.  It is an ontological matter, not one you can work out with your reason and decide to go with Brand O over Brand R.  The Orthodox Church is the Body and Blood of Christ, evident in the thousands of deified men and women who have transfigured the world, upholding us in their prayers.  The Church consistently creates saints and relics&#8230; when people live fully within the Church, they are transfigured.  It is a proven means to the presence of Paradise within the heart of man right here, right now, not in some distant ethereal kingdom.  The Kingdom of Heaven can reside within you.  If you want this, then the Orthodox Church is the place for you.  If you want intellectual certainty, maybe go somewhere else.  </p>
<p>&#8220;Deny yourself and follow me.&#8221;  Which group consistenly fasts?  Which group produces men who are literally ceaseless prayer?  Which group has men whose faces glow like Christ on Mount Tabor, or the like the Prophet Moses?  Which group has men who see the Uncreated Light of God?  Which group converses with the Apostles, and values her Liturgy?  Which group has a blossoming revival of monasticism, &#8220;vocations&#8221; to the priesthood, and conversion?  </p>
<p>Who cares about which Church has correct historical claims?   This is not the problem of man.  The problem of man is the division between created and uncreated, man and woman, mind and heart, soul and body, life and death, etc&#8230; the problem is Death!  Sin!  And the Orthodox Church has a way of fixing all of this, no matter what station of life you are in.  There are saints walking among us today, and you have the possibility of becoming one.  And sanctity is something ontological, not psychological or some predestined merit.</p>
<p>If you submit your logic to the Church, and try to gain a drop of humility in living the ascetical-sacramental life in obedience to a spiritual father through prayer, fasting, almsgiving, pilgrimage, and frequent confession and communion, you will see much fruit.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pilgrim</title>
		<link>http://cathedraunitatis.wordpress.com/about/#comment-2667</link>
		<dc:creator>Pilgrim</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 25 Nov 2007 04:08:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-2667</guid>
		<description>cathedraunitatis,
Thank you for your comments. At this point in time (despite my love of Catholic culture-music, architecture etc) I have no intentions of converting to the RCC for two main reasons, 

1.) I do not yet know enough about her claims-it has only been little more than a year since I began my search into historic Christianity-into things deeper than &quot;me, my Bible, and no creed but Christ&quot;-in this regard I am an infant. I am a musician by trade, and had the good fortune to receive an education at a Conservatory. It certainly would seem odd if after a year of Piano class a singer decided he had the goods on some centuries old disagreement about trill technique.

2.) My wife has found a spiritual home in our local OCA parish. God led us to convert at the same time to Orthodoxy, and I have no doubt that should He choose, he can change my wife&#039;s and my heart and mind in unison as He has before. 

Concerning no.1, I hope that I am thinking about this issue correctly. I tend to see things through a very black/white lense (I am 25, I have been told that for better or worse things tend to gray as one ages), a paradigm that could lead one to the probably far too simplistic conclusion that if
the RCC is right, Orthodoxy is wrong. Like the line &#039;East is East and West is West and never the twain shall meet&#039;- as if none of the two churches&#039; ideas, writings,or theology overlapped.  We are all shaped by our experiences, and while I owe a lot to my Baptistic upbringing, I think that this type of overly simplified-us vs. them-type of thinking I have most likely acquired from my youth is not the best approach to this issue as a whole.

Thoughts?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>cathedraunitatis,<br />
Thank you for your comments. At this point in time (despite my love of Catholic culture-music, architecture etc) I have no intentions of converting to the RCC for two main reasons, </p>
<p>1.) I do not yet know enough about her claims-it has only been little more than a year since I began my search into historic Christianity-into things deeper than &#8220;me, my Bible, and no creed but Christ&#8221;-in this regard I am an infant. I am a musician by trade, and had the good fortune to receive an education at a Conservatory. It certainly would seem odd if after a year of Piano class a singer decided he had the goods on some centuries old disagreement about trill technique.</p>
<p>2.) My wife has found a spiritual home in our local OCA parish. God led us to convert at the same time to Orthodoxy, and I have no doubt that should He choose, he can change my wife&#8217;s and my heart and mind in unison as He has before. </p>
<p>Concerning no.1, I hope that I am thinking about this issue correctly. I tend to see things through a very black/white lense (I am 25, I have been told that for better or worse things tend to gray as one ages), a paradigm that could lead one to the probably far too simplistic conclusion that if<br />
the RCC is right, Orthodoxy is wrong. Like the line &#8216;East is East and West is West and never the twain shall meet&#8217;- as if none of the two churches&#8217; ideas, writings,or theology overlapped.  We are all shaped by our experiences, and while I owe a lot to my Baptistic upbringing, I think that this type of overly simplified-us vs. them-type of thinking I have most likely acquired from my youth is not the best approach to this issue as a whole.</p>
<p>Thoughts?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Fr Paul</title>
		<link>http://cathedraunitatis.wordpress.com/about/#comment-2662</link>
		<dc:creator>Fr Paul</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 Nov 2007 20:29:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-2662</guid>
		<description>You are lucky to know so many Orthodox of an irenical disposition! Where I am there are not so many...establishing a dialogue is not so easy.
Waiting for your e-mail my friend.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You are lucky to know so many Orthodox of an irenical disposition! Where I am there are not so many&#8230;establishing a dialogue is not so easy.<br />
Waiting for your e-mail my friend.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: nationaltribune</title>
		<link>http://cathedraunitatis.wordpress.com/about/#comment-2656</link>
		<dc:creator>nationaltribune</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 Nov 2007 05:56:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-2656</guid>
		<description>P.S.  CU--I for one am very glad you have created this blog. BTW, have you seen Rusty&#039;s blog at becominghinged.wordpress.com ? It considers some of the same issues thrashed out here.

Diane</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>P.S.  CU&#8211;I for one am very glad you have created this blog. BTW, have you seen Rusty&#8217;s blog at becominghinged.wordpress.com ? It considers some of the same issues thrashed out here.</p>
<p>Diane</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: nationaltribune</title>
		<link>http://cathedraunitatis.wordpress.com/about/#comment-2655</link>
		<dc:creator>nationaltribune</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 Nov 2007 05:54:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-2655</guid>
		<description>CU:  While it is true that our Church&#039;s recent official focus has been more on corporate reunion than on individual conversion, we certainly do not turn away Orthodox who wish to embrace the fullness of the faith in Catholicism.

Nor do we discourage such searches as yours.

&lt;i&gt;Lumen Gentium&lt;/i&gt; says all are bound to belong to the Catholic Church. Anything short of the fullness is...well, short of the fullness. Perhaps just the tiniest tad short of the fullness, but still...short of the fullness. :)

I do not mean this non-irenically, much less as proselytism (a loaded term, often undefined). It&#039;s just that...I think we Catholics have ourselves become confused about our own identity in recent years. We hear all these conflicting things, and we end up hopelessly confused re ecumenism vs. apologetics or re the proper way to respond to separated brethren seeking fullness of truth. Our current pope is seeking to restore to us a sense of Catholic identity--and part of that entails the renewed recognition that theCatholic Church &lt;i&gt;is&lt;/i&gt; the One Church possessing the fullness of the faith...and that we ought to pray for all to come into that fullness, just as we used to years ago.  

Sorry for rambling, again....

God bless!

Diane</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>CU:  While it is true that our Church&#8217;s recent official focus has been more on corporate reunion than on individual conversion, we certainly do not turn away Orthodox who wish to embrace the fullness of the faith in Catholicism.</p>
<p>Nor do we discourage such searches as yours.</p>
<p><i>Lumen Gentium</i> says all are bound to belong to the Catholic Church. Anything short of the fullness is&#8230;well, short of the fullness. Perhaps just the tiniest tad short of the fullness, but still&#8230;short of the fullness. <img src='http://s.wordpress.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>I do not mean this non-irenically, much less as proselytism (a loaded term, often undefined). It&#8217;s just that&#8230;I think we Catholics have ourselves become confused about our own identity in recent years. We hear all these conflicting things, and we end up hopelessly confused re ecumenism vs. apologetics or re the proper way to respond to separated brethren seeking fullness of truth. Our current pope is seeking to restore to us a sense of Catholic identity&#8211;and part of that entails the renewed recognition that theCatholic Church <i>is</i> the One Church possessing the fullness of the faith&#8230;and that we ought to pray for all to come into that fullness, just as we used to years ago.  </p>
<p>Sorry for rambling, again&#8230;.</p>
<p>God bless!</p>
<p>Diane</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: cathedraunitatis</title>
		<link>http://cathedraunitatis.wordpress.com/about/#comment-2654</link>
		<dc:creator>cathedraunitatis</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 Nov 2007 00:21:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-2654</guid>
		<description>Fr Paul –

I will drop you an e-mail.

Pilgrim –

Thanks for your comment. I&#039;ll break my blog fast to offer a few rambling thoughts.

I&#039;m certainly not counseling a consideration of Catholicism over Orthodoxy. (To tell the truth, at this point, I regret having started this blog from the perspective of my own personal convictions and consideration of conversion.) But I think it&#039;s helpful to look into both, and to give both a fair hearing (and I mean that for Protestants who are looking primarily at Catholicism as well). At the very least, a convert to Orthodoxy from Protestantism should have a more sympathetic understanding of Catholicism, and a more nuanced understanding of Rome and the Western Church than the polemical books, tracts and blogs will be able to provide (and the reverse is true: don&#039;t just rely on Catholic polemics about Orthodoxy).

Very early on in my reconsideration of Catholic-Orthodox issues, a very wise Catholic priest gave me this advice: As an Orthodox Christian, &quot;Do not become Catholic unless you believe it is your moral duty to do so.&quot; He also pointed out that the Catholic Church does not endorse proselytizing Orthodox individuals or groups of Orthodox Christians. Her policy, especially since Vatican II, has been to deal with Orthodoxy corporately, hoping, praying and working for the eventual reunion of the Churches. 

And I know plenty of Orthodox Christians (converts and cradle; bishops, clergy and laity; scholars and non-scholars; of every jurisdiction) who have have a very irenic and sympathetic point-of-view towards Catholicism (may their tribe increase). The fact that I&#039;m Orthodox does not mean that I can&#039;t appreciate and benefit in some way from the riches of the Roman Catholic tradition (St. Thomas, Palestrina, Chesterton among many, many other wonderful things). And, of course, I don&#039;t think that Eastern Orthodoxy is any less rich than Catholicism in beauty, genius, and spiritual riches.

It&#039;s certainly not my place to offer you any counsel, as I am not your spiritual father. But as someone in your boat and perhaps a little further along in my consideration of these matters, I would recommend that you exercise extreme caution about leaving Orthodoxy and joining Catholicism. And take lots, and lots, and lots of time. Please don&#039;t do anything hasty! (That&#039;s an excellent bit of advice that&#039;s been given to me over and over by both Orthodox and Catholic pastors.)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Fr Paul –</p>
<p>I will drop you an e-mail.</p>
<p>Pilgrim –</p>
<p>Thanks for your comment. I&#8217;ll break my blog fast to offer a few rambling thoughts.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m certainly not counseling a consideration of Catholicism over Orthodoxy. (To tell the truth, at this point, I regret having started this blog from the perspective of my own personal convictions and consideration of conversion.) But I think it&#8217;s helpful to look into both, and to give both a fair hearing (and I mean that for Protestants who are looking primarily at Catholicism as well). At the very least, a convert to Orthodoxy from Protestantism should have a more sympathetic understanding of Catholicism, and a more nuanced understanding of Rome and the Western Church than the polemical books, tracts and blogs will be able to provide (and the reverse is true: don&#8217;t just rely on Catholic polemics about Orthodoxy).</p>
<p>Very early on in my reconsideration of Catholic-Orthodox issues, a very wise Catholic priest gave me this advice: As an Orthodox Christian, &#8220;Do not become Catholic unless you believe it is your moral duty to do so.&#8221; He also pointed out that the Catholic Church does not endorse proselytizing Orthodox individuals or groups of Orthodox Christians. Her policy, especially since Vatican II, has been to deal with Orthodoxy corporately, hoping, praying and working for the eventual reunion of the Churches. </p>
<p>And I know plenty of Orthodox Christians (converts and cradle; bishops, clergy and laity; scholars and non-scholars; of every jurisdiction) who have have a very irenic and sympathetic point-of-view towards Catholicism (may their tribe increase). The fact that I&#8217;m Orthodox does not mean that I can&#8217;t appreciate and benefit in some way from the riches of the Roman Catholic tradition (St. Thomas, Palestrina, Chesterton among many, many other wonderful things). And, of course, I don&#8217;t think that Eastern Orthodoxy is any less rich than Catholicism in beauty, genius, and spiritual riches.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s certainly not my place to offer you any counsel, as I am not your spiritual father. But as someone in your boat and perhaps a little further along in my consideration of these matters, I would recommend that you exercise extreme caution about leaving Orthodoxy and joining Catholicism. And take lots, and lots, and lots of time. Please don&#8217;t do anything hasty! (That&#8217;s an excellent bit of advice that&#8217;s been given to me over and over by both Orthodox and Catholic pastors.)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pilgrim</title>
		<link>http://cathedraunitatis.wordpress.com/about/#comment-2652</link>
		<dc:creator>Pilgrim</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Nov 2007 23:47:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-2652</guid>
		<description>cathedraunitatis,
I appreciate your blog-helpful and also (much to my wife&#039;s chagrin) a great source of rabbit-trails! I am a recent convert to Orthodoxy from Protestantism (Methodist, &#039;Non-Denom.&#039;-basically baptist) and feel that I am guilty of something you referred to in an earlier post, namely, protestants that jump the Bosphorus without giving a glance to Rome. I definitely have my anti-Rome baggage given to me in childhood, and am only now attempting to consider the RCC with an objective mind.  The likes of a St. Thomas, Palestrina, and G.K. Chesterton make Rome hard to resist.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>cathedraunitatis,<br />
I appreciate your blog-helpful and also (much to my wife&#8217;s chagrin) a great source of rabbit-trails! I am a recent convert to Orthodoxy from Protestantism (Methodist, &#8216;Non-Denom.&#8217;-basically baptist) and feel that I am guilty of something you referred to in an earlier post, namely, protestants that jump the Bosphorus without giving a glance to Rome. I definitely have my anti-Rome baggage given to me in childhood, and am only now attempting to consider the RCC with an objective mind.  The likes of a St. Thomas, Palestrina, and G.K. Chesterton make Rome hard to resist.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
