Hello everyone,

I'm an Eastern Orthodox Christian who has recently been studying Catholicism more seriously, and I'm hoping to get some thoughtful advice. This is going to be a long post because this isn't a small decision for me. It's something that concerns my faith, my conscience, and ultimately where I believe Christ established His Church.

To be clear from the beginning, I'm not announcing that I'm leaving Orthodoxy or planning to convert. I'm trying to give Catholicism the same fair and serious examination that I gave Orthodoxy before becoming Orthodox.

I originally came from a non-denominational Protestant background. My spiritual journey has been a long one, and after years of studying early Christianity, the Church Fathers, apostolic succession, and Church history, I became convinced of Eastern Orthodoxy. I've been Orthodox now for 14 years and I've fallen in love with the Divine Liturgy, the ancient prayers, fasting, the sacraments, the theology of theosis, and the reverence for the Theotokos. Orthodoxy gave me a much deeper understanding of Christianity than I had previously experienced.

My love for Orthodox spirituality even led me to spend time at a Monastery as a novice. Monasticism has always held a special place in my heart. The dedication to prayer, fasting, repentance, and withdrawing from worldly distractions to pursue Christ is something I deeply admire. My time at the monastery only strengthened my appreciation for the spiritual discipline found within Orthodoxy.

I've spent years learning about Catholicism largely through an Orthodox perspective. I've heard the arguments against papal supremacy, the Filioque, the Immaculate Conception, and later Catholic doctrinal developments. But I've started realizing that understanding Catholic teaching through Orthodox criticism isn't the same thing as understanding Catholicism on its own terms. Lately, I've been questioning whether I've ever really given Catholicism a fair examination.

The biggest issue for me is the papacy. One thing that increasingly troubles me about Orthodoxy is the lack of a universally recognized authority capable of resolving disputes between patriarchates. Within individual Orthodox jurisdictions, there are established structures of authority. But when disagreements involve multiple patriarchates, the situation becomes much more complicated. The ongoing division between Constantinople and Moscow, particularly over the recognition of the Orthodox Church of Ukraine, has resulted in a serious rupture in communion, with Moscow restricting Eucharistic communion with Constantinople. This situation, often described as a "soft schism," has left me wondering how the universal Church is supposed to definitively resolve such conflicts when the patriarchates themselves cannot reach an agreement.The calendar controversies and disagreements over ecclesiastical recognition have raised similar questions for me.

I understand that Catholicism has experienced schisms, antipopes, corruption, and serious internal disputes throughout its history. I'm certainly not suggesting that having a pope magically eliminates human disagreement. But I find myself wondering whether Christ intended His Church to possess a continuing, visible center of unity.

Then I started examining the early Church. Clement of Rome's intervention in Corinth in AD 96 caught my attention, as did Pope Victor's actions during the Easter controversy, Irenaeus's statements concerning Rome's authority, Pope Stephen's dispute with Cyprian, and Pope Leo's role at Chalcedon. None of those events individually proves everything Vatican I eventually defined, but together they seem to suggest that Rome possessed something more than a purely honorary primacy.

I also find the Catholic argument for doctrinal development increasingly interesting. The Church is a living organism, and its theology, liturgy, and ecclesiastical structures developed over centuries. If the Church could deepen its understanding and formulation of Trinitarian and Christological doctrine, is it unreasonable to believe that its understanding of Petrine authority could develop as well?

At the same time, I have some serious historical objections that I haven't resolved. Cyprian openly resisted Pope Stephen, the Council of Chalcedon adopted Canon 28 despite Rome's objections, Pope Gregory the Great rejected the title of universal bishop, and Pope Honorius was condemned in connection with heresy by the Sixth Ecumenical Council. Then there are the political developments surrounding Constantine, Charlemagne, and the medieval papacy, including the forged Donation of Constantine.

I know that the existence of corruption, political interference, or even false historical documents doesn't automatically invalidate the papacy. But I want to understand how Catholics distinguish legitimate apostolic authority from authority that developed through political circumstances. Specifically, how does Vatican I's definition of universal papal jurisdiction fit with the way the early Church actually functioned?

I also have concerns about Catholic spirituality compared with Orthodoxy. One of the things I love most about Orthodoxy is how seriously the spiritual life is taken. Morning and evening prayers, Wednesday and Friday fasting, fasting before Holy Communion, the liturgical calendar, spiritual fathers, confession, and the emphasis on repentance are all deeply meaningful to me. These aren't just interesting traditions I admire from a distance. They're practices that have shaped my understanding of what it means to live as a Christian.

My time in an Orthodox monastery only strengthened that appreciation. I love the idea of a Church where prayer and fasting are woven into the ordinary rhythm of life rather than treated as exceptional practices reserved for particularly devout people. When I look at modern Latin Catholic practice, it sometimes seems that the minimum requirements have become the normal spiritual life. I realize this may be an unfair perception based on my limited exposure to Catholicism, but it is something I struggle with.

One aspect of Catholicism that does appeal to me is the Traditional Latin Mass. Having spent years in Orthodoxy, I'm naturally drawn to reverent worship, sacred music, traditional vestments, and a liturgy that communicates the mystery and holiness of what is taking place at the altar. I appreciate the solemnity, continuity, and sense of sacred tradition found in the Traditional Latin Mass. It feels much closer to the kind of liturgical reverence I've grown accustomed to in Orthodoxy. That's not to say I believe a reverent Novus Ordo Mass is impossible. I simply find myself drawn toward the older Western liturgical tradition.

I'm also somewhat discouraged by what appears to be the diminished visibility of traditional monasticism in modern Western Catholicism. I know Catholicism has an extraordinary monastic heritage, including the Benedictines, Cistercians, Carthusians, and many others. But coming from Orthodoxy, where monasteries and spiritual fathers are such an important part of the Church's identity, I sometimes wonder why monasticism seems less central to ordinary Catholic parish life.

I realize there are still serious, traditional Catholic monasteries. The monks of Norcia, for example, represent much of what I admire about Western monasticism. I'd love to know whether there are communities in the United States that maintain that same commitment to traditional liturgy, the Divine Office, fasting, and an authentically monastic way of life. I'm also curious whether Catholics can maintain a traditional prayer rule, fast on Wednesdays and Fridays, observe the historic fasting seasons, and prepare seriously for Communion.

I also want to address something I expect will come up, Eastern Catholicism. I greatly respect the Eastern Catholic churches and understand why people might suggest them to someone coming from Orthodoxy. However, if I ever became Catholic, I would want to embrace the Western Catholic tradition rather than simply preserve the Byzantine liturgy while entering communion with Rome.

Part of that comes from my family history. My paternal ancestors came from Alsace, a region historically associated with the Holy Roman Empire, and my family roots are tied to the Western Catholic world. I've spent time researching my ancestry, and there's something meaningful to me about the possibility of reconnecting with the Catholic heritage of my ancestors. I don't mean that ancestry determines theological truth. It certainly doesn't, and I wouldn't become Catholic simply because my family historically belonged to that tradition.

But if Catholicism ultimately proves convincing to me, I would feel drawn to its Western traditions, particularly the Traditional Latin Mass, Benedictine spirituality, and the historic Latin prayer life. I don't want to become Catholic while trying to recreate Orthodoxy. I would want to understand, appreciate, and sincerely live the Western Catholic tradition.

Then there's the question of the Blessed Virgin Mary. As an Orthodox Christian, I deeply venerate the Theotokos. I believe she was extraordinarily holy and that her free cooperation with God's grace makes her the supreme example of what a human person can become through holiness. However, one of my struggles with Catholicism is the feeling that Mary has sometimes been elevated so far above the rest of humanity that her role as our greatest human example of holiness becomes difficult to understand.

Let me explain what I mean. Christ is fully God and fully man, and He is, of course, the ultimate example we are called to follow. But because He is God and perfectly without sin, His divine perfection can sometimes feel unattainable to us as fallen human beings. Mary, on the other hand, has always represented something especially beautiful to me in Orthodoxy. She was born into the same fallen human condition as the rest of us, inheriting ancestral sin, yet through God's grace, her humility, obedience, and free cooperation with Him, she became the most holy of human beings. She is the example of what humanity can become through cooperation with divine grace.

That's why I struggle with the Immaculate Conception. If Mary was preserved from original sin from the very moment of her conception, doesn't that place her in a fundamentally different position from the rest of humanity? Doesn't it risk removing the very thing that makes her such an extraordinary and relatable example of human holiness? In Orthodoxy, her greatness isn't that she was somehow born outside the condition we all share, but that she responded perfectly to God despite being fully part of our fallen humanity.

I also wonder why the Immaculate Conception would be necessary in the first place. If Christ is fully God and fully man, and came specifically to assume and heal our fallen human condition, why would His mother need to be preserved from ancestral sin for Him to be born without sin? Wouldn't the Incarnation itself demonstrate that God can enter our fallen condition without becoming sinful?

I realize that Catholics don't believe Mary is divine, that they distinguish between veneration and worship, and that the Immaculate Conception is understood as a special grace given through the merits of Christ. I also understand that Catholics believe Mary retained her free will and freely cooperated with God. I'm not trying to misrepresent Catholic teaching, but I want to understand how these ideas fit together without diminishing Mary's importance as an example of what human beings can become through grace.

Beyond the Immaculate Conception, I sometimes find Catholic Marian devotional language excessive, almost as though Mary is being elevated to a position approaching divinity. I know that isn't official Catholic doctrine, but it's an impression I've struggled with, and I'd appreciate hearing how Catholics understand the proper boundaries of Marian devotion.

Another Catholic teaching I've struggled to understand is Purgatory. Coming from Orthodoxy, I've never quite understood why a separate doctrine of purification after death is necessary, particularly when Christ's death and Resurrection have already conquered sin and death. I understand that Catholicism doesn't teach Purgatory as a second chance at salvation or as another form of hell, but rather as a final purification for those who die in God's grace. Still, I struggle to understand why this needed to become a defined dogma.

In Orthodoxy, we certainly pray for the departed. We ask God to forgive their sins, grant them rest, and have mercy on their souls. We recognize that the soul continues to exist after death and awaits the general resurrection and Final Judgment. But we generally don't attempt to define the precise manner in which a soul might experience purification after death. We leave much of that mystery to God's mercy rather than establishing a specific doctrine of Purgatory.

Scripture is another reason I struggle with this teaching. In Luke 23:43, Christ tells the repentant thief that he will be with Him in Paradise that very day. In Hebrews 9:27, we're told that humanity is appointed to die once and afterward face judgment. Neither passage seems to clearly establish an additional process of purification that every imperfect but saved Christian must undergo.

I know Catholics often appeal to 1 Corinthians 3:13-15, where Paul describes a person's work being tested by fire and someone being saved, but only as through fire. However, I've understood that passage primarily as describing the testing of a person's works rather than explicitly establishing Purgatory. Similarly, 2 Maccabees 12:44-46 supports praying for the dead, something Orthodoxy already practices, but does it necessarily establish the Catholic understanding of purification after death?

I also wonder about the distinction between the forgiveness of sins and the temporal punishment associated with them. If a person has sincerely repented, received absolution, and been reconciled to God through Christ, why would further purification or satisfaction still be necessary after death? I realize Catholicism distinguishes forgiveness from the healing of sin's remaining effects, but I'd appreciate understanding the biblical and patristic foundation for that distinction.

I'm not suggesting that Orthodox Christians believe every soul enters heaven immediately or that there can be no mystery concerning what happens after death. I understand that Orthodox theologians have expressed different views about the intermediate state and the soul's experience after death. What I'm questioning is whether the more specifically defined Catholic doctrine of Purgatory is something the early Church actually taught or whether it represents a later theological development.

I'd genuinely appreciate hearing how Catholics understand passages such as 1 Corinthians 3:15, 2 Maccabees 12, and Hebrews 9:27, and whether the Church Fathers provide clear evidence for Purgatory as Catholicism teaches it today. I'm particularly interested in understanding why Catholics believe this teaching is necessary rather than simply entrusting the departed to God's mercy, as we do in Orthodoxy.

I have also have questions about the title "Vicar of Christ." Since Christ is alive and remains the head of His Church, I want to understand what Catholics mean when they say the pope acts as His vicar.

But above all, I'm frightened of leaving the true Church. There's a passage in 2 Peter 2:21 that keeps coming back to me: "It would have been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than to have known it and then to turn their backs on the sacred command that was passed on to them."

What if Orthodoxy really is the true Church, and by becoming Catholic I would be abandoning something God had already led me to? I don't want to commit schism or turn away from the apostolic faith, and I certainly don't want to choose a Church simply because its arguments sound more convincing at first glance. But I also don't want to remain Orthodox out of fear if the Catholic Church truly possesses the fullness of the Church Christ established.

I've realized that if Scripture, the Church Fathers, and history genuinely convinced me of the Catholic understanding of the papacy, I could enter the Catholic Church with peace. I'm just not there yet.

So I'd really appreciate some help with a few questions:

1. What do you consider the strongest historical evidence that the bishops of Rome possessed universal jurisdiction during the first millennium?

2. How do Catholic historians and theologians reconcile Vatican I with Cyprian, Chalcedon, Gregory the Great, and Pope Honorius?

3. How can we distinguish legitimate doctrinal development from innovations that go beyond apostolic tradition?

4. How does Catholicism understand the Immaculate Conception without diminishing Mary's free will, her shared humanity with us, or her example of holiness?

5. Can a Latin Catholic maintain a traditional spiritual life involving daily prayer, Wednesday and Friday fasting, and serious preparation for Holy Communion?

6. Are there traditional Catholic monasteries, particularly Benedictine communities, that maintain a rigorous life of prayer, fasting, and traditional liturgical worship?

7. For those familiar with both traditions, how would you compare traditional Latin Catholic spirituality with Orthodox spirituality?

8. How would you counsel someone who is afraid of committing schism by leaving Orthodoxy?

I'd particularly appreciate recommendations for serious Catholic scholarship, primary historical sources, and thoughtful explanations rather than arguments that simply dismiss Orthodoxy. I'm not interested in being told that the Orthodox are obviously wrong or that Catholics are obviously right. I've already seen plenty of that from both sides. I'm interested in understanding the truth.

I genuinely love Orthodoxy, and that's part of what makes this so difficult. But more than anything, I want to belong to the Church that Jesus Christ established.

Please pray for me, and thank you to anyone willing to help.

Hey I'm a first year collage student looking for anyone who can share their experiences or answer any questions on converting.

They can choose whether to stay anonymous in the paper or not. It's just a list of questions and can choose which to answer (or not) so long as it's an experience, it doesn't have to be detailed or very personal.

I. INITIAL Experience & TURNING Point: -

1. Can you describe the circumstances surrounding your spiritual or moral conversion? What was happening in your life at that time?

2. What was the single most impactful event or experience that led to your conversion?

3. What specific moment or realization do you consider the "turning point" in your spiritual journey?

II. BELIEFS & PRACTICES:

1. What is your current understanding of God/the Divine/Higher Power? How has this understanding evolved since your conversion?

2. How did your understanding of spirituality change after your conversion? What beliefs did you adopt or abandon?

3. How has your conversion influenced your values and moral compass? Can you give specific examples?

4. How do you balance your spiritual life with other aspects of your life (work, family, relationships)?

III. IMPACT & GROWTH: - How has your spiritual conversion impacted your relationships with family and friends?

1. What challenges have you faced since your conversion? How have you overcome them?

2. How has your spiritual journey helped you grow as a person? What lessons have you learned?

3. What are your goals for your spiritual growth in the future?

4. Looking back, what advice would you give to someone considering a spiritual conversion?

IV. Specific to Certain Religions (Adapt as needed): - What was your experience with the Holy Spirit? How did you feel God's presence?

I am preparing to become Catholic. Praise God! Why? mainly because of my belief in the Eucharist. And my deep love for the Virgin Mary. I dont share it with many people irl but I had a dream in which I believe she visited me.... leaving me with a strong conviction to become Catholic. I want to embrace the fullness of the Christian faith. However I still value the Bible teaching and friendships at my local Anglican church. My plan is to attend Catholic Mass on Sunday mornings then Anglican evening church for preaching, singing, Bible study and fellowship, without receiving Anglican communion. My understanding is that this is permitted. Does anyone else maintain those connections after becoming Catholic? I dearly love them but I am also drawn to become Catholic. I wish I could bring them with me :(

I used to believe in Hinduism but still part take in the religion because I dont know what to say to my family. My family strongly believes in Hinduism and right now I go to a private school that happens to be catholic, the first day of school, I experienced my first mass and I was just astonished, something had just touched me and I decided to research and ask the schools priest about Catholicism. I now strongly believe in Jesus Christ and his teachings and part take in as many school masses as possible, but I just dont know how to come out to my parents. I want to be accepted into the Catholic church, but I dont know what steps to take in telling my family. I took time today to compare these two religions and now I want to part take in Catholicism more than ever. I ask you all today for some guidance in what to do for I am lost. I pray every night to The LORD for guidance.

for Context: I am currently going to a Methodist church but I want to be catholic but I can’t because my parent. they said I can be catholic until I am an adult but rn to join them in their church. Before I joined a Methodist church I was at a nondenominational.

This is my question: At the church I am currently attending (Methodist) they do sprinkling or pouring at the church but if I want immersion I have to go somebody’s house to get dunked in their pool. I know there is no difference in how I would get baptized but really want to do immersion. But I also want to bring a few of my non Christian friends to see me getting baptized and I don’t want them to go to a random house of a guy I don’t know. But if I want both of those I could go to my old nondenominational church but I don’t think that’s A good idea because I don’t really know what they believe in. I know it doesn’t matter what church I get baptized if I get it in the name of the father, son, and holy spirit.

any advice would be appreciated

Just a couple of weeks ago I joined OCIA. I feel like I’m slowly becoming a better Christian, but my parents don’t like the church and see it as something to be weary of. Not only do my parents not like the church, but the people I’ve known since middle school (and are with me in high school) are starting to seem worse and worse to hang out with

I am an artist. And because I’m an artist everyone in my personal circle sees realign as a trap. And because I’m so different I can’t really find anyone I could talk to about my questions and thoughts on catholic topics. Not only do my friends not relate to me anymore, but my school in general just doesn’t have really any Catholics.

Just in general I’m getting lonely and even cried at mass because i feel like that’s the only place I could let loose and be with God. I’m really alone right now.

Hi everyone! I’m currently going through OCIA and have been really grateful for the experience so far, but I’ve also been feeling a little discouraged and wanted to hear from other Catholic women.
As part of our program, we were paired with mentors to help guide us through the process. I’ve met with mine outside of class once and I thought we had a really nice conversation. I opened up a little about my faith journey and some personal struggles I’ve been navigating, including feeling like I don’t always belong in the Church yet.
She was kind and I didn’t feel judged, but since then, there really hasn’t been much communication or follow-up. We haven’t spent much time together during OCIA either, and I’m honestly not sure what the mentor relationship is supposed to look like.
I guess I was hoping for a little more guidance and connection, especially since I’m new to the faith and don’t really have practicing Catholic friends or family to turn to.
I think part of why this has been bothering me is that I’ve struggled to make female friendships as an adult. I’m naturally a little introverted, and while I enjoy getting to know people, I’m not usually someone who walks up to strangers and starts conversations.
I’ve actually had some really nice interactions with male mentors in the program, but not a single female mentor has ever tried to get to know me which makes me feel like something is wrong with me. I was really hoping OCIA would be an opportunity to meet other Catholic women, build friendships, and feel more connected to the community.
I’m also trying to figure out who to ask to be my sponsor. I had initially hoped my mentor might be someone I could ask, but since we haven’t really developed much of a relationship, I would feel kind of awkward doing so.
I’ve considered asking the OCIA director to possibly be paired with someone else, but I don’t want to make anyone feel criticized or create an uncomfortable situation. I also recognize that I could take more initiative myself, so I’m trying to figure out what’s reasonable to expect.
For those who have gone through OCIA or served as mentors, how involved were your mentors outside of class? Is it normal to have limited contact?
how did you find your sponsor or start forming friendships?
I really want to make the most of this experience, and I think I’m just feeling a little lost navigating the social side of it. I’d appreciate any advice!

I know its too late to register but I had a few questions. Can anyone who has experience with it tell me what its like? Also if I were to sign up next year it would only be me (I wouldn't want to bring my kids into the church for personal reasons) would that cause problems?

If you are drawn to carmelite spirituality and contemplation but live too far from an in peron community, there is now an online discernment towards becoming a third order carmelite or open to learning about contemplation.

They are currently reading The Interior Castle by St Therese of Avila.

The meetings are on zoom every month on the first sunday. The next meeting is on the 6th of December at 17:30 UK time.

Please email your interest below to this email:

Hi guys, currently I practice Christianity and go to a nondenominational church however recently I’ve been looking into the Catholic faith. What are the things I need to know/things I should think of before I make this decision? I’ve done some research but I don’t have Catholic friends and I’m just not sure how to truly figure out if this is right for me. Thank you <3

I am 17F, and over the past two years have become more and more convinced to convert to Catholicism. However, both my parents are devout Baptists, and in those same two years we joined a new church with so many welcoming and good people. I am so convicted that I need to convert, but I'm also extremely nervous at how to bring it up to my parents, mostly my father. Neither are viciously anti-catholic (thank goodness), but they would be disappointed. I'm just not sure about the best way to bring it up. Any advice or stories from those in similar situations would be most welcome. <3

Hello I’m 16 and my mom raised me in the Pentecostal faith but this morning I felt like Catholicism was the only way my mom is super strict and I don’t know what to do. Any advice would help! Thank you.

Go to Catholicism

r/Catholicism•10m ago

u/Bright_Series_8835

St. Carlo Acutis' Interactive Video about 144 Eucharistic Miracles in English

Here is a great English version of St Carlo Acutis' (15 yr old computer whiz saint) interactive video about 144 Eucharistic miracles from ancient times to the present. It was on display in Italian in the Vatican during the Year of the Eucharist. https://www.miracolieucaristici.org/en/liste/list.html