Disagree w/ or want argue Orthodox Church teaching? Please post here.

[marlo]

Monica

what can you expect, when the council of constantinople was held, the two bishops who presided in succession, has conflict with the bishop of Rome, it was initially a local council to place constantinople in first place in the east. The west was not represented, it was not even discussed during the 3rd ecumenical council. In fact, in the 3rd ecumencial council a mere deacon of Rome representing the pope signed on top of the Bishop of Constantinople and all other Patriarchs the canons of the 3rd ecumenical council, this really shows papal primacy

when the canon 28 reached the Pope, he was outrage, since it violated the hierarchy of the ancient church. the Bishop of Constantinople apologizes stating it was the Emperor who wanted that in the canons. canon 28 was never part of the ancient church canons in the first century.

Hi Monica,
Respectfully, I always thought Canon 28 of the Council of Chalcedon read:
And the One Hundred and Fifty most religious Bishops, actuated by the same consideration, gave equal privileges (ἴσα πρεσβεῖα) to the most holy throne of New Rome (Constantinople), justly judging that the city which is honoured with the Sovereignty and the Senate and enjoys equal privileges with the old imperial Rome, should in ecclesiastical matters also be magnified as she is, and rank next after her.

And Canon 3 of the Council of Constantinople in 381 read:
“the bishop of Constantinople… shall have the prerogative of honor after the bishop of Rome; because Constantinople is New Rome.”

Rome maintained her preeminence not because she was the imperial capital of old alone, but because Rome was the Chair of Peter.

 

[SingleMomMonica]

It is great to be able to hit the mark, I don’t deny that.
But what unrepented sins will send someone to hell, and what unrepented sins will not send you to hell? And you don;t believe in purgatory, or do you?

Your 1st question doesn’t make sense. Anyone who is striving to “hit the mark” will be following the teachings of the Church, obeying the Commandments, keeping their prayer rule, receiving the Mysteries. It’s only those who stop trying or who have never begun to try to “hit the mark” that we need to really worry about. God IS Love. A Christian has clearly stopped trying to “hit the mark” when he begins thinking in terms of “well if I committ this sin will I go to Hell or will I still be able to make it into Heaven?” - that is backwards thinking. That is not having your life focused on God and Love of Him, but rather a focus on “okay, what specifically CAN I get away with?” - which is the exact opposite. We must be transformed spirit, soul and body by the renewal of our minds just like the Bible says and we must become holy as He is Holy, perfect as He is Perfect and merciful as he is Merciful. We must Love God with all of our hearts and minds and love each other also.

The answer to your 2nd question. No, Orthodox Christians do not believe in purgatory.

 

[sidbrown]

The answer to your 2nd question. No, Orthodox Christians do not believe in purgatory.

Well, this where I would have to disagree with the Orthodox teaching. Like I pointed out above, a man commits a heinous crime causing untold suffering and agony for innocent children and their families and he curses frequently. At his deathbed, he confesses his murderous crimes and mortal sins since he realises that if he did not, he would go to hell. But still, he does not repent of his venial sins, and his contrition is not perfect. I find the idea that this guy will go straight to heaven as difficult to believe, and the Catholic teaching of Purgatory makes a lot more sense, especially in a case like this.
You have repented imperfectly and you had a lot of sins. You are forgiven in the sense that you have avoided hell, but still, becasue of the heinous nature of your crimes, simply saying “Oh I’m sorry that I comitted this horrble crime” will not wipe your soul immaculately and completely clean. The Catholic teaching on Purgatory is what makes sense here.

 

[TheosisM]

Well, this where I would have to disagree with the Orthodox teaching. Like I pointed out above, a man commits a heinous crime causing untold suffering and agony for innocent children and their families and he curses frequently. At his deathbed, he confesses his murderous crimes and mortal sins since he realises that if he did not, he would go to hell. But still, he does not repent of his venial sins, and his contrition is not perfect. I find the idea that this guy will go straight to heaven as difficult to believe, and the Catholic teaching of Purgatory makes a lot more sense, especially in a case like this.
You have repented imperfectly and you had a lot of sins. You are forgiven in the sense that you have avoided hell, but still, becasue of the heinous nature of your crimes, simply saying “Oh I’m sorry that I comitted this horrble crime” will not wipe your soul immaculately and completely clean. The Catholic teaching on Purgatory is what makes sense here.

I’m confused by this. Are you saying that someone that confesses but is not truly repentant goes to Purgatory?

I assume that in both Catholicism and Orthodoxy, a person that simply says “Oh I’m sorry that I committed this horrible crime” simply because they want to avoid Hell, but the person is not truly repentant, will not be forgiven, hence they will still have that mortal sin to account for. Unless I"m misunderstanding your point…

I think that the Orthodox position is a bit more involved than simply: a person confesses his mortal sins, doesn’t repent of venial sins, but still goes to Heaven.

 

[sidbrown]

I’m confused by this. Are you saying that someone that confesses but is not truly repentant goes to Purgatory?

I assume that in both Catholicism and Orthodoxy, a person that simply says “Oh I’m sorry that I committed this horrible crime” simply because they want to avoid Hell, but the person is not truly repentant, will not be forgiven, hence they will still have that mortal sin to account for. Unless I"m misunderstanding your point…

I think that the Orthodox position is a bit more involved than simply: a person confesses his mortal sins, doesn’t repent of venial sins, but still goes to Heaven.

I am speaking of imperfect contrition.

 

[SingleMomMonica]

Well, this where I would have to disagree with the Orthodox teaching. Like I pointed out above, a man commits a heinous crime causing untold suffering and agony for innocent children and their families and he curses frequently. At his deathbed, he confesses his murderous crimes and mortal sins since he realises that if he did not, he would go to hell. But still, he does not repent of his venial sins, and his contrition is not perfect. I find the idea that this guy will go straight to heaven as difficult to believe, and the Catholic teaching of Purgatory makes a lot more sense, especially in a case like this.
You have repented imperfectly and you had a lot of sins. You are forgiven in the sense that you have avoided hell, but still, becasue of the heinous nature of your crimes, simply saying “Oh I’m sorry that I comitted this horrble crime” will not wipe your soul immaculately and completely clean. The Catholic teaching on Purgatory is what makes sense here.

So you believe that God is incapable of FULLY forgiving certain sins? That Jesus’ sacrifice of Himself simply wasn’t big enough to fully overcome deathbed confessions of certain heinous crimes/sins?

You and I don’t agree.

From what you describe, I guess my God is Bigger, than your God. My God is more Powerful. My God’s Love can overcome anything.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

I don’t want to try and speak for sidbrown but it seems to me that his post’s hypothetical is not saying that God will not fully forgive that individual. I think he is making the point that the man’s contrition is imperfect and thus it requires purgation. The temporal consequences of his transgression coupled with the fact that his sin is so serious and he hasn’t had time to truly meditate on it and prayerfully deal with it on earth mitigates things. Contrition, however, even if it is imperfect, is forgiven in the holy act of confession and reconciliation. But in purgatory one is left to be purged of the temporal consequences and sinful parts of himself that is left as a human being, as a sinner.

I don’t see purgatory as a big obstacle. I have spoken with many Protestants even here in CAF who also don’t have a problem with it. I often feel that some folks want to oppose purgatory more because it’s papally-taught than because it is sinful or an incorrect teaching. I look at it in simple terms…human beings are sinful and very fallen creatures. Christ through his death and blood on the Cross has redeemed us and through the sacraments we are cleansed and saved. But between earth and heaven to be in God’s presence we must be made pure, white as snow, worthy to stand in the beatific vision. We are dirty clothes and we cannot be mixed in with 100% clean white, spotless linen. In between now and there God purges anything left on us that is stained and dirty. We might be forgiven and heaven-bound but we have prejudices, hateful sides to ourselves, grudges, deep lusts, desires for vengeance, and a personality that retains the fallen nature to a higher or lesser degree. God must make us pure to enter His holy house one way or another. Some people need little, someone like me needs plenty I’m sure. How it happens is a mystery and unimportant for us really, but purgation is an obvious necessity at some point is it not?

So you believe that God is incapable of FULLY forgiving certain sins? That Jesus’ sacrifice of Himself simply wasn’t big enough to fully overcome deathbed confessions of certain heinous crimes/sins?

You and I don’t agree.

From what you describe, I guess my God is Bigger, than your God. My God is more Powerful. My God’s Love can overcome anything.

 

[TheosisM]

Dear brother TheosisM,

To Eastern Orthodox, theosis is an eternal journey. Even the Saints in heaven can increase in holiness. Our prayers and suffrages can help both saints and even “unrighteous” to increase in holiness in the Hades after death.

I cannot speak for other Oriental Orthodox, but for my own Coptic Orthodox Tradition, there is a teaching very similar to theosis called theopoiesis. The shortest way I can describe it is that it is somewhere in between the EO teaching on theosis and the Latin teaching on sanctification/justification.

Does that answer your question?

Blessings,
Marduk

Thanks, this does answer my question.

I’m not sure if it has been mentioned already, but from what I understand, in Orthodoxy (and I assume Eastern Catholicism), the dead do not go to Heaven or Hell, but have a foretaste of each, in Hades (a waiting place). Is this correct? If so, where are the canonized saints? Does this also mean that Orthodox believe in a particular judgment and a final judgment? In Catholicism, the belief is that people do go to Heaven or Hell after death, but they won’t be fully experienced until the resurrection.

 

[sidbrown]

So you believe that God is incapable of FULLY forgiving certain sins? That Jesus’ sacrifice of Himself simply wasn’t big enough to fully overcome deathbed confessions of certain heinous crimes/sins?

You and I don’t agree.

From what you describe, I guess my God is Bigger, than your God. My God is more Powerful. My God’s Love can overcome anything.

Of course God is all powerful.
God is omnipotent, all merciful, all loving but He is also all Just. We read in Scripture:
Matthew 7:21:“Not every one that saith to me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven: but he that doeth the will of my Father who is in heaven, he shall enter into the kingdom of heaven.”
Just by saying Lord, Lord, after having lived a wicked life of crime does not mean that you will then go straightaway into heaven. A man whose contrition is imperfect and who does not repent of his venial sins will undergo punishment in Purgatory, where he will be cleansed of all of his imperfections before entering into Heaven.
Although I have to agree that the Orthodox Church is a wonderful Church and has so many strong points, I am sorry to say that it is flat out wrong for anyone to deny the existence and the reasonableness of Purgatory.

 

[sidbrown]

I don’t want to try and speak for sidbrown but it seems to me that his post’s hypothetical is not saying that God will not fully forgive that individual. I think he is making the point that the man’s contrition is imperfect and thus it requires purgation. The temporal consequences of his transgression coupled with the fact that his sin is so serious and he hasn’t had time to truly meditate on it and prayerfully deal with it on earth mitigates things. Contrition, however, even if it is imperfect, is forgiven in the holy act of confession and reconciliation. But in purgatory one is left to be purged of the temporal consequences and sinful parts of himself that is left as a human being, as a sinner.

I don’t see purgatory as a big obstacle. I have spoken with many Protestants even here in CAF who also don’t have a problem with it. I often feel that some folks want to oppose purgatory more because it’s papally-taught than because it is sinful or an incorrect teaching. I look at it in simple terms…human beings are sinful and very fallen creatures. Christ through his death and blood on the Cross has redeemed us and through the sacraments we are cleansed and saved. But between earth and heaven to be in God’s presence we must be made pure, white as snow, worthy to stand in the beatific vision. We are dirty clothes and we cannot be mixed in with 100% clean white, spotless linen. In between now and there God purges anything left on us that is stained and dirty. We might be forgiven and heaven-bound but we have prejudices, hateful sides to ourselves, grudges, deep lusts, desires for vengeance, and a personality that retains the fallen nature to a higher or lesser degree. God must make us pure to enter His holy house one way or another. Some people need little, someone like me needs plenty I’m sure. How it happens is a mystery and unimportant for us really, but purgation is an obvious necessity at some point is it not?

Thanks gurneyhalleck1. the Catholic teaching on Purgatory makes so much sense that I don’t see how anyone could reasonably deny it.

 

[mardukm]

Dear brother TheosisM,

I’m confused by this. Are you saying that someone that confesses but is not truly repentant goes to Purgatory?

I assume that in both Catholicism and Orthodoxy, a person that simply says “Oh I’m sorry that I committed this horrible crime” simply because they want to avoid Hell, but the person is not truly repentant, will not be forgiven, hence they will still have that mortal sin to account for. Unless I"m misunderstanding your point…

Have you ever come across the “Act of Contrition?” It goes like this:

O my God, I am heartily sorry for having offended you. I detest all my sins, because I deserve your just punishments; but most of all, because they offended you my God, Who is all Good, and deserving of all my love. I firmly resolve, with the help of Your Grace, to sin no more and to avoid the near occasions of sin. Amen.

So according to Catholic teaching, one can be truly repentant even if it is for the cause of fear of punishment (the red marked clause in the above prayer). Being repentant for any other reason than for love of God (the green marked clause in the above prayer) is called ATTRITION (which is imperfect contrition). Being repentant because of love for God is called perfect contrition, or, simply, contrition. Of course, one can confess and have both contrition and attrition in your heart.

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[Andrew_Phillip]

Interesting discussion thread guys…

I must say that the RCC teaching about purgatory, where further cleansing and purification takes place seems very far fetched to me - and contradicts many scriptures about the nature of salvation, forgiveness and judgement.

Prayer for the dead in the Orthodox tradition assists those departed who sleep until their judgement by the Almighty - when he comes to judge the living and the dead.

Purgatory was a Catholic innovation against what the ancient Church taught - led to further errors in teaching such as indulgences (payment for the salvation of the dead) which in large part destroyed the unity of the Catholic Communion during the reformation in Western Europe.

Most worrying though, are the contemporary Catholic teachings which extend the Purgation dogma, whereby many Catholics argue that souls of many in purgatory, are given permission by God to return as ‘ghosts’ to the earthly plain after death, in order to further work things through which they may not have dealt with in life - including contact with places and people still living.

I find such a teaching to be potentially dangerous in the instance where demonic activity, is often interpreted as human spirit activity returning from purgatory.

I cannot accept that this RCC dogma has any reasonable basis in scripture, or in the ancient traditions of the Church Fathers. Indeed, there is much in scripture which directly contradicts such a teaching.

If there is indeed a Purgatory, it would be made clear given such a central role assigned through it to salvation. Is it there??? Is there a twelve step purgation programme that any of our Catholic friends can point to???

I think not.

 

[TheosisM]

Dear brother TheosisM,

Have you ever come across the “Act of Contrition?” It goes like this:

O my God, I am heartily sorry for having offended you. I detest all my sins, because I deserve your just punishments; but most of all, because they offended you my God, Who is all Good, and deserving of all my love. I firmly resolve, with the help of Your Grace, to sin no more and to avoid the near occasions of sin. Amen.

So according to Catholic teaching, one can be truly repentant even if it is for the cause of fear of punishment (the red marked clause in the above prayer). Being repentant for any other reason than for love of God (the green marked clause in the above prayer) is called ATTRITION (which is imperfect contrition). Being repentant because of love for God is called perfect contrition, or, simply, contrition. Of course, one can confess and have both contrition and attrition in your heart.

Blessings,
Marduk

Thanks again, this does make sense.

 

[mardukm]

Dear brother TheosisM,

I’m not sure if it has been mentioned already, but from what I understand, in Orthodoxy (and I assume Eastern Catholicism), the dead do not go to Heaven or Hell, but have a foretaste of each, in Hades (a waiting place). Is this correct? If so, where are the canonized saints? Does this also mean that Orthodox believe in a particular judgment and a final judgment? In Catholicism, the belief is that people do go to Heaven or Hell after death, but they won’t be fully experienced until the resurrection.

I cannot speak for the EOC. Their understanding of the afterlife is not set in stone. I have even read from some that apokatastasis is a valid theologoumenon in their Church.

As far as Catholics are concerned, including Eastern and Oriental Catholics, it is a dogmatic fact that there are saints in heaven, and that there are souls in Hell. I don’t believe there is anything in the dogmas of the Catholic Church that would prevent Eastern and Oriental Catholics from believing that there are souls in Hades (which, as mentioned in another post, coincides with the Church’s dogmatic teaching on Purgatory - to be distinguished from the Latin theologoumena on Purgatory).

As far as Orientals are concerned, I cannot speak for my other Oriental brethren, but in the Coptic Tradition, when we have an icon of a saint, that means that the saint has completed their journey and is in heaven. The Coptic Orthodox Church in a Synodal decision (I forget exactly when, but it might have been in '05) have removed prayers for souls in “hell” from the Liturgy.

As far as particular or general judgment, it is a rather esoteric topic where the Orthodox are concerned. It seems that since Orthodox generally believe in the Hades of the dead, there must logically be a belief in particular judgment. However, I can say that the Coptic Orthodox don’t believe in particular judgment, but only in the general judgment. I don’t have the time right now to discuss this topic in any length.

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[Andrew_Phillip]

From what I understand of Eastern Orthodox teaching… God can and does admit some souls into heaven upon their earthly death, and also consigns some to Hell. In both places the soul of the departed is fully concious and aware.

Correct me if am am wrong about this, but Hades is not literally ‘Hell’ in the Greek, it means the grave. Many souls sleep in the grave until judgement.

So if they sleep (unconciously) until judgement - how can purgatory be a place of working through issues of sin etc…? Wouldn’t that require conciousness?

I would be very grateful if Monica could comment on this.

 

[mardukm]

Dear brother Andrew,

Correct me if am am wrong about this, but Hades is not literally ‘Hell’ in the Greek, it means the grave.

Yes. Hades and Hell are two different states or “places” in the afterflife.

Many souls sleep in the grave until judgement.So if they sleep (unconciously) until judgement - how can purgatory be a place of working through issues of sin etc…? Wouldn’t that require conciousness?

I don’t think Orthodox believe in soul sleep. In Hades, souls have a foretaste of their eternal reward, and they could not very well experience that foretaste if they are in “sleep” or have no consciousness.

Did you obtain your understanding from your EO teachers (here I am assuming you are EO and not OO)? If so, it would lend some creedence to my statement in an earlier post that the EO do not have their beliefs in the afterlife set in stone.

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[Charlotte408]

ok so I DONT want to argue LOL…

and I’m no bible scholar so take it easy on meh ladies

So, recently I was prompted to answer 7 questions, and they were about if I agreed with the churches teachings…and one of em’ was ‘Papal Infallibility’…

I have a great deal of faith, but I’m also by nature a big time critical thinker. And…thinkin’ back on some conversations with mormons…they believe their prophets are also infallible, and that, say if after they die, something they said was wrong, well then its ok because they were just speaking as humans or mortals- i forget how they put it.

But that was ridiculous to me. Were not supposed to follow false prophets…I know the JW have said the world was ending lord knows how many times…

See, the thing is, I have faith, and I trust in the CC…I trust the CC cuz its time tested, theres bishops/cardinals/popes etc all these really intellectual people puttin’ their heads together for centuries to work this all out for us…I trust in that wayyy more than I do some random person with his own one sided opinion.

But does that mean that a pope is infallible? How can any person be infallible? Isnt that like, an attribute we would only give to God? Maybe I’m not understanding the way they mean it…idk…

thoughts?

 

[Andrew_Phillip]

Thanks for your reply Marduk

Yes, I am trying to explain Eastern Orthodox and not Oriental or Eastern Catholic Teaching… I was brought up firmly within the Eastern Orthodox tradition (Ukrainian) - but am certaily not a well versed theologian!!! I respect people like Monica, and yourself who know so much more than me!!!

This is my take

The Eastern Orthodox Church teaches that there are two judgments: the first, or “Particular” Judgment, is that experienced by each individual at the time of his or her death, at which time God will decide where the soul is to spend the time until the Second Coming of Christ (Heaven, Hell,Hades or the Grave). So there are three distinct places.

This “Particular” judgment is generally believed to occur on the fortieth day after death. The second, “General” or “Final” Judgment will occur after the Second Coming of Christ.

Although in modern times some have attempted to introduce the concept of “Soul Sleep” into Orthodox thought about life after death, it has never been a part of traditional Orthodox teaching - in those specific terms.

The Eastern Orthodox have always traditionally taught that many souls “rest” in Hades after Particular judgement upon death awaiting the Final judgement after the second coming of Christ. This state of soul ‘rest’ is NOT purgative, and the soul does not when “resting” exert effort towards salvation, which must be done during temporal life.

After Particular immediate judgement upon death, these souls either “rest” in “light” or in “darkness” - a precursor to their final destination of heaven or hell. These souls are seperated from those who are admitted directly to heaven, or condemned immediately to hell at Particular judgement 40 days after death.

Eastern Orthodoxy teaches that salvation is bestowed by God as a free gift of Divine grace, which cannot be earned, and by which forgiveness of sins is available to all.

However, the deeds done by each person is believed to affect how he will be judged, following the Parable of the Sheep and the Goats. How forgiveness is to be balanced against behavior is not well-defined in scripture, judgment in the matter being solely Christ’s.

Similarly, although Eastern Orthodoxy teaches that salvation is obtained only through Christ and his Church, the fate of those outside the Church at the Last Judgment is left to the mercy of God and is not declared.

 

[Joseph_L_Varga]

See, the thing is, I have faith, and I trust in the CC…I trust the CC cuz its time tested, theres bishops/cardinals/popes etc all these really intellectual people puttin’ their heads together for centuries to work this all out for us…I trust in that wayyy more than I do some random person with his own one sided opinion.

But does that mean that a pope is infallible? How can any person be infallible? Isnt that like, an attribute we would only give to God? Maybe I’m not understanding the way they mean it…idk…

thoughts?

Charlotte, I loved your post. The way I imagine it, it’s not that the Pope is infallible because he is smarter or holier than everybody else. No, it’s not really his accomplishment. It’s simply that God promised to build his Church on Peter, and God will somehow make sure that Peter and the Popes will not teach error.

There’s a funny story in Genesis, I think the guy’s name is Balaam. Somebody pays Balaam to go and curse Israel. Then, he goes to a mountain peak, looks towards Israel, and he utters words of blessing instead of curse! He tries again, and he ends up blessing Israel again, instead of cursing it! You see, he really tried to do what he was paid for, he really tried to curse Israel, and yet he ended up blessing it twice, simply because God didn’t let him do what he wanted to do, and God somehow changed the words that he was able to speak.

I imagine it’s the same thing with the Pope. Recently we only had very holy, very good Popes, but even if our next Pope will be some really bad guy, God will still manage to keep him from teaching error.

 

[Charlotte408]

Charlotte, I loved your post. The way I imagine it, it’s not that the Pope is infallible because he is smarter or holier than everybody else. No, it’s not really his accomplishment. It’s simply that God promised to build his Church on Peter, and God will somehow make sure that Peter and the Popes will not teach error.

There’s a funny story in Genesis, I think the guy’s name is Balaam. Somebody pays Balaam to go and curse Israel. Then, he goes to a mountain peak, looks towards Israel, and he utters words of blessing instead of curse! He tries again, and he ends up blessing Israel again, instead of cursing it! You see, he really tried to do what he was paid for, he really tried to curse Israel, and yet he ended up blessing it twice, simply because God didn’t let him do what he wanted to do, and God somehow changed the words that he was able to speak.

I imagine it’s the same thing with the Pope. Recently we only had very holy, very good Popes, but even if our next Pope will be some really bad guy, God will still manage to keep him from teaching error.

eh but then you get into ‘free will’…see what I mean?

the pope is still a man, and we are all subject to temptation, the devil…etc…unless popes are -oh whats the word… singular? no…lol…unless popes are exempt somehow in the same way Mary was?? But even then, thatd be like saying popes are born without original sin…how can that be?

and one time I looked up the list of popes (and boy it was a loooong one) just so i had it handy- and it sure does trace back to peter…but…i noticed theres these words like, anti pope…like there was one where his election was questioned and after a committee they said he was an anti pope and he was desposed… ← i have no idea what any of that means.

Thank you for bearing with my ignorance on these matters with charity.