www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Orthodox view of immediate state after death

I *think* the Orthodox teach that when we die we go to a holding area where we wait until the end of time to be judged. At the end of time we are judged *then* we enter heaven (or go to hell).

Contrasted to that, I think Catholic theology says that we can enter heaven before the end of time and aren't left waiting in such a state.

Are the positions outlined above accurate representations of what both communities believe? If so, then I'm a bit surprised as people (like my priest) often say there are few differences between Catholic and Orthodox.

Eric, I am simply a layman, but I will add what is my understanding.

I believe the afterlife would normally not be described in spatial terms, i.e. as a place or holding area that we go to. What I believe is the most basic belief is that after death we come in to the presence of God (there are different views of how this happens) as our soul is separated from our body. In this particular judgment we experience God relative to how we related to him in life, so we experience the energies of God in ways that either move us towards or away from God. The particular judgment is just a foretaste of the final judgment when soul and body are united.

Metropolitan Hierotheos of Nafpaktos has written a book called "Life After Death" and there are excerpts available here [vic.com] and that may be of interest to you.

Andrew

Some time ago, I read a book by the Old Calendarist Orthodox priest-monk Seraphim Rose on this topic. He explained that, based on patristic writers, he held to a belief that the soul is in a state of travel to places on earth, then to Heaven, and then to Hell, with the particular judgement occurring on the 40th day after death. Thus, the commemoration of the deceased in many Eastern Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches on the 40th day after death. He also elaborated quite extensively on the notion of the "tollgates" through which the soul must pass on it's way to it's destination. If a soul is in an unrepentant state while approaching the "tollgate", it will be presented, by the demons, with a temptation to sin according to the passion to which it was enslaved on earth, and when it succumbs to the passion, the demons seize it, and toss it into Hell. On the other hand, if the soul is in a state of friendship with God, it will not be lured into Hell, but will pass on to it's God-intended destination, Heaven. This latter view has been condemned by many writers from "canonical" Orthodox jurisdictions, as representing Gnosticism. Fr. Seraphim, also, while condemning the notion of Purgatory, did hold to the idea of a "temporary Hell", and also the possibility that souls in Hell can be helped by our prayers (i.e. their torments can be lessened). I don't remember him making a distinction between helping those in the "temporary" Hell, and those in the Eternal Hell.

With all due respect, if you read 'Orthodoxy and the Religion of the Future', which Fr. Seraphim widely promoted, I think it's easy to see that Fr. Seraphim and his ilk were extreme reactionaries, and do not represent mainstream Orthodox thought on the matter.

While acknowledging the apostolic succession and the promulgation of the first 7 ecumenical counsils by contemporary Orthodox scholars, there isn't really any room for authoritative interpretation on this subject. The Catholic perspective of Purgatory as the state after death for the purging of an individual's sins (assuming that their basic disposition was toward God), is the result of hundreds of years of reflection on the matter by many theologians, popes, and saints. I daresay that we Catholics have perhaps a better understanding of the subject because of the Deposit of Faith as delivered to the Successor of Peter.

I'm NOT trying to slam Orthodox Christians on this matter - I think that it may perhaps be more accurate to say that there is no consensus on the state of the soul after death, rather than the definitive statements of a priest of the fringes of Orthodoxy. Fr. Seraphim's writings and statements strike me as reactionary and highly defensive.

Just MHO,

Slainte Mhath,

Daibhibh

As a Byzantine Catholic, I think that Purgatory, or the purification of souls after death, is very defendable, even when viewed from an Eastern perspective. Aside from implied references in Scripture (i.e., Machabees), we also have the writings of some of the Fathers over the centuries. I do remember reading some quotes from Eastern Fathers which would tend to support such a notion, especially in the context of the desirability of praying for the deceased at the Divine Liturgy.In addition, one of the recent "classics" on spirituality from an Eastern Orthodox perspective, a book entitled "Orthodox Spirituality" by Fr. Dmitru Staniloae, details the progression of the soul on it's journey toward union with God. It is somewhat similar (but not completely) to many RC writings on the same topic, in that we see that a soul must go through the stages of purification, and illumination, before attaining union with God, or Theosis/Divinization. The question to ponder is: what happens to the soul of the person who dies in the process of purification? The Catholic answer is easy-the purification continues beyond the grave.

How much authority can the church claim in defining a mystery like the state of the soul after death? It seems like very little to me, and what I think Metropolitan Hierotheos does is expound on the best source we have and that is Holy Scripture. What has been revealed to us about the state of the soul after death is found primarily there in the words of Christ. That is the baseline of our understanding.

Perhaps, but frankly the Latin understanding of Purgatory seemed both odd and problematic to me. Consider the words of Florence

the suffrages of the faithful still living are efficacious in bringing them relief from such punishment, namely the Sacrifice of the Mass, prayers and almsgiving and other works of piety which, in accordance with the designation of the Church, are customarily offered by the faithful for each other.

Or Trent

But let the bishops take care, that the suffrages of the faithful who are living, to wit the sacrifices of masses, prayers, alms, and other works of piety, which have been wont to be performed by the faithful for the other faithful departed, be piously and devoutly performed, in accordance with the institutes of the church; and that whatsoever is due on their behalf, from the endowments of testators, or in other way, be discharged, not in a perfunctory manner, but diligently and accurately, by the priests and ministers of the church, and others who are bound to render this (service).

Or the words of various western saints on the matter

"No tongue can express, no mind can understand, how dreadful is Purgatory�And be assured that the souls have to pay what they owe even to the last farthing. This is God�s decree to satisfy the demands of justice" -St. Catherine of Genoa.

'The same fire torments the damned in hell and the just in Purgatory. The least pain in Purgatory exceeds the greatest in this life." - St. Thomas Aquinas.

"My God, what soul would be sufficiently just to enter heaven without passing through the avenging flames' - St. Teresa of Avila.

And compare all of those to what�s printed in the CCC now, and to be honest with you I think all of the reflection the RCC may be doing now is really moving away from these viewpoints and towards a more Eastern understanding.

Personally, I don�t see the purification that occurs after death as one of God meting out punishment and vengeance, which all of the quotes above would lead me to believe (and I have to wonder if the quotes above or the belief of St. Robert Bellarmine that purgatory is just under the crust of the earth wouldn�t now be considered �extreme� opinions).

I think purification is a reaction to God�s love, not his anger. The mechanics of that process are a mystery, be they the telonia or some other means. Those means are not a matter of doctrine, but theologumenon. That does not seem to me to be a matter of lack of authority to understand the issue, but recognition of where our authority and understanding ends.

No, that is not true. There is agreement that there is a particular and a final judgment and that the process of theosis continues in the next stage of our existence. The rest may be a matter of speculation, but it is not dogma. I don�t consider your comments a slam, I don�t think you really understand the Orthodox view.

Andrew

I was explained that when we die, we arrive to a stand-by state where there is no time or space as it's seen on earth. That's when the purification comes, when the soul faces loneliness or pain (in the case of those who died in sins) or the happy thoughts of someone who's going to meet God very soon in the case of those who were good in life.

I am taught that after this state the Resurection and the Final Judgement come, and it joins those who were alive during the Second Coming as well as those that resurrected and were previously dead.

Then people go to heaven or hell.

Dear Daibhibh,

Forgive me, Celtic brother, but you've given a particular, RC "Slainte" to your understanding of this issue!

One could argue that it was not the Popes of Rome that gave us "Purgatory" - but the scholastic RC theologians who originally concocted it along the lines of "it would appear appropriate that."

It also reflects the Western scholastic preoccupation with trying to define things in minute detail on the basis of scriptural-traditional data that just doesn't support it when one comes right down to it.

But Purgatory itself is not the issue - it is what the West exactly MEANS by it.

And again, as with the Immaculate Conception, the West today seems quite adept at moving about all over the place whenever it perceives that contemporary sensibilities are offended by theological definitions that appear in need of "updating."

So today one will come across the notion of Purgatory being not a "place" but a "state." I was taught in my RC catechism classes when I attended RC schools that Purgatory was a "place."

In fact, at the Council of Florence, what shocked the Greek Orthodox, with Markos Eugenikos, Archbishop of Ephesus at their head, was that the Latin Church actually saw the afterlife defined in three (or even four at the time, if you include "Limbo") separate "places."

The Greeks just couldn't figure out at what point the Latins had departed from what they always believed was the general Patristic consensus otherwise.

For Eastern Christian eschatology, the afterlife is not to be fully consummated or finally determined for us until the Second Coming of Christ, when we will stand before the Judgement Seat of OLGS Jesus Christ in the fullness of our being - body and soul.

Before that time, when the soul is ripped from the body in death, it experiences a forty-day "transition and revelation" period which is why the Church prays for the soul in an especially assiduous manner for the forty days after the soul's repose.

The Church and the Fathers have always believed and taught that only a completely sanctified soul may enter Heaven (or, prior to the Second Coming, Heaven's "Foregate").

Thus, the soul with sins that lead not "unto eternal death" or that has yet to bring forth in a comprehensive manner and fulfill the fruits of repentance and penance is completed goes to Hades until such time as its purification is completed and it is then released from there, especially at the prayers and Divine Liturgies of the Church on earth, to Heaven.

We cannot know the Mercy of God and to whom, no matter how sinful individuals appeared to us on earth, it is demonstrated and so we pray for all to be "loosed from their sins."

God is also the Just Judge and those who died in the state of unrepentant sin that leads "unto eternal death" face the consequences of that as well in Hades for eternity.

That is how the East views it while "Purgatory" with "indulgences" appears to us to be a form of spiritual legalism.

Alex

Alex

I believe what St. Mark of Ephesus, one of our three latter day pillars of Orthodoxy, also objected to was the idea of created grace as it relates to this topic.

Andrew

It is my understanding that there are two beliefs that must be held by Catholics about purgatory.
#1. That purification happens after death.
(Be it a place or state)
#2. That we can help the dead by our prayers and works of charity.

Other beliefs about Purgatory are theological speculations.
Stephanos I

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Rilian:
[QB] [QUOTE]
And compare all of those to what�s printed in the CCC now, and to be honest with you I think all of the reflection the RCC may be doing now is really moving away from these viewpoints and towards a more Eastern understanding.[QUOTE]

You will note that the official teachings outlined by Florence and Trent say nothing about the details of purification.

Dear Andrew,

Yes, St Mark is also one of my pillars too! I have his icon.

St Mark actually came to Florence as a unionist who believed, as he arrived, that unity with Rome can be accomplished if only the Latins remove the Filioque from the Creed.

He believed it to be an heresy but that God would heal it in time - they just had to remove it first and union with the Orthodox Church would do the rest in time.

He was to discover some other aspects of the Latins' doctrine that he didn't know about beforehand and that he found incompatible with Orthodoxy.

This is why he delivered a "non possumus" to the whole unity idea at Florence.

I like him anyway . . .

Alex

Indeed. Well said. The importance of the teaching, therefore, is to (1) improve our purification / theosis here and now -- instead of leaving it for the afterlife and (2) to pray for those on the other side who are still being purified.

-- John

Dear John and Andrew,

However, the Orthodox Church HAS defined the issue of where a soul goes for purification after death.

It goes to "hades" from whence it is released after its purification.

And, as for Theosis, this is something that continues EVEN AFTER souls have reached Heaven, in Orthodoxy and Eastern Christianity.

This is why we actually PRAY FOR the Mother of God and the Saints during the Divine LIturgy.

The prayer doesn't "bring them to heaven" because they're already there . . .

Alex

Dear Alex you said:

"And, as for Theosis, this is something that continues EVEN AFTER souls have reached Heaven, in Orthodoxy and Eastern Christianity."

I say:

Yes according to the Fathers, the soul is in constant movement and goes from 'glory' to 'glory. A lack of movement and growth would be considered hell...or so I believe.

That movement of the soul towards unity with God, in itself would be a form of purgation, since the soul would be continuously purifying itself...or so I believe.

I guess this is my 'theologoumena'.

Zenovia