Survivalist Forum banner

1 - 20 of 148 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,003 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
What is your (Catholic folks here) opinion about this true history of the Catholic Church genesis.

Starting minute 21:30 but worth looking from the beginning.

Orthodox Christianity: Introducing the Frankish Papacy

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,214 Posts
The Roman Church was around a long time before Christ. Where do you think all the Pagan priests went when the New Guy showed up in Rome and started making inroads?
They was already in the business, and had the tooling to ramp up and 'spread the word....".
 

·
Totus tuus
Joined
·
979 Posts
While I have not watched/listened to the entire video, I can tell you that this is from a biased perspective. The woman in the video states that a catholic identity was forced upon an essentially Pagan kingdom - eventually called the Holy Roman Empire. This is not backed up with facts. Another interpretation is that the Franks, and other barbarian tribes, were converted to Christianity, and while they were initially imperfect Christians, nevertheless, they became part of the Church. If you have read anything about the kings of Wessex and their piety, or of the piety of France in the medieval period, then you would know that their faith was real. If you haven't read anything about these historical truths, then you are ignorant of Western history.
 

·
I love this *****
Joined
·
33,879 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,818 Posts
Uh ... you snowflakes are in the wrong sub-forum. You need to go here with your tripe:

Controversial News and Alternative Politics
The conspiracy theory section​
 

·
I love this *****
Joined
·
33,879 Posts
Uh ... you snowflakes are in the wrong sub-forum. You need to go here with your tripe:
Controversial News and Alternative Politics
The conspiracy theory section​

Why would I want to go there when right here is just fine? :D::thumb:
 
  • Like
Reactions: vja4Him

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,003 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
While I have not watched/listened to the entire video, I can tell you that this is from a biased perspective. The woman in the video states that a catholic identity was forced upon an essentially Pagan kingdom - eventually called the Holy Roman Empire. This is not backed up with facts. Another interpretation is that the Franks, and other barbarian tribes, were converted to Christianity, and while they were initially imperfect Christians, nevertheless, they became part of the Church. If you have read anything about the kings of Wessex and their piety, or of the piety of France in the medieval period, then you would know that their faith was real. If you haven't read anything about these historical truths, then you are ignorant of Western history.
History is history. If you would look intently at the historic part of the video you will find that many things there explain the errors of the Catholic Church throughout time. But it is OK if you want to play defensive. Not all look for the truth.

Nobody is questioning the piety of the Catholic Church at large but its genesis explains its mistakes. And if you want to learn from the mistakes so that you do not carry on with the same mistakes then you need to look at the TRUTH.

You Catholics say you want to get back with the Orthodox. For that you need to go back to the Original Creed. This video stipulates clearly why the Catholic Church moved away from the Original Creed and also in some measure why it might never come back. Whoever wants to be saved looks at the Truth and is not scared of the Truth. Whoever wants to just belong to whatever, becomes defensive when the truth is called out about their choice.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,214 Posts
Uh ... you snowflakes are in the wrong sub-forum. You need to go here with your tripe:

Controversial News and Alternative Politics
The conspiracy theory section​
Sorry you think it's tripe, because that is the way it happened. And if you don't see the good that came of recycling pagans into doing God's work, then that beam in your eye must be a big 'un....
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
570 Posts
The Roman Church was around a long time before Christ. Where do you think all the Pagan priests went when the New Guy showed up in Rome and started making inroads?
They was already in the business, and had the tooling to ramp up and 'spread the word....".
So true...heard it referenced many times as "baptized paganism", but I have to disagree somewhat since they can't even get baptism correct! :D:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,003 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
Also... I see that the video was made by an ex-Catholic (and even ex-Protestant) and it makes me think that finally in the West the correct history will be taught one day. We Orthodox know history and appreciate its value. We already know why the Catholic Church removed itself from the Ancient Church and acted aggressively throughout history. Maybe its time for the Westerners to learn it too. Look at this video many times and you will get details that are critical.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,214 Posts
So true...heard it referenced many times as "baptized paganism", but I have to disagree somewhat since they can't even get baptism correct! :D:
Hey, they're doing the best that they can. But when a Church follows its pagan roots into error, then it ain't doing the job the Boss put it here to do. And they'll hear about it when He comes back.
 

·
Totus tuus
Joined
·
979 Posts
cat_1978, Why are you on the warpath against Catholics these days? Lately I think you've done all you could to cast us as errant, lacking the Holy Spirit, following false shepherds, and being entirely in the wrong for the division between our churches. I don't know where this is coming from. A year ago, we had a good discussion over the schizm and its causes. I felt then that we had achieved some understanding and some respect for one another. Now I feel that every time you post it's to damn the Catholic Church. What happened?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,003 Posts
Discussion Starter #15
cat_1978, Why are you on the warpath against Catholics these days? Lately I think you've done all you could to cast us as errant, lacking the Holy Spirit, following false shepherds, and being entirely in the wrong for the division between our churches. I don't know where this is coming from. A year ago, we had a good discussion over the schizm and its causes. I felt then that we had achieved some understanding and some respect for one another. Now I feel that every time you post it's to damn the Catholic Church. What happened?
I post only Truth. You could take the video arguments and discuss them, instead you prefer to run and hide from them. But this is not an individual "fight". This is Truth shown to all the eyes and ears to see how things started and to understand why they developed the way they did. No warpath. Truth path.

I pity the minds and souls that hide form the Truth. I don't hate or go "against" them, I just pity them. If you will understand the beauty of STAYING in Truth you will not feel attacked but try to see if the video shows truth. And if it doesn't you are in a better position than before, stronger in your Faith.

Do not listen to people like Trogshak. I'm afraid they chose an institution and not Christ. I did not chose the Orthodox Church. But I found Christ resides there in fullness. That is what I am into, not a Church even if it is Traditional.

The Orthodox Church kept Christ and its Sacraments. It did not become an institution but a Gate towards God. To each his own. Soon if you are truly a Truth Seeker you will understand where Catholic Church goes wrong. And it is deep, unfortunately.

My advice to you is BE ALIVE, and if you are already, STAY ALIVE. Don't become stone.
 

·
Totus tuus
Joined
·
979 Posts
Normally we look for truth about history from real historians. Scholars who have the credentials and have published in scholarly journals, or who have authored respected works of history. This person does not have a background in history to make the claims she does. And in fact, several Orthodox people are surprised by some of her claims and interpretations. Here's a small sampling. http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php?topic=71018.0
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,003 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
Normally we look for truth about history from real historians. Scholars who have the credentials and have published in scholarly journals, or who have authored respected works of history. This person does not have a background in history to make the claims she does. And in fact, several Orthodox people are surprised by some of her claims and interpretations. Here's a small sampling. http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php?topic=71018.0
The true reason I put the video out there is because this is the general idea and historic view of the Orthodox Church at large about the Genesis of the Roman Catholic Church. My whole life I new only this History and I gave you a taste of what True Orthodox Knows and Believes based on historical facts and theological data. Take it or leave it but THIS is not fringe in Orthodoxy. It is the norm.

Again... this is about the Genesis of the Roman Catholic Church, not a judgement about Popes or believers of this Church. The true genesis also give the solution for the unity of the Two Traditional Churches.
 

·
Totus tuus
Joined
·
979 Posts
If the Roman Catholic Church had been "invented" as Judith Irene Matta states, by Charlemagne, then what existed before the reign of Charlemagne AD 797 - 814? She claims that Charlemagne had all the Orthodox clergy killed in the West and replaced with his warriors - who he made "bishops." The truth is that the Latin Church under the Pope and his bishops sent missionaries throughout Europe and Christianized the land. These great Saints included men such as Benedict (480-547), Francis, Bernard of Clairvaux, Alban, Dominic and others. While there is truth to the assertion that some bishops were in fact warriors, Matta's "history" generalizes that fact to ALL Western (Latin) bishops. That certainly was not the policy of the Popes. In fact it was a phenomenon which the Popes fought against and which eventually resulted in the imposition of celibacy on the clergy.

It also brings up a logical question. If all bishops had been appointed from the warrior ranks by Charlemagne, then why would the Church councils up until and during the time of Charlemagne and after include these so called "warrior bishops" of the West as equals in Ecumenical Councils? Could it be that they were actually acknowledged by the East as real bishops?

Why also did the East and West Churches acknowledge the primacy of the Pope? While this became a point of contention, it was a common truth in the worldwide Church until the late Middle ages.

Judith Irene Matta's explanation of "the true origin of the Roman Catholic Church" does not make sense with what is known factually about early Church and European history. If this is truly what is held to be truth by the average Orthodox, then I'm afraid the average Orthodox Christian is very ignorant of real European and Roman Catholic Church history.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,003 Posts
Discussion Starter #20
If the Roman Catholic Church had been "invented" as Judith Irene Matta states, by Charlemagne, then what existed before the reign of Charlemagne AD 797 - 814? She claims that Charlemagne had all the Orthodox clergy killed in the West and replaced with his warriors - who he made "bishops." The truth is that the Latin Church under the Pope and his bishops sent missionaries throughout Europe and Christianized the land. These great Saints included men such as Benedict (480-547), Francis, Bernard of Clairvaux, Alban, Dominic and others. While there is truth to the assertion that some bishops were in fact warriors, Matta's "history" generalizes that fact to ALL Western (Latin) bishops. That certainly was not the policy of the Popes. In fact it was a phenomenon which the Popes fought against and which eventually resulted in the imposition of celibacy on the clergy. The Sack of Constantinople was pivotal in the plans of the Catholic Church.

It also brings up a logical question. If all bishops had been appointed from the warrior ranks by Charlemagne, then why would the Church councils up until and during the time of Charlemagne and after include these so called "warrior bishops" of the West as equals in Ecumenical Councils? Could it be that they were actually acknowledged by the East as real bishops?

Why also did the East and West Churches acknowledge the primacy of the Pope? While this became a point of contention, it was a common truth in the worldwide Church until the late Middle ages.

Judith Irene Matta's explanation of "the true origin of the Roman Catholic Church" does not make sense with what is known factually about early Church and European history. If this is truly what is held to be truth by the average Orthodox, then I'm afraid the average Orthodox Christian is very ignorant of real European and Roman Catholic Church history.

You are throwing percentages where you should look at the policy at large.

Nobody denies that the Frankish Popes used religion to conquer as much as they could from the known world at the time. Were all Bishop soldiers? Probably not. Were all bishops appointees of the Frankish Papality? Yes they were. The last Ecumenical Council was held in 787 AD. These were times where no Internet and fast daily analysis existed to convey the true magnitude of what happened in the West under Charlemagne. Already the Christian nations were attacked by Muslims so they were paying attention to that. So the Council did not get into successions and politics of the era. But soon after we see that the Rome Bishop changed its attitude vs. its brethren and it was a long journey of a few hundred years until total dissolution of brotherhood.

We see how the Frankish Popes were more interested in conquering than in spreading the word of God. We see that after the split in 1054 AD a few hundreds years passes before the West started to recognize the illegitimacy of the Popes and their ruling class (Bishops and leaders of the Monastic Orders) in spreading the Word (they were spreading false teachings since a while now). This didn't happened in the East. Nobody questioned the clergy in the East because they were just administering the religion there (without much theological novelties) not the politics. We see how the Roman Catholic Church made war with its own subjects (Protestants) and went to make war against other nations as well (America) for gold and vain glory. The Word was their tool not their goal. Why the Roman Catholic Church wanted to conquer the Orthodox lands? Lets not forget that part of history where Hungarian Catholics brought down with big guns Monasteries in Transylvania and Poland tried to annex Russian lands. Where Orthodox not Christians already? Where they in need of the Word?

The whole rational of the Roman Catholic Church was to spread its teachings about the Word and use the Word to create a very centralized institution under a great ruling figure (like the Communist Party and its Dear, Great leader). Why? There is no Vicar of Christ, there are the Apostles and their Church that they created TOGETHER in colloquially. Where is that Church now? Still lives in the Orthodox Church. What is the Catholic Church? An institution under a made up ruler of ALL Christianity taking the place of Jesus.

We do not generalize about bishops and believers and even theologians. We look at the whole picture and the snapshot is revealing. Today the Catholic Church battles the same errors they made since the beginning, errors that will not be fixed until they repair from the root. Renounce the unilateral attitude, come back to true colloquially and start over from the ONLY Creed that the Whole Church only had. After that things can start towards a path of healing for the Catholics.
 
1 - 20 of 148 Posts
Top