www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Purgatory & Orthodoxy

Can I speak to that, even though it is going to take us off topic for a moment.

Fr Serge was lamenting what he calls the "Nikonian innovations" in some other thread which I cannot find now. But the "Pauline innovations" in the 1960s were also destrictive, as you say, of the faith of many elderly people.

One example was my grandmother, the wife of a middleclass shop owner, a butcher, and a woman who radiated charity and compassion for all. Many's the poor family that dined off a roast of beef which she casually dropped off at their house. Many kids found that their parents could afford the school uniform for the local parochial school after she had visited. Her love was focused on and based in her Catholic Church and the Mass. She loved the priests. She loved the nuns and the brothers. It was Mass every morning at 6am. Benediction on Sunday evenings. Perpetual novena every Saturday. Weekly confession.

But then came the 1960s and the "Pauline innovations" - the first thing she found hard was the loss of Latin and the change to English. It turned her world upside down and she stopped attending Mass every morning. Then came the day when she saw someone being given communion in the hand. She came home and wept and wept. She was in her late 70s by then and the innovations shook her faith severely. She would have been in a position something like the Russians who could not adjust to the "Nikonian innovations."

Thankfully she died in the late 1960s. She never lived to hear the clergy denigrating the Rosary nor poo-hooing indulgences....

Looking in the wikipedia entry for Purgatory, I did find an interesting quote by St. Gregory of Nyssa


I would be curious to know the context.

Father Ambrose:

Father bless!!

I have had the difficult task of dealing with six families who came to bury their elderly mother in this situation. Mother, in each case, was an elderly Italian woman who went to make a visit to Jesus in the tabernacle each afternoon and pray the rosary. In each case, a young Italian Jesuit told the woman that she wasn't going to Heaven no matter what she did because she was just an ignorant old Italian lady who didn't know what she was doing and didn't know anything about the Faith anyway. In each case the woman stopped going to church altogether and her whole extended family followed.

This was in the late 1960s and I will never forget the bitterness and anger. The question they all had was why a priest would destroy an elderly, faithful innocent person's faith.

I chuckle to myself over the endless bickering over these and other arcane issues. I give my assent to what my Church proposes that I must believe. But these issues don't come across my radar on a daily basis. Oh, yes, when I was young and knew all the answers, these were all biggies. And I don't mean that by chuckling I make light of these very serious theological issues.

But age and dealing with so many unchurched people, and so many poorly catechised people has made me far more tolerant. I choose not to argue these points becaue they are far removed from my daily work and life. I've never met anyone who's come back from Purgatory, but I pray for those who have gone before me and I know that somehow there must be some place of purification or we'd all be cinders in the Holy Fire that God is. What does Scripture say about a man who looks on the Face of God and knows that he is undone? I deal daily with living on the edge of the grave--literally and figuratively. It's made me very conscious of what the holy metropolitan from St. Petersburg was saying. We don't know if our next breath is a given. Why argue over this stuff? Let the theologians and bishops "rightly define the Word of Truth" and let's get on with praying our rule, feeding the hungry, recognizing Christ in the face of the stranger and the foreigner, and just being the best Bible some people will ever read in this life. Our actions mean a lot more in this post-Christian world we live in. And I firmly believe that we are closer to a wholesale persecution than most people realize, given the anti-Christian direction Western society is moving--not to mention the Islamic world that wants to destroy us, too.

When I look at myself--covered with the leprosy of sin--I don't have time to be picking the scabs (okay perhaps a bit graphic with the leprosy analogy) off my neighbor. But you get the picture.

May we all be given the grace to spiritually mature and see Christ in the neighbor.

Brothers and sister, please forgive me this tangent.

In Christ,

BOB

I seem to recall St. Catherine of Genoa writing that the flames of purgatory were the love of God, and that her writing had the imprimatur.

Doesn't sound unorthodox to me, nor was I convinced by St. Mark's arguments, but that is just me.

I want to add something here that is, perhaps, slightly off-topic but nonetheless is relevant. Dr. Alex mentioned the "Kievian school," and I've heard others talk about different schools in Orthodoxy. I am reading a book by Paul Valliere on Bukharev, Soloviev, and Bulgakov. He argues that they represent a distinct and legitimate school of theology within Orthodoxy that he contrasts to the "neopatristic" school of Lossky, Florevsky, etc. Valliere himself is not Orthodox so, to some extent, I can understand how it is that he is viewing Orthodoxy through the lens of a Western (Episcopalian) Systematic Theologian.

I've been thinking about writing him to inform him of something that is important, namely, that there are no schools in Orthodoxy. There is only Orthodoxy. What Valliere calls the "neopatristic" school in Orthodoxy is not a school. It is Orthodoxy! And the theology of the Russians that Valliere writes about, is not Orthodox, at least insofar as it differs from the patristic consensus.

More evidence for what I am saying is found in the fact that in Orthodoxy there are no different religious orders or schools of spirituality as there is in the west. There is only Orthodox spirituality which is the same for everyone, the only difference being how that spirituality is lived out according to one's vocation. In Orthodoxy we do not accept theological pluralism. There is only one true doctrine and only one true theology. I think that this is why many Catholics, for example, are confused about the fact that we reject the "two lungs" analogy of Pope John Paul II. And so we cannot in Orthodoxy have one school that teaches purgatory and another school that does not. Purgatory is not a doctrine that is compatible with the Orthodox faith and the holy fathers and patriarchs of the Orthodox Church have said so numerous times. Individual priest/theologians have no authority to import ideas from western Christianity.

Joe

Umm, there is no such thing as FINAL Theosis.
Theosis is an eternal event.

Joe,

On the contrary, I believe there is ample Patristic evidence that the Holy Church Fathers did in fact believe in Purgatory, or whatever else we choose to call it. I also believe that Rome's basic Dogmatic definition does fit the bill - 1) There is a place of transition/transformation for those en-route to Heaven, and 2) prayer is efficacious for the dead who are in this state. Is there any Patristic evidence that this is not sound Doctrine, beside second millennium anti-Roman catholic teaching? Please share!

Clement of Alexandria


Origen


Tertullian


Cyprian


Cyril of Jerusalem


John Chrysostom


Gregory of Nyssa


Basil the Great

I remembered today a paper that I had read a while ago published by the Byzantine Studies program at Dumbarton Oaks. It addresses some of the history of the subject. It's in PDF format.

http://www.doaks.org/publications/doaks_online_publications/DOP55/DP55ch06.pdf

So is purification only of the elect?

I agree with wholehearted with Alice.

Over the centuries Orthodox explanations of the purging of sin...or purification... is all over the place. Bear with me if I make errors while summarizing my impressions ...This variance, even contradiction, is not in opposition to Eastern theology which does not try to define everything right down to the iota.

If this is true, then is there not room in Eastern thought for the Catechism of the Catholic Church's definition of Purgatory which reads: 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 he holiness necessary to enter the joy of heaven. 1030

I am very confused by all the postings and various other Orthodox writings on this subject. How are we, the eastern lung of the Catholic Church supposed to explain this "purging" of "purification" of sin? Even the Orthodox Church doesn't speak with one voice. Is it defined in an Ecumenical Council? On the other side of the spectrum, is this definition of Purgatory condemned by an Ecumenical Council? Please give specific reference so that I may read about it in detail and quote references.

To me the Catechism gives me something to teach when asked regarding the gray area between sainthood and the damned...Where do souls go when the body dies?

Please help me to comprehend what the Eastern Church authoritatively teaches.

Come to us O Promised Light!
Fr Deacon Paul

Dear Father Paul,

The Orthodox are always extremely reluctant to made theology out of wholecloth.

Three quotes from widely differing centuries (5th, 17th and 20th) which show the same unanimous but limited teaching on life immediately after death...

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).

-oOo-


The 1980 Resolution of the Synod of bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad (at a time when the mainly US converts were in disarray about the the toll house belief)...

"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..."

Interestingly enough, this is almost a word for word repetition of what Saint Augustine said 1500 years earlier! We see the reliability and stability of the Church's Tradition.

-oOo-



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."

Faoi bhrat Mhuire Mhathair sinn,
Fr Ambrose

Dear Friends,

As always, your postings and writings are a stimulating smorgasbord and groaning board of delectable theological treats!

I just briefly wanted to respond to those posts addressed to me:

The Kyivan Church and tradition (don't remember if I used "school" but certainly the Kyivan Mohyla Academy was a school) did represent the fusion of Baroque influences with Orthodoxy.

That it existed within Orthodoxy is easy enough to prove: Contemporary Orthodox theologians have sometimes spent a lot of time deriding it as "Latinized" etc.

That Baroque tradition also existed in the Greek Orthodox Church as represented in some writings by, for example, St Nicodemos of the Holy Mountain (who also wrote about "indulgences" - however he understood them).

The Orthodox Saints of the Kyivan Baroque era included St Dmitry of Rostov and others whose own devotions were based largely on Western devotional models. Fr. Hieromonk Ambrose has decried St Dmitry's "Tale of the Five Prayers" for the promises made in them. In fact, there is nothing that does not permit someone to believe privately in such promises or devotions. And in the Kyivan Baroque era, everything from the 15 Prayers of St Birgitta to the Little Office of the Immaculate Conception to the Stations of the Cross and the Rosary were translated into Slavonic and were popularized within Orthodoxy by these Saints.

That St Peter Mohyla continued to teach about Purgatory within his Metropolia is a fact, despite what the Orthodox Patriarchs said about it. He was never, to the best of my knowledge, condemned by the Orthodox Patriarchs for doing so. Neither was St Dmitry of Rostov and the host of other Kyivan Baroque Orthodox Saints. However one wishes to call it, whether a "school" or a "tradition" - it was very real and had a real impact on Orthodoxy at the time, whether one considers this to be a negative one or an "inevitable" one, given the times.

Fr. John Meyendorff in his writings periodically discusses an Orthodox theologian who accepted this or that from the West i.e. who understood thoroughly the Western doctrine of Original Sin and the Immaculate Conception - and accepted them both. They could not be condemned as heretics for so doing as they accepted them as theological opinions. The same is true for St Peter Mohyla and the Kyivan Church (and the Ukrainian Orthodox Metropolitan Ilarion Ohienko has given a very strong focus to the specifically "Kyivan Church" throughout his writings).

The Kyivan Church was very Western and very pro-European. And its Metropolitans and other hierarchs regarded Muscovy as little more than barbarians - that is an historical fact.

With grateful regards to Moderators Alice and Theophan, I want to reiterate that at no time have I ever said that belief in Purgatory is either normative in Orthodoxy or that Orthodoxy should accept it. As for imposing anything on anyone - I just don't have the authority to do any of that nor would I.

It would be helpful to this discussion in this thread if our Orthodox posters could explain completely what Orthodoxy herself believes "in place of" Purgatory, i.e. could someone give a compendium of Orthodox eschatology and the meaning of prayer for the dead?

One problem in discussing these matters is that the (Latin)Catholic theology can often appear to be very definitive and therefore easily grasped by the "people in the pews."

How does Orthodoxy respond?

Alex

"Final Theosis" is a somewhat unusual term created by Anthony Dragani on EWTN and he sees it as the Eastern equivalent of Purgatory.

But this concept is not known to either the Orthodox or the Eastern Catholics. Theosis has no finality about it. It is the everlasting journey of a human soul into the divinity of the Holy Trinity, becoming by grace what God is by nature (2 Peter 1:4). Because God is infinite, our own journey into theosis is unending.

Here is the "Tale of the Five Prayers"

Use the lower sliding menu on the left of the page. The Tale is the last item on this menu.

http://www.myriobiblos.gr/texts/english/prayerbook/main.htm

Bless, Father Ambrose!

Thank you, Rev. Father Hieromonk!

I pray this prayer frequently - very moving and warm, as is the Rule of the Theotokos by St Seraphim of Sarov!

St Seraphim also taught the rule of 150 Our Father's and 150 Hail Mary's, as you know, to be said for one's relatives and friends, living and dead. Following this, one was to ask for a special favour that one truly needed - and it would be granted.

A great promise indeed!

Kissing your right hand, I again implore your blessing,

Alex