Christian unity: Poll

[deusveritasest]

My 2 cents: Protestants should come home to Catholic Church,

You don't think that they should return to your church directly, if possible, instead?

[Antonious Nikolas]

Well, I suppose you'll define "Christians" according to your own criteria and I'll define them according to mine.  Your way may seem logical to you, but it seems arbitrary in places to me.

For example, a tadpole is still the same creature once it becomes a frog.  It has just changed its physical form, and I'm sure that is what a Rasta would say about Haile Selassie, who they regard as "Christ in His Kingly Character", the same man in a different form.

I could tell you why I disagree with you proclamations regarding the Protestants, Mormons, and JWs as well, but it'd all be to no avail.  Your criteria makes sense to you, and mine makes sense to me.

Perhaps the original poster and creator of the poll should define "Christian" for us according to his terms.

[deusveritasest]

Perhaps the other issues you have mentioned can be softened or clarified to be made acceptable to the other Apostolic Churches, but, personally, I would not agree to abandoning Purgatory.
Purgatory just makes a whole lot of sense to me as I don;t see anyone burning in hellfire eternally for some of the lessor sins. There are so many examples and it is just too obvious that there are lessor sins and there are greater sins and that many of the lessor sins, although they may be a blemish or imperfection on your soul, do not merit eternal damnation in hell. So, no, I would not in good conscience,  be able to give up this idea of Purgatory, although, like I said, I would agree to a modification, softening, or clarification of the other teachings so that they can be reformulated in such a way as to be acceptable to the other Apostolic Churches. 

I think you are misunderstanding the issue with Purgatory. We actually do believe in the purgation of minor sins. Actually, there have been some writers who have said that we believe in the purgation of "the most grievous of sins". The problem with Purgatory is not the purgation. It is the matter of it being a third thing. There is not a foretaste of bliss or torment in Purgatory. It is thus set up as a third state. But we believe that there can only be two states in relation to God: bliss or torment. Any purgation that occurs must happen within those. Thus there is purgation but no third place or state known as Purgatory.

[stanley123]

Perhaps the other issues you have mentioned can be softened or clarified to be made acceptable to the other Apostolic Churches, but, personally, I would not agree to abandoning Purgatory.
Purgatory just makes a whole lot of sense to me as I don;t see anyone burning in hellfire eternally for some of the lessor sins. There are so many examples and it is just too obvious that there are lessor sins and there are greater sins and that many of the lessor sins, although they may be a blemish or imperfection on your soul, do not merit eternal damnation in hell. So, no, I would not in good conscience,  be able to give up this idea of Purgatory, although, like I said, I would agree to a modification, softening, or clarification of the other teachings so that they can be reformulated in such a way as to be acceptable to the other Apostolic Churches. 

I think you are misunderstanding the issue with Purgatory. We actually do believe in the purgation of minor sins. Actually, there have been some writers who have said that we believe in the purgation of "the most grievous of sins". The problem with Purgatory is not the purgation. It is the matter of it being a third thing. There is not a foretaste of bliss or torment in Purgatory. It is thus set up as a third state. But we believe that there can only be two states in relation to God: bliss or torment. Any purgation that occurs must happen within those. Thus there is purgation but no third place or state known as Purgatory.

Well, if it is going to be a matter of semantics, then it seems like Purgatory or belief in purgation  is not a problem after all.

[deusveritasest]

Perhaps the other issues you have mentioned can be softened or clarified to be made acceptable to the other Apostolic Churches, but, personally, I would not agree to abandoning Purgatory.
Purgatory just makes a whole lot of sense to me as I don;t see anyone burning in hellfire eternally for some of the lessor sins. There are so many examples and it is just too obvious that there are lessor sins and there are greater sins and that many of the lessor sins, although they may be a blemish or imperfection on your soul, do not merit eternal damnation in hell. So, no, I would not in good conscience,  be able to give up this idea of Purgatory, although, like I said, I would agree to a modification, softening, or clarification of the other teachings so that they can be reformulated in such a way as to be acceptable to the other Apostolic Churches. 

I think you are misunderstanding the issue with Purgatory. We actually do believe in the purgation of minor sins. Actually, there have been some writers who have said that we believe in the purgation of "the most grievous of sins". The problem with Purgatory is not the purgation. It is the matter of it being a third thing. There is not a foretaste of bliss or torment in Purgatory. It is thus set up as a third state. But we believe that there can only be two states in relation to God: bliss or torment. Any purgation that occurs must happen within those. Thus there is purgation but no third place or state known as Purgatory.

Well, if it is going to be a matter of semantics, then it seems like Purgatory or belief in purgation  is not a problem after all.

It's not just a matter of semantics. It seems to us that the Roman tradition creates a third state that is neither torment or bliss. This idea we reject.

[rakovsky]

Perhaps the other issues you have mentioned can be softened or clarified to be made acceptable to the other Apostolic Churches, but, personally, I would not agree to abandoning Purgatory.
Purgatory just makes a whole lot of sense to me as I don;t see anyone burning in hellfire eternally for some of the lessor sins. There are so many examples and it is just too obvious that there are lessor sins and there are greater sins and that many of the lessor sins, although they may be a blemish or imperfection on your soul, do not merit eternal damnation in hell. So, no, I would not in good conscience,  be able to give up this idea of Purgatory, although, like I said, I would agree to a modification, softening, or clarification of the other teachings so that they can be reformulated in such a way as to be acceptable to the other Apostolic Churches. 

Jesus washes away your sins, mortal and venial. The psychology that you MUST be punished is Old Testament. I believe God loves us and can forgive us. That is what the atonement is about. If you come into communion with Jesus and he forgives you, no "need" for purgatory. What you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.

Purgatory seems to me perhaps even more spurious than some other ideas like the filioque, which could be "reinterpreted" or something.

[rakovsky]

My 2 cents: Protestants should come home to Catholic Church,

You don't think that they should return to your church directly, if possible, instead?

They Should! As you said I think elsewhere, the Orthodox Church is the catholic Church.
If going through the Catholic church helps them on the process it seems good. However, I am not sure if it is helpful to reject some problems for others. Maybe I am placing apostolic succession, liturgical forms, and church tradition above other things. But it seems like a person could have a strong focus on returning to the early church, and the popular idea among Protestants is that Catholicism is the early church + distortions, whereas the idea is that Protestantism is just "Biblical-style" Christianity with no concern for replicating the early church or traditions. So going back to Catholic church could be part of a search for the early church. This is the feeling I get when I see the structure and forms of Catholicism as more similar to Orthodoxy.

On the other hand, MAYBE THE OPPOSITE IS TRUE! I think Luther wanted to get back to authentic Christianity. Maybe a catholic could give up the inventions, go to Protestantism, feel alot is missing, and then find Orthodoxy. So I am not sure.

Your thoughts on whether joining Catholicism is a step forward for Protestants, please?

[deusveritasest]

Your thoughts on whether joining Catholicism is a step forward for Protestants, please?

I do think that the Protestants actually did make some improvements over Romanism.

And I do tend to think that some of the High Reformation Protestants might actually be closer to orthodoxy than the Romanists.

But overall I think Romanism is closer to orthodoxy than Protestantism and a Protestant joining the Roman church would be a step in the right direction.

[deusveritasest]

Perhaps the other issues you have mentioned can be softened or clarified to be made acceptable to the other Apostolic Churches, but, personally, I would not agree to abandoning Purgatory.
Purgatory just makes a whole lot of sense to me as I don;t see anyone burning in hellfire eternally for some of the lessor sins. There are so many examples and it is just too obvious that there are lessor sins and there are greater sins and that many of the lessor sins, although they may be a blemish or imperfection on your soul, do not merit eternal damnation in hell. So, no, I would not in good conscience,  be able to give up this idea of Purgatory, although, like I said, I would agree to a modification, softening, or clarification of the other teachings so that they can be reformulated in such a way as to be acceptable to the other Apostolic Churches. 

Jesus washes away your sins, mortal and venial. The psychology that you MUST be punished is Old Testament. I believe God loves us and can forgive us. That is what the atonement is about. If you come into communion with Jesus and he forgives you, no "need" for purgatory. What you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.

Purgatory seems to me perhaps even more spurious than some other ideas like the filioque, which could be "reinterpreted" or something.

Hal,

You bring up another fundamental problem there is with Purgatory.

It is primarily founded on the idea that all sins must eventually be punished, and that "mortal sins" must be absolved or punish in eternal hellfire, whereas "venial sins" can be punished in Purgatory and then move someone onto Heaven. They even teach that if a venial sin has been absolved that the punishment for it still has to be suffered in Purgatory.

On this point we are also inclined to disagree. Not only do absolved sins need any longer be punished, but God is not ultimately concerned with punishments of sins in and of itself anyway. For us purgation is a matter of preparing and changing the soul to be compatible with God's Kingdom, not a legal concern.

[Melodist]

My understanding is that one of the main differences has to do with purgatory (purgation, purification, whatever term you wish to use) is the RC use of legalistic language to describe it as a legal punishment vs the Orthodox expression of something similar to a refining process. This difference leads to the practice where a legal punishment can be declared to be remitted (indulgences), where you can not just declare a refining process to be past a certain point.

[Wyatt]

Perhaps the other issues you have mentioned can be softened or clarified to be made acceptable to the other Apostolic Churches, but, personally, I would not agree to abandoning Purgatory.
Purgatory just makes a whole lot of sense to me as I don;t see anyone burning in hellfire eternally for some of the lessor sins. There are so many examples and it is just too obvious that there are lessor sins and there are greater sins and that many of the lessor sins, although they may be a blemish or imperfection on your soul, do not merit eternal damnation in hell. So, no, I would not in good conscience,  be able to give up this idea of Purgatory, although, like I said, I would agree to a modification, softening, or clarification of the other teachings so that they can be reformulated in such a way as to be acceptable to the other Apostolic Churches. 

I think you are misunderstanding the issue with Purgatory. We actually do believe in the purgation of minor sins. Actually, there have been some writers who have said that we believe in the purgation of "the most grievous of sins". The problem with Purgatory is not the purgation. It is the matter of it being a third thing. There is not a foretaste of bliss or torment in Purgatory. It is thus set up as a third state. But we believe that there can only be two states in relation to God: bliss or torment. Any purgation that occurs must happen within those. Thus there is purgation but no third place or state known as Purgatory.

Well, if it is going to be a matter of semantics, then it seems like Purgatory or belief in purgation  is not a problem after all.

It's not just a matter of semantics. It seems to us that the Roman tradition creates a third state that is neither torment or bliss. This idea we reject.

If you reject it then why do you pray for the dead? Surely one already experiencing bliss doesn't need prayers, and prayers will do nothing for one who is already experiencing the torments of hell.

[deusveritasest]

Perhaps the other issues you have mentioned can be softened or clarified to be made acceptable to the other Apostolic Churches, but, personally, I would not agree to abandoning Purgatory.
Purgatory just makes a whole lot of sense to me as I don;t see anyone burning in hellfire eternally for some of the lessor sins. There are so many examples and it is just too obvious that there are lessor sins and there are greater sins and that many of the lessor sins, although they may be a blemish or imperfection on your soul, do not merit eternal damnation in hell. So, no, I would not in good conscience,  be able to give up this idea of Purgatory, although, like I said, I would agree to a modification, softening, or clarification of the other teachings so that they can be reformulated in such a way as to be acceptable to the other Apostolic Churches. 

I think you are misunderstanding the issue with Purgatory. We actually do believe in the purgation of minor sins. Actually, there have been some writers who have said that we believe in the purgation of "the most grievous of sins". The problem with Purgatory is not the purgation. It is the matter of it being a third thing. There is not a foretaste of bliss or torment in Purgatory. It is thus set up as a third state. But we believe that there can only be two states in relation to God: bliss or torment. Any purgation that occurs must happen within those. Thus there is purgation but no third place or state known as Purgatory.

Well, if it is going to be a matter of semantics, then it seems like Purgatory or belief in purgation  is not a problem after all.

It's not just a matter of semantics. It seems to us that the Roman tradition creates a third state that is neither torment or bliss. This idea we reject.

If you reject it then why do you pray for the dead? Surely one already experiencing bliss doesn't need prayers, and prayers will do nothing for one who is already experiencing the torments of hell.

Those experiencing the foretaste of Heaven after their death may still be in need of purification before they are able to actually enter into the fullness of the Kingdom of Heaven.

And yes, we believe that prayers may affect the fate of those experiencing the foretaste of eternal torment.

[Wyatt]

Those experiencing the foretaste of Heaven after their death may still be in need of purification before they are able to actually enter into the fullness of the Kingdom of Heaven.

You just described Purgatory.

And yes, we believe that prayers may affect the fate of those experiencing the foretaste of eternal torment.

Here I would disagree as this makes it sound like you can essentially "pray someone out of Hell" which the Catholic Church rejects. Everyone undergoing purification that can be helped by the prayers of the Church Militant are already saved. One who is damned cannot be saved by any amount of prayers.

[rakovsky]

Well, I suppose you'll define "Christians" according to your own criteria and I'll define them according to mine.  Your way may seem logical to you, but it seems arbitrary in places to me.

For example, a tadpole is still the same creature once it becomes a frog.  It has just changed its physical form, and I'm sure that is what a Rasta would say about Haile Selassie, who they regard as "Christ in His Kingly Character", the same man in a different form.

I could tell you why I disagree with you proclamations regarding the Protestants, Mormons, and JWs as well, but it'd all be to no avail.  Your criteria makes sense to you, and mine makes sense to me.

Perhaps the original poster and creator of the poll should define "Christian" for us according to his terms.

Authoritative Russian Dictionary Ozheg's says:

Толковый словарь Ожегова
Ожегов Сергей Иванович

ОЖЕГОВ Сергей Иванович (1900-64) - российский языковед, лексиколог, лексикограф, исследователь норм русского литературного языка, доктор филологических наук.

ХРИСТИАНИ́Н, -а, мн. -ане, -ан, муж. Последователь христианства.
• Духовные христиане возникшее на рубеже 1718 вв. направление в сектантстве (духоборы, молокане, хлысты и нек-рые др.), противопоставляющее себя православной церкви и провозглашающее веру в то, что святой дух может воплотиться в каждом отдельном человеке.


Russian Dictionary HAS SPOKEN!

Christian: Follower of Christianity.
Example: *Spiritual Christians arose on the edge of 1718 AD directed to sektarianism (Spiritfighters- group supported by Tolstoy that emigrated to Canada, Milkdrinkers-peaceniks who moved to North Dakota, whippers - Rasputin I think and some others), conflicting themselves with the Orthodox Church and announcing belief that the Holy Spirit can incarnate in every separate person.

The example here are basically kinds of Russian protestant movements, although they do not use the word Protestant. I think that Tolstoy tried to follow Jesus, although he didn't believe in the miracles, and I think the SpiritFighters sect (similar to Quakerism), probably had similar beliefs.



However interesting, INTERPRETIVE RUSSIAN DICTIONARY OZHEG'S continues:

ХРИСТИА́НСТВО, -а, ср. Одна из трёх мировых религий, основанная на культе (служение божеству и связанные с этим действия, обряды) Сына Божия Иисуса Христа как Богочеловека и спасителя мира, возникшая в нач. 1 в. н. э. в Римской империи и существующая в трёх основных направлениях: православии, католицизме и протестантизме. Исповедовать х. Принятие христианства на Руси (988-989 гг.).

Christianity: One of three world religions, founded on the cult (serving deity/divineness and related with this acts, rituals) of the Son of God Jesus Christ as God-man [yes we say God-man in Russian] and savior of the world, arisen in the first century of our era in Roman empire and existing in three main directions: orthodoxy, catholicism, and protestantism. Acceptance of Christianity on HOLY MOTHERLAND TOTALLY GREAT AND AWESOME RUS (988-989 years).



Consequently, maybe you can reply to me that religions that aren't based on worship of Son of God Jesus Christ AS God-Man and savior of the world are not "Christian."

Interesting.

Regards.

Russian Dictionary Has Spoken.

[rakovsky]

Perhaps the other issues you have mentioned can be softened or clarified to be made acceptable to the other Apostolic Churches, but, personally, I would not agree to abandoning Purgatory.
Purgatory just makes a whole lot of sense to me as I don;t see anyone burning in hellfire eternally for some of the lessor sins. There are so many examples and it is just too obvious that there are lessor sins and there are greater sins and that many of the lessor sins, although they may be a blemish or imperfection on your soul, do not merit eternal damnation in hell. So, no, I would not in good conscience,  be able to give up this idea of Purgatory, although, like I said, I would agree to a modification, softening, or clarification of the other teachings so that they can be reformulated in such a way as to be acceptable to the other Apostolic Churches. 

I think you are misunderstanding the issue with Purgatory. We actually do believe in the purgation of minor sins. Actually, there have been some writers who have said that we believe in the purgation of "the most grievous of sins". The problem with Purgatory is not the purgation. It is the matter of it being a third thing. There is not a foretaste of bliss or torment in Purgatory. It is thus set up as a third state. But we believe that there can only be two states in relation to God: bliss or torment. Any purgation that occurs must happen within those. Thus there is purgation but no third place or state known as Purgatory.

Well, if it is going to be a matter of semantics, then it seems like Purgatory or belief in purgation  is not a problem after all.

it's not semantics.

I looked into this a few years ago. Roman Catholic idea of purgatory is based on place in Paul's letters talking about fire burning things. Orthodox interpretation is that the sins are burned up and trashed, not the person. Peace.

Maybe an analogy is that when someone comes to Christianity we aren't supposed to hold previous sins against them, and don't think God will either when they repent of them. That's supposed to be true for everyone.

[rakovsky]

Those experiencing the foretaste of Heaven after their death may still be in need of purification before they are able to actually enter into the fullness of the Kingdom of Heaven.

I don't think this part is an official doctrine of the Orthodox church, if by purification you mean physical burning up of the believer, as opposed to just the sins.


Anyway, while this is a spurious doctrine, the real OBSTACLE to communion is PAPAL INFALLIBILITY and unequaled SUPREMACY, because you can't have any disagreements about faith with the Pope if you reunite with him, he becomes your boss on everything in matters of faith. Basically, we can't reunite and yet still retain any autocephaly or own differences of doctrine. And Pope won't give it up because of POWER. He still has alot of political power right now, unlike I think Orientals. Whatever the disagreements of Christ's nature, I see reunion as much more possible with Orientals if not for this reason alone, despite all the declarations by the Vatican of the "soon reunion" with Orthodox. Only way to get around this is for Catholics to make VERY strong urges on Pope to give this up, and I don't know how it's possible, because it's considered so important. 

[rakovsky]

I think it's easy for Orthodox to say to Orientals with the current political situation, look, is all this Monophysite and non-Constantinople-II Miaphysite stuff what you believe? They could say of course not, we reject it, and accept the Miaphysitism that Constantinople II allowed. then reunion and acceptance of the 7 Councils. It could happen fast with the facts on the ground.

With Roman Catholicism, the idea of infallibility and unequal Supremacy is very hard block, unfortunately. Very unfortunate. And I think folks don't realize how big this one is compared to all the other differences like wafers.

[ialmisry]

Perhaps the other issues you have mentioned can be softened or clarified to be made acceptable to the other Apostolic Churches, but, personally, I would not agree to abandoning Purgatory.
Purgatory just makes a whole lot of sense to me as I don;t see anyone burning in hellfire eternally for some of the lessor sins. There are so many examples and it is just too obvious that there are lessor sins and there are greater sins and that many of the lessor sins, although they may be a blemish or imperfection on your soul, do not merit eternal damnation in hell. So, no, I would not in good conscience,  be able to give up this idea of Purgatory, although, like I said, I would agree to a modification, softening, or clarification of the other teachings so that they can be reformulated in such a way as to be acceptable to the other Apostolic Churches. 

I think you are misunderstanding the issue with Purgatory. We actually do believe in the purgation of minor sins. Actually, there have been some writers who have said that we believe in the purgation of "the most grievous of sins". The problem with Purgatory is not the purgation. It is the matter of it being a third thing. There is not a foretaste of bliss or torment in Purgatory. It is thus set up as a third state. But we believe that there can only be two states in relation to God: bliss or torment. Any purgation that occurs must happen within those. Thus there is purgation but no third place or state known as Purgatory.

Well, if it is going to be a matter of semantics, then it seems like Purgatory or belief in purgation  is not a problem after all.

It's not just a matter of semantics. It seems to us that the Roman tradition creates a third state that is neither torment or bliss. This idea we reject.

If you reject it then why do you pray for the dead? Surely one already experiencing bliss doesn't need prayers, and prayers will do nothing for one who is already experiencing the torments of hell.

We have been around this a time or two.  We pray for the departed because the Church has always done so. Period.

Your church once said "kill them all. Let God sort them out." Somewhat similar concept: we let the Lord apply prayers as He sees fit. We pray in time, He answers from eternity.

The Vatican's obsession of systemizing everything gets it in a lot of trouble.

[rakovsky]

We have been around this a time or two.  We pray for the departed because the Church has always done so. Period.

Your church once said "kill them all. Let God sort them out." Somewhat similar concept: we let the Lord apply prayers as He sees fit. We pray in time, He answers from eternity.

The Vatican's obsession of systemizing everything gets it in a lot of trouble.

Caedite eos. Novit enim Dominus qui sunt eius.

Wow, dude! 

[ialmisry]

Those experiencing the foretaste of Heaven after their death may still be in need of purification before they are able to actually enter into the fullness of the Kingdom of Heaven.

You just described Purgatory.

And yes, we believe that prayers may affect the fate of those experiencing the foretaste of eternal torment.

Here I would disagree as this makes it sound like you can essentially "pray someone out of Hell" which the Catholic Church rejects. Everyone undergoing purification that can be helped by the prayers of the Church Militant are already saved. One who is damned cannot be saved by any amount of prayers.

The Lordn's hand is not shortened that He cannot save.

[ialmisry]

We have been around this a time or two.  We pray for the departed because the Church has always done so. Period.

Your church once said "kill them all. Let God sort them out." Somewhat similar concept: we let the Lord apply prayers as He sees fit. We pray in time, He answers from eternity.

The Vatican's obsession of systemizing everything gets it in a lot of trouble.

Caedite eos. Novit enim Dominus qui sunt eius.

Wow, dude! 

Sorry, you're right: it was "God knows His own."

[Alveus Lacuna]

Here I would disagree as this makes it sound like you can essentially "pray someone out of Hell" which the Catholic Church rejects. Everyone undergoing purification that can be helped by the prayers of the Church Militant are already saved. One who is damned cannot be saved by any amount of prayers.

If my sister's fiance wasn't even a Christian and committed suicide, but by praying for him I can offer him one drop of cool water on his tongue to relieve his suffering, then I am compelled to do this out of Christian love and charity. It is my hope and deepest wish that all will be saved and made divine. Kyrie Eleison.

[stanley123]

Here I would disagree as this makes it sound like you can essentially "pray someone out of Hell" which the Catholic Church rejects. Everyone undergoing purification that can be helped by the prayers of the Church Militant are already saved. One who is damned cannot be saved by any amount of prayers.

If my sister's fiance wasn't even a Christian and committed suicide, but by praying for him I can offer him one drop of cool water on his tongue to relieve his suffering, then I am compelled to do this out of Christian love and charity. It is my hope and deepest wish that all will be saved and made divine. Kyrie Eleison.

Yes, I hope so too, BUT Jesus mentions eternal hellfire in Matthew 25:41. Why would He talk about hell if it did not exist. Further, with reference to Purgatory, it just seems so reasonable to me that for the lessor sins, and I can give you many obvious examples of these, people will not go to the eternal hellfire as mentioned in Matthew 25:41, but will suffer a lessor fate, the temporary fate of Purgatory. Now it is said that this difference is not a matter of semantics and it is not merely a difference of opinion on what constitutes purification after death.  Well, if that is the case, it is not for me to decide this of course, but  I personally would not want any reunion where I would have to give up a belief in Purgatory. 

[Wyatt]

We have been around this a time or two.  We pray for the departed because the Church has always done so. Period.

Your church once said "kill them all. Let God sort them out." Somewhat similar concept: we let the Lord apply prayers as He sees fit. We pray in time, He answers from eternity.

The Vatican's obsession of systemizing everything gets it in a lot of trouble.

If you believe that prayers for the dead are efficacious then you must believe that there is some sort of intermediate state that the soul is in after death but before entering heaven. Just because we have a name for that state (Purgatory) doesn't mean it's wrong. It seems like most Orthodox are more uncomfortable with the word than the concept. You must believe that there is an intermediate state because both heaven and hell are eternal states that the soul is in that cannot be changed by any number of prayers.

[ialmisry]

Here I would disagree as this makes it sound like you can essentially "pray someone out of Hell" which the Catholic Church rejects. Everyone undergoing purification that can be helped by the prayers of the Church Militant are already saved. One who is damned cannot be saved by any amount of prayers.

If my sister's fiance wasn't even a Christian and committed suicide, but by praying for him I can offer him one drop of cool water on his tongue to relieve his suffering, then I am compelled to do this out of Christian love and charity. It is my hope and deepest wish that all will be saved and made divine. Kyrie Eleison.

Yes, I hope so too, BUT Jesus mentions eternal hellfire in Matthew 25:41. Why would He talk about hell if it did not exist. Further, with reference to Purgatory, it just seems so reasonable to me that for the lessor sins, and I can give you many obvious examples of these, people will not go to the eternal hellfire as mentioned in Matthew 25:41, but will suffer a lessor fate, the temporary fate of Purgatory. Now it is said that this difference is not a matter of semantics and it is not merely a difference of opinion on what constitutes purification after death.  Well, if that is the case, it is not for me to decide this of course, but  I personally would not want any reunion where I would have to give up a belief in Purgatory. 

Well, since you have figured out our eternal fates, I guess He need not come back for the Last Judgement.

[stanley123]

We have been around this a time or two.  We pray for the departed because the Church has always done so. Period.

Your church once said "kill them all. Let God sort them out." Somewhat similar concept: we let the Lord apply prayers as He sees fit. We pray in time, He answers from eternity.

The Vatican's obsession of systemizing everything gets it in a lot of trouble.

If you believe that prayers for the dead are efficacious then you must believe that there is some sort of intermediate state that the soul is in after death but before entering heaven. Just because we have a name for that state (Purgatory) doesn't mean it's wrong. It seems like most Orthodox are more uncomfortable with the word than the concept. You must believe that there is an intermediate state because both heaven and hell are eternal states that the soul is in that cannot be changed by any number of prayers.

yes.

[ialmisry]

We have been around this a time or two.  We pray for the departed because the Church has always done so. Period.

Your church once said "kill them all. Let God sort them out." Somewhat similar concept: we let the Lord apply prayers as He sees fit. We pray in time, He answers from eternity.

The Vatican's obsession of systemizing everything gets it in a lot of trouble.

If you believe that prayers for the dead are efficacious then you must believe that there is some sort of intermediate state that the soul is in after death but before entering heaven.

No, I don't.

Just because we have a name for that state (Purgatory) doesn't mean it's wrong.

No, it's wrong because God (who alone knows) revealed no such thing, and the Apostles (upon whom we must depend for our information) taught no such thing.

It seems like most Orthodox are more uncomfortable with the word than the concept. You must believe that there is an intermediate state because both heaven and hell are eternal states that the soul is in that cannot be changed by any number of prayers.

And we have another who has relieved the Lord of the responsibility of the Last Judgement....

[stanley123]

Here I would disagree as this makes it sound like you can essentially "pray someone out of Hell" which the Catholic Church rejects. Everyone undergoing purification that can be helped by the prayers of the Church Militant are already saved. One who is damned cannot be saved by any amount of prayers.

If my sister's fiance wasn't even a Christian and committed suicide, but by praying for him I can offer him one drop of cool water on his tongue to relieve his suffering, then I am compelled to do this out of Christian love and charity. It is my hope and deepest wish that all will be saved and made divine. Kyrie Eleison.

Yes, I hope so too, BUT Jesus mentions eternal hellfire in Matthew 25:41. Why would He talk about hell if it did not exist. Further, with reference to Purgatory, it just seems so reasonable to me that for the lessor sins, and I can give you many obvious examples of these, people will not go to the eternal hellfire as mentioned in Matthew 25:41, but will suffer a lessor fate, the temporary fate of Purgatory. Now it is said that this difference is not a matter of semantics and it is not merely a difference of opinion on what constitutes purification after death.  Well, if that is the case, it is not for me to decide this of course, but  I personally would not want any reunion where I would have to give up a belief in Purgatory. 

Well, since you have figured out our eternal fates, I guess He need not come back for the Last Judgement.

I am reading  Matthew 25:41 and trying to make sense of what is said there. This refers, I think, to the last judgement.

[ialmisry]

Here I would disagree as this makes it sound like you can essentially "pray someone out of Hell" which the Catholic Church rejects. Everyone undergoing purification that can be helped by the prayers of the Church Militant are already saved. One who is damned cannot be saved by any amount of prayers.

If my sister's fiance wasn't even a Christian and committed suicide, but by praying for him I can offer him one drop of cool water on his tongue to relieve his suffering, then I am compelled to do this out of Christian love and charity. It is my hope and deepest wish that all will be saved and made divine. Kyrie Eleison.

Yes, I hope so too, BUT Jesus mentions eternal hellfire in Matthew 25:41. Why would He talk about hell if it did not exist. Further, with reference to Purgatory, it just seems so reasonable to me that for the lessor sins, and I can give you many obvious examples of these, people will not go to the eternal hellfire as mentioned in Matthew 25:41, but will suffer a lessor fate, the temporary fate of Purgatory. Now it is said that this difference is not a matter of semantics and it is not merely a difference of opinion on what constitutes purification after death.  Well, if that is the case, it is not for me to decide this of course, but  I personally would not want any reunion where I would have to give up a belief in Purgatory. 

Well, since you have figured out our eternal fates, I guess He need not come back for the Last Judgement.

I am reading  Matthew 25:41 and trying to make sense of what is said there. This refers, I think, to the last judgement.

Yes, and?

[Wyatt]

No, it's wrong because God (who alone knows) revealed no such thing, and the Apostles (upon whom we must depend for our information) taught no such thing.

So in your view, someone can be prayed out of hell essentially?

[ialmisry]

No, it's wrong because God (who alone knows) revealed no such thing, and the Apostles (upon whom we must depend for our information) taught no such thing.

So in your view, someone can be prayed out of hell essentially?

God knows His own. Let Him sort them out.

[stanley123]

No, it's wrong because God (who alone knows) revealed no such thing, and the Apostles (upon whom we must depend for our information) taught no such thing.

Is your claim then that there is nothing which the Orthodox Church teaches, except that which is directly revealed in Scripture? This seems to me like it is a serious error.

[Alveus Lacuna]

We're saying that we pray for the "dead" because we know that it helps them. That's all that we know. The Church has always done it out of love, and we continue to do so.

[stanley123]

We're saying that we pray for the "dead" because we know that it helps them. That's all that we know. The Church has always done it out of love, and we continue to do so.

Has it been revealed by God that it helps to pray for the dead?

[Asteriktos]

A few random thoughts... humans won't be put into what we call hell until after the last judgment (cf Rev. 20)... St. Mark of Ephesus and other Orthodox seem to have no problem with the idea that the condition of people in the afterlife can be changed through things like prayers... that doesn't necessarily mean that there is a third place that the dead go to...

[ialmisry]

No, it's wrong because God (who alone knows) revealed no such thing, and the Apostles (upon whom we must depend for our information) taught no such thing.

Is your claim then that there is nothing which the Orthodox Church teaches, except that which is directly revealed in Scripture? This seems to me like it is a serious error.

Who claimed that?

[deusveritasest]

Those experiencing the foretaste of Heaven after their death may still be in need of purification before they are able to actually enter into the fullness of the Kingdom of Heaven.

You just described Purgatory.

I don't think so. I think there some highly substantial differences.

For one, as far as I know, what I am talking about is primarily a blissful state, the foretaste of Heaven, that also involves purification as a secondary quality.

Purgatory, on the other hand, does not appear to be a blissful state (and thus not really a foretaste of Heaven at all), but rather a place of suffering and punishment that is necessary to prepare and individual for their actual entrance into the blissful state.

Their being a state that is neither bliss nor torment essentially establishes a third thing that we clearly do not believe in.

Another thing is that Purgatory is about suffering the necessary punishments for sins. We do not believe that there is a necessary punishment for sins. Rather we believe that God is only concerned with converting and turning sinners from sin to conformity to His image; the purgation we are talking about is, as was previously said, a "refining" rather than a punishment.

And yes, we believe that prayers may affect the fate of those experiencing the foretaste of eternal torment.

Here I would disagree as this makes it sound like you can essentially "pray someone out of Hell" which the Catholic Church rejects. Everyone undergoing purification that can be helped by the prayers of the Church Militant are already saved. One who is damned cannot be saved by any amount of prayers.

Perhaps I was overstepping the extent of this teaching a little bit. Unless one strains the logical implication out of Peter Mogila's statement that even "the most grievous of sins may be forgiven" (those unrepentant with the most grievous of sins are most likely in torment), there really is no official statement that says that those judged for torment at the particular judgment may be purified. The explicit official teaching is found only with regards to the faithful who have been judged to bliss. On the other hand, in terms of individual understandings and opinions, I have found it to be quite a common teaching for Eastern Christians to say that even those judged to be damned at the particular judgment may still be saved.

[deusveritasest]

I don't think this part is an official doctrine of the Orthodox church, if by purification you mean physical burning up of the believer, as opposed to just the sins.

No, I don't. I essentially just mean sanctification in some sense; being removed from sin.

[deusveritasest]

I think it's easy for Orthodox to say to Orientals with the current political situation, look, is all this Monophysite and non-Constantinople-II Miaphysite stuff what you believe? They could say of course not, we reject it, and accept the Miaphysitism that Constantinople II allowed. then reunion and acceptance of the 7 Councils. It could happen fast with the facts on the ground.

Even if we possibly believe in the Miaphysitism that Constantinople II allowed for, we still wouldn't believe in Chalcedon.

[deusveritasest]

It is my hope and deepest wish that all will be saved and made divine.

Amen! 

[deusveritasest]

If you believe that prayers for the dead are efficacious then you must believe that there is some sort of intermediate state that the soul is in after death but before entering heaven.

Of course there is. Actually, Eastern Christianity is really the most affirming of an intermediate state. The West has traditionally taught that it is possible to enter into the state of eternal punishment or eternal bliss even before the Final Judgment, and that they are able to spiritually experience the full and eventual state of bliss or torment. Eastern Christians, on the other hand, typically hold that people in general do not enter into the place/state of eternal damnation or salvation until after the Final Judgment, and that there experience of bliss or torment is incomplete: a mere "foretaste". If anything we believe and teach a stronger view of an intermediate state. That is not the issue here, which it seems like you two are failing to understanding. It is rather only the nature of the intermediate state that is being debated.

Just because we have a name for that state (Purgatory) doesn't mean it's wrong.

No, it doesn't. But that's not the issue. The issue is that we believe different things about the intermediate state. To go over it again:

1. You believe that the damned enter into their (spiritually) full and eternal state of torment at death. We do not.

2. You believe that those judged to enter into bliss at their particular judgment likewise do so in their (spiritually) full and eternal state. We do not.

3. For those still in need of purification to enter into the state of bliss, you believe that they enter into a third state of punishment and suffering (not torment) to prepare them for bliss. We do not. We believe that the state of purification would either occur in the midst of the one foretaste of bliss or the one foretaste of torment.

4. You believe that all must eventually suffer all the punishment due all their sins. We do not.

You must believe that there is an intermediate state because both heaven and hell are eternal states that the soul is in that cannot be changed by any number of prayers.

That's not entirely what we believe. We believe that most people, with very few exceptions, will not enter into the fullness of torment or bliss at their death, but will none the less be judged as one the path to damnation or salvation and will be granted a foretaste of bliss or torment. We generally believe that within these states that it is possible for peoples' fates to be changed.

[Wyatt]

I think there is a big misunderstanding amongst many Orthodox on here as to what Catholics actually believe about Purgatory. As far as I know, the Council of Trent only requires that we believe in an intermediate state that the soul is in as it's being purified and prepared for heaven. As far as whether Purgatory is a painful experience or not is up for debate as the Catholic Church, to my knowledge, has not defined the nature of Purgatory. The Catholic Church only requires that we, as Catholics, believed in Purgatory, yet is silent on its nature. I've heard people say it's a hellish, torturous state to be in, and I've heard others say it is peaceful. We'll know once get there I suppose. The idea of Purgatory being hellish I think developed in the Middle Ages, but the Catholic Church has never defined that point of view as an official doctrine or dogma. As such, it is merely theological opinion, much like limbo of the infants.

[ialmisry]

I think there is a big misunderstanding amongst many Orthodox on here as to what Catholics actually believe about Purgatory.

Many of the Orthodox are former communicants of the Vatican. We know what you are talking about. We just reject it.

As far as I know, the Council of Trent only requires that we believe in an intermediate state that the soul is in as it's being purified and prepared for heaven. As far as whether Purgatory is a painful experience or not is up for debate as the Catholic Church, to my knowledge, has not defined the nature of Purgatory. The Catholic Church only requires that we, as Catholics, believed in Purgatory, yet is silent on its nature. I've heard people say it's a hellish, torturous state to be in, and I've heard others say it is peaceful. We'll know once get there I suppose. The idea of Purgatory being hellish I think developed in the Middle Ages, but the Catholic Church has never defined that point of view as an official doctrine or dogma. As such, it is merely theological opinion, much like limbo of the infants.

Hopefully purgatory will go the way of limbo.

[Wyatt]

Hopefully purgatory will go the way of limbo.

Not possible. Limbo was never an official doctrine of the Catholic Church, but Purgatory was and is. Doctrines cannot change.

[ialmisry]

Hopefully purgatory will go the way of limbo.

Not possible. Limbo was never an official doctrine of the Catholic Church, but Purgatory was and is. Doctrines cannot change.

LOL. Doctrinal developement. You guys do it all the time. We call it doctrinal drift. We don't suffer from it.

[Tags:]

OrthodoxChristianity.net > Moderated Forums > Orthodox-Other Christian Discussion > Topic: Christian unity: Poll