OrthodoxChristianity.net
October 22, 2014, 06:17:07 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 »   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Indulgences, Temporal Punishment, Purgatory, etc  (Read 179056 times) Average Rating: 5
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Rufus
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: leet


Nafpliotis with sunglasses and a cigar.


« Reply #1035 on: March 29, 2010, 01:50:11 PM »

In Orthodoxy, the point of hell is not for God to get back at you. Hell is the unpreparedness to receive God's glory--hence, God is perceived as a burning fire. This is stated in certain Eucharistic prayers, as well as the Fathers, notably St. Mark of Ephesus. The idea that God will burn away all our bad works, but then save what is left of the person, is to be found in 1 Cor. 3:15, and it refers to hell after the last judgment, not to the intermediate state. So Orthodx hell is similar to RC purgatory.

Interestingly, St. John Chrysostom interprets 1 Cor. 3:15 as meaning that the person will say in the fire after his works have been destroyed (in Greek, sothenai can mean both "saved" and "preserved"), i.e. he is "preserved in the fire." So either way, it refers to hell. The idea of purgatory is incompatible with Orthodoxy. We are cleansed of our sins through repentence and grace, NOT through being sufficiently punished. Legalism has no place in Orthodoxy, because it has no place in reality.
Logged
Jetavan
Argumentum ad australopithecum
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Science to the Fourth Power
Jurisdiction: Ohayo Gozaimasu
Posts: 6,580


Barlaam and Josaphat


WWW
« Reply #1036 on: March 29, 2010, 02:00:52 PM »

The idea that God will burn away all our bad works, but then save what is left of the person, is to be found in 1 Cor. 3:15, and it refers to hell after the last judgment, not to the intermediate state. So Orthodx hell is similar to RC purgatory.
Shocked
Logged

If you will, you can become all flame.
Extra caritatem nulla salus.
In order to become whole, take the "I" out of "holiness".
सर्वभूतहित
Ἄνω σχῶμεν τὰς καρδίας
"Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion is." -- Mohandas Gandhi
Y dduw bo'r diolch.
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #1037 on: March 29, 2010, 05:53:13 PM »

In Orthodoxy, the point of hell is not for God to get back at you. Hell is the unpreparedness to receive God's glory--hence, God is perceived as a burning fire. This is stated in certain Eucharistic prayers, as well as the Fathers, notably St. Mark of Ephesus. The idea that God will burn away all our bad works, but then save what is left of the person, is to be found in 1 Cor. 3:15, and it refers to hell after the last judgment, not to the intermediate state. So Orthodx hell is similar to RC purgatory.

Interestingly, St. John Chrysostom interprets 1 Cor. 3:15 as meaning that the person will say in the fire after his works have been destroyed (in Greek, sothenai can mean both "saved" and "preserved"), i.e. he is "preserved in the fire." So either way, it refers to hell. The idea of purgatory is incompatible with Orthodoxy. We are cleansed of our sins through repentence and grace, NOT through being sufficiently punished. Legalism has no place in Orthodoxy, because it has no place in reality.
On the one hand, Orthodox hell is similar to RC purgatory, but on the other hand, the idea of purgatory is incompatible with Orthodoxy?
I guess that I am missing something here. Sorry.
Logged
Rufus
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: leet


Nafpliotis with sunglasses and a cigar.


« Reply #1038 on: March 29, 2010, 06:11:34 PM »

In Orthodoxy, the point of hell is not for God to get back at you. Hell is the unpreparedness to receive God's glory--hence, God is perceived as a burning fire. This is stated in certain Eucharistic prayers, as well as the Fathers, notably St. Mark of Ephesus. The idea that God will burn away all our bad works, but then save what is left of the person, is to be found in 1 Cor. 3:15, and it refers to hell after the last judgment, not to the intermediate state. So Orthodx hell is similar to RC purgatory.

Interestingly, St. John Chrysostom interprets 1 Cor. 3:15 as meaning that the person will say in the fire after his works have been destroyed (in Greek, sothenai can mean both "saved" and "preserved"), i.e. he is "preserved in the fire." So either way, it refers to hell. The idea of purgatory is incompatible with Orthodoxy. We are cleansed of our sins through repentence and grace, NOT through being sufficiently punished. Legalism has no place in Orthodoxy, because it has no place in reality.
On the one hand, Orthodox hell is similar to RC purgatory, but on the other hand, the idea of purgatory is incompatible with Orthodoxy?
I guess that I am missing something here. Sorry.

What I am saying is, there seems to be a similarity between purgatory and Orthodox hell, but the RC idea that forgiveness comes through sufficient punishment is totally incompatible with Orthodoxy. Hell is not God's capital punishment, hell is separation from God. The RC Catechism says so, so we agree on that.

The similarity between purgatory and Orthodox hell is the concept of the burning away of sin. The difference is that purgatory implies that suffering is how one is forgiven, whereas in Orthodoxy, the burning away of sin is the punishment itself. I hope this makes my point clearer, and if I am misrepresenting purgatory, which is certainly possible, please explain.
Logged
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,255


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #1039 on: March 29, 2010, 06:34:56 PM »

In Orthodoxy, the point of hell is not for God to get back at you. Hell is the unpreparedness to receive God's glory--hence, God is perceived as a burning fire. This is stated in certain Eucharistic prayers, as well as the Fathers, notably St. Mark of Ephesus. The idea that God will burn away all our bad works, but then save what is left of the person, is to be found in 1 Cor. 3:15, and it refers to hell after the last judgment, not to the intermediate state. So Orthodx hell is similar to RC purgatory.

Interestingly, St. John Chrysostom interprets 1 Cor. 3:15 as meaning that the person will say in the fire after his works have been destroyed (in Greek, sothenai can mean both "saved" and "preserved"), i.e. he is "preserved in the fire." So either way, it refers to hell. The idea of purgatory is incompatible with Orthodoxy. We are cleansed of our sins through repentence and grace, NOT through being sufficiently punished. Legalism has no place in Orthodoxy, because it has no place in reality.
On the one hand, Orthodox hell is similar to RC purgatory, but on the other hand, the idea of purgatory is incompatible with Orthodoxy?
I guess that I am missing something here. Sorry.

What I am saying is, there seems to be a similarity between purgatory and Orthodox hell, but the RC idea that forgiveness comes through sufficient punishment is totally incompatible with Orthodoxy. Hell is not God's capital punishment, hell is separation from God. The RC Catechism says so, so we agree on that.

The similarity between purgatory and Orthodox hell is the concept of the burning away of sin. The difference is that purgatory implies that suffering is how one is forgiven, whereas in Orthodoxy, the burning away of sin is the punishment itself. I hope this makes my point clearer, and if I am misrepresenting purgatory, which is certainly possible, please explain.
There is so little about Purgatory that is actually defined dogma.

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

III. THE FINAL PURIFICATION, OR PURGATORY

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

1031 The Church gives the name Purgatory to this final purification of the elect, which is entirely different from the punishment of the damned.604 The Church formulated her doctrine of faith on Purgatory especially at the Councils of Florence and Trent. The tradition of the Church, by reference to certain texts of Scripture, speaks of a cleansing fire:605


As for certain lesser faults, we must believe that, before the Final Judgment, there is a purifying fire. He who is truth says that whoever utters blasphemy against the Holy Spirit will be pardoned neither in this age nor in the age to come. From this sentence we understand that certain offenses can be forgiven in this age, but certain others in the age to come.606
1032 This teaching is also based on the practice of prayer for the dead, already mentioned in Sacred Scripture: "Therefore [Judas Maccabeus] made atonement for the dead, that they might be delivered from their sin."607 From the beginning the Church has honored the memory of the dead and offered prayers in suffrage for them, above all the Eucharistic sacrifice, so that, thus purified, they may attain the beatific vision of God.608 The Church also commends almsgiving, indulgences, and works of penance undertaken on behalf of the dead:


Let us help and commemorate them. If Job's sons were purified by their father's sacrifice, why would we doubt that our offerings for the dead bring them some consolation? Let us not hesitate to help those who have died and to offer our prayers for them.609
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
akimel
Fr Aidan
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ROCOR (Western Rite)
Posts: 520



WWW
« Reply #1040 on: March 29, 2010, 07:58:56 PM »

"The reason for purgatory is not the past, not an external, legal punishment for past sins, as if our relationship with God were still under the old law. Rather, its reason is the future; it is our rehabilitation, it is training for heaven. For our relationship with God has been radically changed by Christ; we are adopted as his children, and our relationship is now fundamentally filial and familial, not legal. Purgatory is God’s loving parental discipline" (see Heb 12:5-14).

Peter Kreeft, Catholic Christianity, pp. 149-150.
Logged

Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #1041 on: March 29, 2010, 08:32:17 PM »

"The reason for purgatory is not the past, not an external, legal punishment for past sins, as if our relationship with God were still under the old law. Rather, its reason is the future; it is our rehabilitation, it is training for heaven. For our relationship with God has been radically changed by Christ; we are adopted as his children, and our relationship is now fundamentally filial and familial, not legal. Purgatory is God’s loving parental discipline" (see Heb 12:5-14).

Peter Kreeft, Catholic Christianity, pp. 149-150.

This is only Catholicism lite - true as far as it goes but suppressing authentic papal teaching.  If we go back through this thread and read the statements of Pope Paul VI and Pope John Paul II we see that Kreeft's view is superficial and contradicts modern papal teaching.
Logged
Melodist
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: The Faith That Established The Universe
Jurisdiction: AOANA
Posts: 2,523



« Reply #1042 on: March 29, 2010, 08:46:28 PM »

There is an Orthodox teaching on purification, illumnation, and theosis. The main difference that I know of between "purgatory" in the Catholic sense and "purification" in the Orthodox sense is that purification is cleansing and not punitive or disciplinary. This difference probably come from a combination of the western acceptance of "satisfaction" and the eastern teaching that the grace that purifies, illumines, and nurtures repentant sinners is the same grace that is experienced as fire and torment by unrepentant sinners.

Just a thought.
Logged

And FWIW, these are our Fathers too, you know.

Made Perfect in Weakness - Latest Post: The Son of God
Rufus
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: leet


Nafpliotis with sunglasses and a cigar.


« Reply #1043 on: March 29, 2010, 08:53:06 PM »

There is an Orthodox teaching on purification, illumnation, and theosis. The main difference that I know of between "purgatory" in the Catholic sense and "purification" in the Orthodox sense is that purification is cleansing and not punitive or disciplinary. This difference probably come from a combination of the western acceptance of "satisfaction" and the eastern teaching that the grace that purifies, illumines, and nurtures repentant sinners is the same grace that is experienced as fire and torment by unrepentant sinners.

Just a thought.

Couldn't have said it better myself. However, I admit that I'm kinda confused on what the RC doctrine on purgatory, indulgences, and satisfaction actually is. I may have spoken rashly in my previous posts. Does anyone know what the scholastic writers had to say about these topics? The Summa Theologica are easy to find on the web, but other writings are not, and not all of the scholastics agreed with Thomas Aquinas.
Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #1044 on: March 29, 2010, 09:17:42 PM »

However, I admit that I'm kinda confused on what the RC doctrine on purgatory, indulgences, and satisfaction actually is.

Dear Rufus,

You need not be concerned very much about trying to understand since if you go on a Forum such as Catholic Answers you will soon see the confusion between older Catholics who have been taught one thing and younger Catholics who are being taught another and simply have no comprhension what the older Catholics are talking about and dismiss it as nonsense taught by ignorant priests and nuns and based on erroneous transmission of thre faith in more gullible centuries

The problem is that some of Catholicism's theology is in a state of flux and there are divergent teachings.  So Catholics may use one argument one day and the next day use another if it is more appropriate.

I'd like to pull a post from a mutual friend who writes here.

-oOo-

Do yourself a favor and pick up any book in the 1950's teaching the Roman Catholic Faith...

This is The Faith
Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma
Everyman's Theology
Baltimore Catechism
etc

and you will find the faith taught by the Roman Catholic Church in the 1950's and 'all' of them taught Purgatory, Limbo, etc in the same exact way with very little in common with today's Roman Catholic Theology.

Modern Roman Catholics are all about reductionism. Separating 'depictions' from Doctrine, Traditions from traditions, etc etc. That is because within this kind of reconstruction you would be forced to deal with the contradictions such a move in Theology would create.

I'd recommend that Catholics start rereading the Classics and realize that Post-Vatican II Theology is a departure from what has been taught and thought for one thousand years.

Now you and others may argue that this 'piece' of Classic Theology wasn't 'infallibly' spoken or was only tradition with a small "t".   For me that spin on the reductionism happening within the Roman Catholic Church since Vatican II is such a farce.  It's rationalizing how we 'change the theology of the Roman Catholic Church' without admitting that we are changing the theology of the Roman Catholic Church... and that is weak in my opinion.

For hundreds of years Roman Catholics were taught Purgatory was a 'place and state' and that Limbo was a 'place and state' but in our modern times such certainties have been sidelined to make room for other theological opinions.  I ask, what happened to 'truth'?   I look and I see Catholicism reconstructing itself and pretending that it really isn't because this or that wasn't spoken infallibly or was actually never 'really' part of Tradition but only tradition with a small "t".   I simply can't believe in the Roman Catholic Church because of such nonsense and have simply embraced the Church that Catholicism is attempting to remake itself into... the Holy Orthodox Catholic Church.

Logged
akimel
Fr Aidan
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ROCOR (Western Rite)
Posts: 520



WWW
« Reply #1045 on: March 30, 2010, 07:00:30 AM »

"The reason for purgatory is not the past, not an external, legal punishment for past sins, as if our relationship with God were still under the old law. Rather, its reason is the future; it is our rehabilitation, it is training for heaven. For our relationship with God has been radically changed by Christ; we are adopted as his children, and our relationship is now fundamentally filial and familial, not legal. Purgatory is God’s loving parental discipline" (see Heb 12:5-14).

Peter Kreeft, Catholic Christianity, pp. 149-150.

This is only Catholicism lite - true as far as it goes but suppressing authentic papal teaching.  If we go back through this thread and read the statements of Pope Paul VI and Pope John Paul II we see that Kreeft's view is superficial and contradicts modern papal teaching.

As suggested, I have gone back through the thread. Is Peter Kreeft's presentation superficial?  No.  It is perfectly in accord with the Catechism of the Catholic Church.  Does this mean, therefore, that Kreeft's explanation of purgatorial satisfaction would have satisfied a Catholic theologian 150 years ago?  Perhaps not.

Without question there has been significant doctrinal development in the Catholic understanding of purgatory and clarification purgatorial punishment of the temporal consequences of sin.  Given, Fr Ambrose, that your principal concern in this discussion is purely polemical, I know that you will cast this doctrinal development in the worst possible light, as you seek to demonstrate the ecclesial superiority of Orthodoxy.  Be that as it may, a change has occurred.  A Catholic will seek always to interpret doctrinal change within a context of fundamental doctrinal continuity and a deepening of the Church's apprehension of the apostolic deposit of faith.  My own reflections on this subject may be found on my old blogsite Pontifications.       

Doctrinal development has occurred and is continuing to occur in the Catholic Church's understanding of post-mortem sanctification, as evidenced in the Catholic Catechism, Pope John Paul II's catechetical addresses, and Pope Benedict's encyclical Spe Salvi, as well as in the writings of numerous Catholic theologians.  What is taking place is a thorough-going reconstruction of inherited juridical and penal categories in a renewed apprehension of the infinite and unconditional love of the Holy Trinity, as revealed in Holy Scripture.   

Instead of seeking to exploit this development for apologetic and polemical purposes, why not simply rejoice that the Orthodox and Catholic Churches now find themselves closer on this particular topic than at any time during the past thousand years? 

Logged

Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 7,019


"My god is greater."


« Reply #1046 on: March 30, 2010, 11:34:00 AM »

Instead of seeking to exploit this development for apologetic and polemical purposes, why not simply rejoice that the Orthodox and Catholic Churches now find themselves closer on this particular topic than at any time during the past thousand years? 

The problem with the modern Papal church's shifts in doctrine, even if they seem superficially closer to Orthodoxy, is that they are accompanied by modernism and a general drift toward relativism. They are just the tremors of a crumbling edifice sinking into the pit. It is important to look at the spirit as much as the letter. The orchestrators of these changes are the same folks who sit idly by as the Catholic mass is destroyed. As I understand it, "development of doctrine" is meant to expand and clarify; it's not supposed to be a revision which overthrows the previous understanding. Who knows what change is coming next?
Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake
ignatius
Baptacathadox
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic > Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA - Diocese of the South
Posts: 1,690


My Son Aidan... :-)


« Reply #1047 on: March 30, 2010, 01:18:22 PM »

In an Orthodox Country after an Orthodox Christian confesses their sins... was there any sense that they must 'still' face civil law for their crimes?
Logged

St Basil the Great (330-379 A.D.): “I think then that the one goal of all who are really and truly serving the Lord ought to be to bring back to union the churches who have at different times and in diverse manners divided from one another.”
Shlomlokh
主哀れめよ!
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Bulgarian
Posts: 1,267



« Reply #1048 on: March 30, 2010, 01:32:07 PM »

Instead of seeking to exploit this development for apologetic and polemical purposes, why not simply rejoice that the Orthodox and Catholic Churches now find themselves closer on this particular topic than at any time during the past thousand years? 

The problem with the modern Papal church's shifts in doctrine, even if they seem superficially closer to Orthodoxy, is that they are accompanied by modernism and a general drift toward relativism. They are just the tremors of a crumbling edifice sinking into the pit. It is important to look at the spirit as much as the letter. The orchestrators of these changes are the same folks who sit idly by as the Catholic mass is destroyed. As I understand it, "development of doctrine" is meant to expand and clarify; it's not supposed to be a revision which overthrows the previous understanding. Who knows what change is coming next?

I agree with this completely. While I find it nice that they are coming closer to the Orthodox position, I am wary that the RCC seemingly changes its doctrines from age to age all in the name of "development of doctrine." What is wrong with St. Vincent of Lérins idea of the Catholic Faith? Perhaps if the RCC stuck to that, maybe there would not be such confusion and mess as there is now.  Undecided

In Christ,
Andrew
Logged

"I will pour out my prayer unto the Lord, and to Him will I proclaim my grief; for with evils my soul is filled, and my life unto hades hath drawn nigh, and like Jonah I will pray: From corruption raise me up, O God." -Ode VI, Irmos of the Supplicatory Canon to the Theotokos
Rufus
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: leet


Nafpliotis with sunglasses and a cigar.


« Reply #1049 on: March 30, 2010, 01:50:00 PM »

In an Orthodox Country after an Orthodox Christian confesses their sins... was there any sense that they must 'still' face civil law for their crimes?

What exactly are you getting at? Orthodox Christians believe in forgiveness, not retribution, even if the perpetrator deserves it. We are all perpetrators of sin. Sometimes civil law needs to punish someone to maintain order in society, but it has nothing to do with retribution. St. Moses of Ethiopia was a thug and a murderer; when he converted, the monks did not punish him, they just accepted him. I believe several Orthodox saints, including St. Nicholas and even Bd. Augustine, bargained hard for the freedom of criminals who were setenced to death. God, I imagine, is also forgiving, otherwise we are not being conformed to His image by learning forgiveness. You cannot have both forgiveness and punishment.
Logged
akimel
Fr Aidan
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ROCOR (Western Rite)
Posts: 520



WWW
« Reply #1050 on: March 30, 2010, 05:02:59 PM »

Instead of seeking to exploit this development for apologetic and polemical purposes, why not simply rejoice that the Orthodox and Catholic Churches now find themselves closer on this particular topic than at any time during the past thousand years? 

The problem with the modern Papal church's shifts in doctrine, even if they seem superficially closer to Orthodoxy, is that they are accompanied by modernism and a general drift toward relativism. They are just the tremors of a crumbling edifice sinking into the pit. It is important to look at the spirit as much as the letter. The orchestrators of these changes are the same folks who sit idly by as the Catholic mass is destroyed. As I understand it, "development of doctrine" is meant to expand and clarify; it's not supposed to be a revision which overthrows the previous understanding. Who knows what change is coming next?

I agree with this completely. While I find it nice that they are coming closer to the Orthodox position, I am wary that the RCC seemingly changes its doctrines from age to age all in the name of "development of doctrine." What is wrong with St. Vincent of Lérins idea of the Catholic Faith? Perhaps if the RCC stuck to that, maybe there would not be such confusion and mess as there is now.  Undecided

C'mon, guys.  Perhaps we can talk about the infiltration of modernism in the Catholic Church in another thread, but modernism doesn't obtain here.  Fair is fair.  You can't have it both ways.  You can't jump on the  Catholic Church for advancing a false or defective teaching (in this case, the temporal punishment of sins) and then jump on it when it reformulates this teaching in ways more acceptable to the Eastern Church.  Whatever you may think about the development of doctrine, it does allow the Catholic Church to recognize the historical-conditionedness of its doctrinal formulations and to reformulate them in light of deeper reflection upon the apostolic deposit of faith.  As Pope John XXIII declared at the opening of the Second Vatican Council:

Quote
What is needed at the present time is a new enthusiasm, a new joy and serenity of mind in the unreserved acceptance by all of the entire Christian faith, without forfeiting that accuracy and precision in its presentation which characterized the proceedings of the Council of Trent and the First Vatican Council. What is needed, and what everyone imbued with a truly Christian, Catholic and apostolic spirit craves today, is that this doctrine shall be more widely known, more deeply understood, and more penetrating in its effects on men's moral lives. What is needed is that this certain and immutable doctrine, to which the faithful owe obedience, be studied afresh and reformulated in contemporary terms. For this deposit of faith, or truths which are contained in our time-honored teaching is one thing; the manner in which these truths are set forth (with their meaning preserved intact) is something else.

I am not going to pretend that everything has gone swimmingly for the Catholic Church during the past fifty years, but it is unreasonable for the Orthodox to deny to the Catholic Church the freedom to re-think and re-state its teachings.  Contemporary Orthodox theologians complain about the Western captivity of the Orthodox Church over the past five hundred years.  Many Catholic theologians also complain of the Western (i.e., scholastic) captivity of the Catholic Church during that same period of time--hence the return of many Catholic theologians and scholars to the biblical and patristic sources of the faith (ad fontes).  Pope Benedict is an outstanding example of this ressourcement.         

Fair is fair.  Let's at least give the Catholic Church her due when it is due.     
Logged

Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #1051 on: March 30, 2010, 08:36:00 PM »

Instead of seeking to exploit this development for apologetic and polemical purposes, why not simply rejoice that the Orthodox and Catholic Churches now find themselves closer on this particular topic than at any time during the past thousand years? 



1.  The Orthodox receive their faith through the transmission of the sacred Tradition which takes a variety of forms.   Bishops, priests and laity alike are all guardians of the Tradition and must be obedient to it.

2.  Catholics on the other hand are expected to be submissive to the Magisterium and to its official Magisterial teachings.  Whatever of their tradition has not been codified into a Magisterial teaching is really nothing more than what the Orthodox might call theologoumena.

I learnt this major difference between our Churches in the way we approach the faith the hard way.   I instinctively fall into the error of thinking that Catholics are subject to Tradition and I have often written of their traditional beliefs as if they are a concrete part of their faith. But that is not the case - without a magisterial teaching they are not certain.  They are only an interim belief/opinion on which you cannot place much reliance because in future centuries it may be redefined or even discarded since it never had a magisterial definition.

I think I have written about this here previously?  Teachings which have been taught and believed for centuries as part of the sacred Tradition within Catholicism may be annulled and superseded by subsequent teachings and definitions.

Take purgatory as an example.  The amazingly superficial way in which the traditional teaching of purgatory as a place and a state was changed by Pope John Paul in a couple of lunchtime homilies is a case in point.   During his lunchtime homilies, in a few minutes while people are munching on their sandwiches, the Pope does away with the traditional teaching.  The Catholic world applauds this.

But it was merely an opinion of Pope John Paul. 

There was no official papal proclamation, no Council, no consultation with the Magisterium, no Magisterial pronouncement. 

There is no reason why the next generation of Catholics cannot revert to the older teaching.   You see how unstable the system is becoming for Catholics?

Logged
ignatius
Baptacathadox
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic > Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA - Diocese of the South
Posts: 1,690


My Son Aidan... :-)


« Reply #1052 on: March 30, 2010, 09:19:30 PM »

In an Orthodox Country after an Orthodox Christian confesses their sins... was there any sense that they must 'still' face civil law for their crimes?

What exactly are you getting at? Orthodox Christians believe in forgiveness, not retribution, even if the perpetrator deserves it. We are all perpetrators of sin. Sometimes civil law needs to punish someone to maintain order in society, but it has nothing to do with retribution. St. Moses of Ethiopia was a thug and a murderer; when he converted, the monks did not punish him, they just accepted him. I believe several Orthodox saints, including St. Nicholas and even Bd. Augustine, bargained hard for the freedom of criminals who were setenced to death. God, I imagine, is also forgiving, otherwise we are not being conformed to His image by learning forgiveness. You cannot have both forgiveness and punishment.

I'm curious if there is a sense of crimes having consequences even after one has confessed them? Would a murderer not face civil court for his crimes after confession?
Logged

St Basil the Great (330-379 A.D.): “I think then that the one goal of all who are really and truly serving the Lord ought to be to bring back to union the churches who have at different times and in diverse manners divided from one another.”
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 7,019


"My god is greater."


« Reply #1053 on: March 30, 2010, 09:25:51 PM »

In an Orthodox Country after an Orthodox Christian confesses their sins... was there any sense that they must 'still' face civil law for their crimes?

What exactly are you getting at? Orthodox Christians believe in forgiveness, not retribution, even if the perpetrator deserves it. We are all perpetrators of sin. Sometimes civil law needs to punish someone to maintain order in society, but it has nothing to do with retribution. St. Moses of Ethiopia was a thug and a murderer; when he converted, the monks did not punish him, they just accepted him. I believe several Orthodox saints, including St. Nicholas and even Bd. Augustine, bargained hard for the freedom of criminals who were setenced to death. God, I imagine, is also forgiving, otherwise we are not being conformed to His image by learning forgiveness. You cannot have both forgiveness and punishment.

I'm curious if there is a sense of crimes having consequences even after one has confessed them? Would a murderer not face civil court for his crimes after confession?

We render unto Caesar what is Caesar's, and unto God's what is God's. Confession is satisfactory to God, but isn't satisfactory to the secular law. As Christians, we are supposed to obey the law insofar as it does not require us to act against our faith, so one still submits to the judgment of the earthly authorities.
Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #1054 on: March 30, 2010, 09:27:16 PM »

In an Orthodox Country after an Orthodox Christian confesses their sins... was there any sense that they must 'still' face civil law for their crimes?

What exactly are you getting at? Orthodox Christians believe in forgiveness, not retribution, even if the perpetrator deserves it. We are all perpetrators of sin. Sometimes civil law needs to punish someone to maintain order in society, but it has nothing to do with retribution. St. Moses of Ethiopia was a thug and a murderer; when he converted, the monks did not punish him, they just accepted him. I believe several Orthodox saints, including St. Nicholas and even Bd. Augustine, bargained hard for the freedom of criminals who were setenced to death. God, I imagine, is also forgiving, otherwise we are not being conformed to His image by learning forgiveness. You cannot have both forgiveness and punishment.

I'm curious if there is a sense of crimes having consequences even after one has confessed them? Would a murderer not face civil court for his crimes after confession?

Having in mind the distinction between crime and sin (for example masturbation is not a crime but it is a sin) the question really is -  was Christ's satisfaction for sin on the Cross "full and final payment of the debt" or did He fail to make full satisfaction?
Logged
ignatius
Baptacathadox
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic > Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA - Diocese of the South
Posts: 1,690


My Son Aidan... :-)


« Reply #1055 on: March 30, 2010, 09:31:21 PM »

In an Orthodox Country after an Orthodox Christian confesses their sins... was there any sense that they must 'still' face civil law for their crimes?

What exactly are you getting at? Orthodox Christians believe in forgiveness, not retribution, even if the perpetrator deserves it. We are all perpetrators of sin. Sometimes civil law needs to punish someone to maintain order in society, but it has nothing to do with retribution. St. Moses of Ethiopia was a thug and a murderer; when he converted, the monks did not punish him, they just accepted him. I believe several Orthodox saints, including St. Nicholas and even Bd. Augustine, bargained hard for the freedom of criminals who were setenced to death. God, I imagine, is also forgiving, otherwise we are not being conformed to His image by learning forgiveness. You cannot have both forgiveness and punishment.

I'm curious if there is a sense of crimes having consequences even after one has confessed them? Would a murderer not face civil court for his crimes after confession?

Having in mind the distinction between crime and sin (for example masturbation is not a crime but it is a sin) the question really is -  was Christ's satisfaction for sin on the Cross "full and final payment of the debt" or did He fail to make full satisfaction?

So are you and others saying that in a true Christian Nation there should be no penalty for crimes because Christ has 'paid the debt'?
Logged

St Basil the Great (330-379 A.D.): “I think then that the one goal of all who are really and truly serving the Lord ought to be to bring back to union the churches who have at different times and in diverse manners divided from one another.”
akimel
Fr Aidan
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ROCOR (Western Rite)
Posts: 520



WWW
« Reply #1056 on: March 30, 2010, 09:39:41 PM »

There is no reason why the next generation of Catholics cannot revert to the older teaching.   You see how unstable the system is becoming for Catholics?

Yes, yes, we get it, Father.  The Catholic Church is bad.  The Orthodox Church is best.  Any stick is good enough to beat Catholicism with, right?  

But couldn't we, just this once, stick with the topic of the thread.  
Logged

Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 7,019


"My god is greater."


« Reply #1057 on: March 30, 2010, 09:52:37 PM »

There is no reason why the next generation of Catholics cannot revert to the older teaching.   You see how unstable the system is becoming for Catholics?

Yes, yes, we get it, Father.  The Catholic Church is bad.  The Orthodox Church is best.  Any stick is good enough to beat Catholicism with, right?  

But couldn't we, just this once, stick with the topic of the thread.  

We are sticking with the topic. Irish Hermit just pointed out why the doctrinal changes in the RCC are not substantial- they are the result of whim and may likewise be reversed on a whim.

I think you taking a very reductionist approach in suggesting that modernism and degenerate liturgy are completely separate issues from the Vatican's doctrinal flavor of the month. The current mood of the Papal church vis-a-vis Purgatory is an effect of its instability, therefore it is unreliable and not particularly promising. The Church of Christ arrives at her dogmatic positions on the basis of Tradition; the RCC arrives at hers on the basis of fads and revisionism. In fact, when people can openly question the Vatican's dogmas and still remain in communion, like the Melkites, it is hard to conclusively say what the RCC teaches at all.
Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake
Rufus
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: leet


Nafpliotis with sunglasses and a cigar.


« Reply #1058 on: March 30, 2010, 10:04:22 PM »

In an Orthodox Country after an Orthodox Christian confesses their sins... was there any sense that they must 'still' face civil law for their crimes?

What exactly are you getting at? Orthodox Christians believe in forgiveness, not retribution, even if the perpetrator deserves it. We are all perpetrators of sin. Sometimes civil law needs to punish someone to maintain order in society, but it has nothing to do with retribution. St. Moses of Ethiopia was a thug and a murderer; when he converted, the monks did not punish him, they just accepted him. I believe several Orthodox saints, including St. Nicholas and even Bd. Augustine, bargained hard for the freedom of criminals who were setenced to death. God, I imagine, is also forgiving, otherwise we are not being conformed to His image by learning forgiveness. You cannot have both forgiveness and punishment.

I'm curious if there is a sense of crimes having consequences even after one has confessed them? Would a murderer not face civil court for his crimes after confession?

Having in mind the distinction between crime and sin (for example masturbation is not a crime but it is a sin) the question really is -  was Christ's satisfaction for sin on the Cross "full and final payment of the debt" or did He fail to make full satisfaction?

So are you and others saying that in a true Christian Nation there should be no penalty for crimes because Christ has 'paid the debt'?

In a civil society, there needs to be a system of enforced justice to act as a deterrent to crime and to protect the populace from criminals. I am sure we agree on this. God gave the Law to Israel because it was necessary for the establishment of God's people as a civil society. The Law has nothing whatsoever to do with punishing people for the sake of punishment.

If you really think that punishing people for their sins is the will of God, then you need to take a long and serious look at the way God treated sinners when he was with us in the person of Jesus Christ. The God who saved the adultress's life (and no, she did not go to confession first) does not require criminals to be punished, and he is certainly not antagonizing people in Purgatory for every sin they ever committed.
Logged
ignatius
Baptacathadox
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic > Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA - Diocese of the South
Posts: 1,690


My Son Aidan... :-)


« Reply #1059 on: March 30, 2010, 10:44:01 PM »

In an Orthodox Country after an Orthodox Christian confesses their sins... was there any sense that they must 'still' face civil law for their crimes?

What exactly are you getting at? Orthodox Christians believe in forgiveness, not retribution, even if the perpetrator deserves it. We are all perpetrators of sin. Sometimes civil law needs to punish someone to maintain order in society, but it has nothing to do with retribution. St. Moses of Ethiopia was a thug and a murderer; when he converted, the monks did not punish him, they just accepted him. I believe several Orthodox saints, including St. Nicholas and even Bd. Augustine, bargained hard for the freedom of criminals who were setenced to death. God, I imagine, is also forgiving, otherwise we are not being conformed to His image by learning forgiveness. You cannot have both forgiveness and punishment.

I'm curious if there is a sense of crimes having consequences even after one has confessed them? Would a murderer not face civil court for his crimes after confession?

Having in mind the distinction between crime and sin (for example masturbation is not a crime but it is a sin) the question really is -  was Christ's satisfaction for sin on the Cross "full and final payment of the debt" or did He fail to make full satisfaction?

So are you and others saying that in a true Christian Nation there should be no penalty for crimes because Christ has 'paid the debt'?

In a civil society, there needs to be a system of enforced justice to act as a deterrent to crime and to protect the populace from criminals. I am sure we agree on this. God gave the Law to Israel because it was necessary for the establishment of God's people as a civil society. The Law has nothing whatsoever to do with punishing people for the sake of punishment.

If you really think that punishing people for their sins is the will of God, then you need to take a long and serious look at the way God treated sinners when he was with us in the person of Jesus Christ. The God who saved the adultress's life (and no, she did not go to confession first) does not require criminals to be punished, and he is certainly not antagonizing people in Purgatory for every sin they ever committed.

I've asked two questions. Where are you getting all this presumption of my motives for these two simple questions?
Logged

St Basil the Great (330-379 A.D.): “I think then that the one goal of all who are really and truly serving the Lord ought to be to bring back to union the churches who have at different times and in diverse manners divided from one another.”
Melodist
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: The Faith That Established The Universe
Jurisdiction: AOANA
Posts: 2,523



« Reply #1060 on: March 30, 2010, 11:51:01 PM »

I'm curious if there is a sense of crimes having consequences even after one has confessed them? Would a murderer not face civil court for his crimes after confession?

Human justice and God's justice are two completely different things.

Human justice is a combination of protecting the rest of society from criminals and having a formal system of punishment as retribution or "getting even" against criminals.

God's justice is to take every possible step that can be taken to reconcile us to Him and cleanse us of whatever stands between us and Him.

As for your question about the murderer, his position with the civil authorities would depend on whether or not the police catch him and have enough evidence to prosecute and convict him. His position with God has great potential.



Your mind was filled with a holy inspiration from God,
Turning you from the lust and pleasures of the flesh,
Bringing you to the height of the city of God!
O Holy Father Moses, intercede with Christ God that He may grant us great mercy!


Logged

And FWIW, these are our Fathers too, you know.

Made Perfect in Weakness - Latest Post: The Son of God
Alveus Lacuna
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 6,917



« Reply #1061 on: March 31, 2010, 12:23:09 AM »

In fact, when people can openly question the Vatican's dogmas and still remain in communion, like the Melkites, it is hard to conclusively say what the RCC teaches at all.

Bingo.
Logged
akimel
Fr Aidan
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ROCOR (Western Rite)
Posts: 520



WWW
« Reply #1062 on: March 31, 2010, 01:14:35 AM »

I think I have written about this here previously? Teachings which have been taught and believed for centuries as part of the sacred Tradition within Catholicism may be annulled and superseded by subsequent teachings and definitions.

Take purgatory as an example.  The amazingly superficial way in which the traditional teaching of purgatory as a place and a state was changed by Pope John Paul in a couple of lunchtime homilies is a case in point.   During his lunchtime homilies, in a few minutes while people are munching on their sandwiches, the Pope does away with the traditional teaching.  The Catholic world applauds this.

Since at least one reader appears to be taking the above comment seriously, I suppose it needs to be addressed.  In fact, Fr Ambrose is simply wrong.  The suggestion that in his catechetical address on purgatory the Pope peremptorily and single-handedly altered the Church's teaching is silly and displays a remarkable ignorance of the Catholic Church and the limits of the teaching authority of the Pope, as well as ignorance of the scholarly biblical, historical, and theological scholarship and analysis that long preceded the Pope's catechetical address on purgatory.  Fr Ambrose loves to attack the Catholic Church.  I think it occasionally borders on sin.  It is certainly spiritually destructive.  Why he devotes so much energy to this endeavor only God knows; but his knowledge of the Catholic Church as a living, breathing, thinking community is exceptionally limited.  His knowledge of Catholic theology appears to be restricted to a few magisterial proof-texts he's pulled together from the internet.  Perhaps at one time in the far past he actually read some serious Catholic theology--I have assumed, perhaps mistakenly, that he was raised in the Catholic Church (which might explain a lot) and converted to Orthodoxy as a young man--but certainly he has not read any of the heavy hitters from the past fifty years.  I enjoy engaging cantankerous old men, and I'd love to throw back a pint with him sometime at the local pub.  But please take his cyber-pontifications on Catholicism with a grain of salt.      

That a clarification of the dogmatic meaning of "temporal punishments" and purgatory is now occurring within the Catholic Church I do not deny--indeed, I applaud it. This clarification has not been foisted upon the Church by the Pope or any single theologian or group of theologians.  That's simply not the way things work in the Catholic Church.  This clarification is the fruit of many decades of scholarly engagement with Scripture and the Church Fathers (especially the Eastern Fathers), as well as ecumenical discussion with the Lutherans and Anglicans.  The Pope simply brought to word what Catholic theologians have been thinking and teaching for the past several decades.          

I didn't join this thread to attack the Orthodox Church or to defend the Catholic Church against her detractors.  It's just that this particular topic is one that I know a little about, and I thought I might be helpful in the discussion ...    
« Last Edit: March 31, 2010, 01:15:19 AM by akimel » Logged

Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #1063 on: March 31, 2010, 05:05:35 AM »


 Fr Ambrose loves to attack the Catholic Church.  I think it occasionally borders on sin.  It is certainly spiritually destructive.  

Father, within its own sphere the Roman Catholic Church does a reasonable work of teaching its people about Christ, as do the Anglican and Lutheran Churches, the Methodists and Baptists.

But within the context of its relationship through the centuries with the Orthodox Church, Catholicism has brought us only sorrow, destruction and aggression.  It has proven to be as much an enemy of the Church of Christ as the Muslims and the Communists.  Has it repented?  Has it reformed? Has it been able to assume an entirely different mindset?  We really do not know.

My mentor in these things was the ever-memorable and holy Archimandrite of the Monastery of Cheliye, Fr Justin Popovich (died 1979), one of the 20th century's best theologians and spiritual fathers.  His writings on the deleterious effect of the Catholic Church on the Orthodox Church are unashamedly honest.  Despite his holiness I can imagine that if he were writing on Internet forums these days the Moderators would not know how to handle him!   laugh

You may remember that I wrote to you once of the doubt and suspicion described by Metropolitan Anthony Bloom of London in his summation of the Catholic-Orthodox dialogue.  What he said is worth noting since he was a Russian hierarch who had actively participated for decades in the ecumenical dialogue between the Orthodox and Catholics.   His view is a not uncommon one within Orthodoxy and it merits consideration in the ecumenical encounter.

He was unable to attend the annual Synod in Moscow in 1997 and he made a written report to the Patriarch and Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church and in part his report reads:

"Our relationship with Roman Catholicism

"It is time we realised that Rome is only interested in extinguishing Orthodoxy.
Theological encounters and 'accords' on the basis of texts lead us up a blind alley,
for behind them there looms a firm resolve of the Vatican to swallow up the Orthodox Church."


The whole thing is in "Sourozh" the diocesan magazine of the UK Russian diocese:
Metr. Anthony of Sourozh, "A Letter to Patriarch Alexis of Moscow and All
Russia", SOUROZH, 69 (August 1997), 17-22.

« Last Edit: March 31, 2010, 05:11:01 AM by Irish Hermit » Logged
Azul
Moderated
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Român Ortodox
Jurisdiction: Eastern Orthodox
Posts: 988



« Reply #1064 on: March 31, 2010, 07:38:57 AM »

Where are the souls of those departed ones for whom we pray?
Logged

Every formula of every religion has in this age of reason, to submit to the acid test of reason and universal assent.
Mahatma Gandhi
Altar Server
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian(as of 12/18/10)
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 978


Holy Father Seraphim, Pray to God for us!


« Reply #1065 on: March 31, 2010, 07:54:01 AM »

Glory to Jesus Christ!
        Forgive me if I am wrong for I don't know very much about post-death theology in the OC as of yet. But I think that when we pray for the deceased during the first 40 days after they have fallen asleep  we do so because they are in a state of transition .

Just my two cents

Have a Blessed Great week
Logged

All my hope I place in you, O Mother of God, keep me under your protection!
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #1066 on: March 31, 2010, 07:54:51 AM »

Where are the souls of those departed ones for whom we pray?


Three quotes from widely differing centuries (5th, 17th and 20th) which show the same unanimous teaching on life after death and prior to the Last Judgement.

Orthodox teaching on this point (pax to Fr Seraphim Rose) is characterised by a sober reticence to go beyond the little which the Saviour has been pleased to reveal to us.

But the human mind which always hates to admit its limitations is very ingenious in creating afterlife scenarios, and in this respect our Roman Catholic brothers are the most ingenious of all.   Smiley
 
Quote 1:   The teaching of Saint Augustine of Hippo:
 
 
"During the time, moreover, which intervenes between a man's death
 and the final resurrection, the soul dwells in a hidden retreat, where it enjoys rest
or suffers affliction just in proportion to the merit it has earned by the life which it led on earth."

Augustine, Enchiridion, 1099 (A.D. 421).

 
Quote 2:  The 1980 Resolution of the ROCA Synod of bishops on the toll house belief... which is virtually word for word what Augustine wrote 1,500 years earlier!

"Taking all of the foregoing into consideration, the Synod of Bishops resolve:

In the deliberations on life after death one must in general keep in mind
that it has not pleased the Lord to reveal to us very much aside from the
fact that the degree of a soul's blessedness depends on how much a man's life
on the earth has been truly Christian, and the degree of a man's posthumous
suffering depends upon the degree of sinfulness. To add conjectures to the little
that the Lord has been pleased to reveal to us is not beneficial to our salvation..."
 

 
 
Quote 3:    The Synod of Constantinople of 1672:
 
"We believe that the souls of the departed are in either
repose or torment as each one has wrought, for immediately after the
separation from the body they are pronounced either in bliss or in suffering
and sorrows, yet we confess that neither their joy nor their condemnation
are yet complete. After the general resurrection, when the soul is reunited
with the body, each one will receive the full measure of joy or condemnation
due to him for the way in which he conducted himself, whether well or ill."


Logged
Azul
Moderated
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Român Ortodox
Jurisdiction: Eastern Orthodox
Posts: 988



« Reply #1067 on: March 31, 2010, 08:00:53 AM »

Where are the souls of those departed ones for whom we pray?


Three quotes from widely differing centuries (5th, 17th and 20th) which show the same unanimous teaching on life after death and prior to the Last Judgement.

Orthodox teaching on this point (pax to Fr Seraphim Rose) is characterised by a sober reticence to go beyond the little which the Saviour has been pleased to reveal to us.

But the human mind which always hates to admit its limitations is very ingenious in creating afterlife scenarios, and in this respect our Roman Catholic brothers are the most ingenious of all.   Smiley
 
Quote 1:   The teaching of Saint Augustine of Hippo:
 
 
"During the time, moreover, which intervenes between a man's death
 and the final resurrection, the soul dwells in a hidden retreat, where it enjoys rest
or suffers affliction just in proportion to the merit it has earned by the life which it led on earth."

Augustine, Enchiridion, 1099 (A.D. 421).

 
Quote 2:  The 1980 Resolution of the ROCA Synod of bishops on the toll house belief... which is virtually word for word what Augustine wrote 1,500 years earlier!

"Taking all of the foregoing into consideration, the Synod of Bishops resolve:

In the deliberations on life after death one must in general keep in mind
that it has not pleased the Lord to reveal to us very much aside from the
fact that the degree of a soul's blessedness depends on how much a man's life
on the earth has been truly Christian, and the degree of a man's posthumous
suffering depends upon the degree of sinfulness. To add conjectures to the little
that the Lord has been pleased to reveal to us is not beneficial to our salvation..."
 

 
 
Quote 3:    The Synod of Constantinople of 1672:
 
"We believe that the souls of the departed are in either
repose or torment as each one has wrought, for immediately after the
separation from the body they are pronounced either in bliss or in suffering
and sorrows, yet we confess that neither their joy nor their condemnation
are yet complete. After the general resurrection, when the soul is reunited
with the body, each one will receive the full measure of joy or condemnation
due to him for the way in which he conducted himself, whether well or ill."




Interesting.What does it mean being in hidden retreat, or repose?
Logged

Every formula of every religion has in this age of reason, to submit to the acid test of reason and universal assent.
Mahatma Gandhi
Azul
Moderated
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Român Ortodox
Jurisdiction: Eastern Orthodox
Posts: 988



« Reply #1068 on: March 31, 2010, 08:03:00 AM »

Glory to Jesus Christ!
        Forgive me if I am wrong for I don't know very much about post-death theology in the OC as of yet. But I think that when we pray for the deceased during the first 40 days after they have fallen asleep  we do so because they are in a state of transition .

Just my two cents

Have a Blessed Great week

Afaik there are ceremonies and prayers for the death even after the 40 days.
Logged

Every formula of every religion has in this age of reason, to submit to the acid test of reason and universal assent.
Mahatma Gandhi
Azul
Moderated
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Român Ortodox
Jurisdiction: Eastern Orthodox
Posts: 988



« Reply #1069 on: March 31, 2010, 08:07:38 AM »

There are memorial services for the death even up to 1 year from death, and there are practices of memorials even yearly for the death.
Logged

Every formula of every religion has in this age of reason, to submit to the acid test of reason and universal assent.
Mahatma Gandhi
Rufus
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: leet


Nafpliotis with sunglasses and a cigar.


« Reply #1070 on: March 31, 2010, 01:08:09 PM »

"It is time we realised that Rome is only interested in extinguishing Orthodoxy.
Theological encounters and 'accords' on the basis of texts lead us up a blind alley,
for behind them there looms a firm resolve of the Vatican to swallow up the Orthodox Church."


This is so obvious it's not even funny. First they tried to swallow up the Orthodox by violence in the Middle Ages. Today they couldn't get away with that any more, so they go sheep-stealing by forming Unia. Now in the past decades they have "reformed" their liturgy and doctrine by catering to the masses. If this is the case, I ask, then what does it matter if the teachings of the Western church are gradually approximating Orthodox doctrine better and better? Are they "re-formulating" teachings such as Purgatory, or are they just trying to suck in more Orthodox and protestants? Is not the "softening-up" of Western doctrine as a way to appeal to Orthodox analogous to the Western church's sanction of the charismatic movement within their church as a way to appeal to charismatic protestant groups? The inconsistency of RC doctrinal formulation, whether real or imagined, is a product of a pathological desire the convert everyone at the expense of upholding the true faith. That is all we Orthodox need to know until the West proves otherwise.
Logged
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #1071 on: March 31, 2010, 01:56:47 PM »

"It is time we realised that Rome is only interested in extinguishing Orthodoxy.
Theological encounters and 'accords' on the basis of texts lead us up a blind alley,
for behind them there looms a firm resolve of the Vatican to swallow up the Orthodox Church."


This is so obvious it's not even funny. First they tried to swallow up the Orthodox by violence in the Middle Ages. Today they couldn't get away with that any more, so they go sheep-stealing by forming Unia. Now in the past decades they have "reformed" their liturgy and doctrine by catering to the masses. If this is the case, I ask, then what does it matter if the teachings of the Western church are gradually approximating Orthodox doctrine better and better? Are they "re-formulating" teachings such as Purgatory, or are they just trying to suck in more Orthodox and protestants? Is not the "softening-up" of Western doctrine as a way to appeal to Orthodox analogous to the Western church's sanction of the charismatic movement within their church as a way to appeal to charismatic protestant groups? The inconsistency of RC doctrinal formulation, whether real or imagined, is a product of a pathological desire the convert everyone at the expense of upholding the true faith. That is all we Orthodox need to know until the West proves otherwise.
I was sorry to read this.  I hope that you are wrong on this.
Logged
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,255


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #1072 on: March 31, 2010, 02:13:50 PM »




Father, within its own sphere the Roman Catholic Church does a reasonable work of teaching its people about Christ, as do the Anglican and Lutheran Churches, the Methodists and Baptists.


Give me a break. Your behavior online does not demonstrate that you think this at all. You were called out and you are now trying to protect yourself from legitmate criticism.
« Last Edit: March 31, 2010, 02:14:24 PM by Papist » Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
Rufus
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: leet


Nafpliotis with sunglasses and a cigar.


« Reply #1073 on: March 31, 2010, 03:51:18 PM »

"It is time we realised that Rome is only interested in extinguishing Orthodoxy.
Theological encounters and 'accords' on the basis of texts lead us up a blind alley,
for behind them there looms a firm resolve of the Vatican to swallow up the Orthodox Church."


This is so obvious it's not even funny. First they tried to swallow up the Orthodox by violence in the Middle Ages. Today they couldn't get away with that any more, so they go sheep-stealing by forming Unia. Now in the past decades they have "reformed" their liturgy and doctrine by catering to the masses. If this is the case, I ask, then what does it matter if the teachings of the Western church are gradually approximating Orthodox doctrine better and better? Are they "re-formulating" teachings such as Purgatory, or are they just trying to suck in more Orthodox and protestants? Is not the "softening-up" of Western doctrine as a way to appeal to Orthodox analogous to the Western church's sanction of the charismatic movement within their church as a way to appeal to charismatic protestant groups? The inconsistency of RC doctrinal formulation, whether real or imagined, is a product of a pathological desire the convert everyone at the expense of upholding the true faith. That is all we Orthodox need to know until the West proves otherwise.
I was sorry to read this.  I hope that you are wrong on this.

I apologize if my post was offensive. I hope that I am wrong too.
Logged
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,255


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #1074 on: March 31, 2010, 05:25:25 PM »



This is so obvious it's not even funny. First they tried to swallow up the Orthodox by violence in the Middle Ages.
You mean like when the Byzantines massacred the Latins who were living in Constantinople???
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #1075 on: March 31, 2010, 06:02:25 PM »




Father, within its own sphere the Roman Catholic Church does a reasonable work of teaching its people about Christ, as do the Anglican and Lutheran Churches, the Methodists and Baptists.


Give me a break. Your behavior online does not demonstrate that you think this at all. You were called out and you are now trying to protect yourself from legitmate criticism.

I wasn't "called out."  I was defamed by a Roman Catholic priest - and why?  because I hold certain views about the negative and destructive aspects of his Church and its doctrines.  

And who can deny the damage it has done to the Orthodox Church over the centuries?  And what simple-minded cretins we would be if we accepted on face value the cosmetic changes which have taken place over the last 40 years since Vatican II.

But I have to say..... Aside from the bad things which proceed from the nature of the instutution itself, I have many Catholic friends who are priests, school principals, religious and laypeople, and even a hermitess....  We visit one another and share meals.  I was even teamed up with a Roman Catholic nun for about 8 years, taking care of street people and solvent abusers.  I am well able to appreciate the good that is in them and the good that is in their Church.    For you to judge otherwise of me is yet another facile defamation of me.  I don't judge anybody simply by what they write on this Forum.
« Last Edit: March 31, 2010, 06:10:33 PM by Irish Hermit » Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #1076 on: March 31, 2010, 06:09:10 PM »



This is so obvious it's not even funny. First they tried to swallow up the Orthodox by violence in the Middle Ages.
You mean like when the Byzantines massacred the Latins who were living in Constantinople???

Was this in reaction to the massacre of Christians in the provinces of southern Italy who were in dioceses belonging to the Patriarch of Constantinople and who were refusing to change to unleavened bread and adopt other latinisations?
Logged
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,255


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #1077 on: March 31, 2010, 06:20:12 PM »



This is so obvious it's not even funny. First they tried to swallow up the Orthodox by violence in the Middle Ages.
You mean like when the Byzantines massacred the Latins who were living in Constantinople???

Was this in reaction to the massacre of Christians in the provinces of southern Italy who were in dioceses belonging to the Patriarch of Constantinople and who were refusing to change to unleavened bread and adopt other latinisations?
Not sure what the reaction was but there is blood on your hands as well as on our so stoping playing this moral superiority nonsense. Such an attitude on your part has no place in reality.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,255


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #1078 on: March 31, 2010, 06:21:36 PM »




Father, within its own sphere the Roman Catholic Church does a reasonable work of teaching its people about Christ, as do the Anglican and Lutheran Churches, the Methodists and Baptists.


Give me a break. Your behavior online does not demonstrate that you think this at all. You were called out and you are now trying to protect yourself from legitmate criticism.

I wasn't "called out."  I was defamed by a Roman Catholic priest - and why?  because I hold certain views about the negative and destructive aspects of his Church and its doctrines.  

And who can deny the damage it has done to the Orthodox Church over the centuries?  And what simple-minded cretins we would be if we accepted on face value the cosmetic changes which have taken place over the last 40 years since Vatican II.

But I have to say..... Aside from the bad things which proceed from the nature of the instutution itself, I have many Catholic friends who are priests, school principals, religious and laypeople, and even a hermitess....  We visit one another and share meals.  I was even teamed up with a Roman Catholic nun for about 8 years, taking care of street people and solvent abusers.  I am well able to appreciate the good that is in them and the good that is in their Church.    For you to judge otherwise of me is yet another facile defamation of me.  I don't judge anybody simply by what they write on this Forum.
Bologna. I have watched your behavior ever since you were over at CAF, and you pretend to be "innocent" but spend all of your time and energy attacking the Catholic Church. It really is unhealthy.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #1079 on: March 31, 2010, 06:27:37 PM »



This is so obvious it's not even funny. First they tried to swallow up the Orthodox by violence in the Middle Ages.
You mean like when the Byzantines massacred the Latins who were living in Constantinople???

Was this in reaction to the massacre of Christians in the provinces of southern Italy who were in dioceses belonging to the Patriarch of Constantinople and who were refusing to change to unleavened bread and adopt other latinisations?
Not sure what the reaction was but there is blood on your hands as well as on our so stoping playing this moral superiority nonsense. Such an attitude on your part has no place in reality.

Catholicism has shed an ocean of Orthodox blood, in many countries and in many centuries.

Pope John Paul II graciously asked God to forgive those who have done this in his several "apologies."
Logged
Tags: indulgences purgatory Hell forgiveness after death toll houses apokatastasis 
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 »   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.196 seconds with 72 queries.