www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West Purgatory is a process, not a place, pope says at general audienc

In a divided Church there are no winners and that mentality will never lead to reconciliation.IMHO


So again my question- if purgatory was not a dogma would the Orthodox have a problem with this as a theological opinion? My point being that it seems that usually the argument is against things from Rome being dogmatized. So I am trying to understand if that is the only reason for its rejection because it comes from Rome as a dogma? (The Immaculate Conception also comes to mind, since there are some in the Orthodox Church whom subscribe to it but not as a dogma but theological opinion)

I personally think that Pope Benedict and Pope John Paul II of blessed memory are trying to work out a way that makes purgatory more acceptable to non-Catholics. I don't particularly see a problem with the Roman Church moving away for the medieval idea of purgatory (which I don't agree with at all) but their (last two Popes) words for me as a Greek Catholic are more acceptable.

I don't know any serious Orthodox theologians who consider purgatory to be a substantive obstacle to unity. It's usually the reflexively anti-Catholic among the laity and monastics who get heartburn over something they don't really understand. As an Eastern Catholic, I can take or leave purgatory as defined by the Latin Church, so long as the Latin Church leaves me alone. For the most part, it has: I have not heard a peep about purgatory from bishop or priest, officially or unofficially, these past fifteen years.

Stuart, now that you have mentioned the topic...we will be hearing about purgatory from every Tom, Dick or Harry.

I think you put that very well, Nelson. But I'll share what I was thinking anyhow. What I was thinking is that if you define "win" to mean being the true Church and adhering to the truth, then one side or the other has already won, but we can't agree on which side that is.

If you instead define "win" to mean not only being the true Church but also getting the other side to admit that, then clearly neither side has "won" yet.

I didn't respond when you first asked the question; but since no one else has responded either, I will venture to say: Perhaps the reason no one has responded is that none of us can see how things would be, if they were not as they are.

If it is just a theological opinion I don't think that most would see it as a problem.

On a side note, it occurs to me that purgatory may not technically be a "dogma", although it is certainly a mandatory belief. (I'm reminded of the way Mary's perpetual virginity is often referred to as a "dogma" even though it was never dogmatically defined.)

Peter,

I wondered that as well, as it hardly seemed to me to merit dogmatizing (not that Rome solicits my opinion, mores the pity ). However, an internet search seems to suggest that it is (although there are almost as many hits that cite it as doctrine, but not dogma).

Many years,

Neil

My Roman Catholic friends tell me that purgatory was made a dogma at the Council of Florence.

I tend to agree with Stuart on this subject.

I'll concur with the other posters, and Peter put it very succintly.

The answer to the question of "if purgatory were not dogma would it be a problem" is clearly "no, it wouldn't be", but the point is that it IS dogma.

I don't actually see that the document in question here changes that - it rewords it and nuances it differently, but it doesn't step away from it.

Of the issues from the Council of Florence, purgatory is the most difficult dogmatic issue, but discussion of why I think that is clearly off topic here.

I've studied both Trent and Florence and other teachings and commentaries on purgatory (it is a common question from RCs at the website). I would say that it can be broken down into dogmatic and doctrinal parts. The dogma is that after we die there is a journey and that prayer is helpful to those undergoing the journey. On this the East and West hold common teaching. All the rest is doctrinal, and some commonly held ideas are merely speculative.

Then perhaps you could tell us what it is that the Orthodox have won?

Purgatory is no longer a divisive issue, insofar as the Latin Church has answered all of the principal objections raised against it at the Council of Florence. What the Latin Church has today might best be called "Purgatory Lite", and corresponds generally to the fundamental Orthodox doctrine that the soul requires some form of purification after death, and that prayers for the repose of the dead are efficacious. That's the theologia prima, that's the Tradition. The Church of Rome makes no attempt to impose the scholastic doctrine of purgatory upon the Eastern Churches in communion with her, which means this dogma has lost its bite. The East has won, but suddenly has a legalistic fixation on certain conciliar canons, ignoring its own history of allowing canons to linger on the books longer after they have lapsed into desuetude.

Be good winners. Don't run up the score, and don't gloat.

I don't even think purgatory is a dogma. In fact, as far as I can tell people can hold a wide range of opinions about what happens after death. Personally I believe in unending growth into God (i.e., what St. Gregory of Nyssa called "epektasis").

I like that. It gives a positive spin to the concept of purgation and, what is more, creates common ground between east and west. We need as much of that as we can get.