www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West Indulgences and Eastern Catholics

I see there is a thread
“Why no Penance in the East?”
https://www.byzcath.org/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/396316/Why_no_penance_in_the_East#Post396316

Bless Father,

St Mark of Ephesus was, however, the only one who didn't sign the Union of Florence.

One can put that up to politics with respect to the other Greek Bishops. But St Mark apparently didn't think so as he asked that none of those who signed the Florentine union be present at his funeral.

It is an important issue, but I believe that the Creed of Dositheus is more than sufficient to satisfay both sides.

Alex

Bless Father,

I will only add that I don't see how what you have said here meshes with what the Creed of Dositheus affirmed.

But I'm no theologian and I defer to you.

Alex

http://orthodoxeurope.org/page/11/1/6.aspx
Orthodox are convinced that Christians here on earth have a duty to pray for the departed, and they are confident that the dead are helped by such prayers. But precisely in what way do our prayers help the dead? What exactly is the condition of souls in the period between death and the Resurrection of the Body at the Last Day? Here Orthodox teaching is not entirely clear, and has varied somewhat at different times. In the seventeenth century a number of Orthodox writers — most notably Peter of Moghila and Dositheus in his Confession — upheld the Roman Catholic doctrine of Purgatory, or something very close to it (According to the normal Roman teaching, souls in Purgatory undergo expiatory suffering, and so render ‘satisfaction’ or ‘atonement’ for their sins. It should be remarked, however, that even in the seventeenth century there were many Orthodox who rejected the Roman teaching on Purgatory. The statements on the departed in Moghila’s Orthodox Confession were carefully changed by Meletius Syrigos, while in later life Dositheus specifically retracted what he had written on the subject in his Confession). Today most if not all Orthodox theologians reject the idea of Purgatory, at any rate in this form. The majority would be inclined to say that the faithful departed do not suffer at all. Another school holds that perhaps they suffer, but, if so, their suffering is of a purificatory but not an expiatory character; for when a man dies in the grace of God, then God freely forgives him all his sins and demands no expiatory penalties: Christ, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world, is our only atonement and satisfaction. Yet a third group would prefer to leave the whole question entirely open: let us avoid detailed formulation about the life after death, they say, and preserve instead a reverent and agnostic reticence. When Saint Antony of Egypt was once worrying about divine providence, a voice came to him, saying: ‘Antony, attend to yourself; for these are the judgments of God, and it is not for you to know them’ (Apophthegmata (P.G. 65), Antony, 2).

There is a lot of lack of knowledge among even the Orthodox about some
aspects of the Council of Florence.

The delegates who did sign were, on the whole, not happy with it, and added the proviso that their signatures had no authority for their Churches and the matter had to be decided by a future Great Synod of the Eastern Churches.

So the widespread misapprehension in the West today that reunion was achieved at Florence and ratified by the Orthodox but then repudiated by the "perfidious Greeks" is just that – a misapprehension. This is a bit of a propaganda item which should be laid to rest...! The acceptance of Florence
was conditional upon its subsequent acceptance by an Eastern Council.


" However, after Patriarch Joseph II of Constantinople died only two days later [at Florence],** the Greeks insisted that ratification by the Eastern Church could be achieved only by the agreement of an Eastern synod.**

"Upon their return, the Eastern bishops found their agreement with the West broadly rejected by the populace and by civil authorities (with the notable exception of the Emperors of the East who remained committed to union until the fall of the Byzantine Empire two decades later). The union signed at
Florence, even down to the present, has never been accepted by the Eastern churches."

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_Florence

We have to check this but I think Metropolitan Sidiropoulos refused to sign. He returned to Constantinople and spoke strongly and publically against the Council of Florence. Subsequently he became Patriarch Germanos of Constantinople.

Dear Recluse, this quote is an excellent and balanced presentation. It merits a focused reading. It is what I have been trying to say but not near as well.

I find the insistence by some that Orthodoxy teaches a doctrine of Purgatory, simply under another guise, very odd, especially when the Orthodox insistently deny it.

Yes Father. I have often heard the attempt to somehow justify an Orthodox belief in the Latin concept of purgatory....usually using the Confession of Dositheus as the proof. But it is not the Orthodox teaching.

Of course, politics was at play. The West should have helped the East militarily regardless, but that was not to be.

I was just calling attention to the fact that St Mark never forgave the bishops who signed the union of Florence to the extent that he did not wish them at his funeral.

Clearly, he believed they committed something akin to heresy and not only an act of political expediency.

Alex

Dear Father and Recluse,

I never said that Orthodoxy, in any one of the three streams of thought that the quote above mentions, affirms "Purgatory under another name."

I agree, with the quote, that there were and are those Orthodox who agree with St Peter Mohyla and the Creed of Dositheus. I do too. That doesn't mean that "we" affirm the RC doctrine of purgatory.

This "discussion" has come to an end for me. Now the two of you seem to want to cast an Orthodox anathema at me re: purgatory.

The fact is, as the quote that Recluse gave affirms, the matter is undefined/unrefined within Orthodoxy and there are, by the article's own affirmation, three (I assume acceptable) ways of understanding the matter.

The purificational aspect is what I'e always accepted. As for "expiation," I don't really know anything about that.

But I find utterly ridiculous the notion of modern Orthodox regarding "no penance" and the like.

The lives of Orthodox saints show quite the opposite - unless one will make the argument that the heavy chains and other afflictions voluntarily undertaken by Orthodox monastic saints are not "penitential" but that they were/are having a good time etc.

That is modern Orthodoxy trying to find a spiritual identity separate from Catholicism, perhaps. It is not historical Orthodox spirituality.

I'll go before you continue to speak about me as if I'm not here.

Alex

Recluse,

In accordance with the article you quoted above, there is no ONE Orthodox teaching on the matter.

Alex

When the pope learned that the Russian Bishop Abraham of Suzdal had not signed, he dispatched his own Bishop Christopher Garatoni of Corona to secure his signature. After this attempt failed, the Russian Bishop Isidore of Kiev had Abraham arrested and incarcerated for one week. After that, he released Abraham who, under much pressure, agreed to sign.

Metropolitan Anthony of Herakleia was absent because of illness but was enjoined to sign the decree while lying in bed. Even those who were not formerly allowed to vote were made to sign. The only exceptions were those who had either died or managed to escape Florence. None of the Greeks bothered to ask or disturb Mark; all were convinced of his firmness.

To avoid signing, those who definitely managed to flee to Venice were Esaias of Stavropol and the Bishop of Tver. When Bishop Esaias learned that the Latins planned to murder him because of his refusal to sign, he secretly left the city. The Georgian Bishop Gregory also left Florence undercover in order to avoid signing the decree. The Despot Demetrios departed four days before the death of Patriarch Joseph. Accompanying the Despot were George Gemistes Plethon who disliked the Latin Church, George Scholarios who left in protest, and John Evgenikos, the resolute champion's brother. Also, the deacon and archphylax of the Great Church quit Florence. Curiously, the signature of Methodius of Lakedaimon is nowhere to be found.
From The Great Synaxaristes Of The Orthodox Church

He was tough, wasn't he? But look at the extenuating circumstances of these sorry Orthodox delegates.

Both the Pope and the Emperor were exasperated by this never-ending Council.

The Orthodox delegates were confined to their cells.

They were undernourished.

They were afraid of being killed. They believe Patriarch Joseph's death was a murder. He was found dead in his cell in Florence with a fraudulent document in which he agreed to papal submission, Purgatory, the whole nine yards.

Those bishops just wanted to get out of Italy, and preferably not in a coffin.

I am confused. As a Catholic, are you not obliged to affirm the doctrine of purgatory as set forth by Rome?

I am confused too - are you saying there is only one way of understanding this?

In fact, I haven't heard the word "purgatory" used in any UGCC parish I've attended in, say, over twenty years.

The Romans understand it as the foundation of prayer for the dead. And exactly what purgatory is according to Roman theology today is anyone's guess.

I accept the Orthodox view of the forecourts of heaven and hell and that prayer for the dead assists them.

If the Latins want to call that by a name, I'm OK with it.

Alex