“To My Protestant Friends”

by Vicki Marshal

After over 25 years of walking out my faith within Protestant Christianity, my family and I have recently—and prayerfully—entered the Eastern Orthodox Church. I know this may come as a surprise and raise questions about how this happened and why we left a church we dearly loved.

This is not a step away from Christ or the Christian faith, but a deeper step into it, and I want to share the fuller story of our journey here for clarity, peace, and understanding with all who have walked alongside us.

This is going to be a long post because it reflects the full journey of faith that led our family to where we are now: the Holy Orthodox Church. Please feel free to pause and return to it; I’ll have it pinned on my wall.

Please know that we love you dearly, and I share this with sincerity and respect, hoping you’ll read it with an open heart and an open mind. ??

We left our church fairly suddenly and never had the chance to explain, in our own words, why we left. It is very important for the sake of my Christian witness that nobody is left guessing at our motives or assuming we have denied our Lord and Savior in any way.

To be completely clear, I share all of this not to debate or argue. I am still learning within Orthodoxy myself, discovering new depth each day! I simply want to recount the journey God has taken me on, the convictions He has placed on my heart, and some of what I’ve learned along the way.

While we are expected to know and believe the essentials of the faith, understanding the fullness of it is a lifelong endeavor that will likely never be fully realized.

With that in mind, I approach my faith with a newfound humility, aware of how much I still have to learn. I pray that God works in my heart first, shaping me to grow in patience, love, and wisdom, and I trust Him to work in the hearts of others as only He can?. Any insight I am about to share comes from my own experience, not from a position of authority or judgment.

WHY WE LEFT

It is so critical to state right off the bat that we didn’t leave Protestantism because of “church hurt”, disappointment, or a desire to move away from Christ and our faith. Believe it or not, the opposite is true. Through study and prayer, we found ourselves being drawn deeper into the historic Christian Church, and our departure happened before we could explain that clearly.

This decision was not made lightly??. It meant leaving our faith community and the people we love; friends who became family, and people we did life with for over 15 years. We did not leave casually or because anything was lacking in anyone’s devotion. We left because we had to follow Christ wherever He led, even when it cost us deeply.

When we finally made the decision to leave, some painfully referred to us as apostates?, and told us we were “leaving the faith” and “turning our backs on Christ.”

These accusations weren’t only hurtful because they were false, but because they struck us as dishonest (which was extremely disheartening). Call me misled or deceived if you like, but it was never a willful abandonment of Christ. No one can truly know another’s heart—only God sees that.

Hearing that we were considered to be leaving Christianity and no longer welcome unless we “repented” was deeply painful, especially coming from people we love and have long considered family. I share this not to accuse or argue, but to be honest about what we experienced.

The truth is, staying would have been far easier. We had deep friendships, a community we loved, people we had shared our lives with for years. Starting over in a new church family is never easy. But once you learn something, you cannot unlearn it?. We are responsible for the truth we’ve been shown.

MY PROTESTANT FOUNDATION

For most of my life, I practiced my faith within the Protestant framework (mainly non-denominational). It was there that I fell in love with Jesus, learned Scripture, learned to pray, and sought Him with all my heart. I am deeply grateful for that foundation, and I know that many Protestants earnestly seek to honor God and live faithfully.

But over time, I felt something was missing—an unexplained sense of unease and emptiness.

In Protestantism, I was told that Christ came to free us from being “religious,” and that traditional churches were all about “rules and regulations” rather than a real relationship with God. I accepted what I was taught and lived within it for over 25 years. It was only in the past couple of years that I began to seriously question it and see how completely untrue that idea was.

FIRST ENCOUNTER WITH ORTHODOXY

When I first encountered Orthodoxy, I honestly didn’t know what to make of it. The only tradition-based Christianity I had ever known was Roman Catholicism, which I firmly believed had moved away from the original faith of the early Church. Much to my surprise, I would soon realize that even some of my assumptions about Roman Catholicism were rooted in ignorance!

I assumed anything traditional was the same: full of “dead traditions”—rituals and ceremonies disconnected from real faith. Beauty without substance; practices that didn’t glorify Christ. I had no idea that Orthodoxy would completely overturn these assumptions.

What I eventually discovered was that Eastern Orthodoxy, unlike Roman Catholicism, had not altered the faith, but had faithfully guarded what was handed down from the beginning?.
I learned that in many critical ways, Roman Catholicism was actually closer to the authentic faith than I was as a Protestant. However, I also learned that there were very significant differences between Catholicism and Orthodoxy.

So while many are unaware of these differences (or try to downplay them), only one of these Churches has preserved the faith pure and undefiled from the Apostolic era to the present day…whereas the other has gone through radical changes and innovations.

Orthodoxy is not just “another denomination”. It is PRE-denominational, rooted in the faith of the Church before divisions, before schisms, and before any modern labels. It is the faith the apostles entrusted to the earliest Christians and that has been preserved through the centuries.

DISCOVERY AND RESEARCH

I didn’t set out looking for Eastern Orthodoxy. I actually stumbled upon it by accident. I kept hearing about people leaving Protestantism, not for atheism or for some trendy movement, but for a Church I honestly barely knew existed.

That curiosity led me to start researching, and I was blown away at the amount of content out there on this topic. How had I never heard of this before?

Even though I had been taught Church history within a Protestant framework, reading the primary sources for myself revealed a picture very different from what I had been taught—one that was far more structured, unified, and consistent than I had realized. It quickly became clear how much of historic Christianity I had never fully encountered before.

The gap in my understanding had led me to believe many incorrect things about the faith, and I began to question everything I had previously believed. I was amazed at how closely Orthodoxy aligns with this earliest Christian understanding of worship, prayer, and the life of the Church.

One of the clearest windows into the early Church is St. Ignatius of Antioch (AD 35–107)—a disciple of John and bishop. He speaks with striking clarity about the Church’s structure, urging Christians to remain in unity with their bishop:

“Do nothing without the bishop.”

He also wrote,

“Where the bishop appears, there let the people be; just as where Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church” (Letter to the Smyrnaeans, 8:1), emphasizing that unity with the bishop is inseparable from being part of the Church.

Authority and hierarchy were not optional; they were built into the life of the Church.

Even more striking is that Ignatius did not separate Church authority from the sacraments. Writing against those who refused the Eucharist

“because they do not confess that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ” (Letter to the Smyrnaeans),

he shows that right belief, participation in the Eucharist, and unity with the bishop were inseparable. From the very beginning, the early Christians understood these as essential, not optional.

This realization, that authority, unity, and the sacraments were foundational (not optional), sparked months of research.

I listened to everything I could get my hands on: debates, sermons, lectures, interviews, and firsthand accounts from people who had walked this road before me. I didn’t just hear the Orthodox perspective; I explored Protestant, Catholic, Orthodox, academic, and pastoral voices alike.

The more I compared the claims, the history, the theology, and the lived reality of each tradition, the more I was pulled in one direction. When I finally understood Church history, I couldn’t justify my Protestant views anymore.

FIRST DIVINE LITURGY

By the time I attended my first Divine Liturgy, I had already been converted in my heart.

This was not emotional hype or a search for beauty, though the liturgy is profoundly beautiful.

My research had shown me that I was encountering a Church that had preserved the faith from the beginning. The liturgy confirmed what I already knew intellectually: this is Christ’s Church, alive and faithful.

The first time I stepped into an Orthodox church, it literally felt like I had been transported back in time.

But more than that, what I experienced was unmistakably real.

It was not the beauty of the building. It was not an emotional high. It was the tangible, peaceful presence of God, a holiness that lingered long after we left.

Scripture? was everywhere, woven into every hymn, prayer, and moment. Christ was glorified above all, and the Church’s worship centered entirely on Him.

This was the most reverent and Christ-exalting service I had ever experienced.

I kept returning to the one persistent question: If this is truly the Church Christ established, how could I remain anywhere else?

WORSHIP, SACRAMENTS, AND THE FULL LIFE OF THE CHURCH

Understanding the centrality of the sacraments made me come to a realization. If the apostles and early Church treated these as a necessary means of grace and salvation, I could not treat them as optional. I wanted the fullness of what Christ offers, not a modern, watered-down version of it.

Sure, I had concerns about things I didn’t fully understand yet, especially icons and the honoring of saints. But as I studied Scripture and the early Church, I realized these were not “add-ons” or later inventions. They flowed naturally from the belief that the Church in heaven and the Church on earth are one Body in Christ.

One of the most beautiful truths I came to understand is that worship is not something we do in isolation. In Orthodoxy, you begin to see the Church as Scripture describes it—not divided between “up there” and “down here,” but one body.

The saints in heaven are not distant figures. They are alive in Christ and worshiping with us. We are part of a vast family, those on earth and those already in His presence, gathered around Christ.
Discovering that the Church is this living, interconnected body has been one of the deepest, most profound, and amazing gifts of this entire journey.

Scripture speaks of a “great cloud of witnesses” surrounding us (Hebrews 12:1).

At the Mount of Transfiguration, Moses and Elijah appeared and spoke with Christ (Matthew 17:1-3). But I thought Moses was dead? Was our Lord a necromancer? God forbid the thought!
In Revelation 5:8, the saints in heaven present the prayers of the faithful before God. Clearly, these are not “dead” saints

“For He is not the God of the dead but of the living, for all live in Him.”—Luke 20:38.

Though their bodies have passed, the saints are alive in Christ and continue to worship in His kingdom.

So honoring them is not worship; it is love and respect for those who have gone before us and remained faithful, whose example we follow as we pick up our own cross and follow Him.

“Brothers and sisters, join in imitating me, and keep your eyes on those who walk according to the example you have in us.”– Philippians 3:17 (ESV)

“Be imitators of me, as I am of Christ.”– 1 Corinthians 11:1 (ESV)

One stumbling block for us was veneration of icons. However, even icons became for me what they were in the early Church: windows pointing to the reality of Christ’s work in His people, not distractions from Him.

In a way, venerating icons is no different than other forms of respect and remembrance we practice all the time. We venerate fallen soldiers at their graves?, we keep pictures of family members?? to honor and remember them, and even pledging allegiance to a flag expresses respect and devotion to what it represents.

When you understand icons in this light, they are simply a natural, tangible way of honoring the saints and pointing our hearts to Christ, not objects of worship themselves.

Icons also played a vital role in the early Church as visual storytellers, helping the faithful, especially those who were illiterate, understand Scripture and the Gospel. Before the Bible was widely available, icons were essential teaching tools, conveying stories of Christ, the saints, and God’s work in human history.

There are so many misconceptions about what Christians call “institutionalized religion”. It is not something that can be conveyed in any single post. It has to be studied with a sincere and open mind, setting aside presuppositions.

What finally confronted me with the reality of historic Christianity was the Church’s sacraments, especially the Eucharist and Baptism.

These were not symbolic reminders, but the actual means through which Christ gives His life to His people.

Jesus Himself says,

“Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in you” (John 6:53).

I’ve read that verse countless times and never has it struck me the way it does now. The early Christians did not treat these words as metaphor. St. Ignatius of Antioch, a disciple of John, called the Eucharist “the medicine of immortality.”

Something definitely worth emphasizing is that the earliest Christians were completely unified on the sacraments. There weren’t various different interpretations. There weren’t “multiple valid views.” From the very beginning, every Christian community believed the same thing about the Eucharist and baptism. They all understood the Eucharist as the real, life-giving Body and Blood of Christ. Not merely a symbol. Not merely a reminder. But a mystery in which Christ Himself is truly present, and through which we become “partakers of the divine nature” (2 Peter 1:4).

Orthodoxy doesn’t treat “symbolic” and “real” as competing ideas. They exist together. It’s not an “either/or”, but rather a “both/and”.

They also all understood baptism was the moment God actually does something (what the Church calls ‘baptismal regeneration’).

In baptism, God washes away sins, regenerates, and unites the believer to Christ’s death and resurrection. It is not merely a public declaration of faith, nor was it ever optional for being a Christian.
Of course, God can save by extra?normative means, but Scripture and the early Church show that baptism is the ordinary, God?ordained way He brings new life.

Some may worry this adds works to salvation. Absolutely not. God does all the work in baptism. It is entirely His grace, not human effort, that regenerates and unites us to Christ. Baptism is not a work to earn your way to Heaven. It is an instrument that God uses to apply the mercy of Christ.

In Colossians 2:12, Paul says,

“We were buried with him in baptism, in which you were raised with him through faith in the powerful working of God.”

And 1 Peter 3:21 says,

”Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ”.

There is not a single early Christian text that teaches a merely symbolic view of the Eucharist or a merely symbolic baptism. Not one. These sacramental beliefs weren’t debated, they were assumed.
Baptism and the Eucharist were never optional. The faith was clear, consistent, and handed down through both Scripture and Tradition.

God cares deeply about how we worship, and He has designed ways for that worship to be faithfully preserved across generations.

I came across something another Christian wrote that captures this truth beautifully, and I want to share it:

“Correct Worship Isn’t Optional” by Hermione Marie

From Genesis to Revelation, God has never said, “Worship Me however you feel like.“

Not once. In fact, every time someone decided to get “creative” with worship, whether it was Cain offering the wrong sacrifice (Gen 4), Nadab and Abihu bringing strange fire (Lev 10), or Uzzah touching the Ark (2 Sam 6), God didn’t reward their good intentions. He showed that worship is His domain, not ours.

The Old Testament is full of extremely specific instructions: the pattern of the Tabernacle, the priestly garments, the incense, the feasts. God wasn’t being “extra,” He was teaching His people that He determines how He is worshiped.

And when Christ came, He didn’t erase that principle, He fulfilled it. The Apostles didn’t wander into fields with musical instruments and say, “Let’s freestyle for the Lord.” They kept the liturgical prayers (Acts 2:42), read the Scriptures publicly (1 Tim 4:13), chanted the Psalms, and celebrated the Eucharist “according to the TRADITION” (1 Cor 11:2). Heaven itself is liturgical—read Revelation and tell me it looks like a modern Christian praise set.

So when someone says, “God doesn’t care how we worship, He just wants the heart,” they’re half right. He does want the heart, but He also commands the form. Cain brought his idea of worship, and God rejected it. The golden calf was proclaimed “a feast to the Lord” (Ex 32:5). They thought they were honoring the Lord, and He still condemned it.

Orthodox worship isn’t “dead ritual.” It’s the continuity of the worship God Himself established, fulfilled in Christ, and handed down through the Apostles. We didn’t invent it, we received it.
If we claim to follow the Bible, we can’t ignore that God has always demanded a distinct, set-apart style of worship that reflects His holiness, not our personal taste. All glory to God.”

SCRIPTURE AND ORAL TRADITION

This shows that God’s way of worship has always been specific, yet not every detail was captured in written Scripture. From the beginning, the Church preserved these practices through apostolic teaching, passing them down so the fullness of worship would remain intact across generations?. Scripture and lived instruction were never meant to be separated. The authority of oral tradition is not a later invention; it is woven throughout Scripture itself. One example: King David established detailed liturgical and musical practices for Temple worship???, which were handed down to the priests and Levites. A thousand years later, King Hezekiah restored Temple worship according to David’s instructions? (2 Chronicles 29). This preservation happened through careful transmission, not because every detail was exhaustively recorded in Scripture.

Jesus Himself acknowledged this model when He said, “The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses’ seat, so practice and observe whatever they tell you, but not what they do” (Matthew 23:1–3). Christ affirmed legitimate teaching authority, even while condemning hypocrisy. This makes one thing clear: God intended His revelation to be preserved not only through written texts, but through living, authoritative instruction passed down within the community He established.

APOSTOLIC TEACHING AND EARLY CHURCH

In the New Testament, Paul confirms this pattern, instructing the Church to hold fast to the traditions “by word of mouth” or  “by letter” (2 Thessalonians 2:15).

Throughout Scripture, there are multiple instances where oral teaching, authoritative instruction, and handed-down tradition are assumed or cited, though I won’t go into all of them here. My point is simply that God intended His revelation to be preserved not only in written texts, but also through living, authoritative teaching passed down through the Church????. In addition, the Bible itself references several books and letters that we no longer have??, such as Paul’s letter to the Laodiceans, the lost letter to the Corinthians, the Book of the Wars of the Lord, the Book of the Just, and the Book of Nathan the Prophet. If God’s truth were only ever preserved in writing, how would we know what was taught in these texts? This shows why the apostles’ oral teaching was essential: the Church relied on it to faithfully pass down the Gospel, even when certain writings were lost. Taken together, these examples make it clear that God intended His revelation to be preserved both in written Scripture and in living, handed-down Tradition.

Sola Scriptura, which elevates the written word alone, has no foundation in Scripture itself. The Orthodox Church continues this apostolic pattern, preserving the fullness of God’s revelation in both Word and worship. I know this is difficult to hear. The idea that Scripture alone is sufficient has been deeply rooted in Western Christianity for centuries, and for many, it almost feels heretical (or even sinful) to question it.

I share this not to condemn, but to invite reflection on the full picture of how God intended His revelation to be preserved.

The only way to dismiss these historic doctrines is to assume the entire Church fell into mass error the moment the apostles died, and would be corrupted for at least a thousand years. But that creates a serious problem. Scripture itself says the gates of hell will not prevail against the Church (Matthew 16:18). If the Church had instantly fallen into error, Christ’s promise would have failed.

CHURCH CONTINUITY AND SOLA SCRIPTURA

Many don’t think about this, but the Bible didn’t appear out of thin air. Its canon was discerned, recognized, and compiled by the post-apostolic Church, the very bishops and councils whose authority some Protestants now reject.

To claim that the Church immediately lost the truth makes it impossible to trust the same leaders to have accurately preserved Scripture. You cannot reject the Church while still relying on the Bible it safeguarded??. It is internally inconsistent, and illogical. Likewise, you cannot accept the Church that compiled the Bible yet dismiss its interpretation of it.

And, no, these aren’t “dead traditions of men.” That accusation only comes from people who have never actually studied where the liturgy, the sacraments, or the apostolic practices came from.

Scripture is infallible, but INTERPRETATIONS aren’t. That is why we have thousands of competing denominations, all claiming the same Spirit yet arriving at contradictory doctrines. The Church’s continuity isn’t about clinging to old rituals, it’s about guarding the apostolic faith so Scripture is understood the way it was actually handed down.

FOR OUR CHILDREN AND FUTURE GENERATIONS

We also couldn’t ignore the question of our children. What happens when they grow up, have their own families, and need a firm foundation? In Protestantism, everything shifts?: doctrine, worship, morals, even the very definition of what the church is. Each generation ends up reconstructing its version of Christianity. We lived this ourselves. Over 25 years, we changed core doctrines multiple times and never experienced consistency in how we worshiped, prayed, or understood the Gospel. We weren’t willing to leave our children standing on a foundation that changes every decade. We wanted them rooted in a faith that has actually held the same ground for two thousand years, so they’re not left chasing the next interpretation or trend. We wanted them in the truth, not in whatever a pastor or denomination happens to believe at the moment??.

REFORMATION INSIGHTS

I looked at Reformation history. Martin Luther and the early reformers are often hailed as starting something new. But they weren’t launching a new religion; they were protesting abuses and distortions in the Roman Church while pointing back to what they saw as the purer, older faith. To my surprise, many of the reformers upheld beliefs most Protestants today would reject, such as the real presence of the Eucharist and a sacramental view of baptism. Luther even defended the Eastern, “Greek” Church, reportedly saying,

“The Greeks are not heretics or schismatics but the most Christian people and the best followers of the Gospel on earth” (Luther’s Works, vol. 32: Career of the Reformer II).

While he did not fully endorse all Orthodox doctrine, he respected their faithful adherence to the Gospel even where he disagreed. He upheld doctrines that many modern Protestants no longer embrace, including reverence for Mary as the Mother of God and belief in the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist.

For Luther, the Lord’s Supper was far more than a symbolic remembrance. It was truly sacramental, embodying Christ’s presence. He also upheld the life-giving power of baptism, through which God washes, regenerates, and unites the believer to Christ. It amazed me that these earliest reformers defended beliefs closely aligned with Eastern Orthodoxy: the real presence, the honored role of Mary, and a deeply sacramental understanding of the faith.

WHY DOCTRINE MATTERS

Why is it so important that we believe the correct doctrine? Well, even Scripture itself treats deviation from the apostolic faith as a serious matter.
In Galatians 5, Paul lists ‘heresies’ among the works of the flesh, right alongside things no Christian would dare excuse, and he warns that those who persist in them ‘will not inherit the kingdom of God’.

That isn’t a light caution. It tells me that what we believe, and who we receive our teaching from, actually matters. It isn’t optional.

So when I realized the early Church fought heresy from the beginning, preserved the faith with absolute vigilance, and guarded the canon itself, I had to ask myself why I trusted later interpretations more than the men formed by the apostles’ own disciples.

The real question isn’t “tradition vs. truth,” but “which tradition faithfully preserves the apostolic faith?” Protestantism drifted from many of these core convictions. Paul’s warning about “another gospel” pushed me to step back and ask a simple question: If the gospel is this serious, shouldn’t we know exactly what the apostles actually taught? Today, many “man-made traditions” and innovations have caused confusion and inconsistencies in doctrine.

Countless groups now teach different “gospels” while claiming the Bible alone. That does not create certainty, it creates chaos and confusion. If I am supposed to avoid “another gospel,” as Paul warns in Galatians, the only honest way to know the apostolic gospel is to look at the Church that received it directly and preserved it faithfully from the beginning??.

In conclusion, I did not come to Orthodoxy seeking novelty. I came because I was convinced that this is where the historic Church, the apostolic teaching, and the fullness of the faith have been faithfully preserved for two millennia.

I’m sharing this not to argue or to criticize, but because Christ means more than everything to me. If He founded a Church that still lives, still breathes, and still remains faithful after two thousand years, then that reality deserves to be sought out and taken seriously. Christ is worth seeking with our whole heart. Truth is worth pursuing wherever it leads. We want our children to grow up on solid ground, where doctrine is stable, Scripture is faithfully interpreted, and the sacraments convey the life of Christ as they were always intended.

GRATITUDE FOR MY HUSBAND

I also want to express deep gratitude for my husband. This season was not easy for him, and he approached it with care and seriousness, carrying significant responsibility, given his involvement in our church and its leadership. Most of the above is written in the first person, as “I” or “me,” but know that after a long journey of his own, Andrzej was part of writing this post and is fully on board with everything stated. I could have written it as “we,” because we are completely aligned in our perspective. Our journey required real wrestling, careful discernment, and time. We did not rush into it. It took prayer, honest conversations, and a willingness to re-examine beliefs we had both held for many years.

Much of what we encountered challenged the Protestant framework we had lived within and could not be accepted quickly or casually. This was especially difficult when we were on different pages. Andrzej didn’t simply follow my lead or accept my conclusions. He had to journey on his own to discover Orthodoxy. Experiencing months of not being united in our faith was incredibly painful??, and I thank God that He opened Andrzej’s eyes, and now he leads our family in the ancient faith. Andrzej’s patience, integrity, and commitment to seeking truth, even when it was costly, meant more to me than I can express. I am deeply thankful that we have walked this road together, imperfectly but faithfully, trusting Christ to lead us where He willed.

ENCOURAGEMENT TO EXPLORE

To my Protestant friends, I encourage you to explore Church history for yourselves and compare what the early Christians believed and practiced with what is taught in modern Protestantism???.
Look into archaeological findings that support the historical record? Don’t rely on a single voice or only post-Reformation theologians. Often, I see quotes from more recent figures like Charles Spurgeon, Jonathan Edwards, or even Calvin—and I always wonder: why not go further back? We have writings and testimonies that reach all the way to the first century. Read the Church Fathers, talk to a priest (they are honestly some of the most loving and humble people I have encountered)?

There are so many resources available on this topic, literally at our fingertips.  If you are willing, attend a Divine Liturgy and see how Christ is honored, exalted, and glorified, and is at the center of everything.

See with your own eyes how the faith of two millennia is alive.

CONCLUSION: SEEK TRUTH AND CHRIST

Again, I write this with love, humility, and earnestness. Keep seeking truth and pursuing Christ?

God Bless.