www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology redemptive suffering

How do easterners view the redeptive suffering doctrine from the west-taken from:Col:1:24:
24 Who now rejoice in my sufferings for you and fill up those things that are wanting of the sufferings of Christ, in my flesh, for his body, which is the church: (DRV)

Let me know your thoughts..

[ 02-20-2002: Message edited by: Broric ]

Dear Broric,

Is it just me or is your grammar getting worse by the hour ?

The verse you refer to is understood by "us Easterners" as our vocation to suffer with Christ and carry our Crosses in union with Him as we struggle to overcome concupiscence, the world and the devil which stand as roadblocks for the development of the Body of Christ, the Church, on earth.

We do not have the "spiritual accounting" outlook that sometimes obtained in certain schools of the West in this regard.

Alex

I am not so sure that there is a hugely different interpretation of this particular verse.

Byzantine Christians (Catholic and Orthodox) would understand this as Christ and his Church (His people) being so intimately united that he suffers along with us in our sufferings just as we suffered and died with Him in our baptism and continue to do so in our daily lives.

Broric, in what way do you believe the West is different in its interpretation of this passage?

Moose, the doctine of redeptive suffering has a lot to do with the justice of God. Even though Christ died for us to reconcile us there still is penelty for sin. Which leads to purgatory and people doing penance for others, also the teaching of victom souls. I believe this verse is a proof text for the doctine.

Broric,

I don't understand the question you are asking. How does the West differ from the East on this?

In the verse you cite, Paul is speaking of how the "sufferings of Christ" are intimately connected with the completion and fulfillment of the Gospel. Paul's vocation is to proclaim the Gospel everywhere - especially to the people who have not yet heard it. Everywhere he and the other apostles went their preaching caused a certain level of division since some welcomed their teaching and received Christ while others persecuted them for their efforts. The "sufferings of Christ" here is first and foremost the apostolic sufferings that they endured as they took the Gospel to new places. In a more general sense this is also the sufferings we endure willingly for Christ's sake for being Christians and striving to proclaim the Gospel and how Christ intimately associates with us through our sufferings.

You are quite correct in your statements that Christ died for us to reconcile us, that there is still penalty for sin, and that our prayers and efforts may be of spiritual and even physical benefit to others. I don't see the direct connection between this verse and the questions you are raising.

Can you rephrase your question so that I can understand it?

Moose

moose- victom souls are people God chooses to suffer in order to pay for the sins of others. Co-redemers as a result of penalties for sins still being commited in the world. There is a big differnce in the eastern understanding of this teaching. I used the verse above because of course there can be drawn similar aspects, but the west goes further in using it as a proof text as for redemptive suffering. I was just wondering if the east went to this extreme as well. ORTHO-Cath gave me my answer in that they dont. The western thought focuses more on the aspect of the justice of God in their redemptive theology, the east, on the other hand, focuses on defication of mankind through the work of Christ, thats what leads to different aspects and thats why I asked my question. Hey, orth-cath please have mercy on me for my bad grammer.

[ 02-20-2002: Message edited by: Broric ]

Dear Broric,

As for your grammar, it is God Who forgives!!

I understand your question (isn't Moose one of the most thoughtful and articulate posters you've ever come across - we should both emulate him!), but getting back, I understand your question in terms of the "merits" equation that characterized western thinking on this question.

I don't like "proof texts" as this is largely a Protestant idea that uses the Scriptures, divorced from Patristics and Tradition, as a kind of "factual deposit" where one may pick and choose to come up with doctrine.

It is true that St Bonaventure and others understood this text in terms of spiritual accounting, as I mentioned.

Purgatory is then deemed to be the place where one pays one's final "taxes" to "even up" with God before getting the "go ahead" to heaven.

The operative word here is "lacking" as if something could be lacking in the sufferings of Christ.

Actually, nothing is.

What St Paul is referring to is the application of what Christ has done for us, once and for all, during His life, death and resurrection.

And that is what the Church does. Although Christ has saved us, we must appropriate for ourselves His salvation and deification as opportunities that we need to realize in our lives and through the mediation of the Church of the Apostles.

We are called to suffer and carry our Cross with Christ.

Without our participation in this way, Christ's salvation of us is truly "incomplete."

Alex

Interesting idea...

"God chooses people to suffer..."

I always thought God only wanted good for his people? He "permits" suffering, but the existence of pain and suffering in the world, is our choice, from Adam to the present day, and is the result of the fall and personal sin. Only we are responsible for it. His "permission" for there to be suffering in the world, is more connected with the choices man has made, than with God's plan.

I am curious how we can pay for the sins of others, when Christ himself has already paid this debt? He paid for them, and the price he paid was his death on the Cross. We have been bought, and at what a price! He has offered himself completely for the sins of the whole world. His victory over sin and death is complete, and there is nothing lacking in it. Why is there need to pay for something, that has been already bought and paid for?

Of course, suffering can be redemptive. But always in relation to the Cross of Christ, and to the extent that we unite our suffering to his. If there is power in human suffering, it is only the result of this mysterious union with Christ's perfect and flawless offering, and that is more by his gift than our decision. Otherwise without this gift of union with God, of its own, suffering is meaningless and tragic.

This is a very complex mystery. But the language of "victim souls" is so given to misinterpretation. It is best considered as a spiritual gift, to Christians who are granted holy "theosis", true divinization and union with God. God shares his life with such Christians, and they discover how awesome is God's love, which of his own will, accepts suffering and death for love of us. Such knowledge of God is great and terrible.

In the context of spiritual theology, such language has some meaning. However, out of context, it sounds like it is related to the doctrine of personal redemption (as it uses language from that tract). In such a context, it is given to dangerous misunderstandings, and would offend God, if it implied that "we" can save others, or God chooses suffering. God saves! and wills good for his children.

Forgive me if I have spoken error (or missed the point here), but this is my simple understanding of this mystery.

Elias

You made some good points Monk. I would like to point out that from what I understand no one in the eastern church has ever had the stigmata. The ways of the western spirtuality differ from that of the east, as you well know. I would like to point out a "victom soul" the late blessed padre pio. He had the stigmata and like Chirst his body was totaly drained of all blood at his death. His sufferings were great during his life. His suffering was for others and God chose him to live that life -he was a victom soul. It seems that many western saints believed in doing penance for others sins. For instance santa rosa of lima, chained a anchor around herself and threw the key in a well to pay the price for others offenses agianst God. This concept is from the fact of the doctrine of redemptive suffering in the west and as you well pointed out its power is sharing with what Christ has all ready done, by suffering for others sins.

[ 02-21-2002: Message edited by: Broric ]