Filioque and Purgatory

[ralphinal]

Well, the thread vanished and reappeared.

Anyway,

I would love some Eastern Orthodox (name removed by moderator)ut on this, especially the purgatory issue.

 

[anamchrist]

An exellent discussion of the Filoque is found here:

catholicukes.org.au/tiki/tiki-download_file.php?fileId=7

“The Union of Brest-Litovsk therefore expressly excluded, and excludes not only the requirement that the filioque form any part of the Creed as used by the Ukrainian Catholic Church, but also that it even accept the Western understanding of the double procession of the Holy Spirit. Thus, the practice of reciting the Western form of the Creed, which contains the filioque, is nothing more than a practice which has developed as a consequence of Latinisation. This is reflected in the fact that many contemporary Ukrainian Catholic liturgical books enclose in brackets the filioque (’[and the Son]’). Such a Latinisation of Eastern creeds and rites must be viewed, pursuant to Eastern Christian theology and tradition, and pursuant to the Union of Brest-Litovsk, and specifically Article One of the Union, as not obligatory upon Ukrainian Catholics, and as a direct violation of the Union.”

 

[holdencaulfield]

I hate to ask these questions again, but I need a little help.

As far as the filioque goes, is this a true statement? If so, does it alter anyone’s position on it? SHould it?

Well you should of course cite that quote. Could you, that would give it more backing to everyone else. I think that many Eastern Orthodox Christians would agree that the Filioque is theologically correct as they did agree to it at the Council of Florence. However if that is true, they cannot say that Pope Leo IX changed tradition to add the Filioque. That still however leaves the issue of whether it was a Licit insertion or not. However that is beyond this thread.

Yes the ancient Jews did believe in some form of Purgatory, just as the Eastern Orthodox do today. There really is no theological difference here as the Orthodox understanding of Prayers for the Dead is the same as the Catholic understanding of Purgatory, although it is less refined and defined.

Hope this helps.

 

[ralphinal]

Well you should of course cite that quote. Could you, that would give it more backing to everyone else. I think that many Eastern Orthodox Christians would agree that the Filioque is theologically correct as they did agree to it at the Council of Florence. However if that is true, they cannot say that Pope Leo IX changed tradition to add the Filioque. That still however leaves the issue of whether it was a Licit insertion or not. However that is beyond this thread.

Yes the ancient Jews did believe in some form of Purgatory, just as the Eastern Orthodox do today. There really is no theological difference here as the Orthodox understanding of Prayers for the Dead is the same as the Catholic understanding of Purgatory, although it is less refined and defined.

Hope this helps.

I will find that citation.

What you said about purgatory goes against what some EO posters on here have said. SOme claim that the Catholic doctrine goes to far or that they acknowledge no such place. The prayers for the dead, so I have been told, have more to do with the fact that God being outside of our time, can grant grace to those who have died knowing that we pray for them later. IS there a good source for this?

 

[holdencaulfield]

.
What you said about purgatory goes against what some EO posters on here have said. SOme claim that the Catholic doctrine goes to far or that they acknowledge no such place. The prayers for the dead, so I have been told, have more to do with the fact that God being outside of our time, can grant grace to those who have died knowing that we pray for them later. IS there a good source for this?

I have seen the Eastern understanding as this. After death, everyone participates in the Initial Judgment. Everyone descends into Hades/Sheol. The good and righteous are rewarded (Heaven), those that prayers for the dead might save, or who were good yet still need to be purified are punished until the Last Judgment (Purgatory), the evil and wicked are punished and damned for an eternity (Hell). Then the Last Judgment, those that have been saved go to Heaven (New Earth), and those that have been damned go to Hell. They just believe that all of these things are initially three states that all occur in one place (Hades/Sheol).

This teaching is consistent with the Jewish belief and the Bible. For instance are not Lazarus and the Rich Man both in the same place, yet Lazarus is being rewarded and the Rich Man punished.

When Christ descends into Hades/Sheol, He sets free the souls of the righteous. Why would the righteous be in the same place as the damned? Because there is only one place, Hades/Sheol and various states that occur there. After the Last Judgment however there are two places, Heaven and Hell.

If you read Dante’s Inferno you can see that this is also the traditional Western belief. Hades/Sheol is basically a mountain. Those at the bottom and near the bottom are in Hell, those climbing to the top are in Purgatory, and those at the top are in Heaven.

Hope this helps.

 

[ralphinal]

I have seen the Eastern understanding as this. After death, everyone participates in the Initial Judgment. Everyone descends into Hades/Sheol. The good and righteous are rewarded (Heaven), those that prayers for the dead might save, or who were good yet still need to be purified are punished until the Last Judgment (Purgatory), the evil and wicked are punished and damned for an eternity (Hell). Then the Last Judgment, those that have been saved go to Heaven (New Earth), and those that have been damned go to Hell. They just believe that all of these things are initially three states that all occur in one place (Hades/Sheol).

This teaching is consistent with the Jewish belief and the Bible. For instance are not Lazarus and the Rich Man both in the same place, yet Lazarus is being rewarded and the Rich Man punished.

When Christ descends into Hades/Sheol, He sets free the souls of the righteous. Why would the righteous be in the same place as the damned? Because there is only one place, Hades/Sheol and various states that occur there. After the Last Judgment however there are two places, Heaven and Hell.

If you read Dante’s Inferno you can see that this is also the traditional Western belief. Hades/Sheol is basically a mountain. Those at the bottom and near the bottom are in Hell, those climbing to the top are in Purgatory, and those at the top are in Heaven.

Hope this helps.

It does. What is the issue that some EO have with the Catholic understanding of Purgatory?

 

[jimmy]

It does. What is the issue that some EO have with the Catholic understanding of Purgatory?

The Orthodox have no concept of purgatory. Yes, they have the idea of toll houses but that is only a theologoumen(theological opinion). Some have theorized that they go to hell and they see the suffering in hell and they repent of their sins(I think St. Mark of Ephesus held to a concept like this). So there is no definition and they see no reason why there should be. Definitions don’t always help and they are not always relevant. They don’t see the purpose in defining how prayers for the dead help. All they need to know is that they help. They are willing to leave the rest to mystery.

 

[ralphinal]

The Orthodox have no concept of purgatory. Yes, they have the idea of toll houses but that is only a theologoumen(theological opinion). Some have theorized that they go to hell and they see the suffering in hell and they repent of their sins(I think St. Mark of Ephesus held to a concept like this). So there is no definition and they see no reason why there should be. Definitions don’t always help and they are not always relevant. They don’t see the purpose in defining how prayers for the dead help. All they need to know is that they help. They are willing to leave the rest to mystery.

That really helps.

Dumb follow-up question: what happens when someone asks to explain how the prayers help? What if someone questions the teaching? The answer because that is the way it is seldom works.

 

[holdencaulfield]

It does. What is the issue that some EO have with the Catholic understanding of Purgatory?

They say that it is too refined. I believe that’s the issue.

 

[holdencaulfield]

That really helps.

Dumb follow-up question: what happens when someone asks to explain how the prayers help? What if someone questions the teaching? The answer because that is the way it is seldom works.

I don’t know if they would have an answer.

 

[ralphinal]

I don’t know if they would have an answer.

I know that we deal with quesitons about the why of our faith from non-Catholics, but we also get them from Children, Atheists, Agnostics, and more. Simply saying it is a mystery will not always solve the probelm.

 

[holdencaulfield]

I know that we deal with quesitons about the why of our faith from non-Catholics, but we also get them from Children, Atheists, Agnostics, and more. Simply saying it is a mystery will not always solve the probelm.

No, but still many things are a mystery. That is one of the disagreements between Orthodoxy and Catholicism is that they believe that we are too refined with our dogmas and doctrines.

 

[ralphinal]

No, but still many things are a mystery. That is one of the disagreements between Orthodoxy and Catholicism is that they believe that we are too refined with our dogmas and doctrines.

And I guess that we say something along the lines of “we understand the desire ot leave the beauty and peace of mystery in the faith, we feel that in not defining articles more clearly, the EO leave room for misunderstanding.”

 

[Hesychios]

They say that it is too refined. I believe that’s the issue.

Too refined? Hardly…

Too limiting!

The concept of purgatory is a set piece explanation of how God works. It is (like “toll houses”) really almost mythological, like reducing a BIG idea into a concentrated little idea people can wrap their minds around.

The west, somehow in it’s long history missed the concept of theosis.

If you are like most people (and Dante) the concept of purgatory is like a place or state of being that one passes through and pops out clean, like a shirt out of the washer, that sort of thing. Ready for one’s very own hanger in heaven.

Or like graduating from school, ready for whatever life sends at you.

Orthodoxy by it’s very nature cannot be that specific about the process of becoming more Godlike. Certainly not about purging, purging of what? It implies an alien element present in one’s soul, or perhaps an integral element having been somehow disturbed and needing removal, like a bad kidney.

When someone knows that they are about to meet the President of the United States or the Prime Minister of England, or the Pope perhaps how does one prepare? Does one prepare for this and other life changing events by taking a sound beating?

Or with a new haircut and a freshly clean suit? A workout at the gym? A splash of cologne and a smile? We know we are lucky for this opportunity, and probably not deserving. We want to feel we have earned it sure, but deep inside we know that this chance perhaps only happens once in a lifetime for most people, and for some never…

How about preparing for one’s wedding day? What about the first time you come before The Divine…

No, we are not worthy, we are human, we are in many ways a failed piece of work, but we are the child creatures of God. You are who you are and you need to be not so much purged (or not necessarily so) but healed and refreshed and transformed. And it is a never-ending process! One does not graduate.

One cannot help but notice that the western notion of purgatory implies some form of punishment, and that this punishment is fixed for each person. Is that the only way God works with us after our passing? What about the Power of a hug?

The best analogy I can think of is a penitentiary, where one serves one’s time. A punishing or frightening or lonely experience. Hard labor and many tears, then release. I am not stating that God can not, or will not work this way. Certainly He, the Great Physician will apply the best treatment for an ailing soul and if this includes a punishing experience so be it.

But the process of theosis is more of positive one, and an unmeasured one. Compared to the penitentiary experience I would contrast the athletic training experience.

The Apostle himself was known to use athletic analogy. I think that it is more appropriate “pray that I have not run the race in vain” he would write. The process of becoming like God can indeed for us be a struggling, grueling, exhaustive and yes, punishing experience. It can require an intense focus on our part, a will and a drive, and the love of God…in this life and the next…forever and ever.

The imagery of salvation is beginning to resemble an eternal marriage. Hell perhaps, the eternal divorce.

No, the theory of purgatory is not refined, and yes, I would appreciate your prayers.

 

[jimmy]

Hesychios,

So in other words the Orthodox speak more with words of the positive relationship with God and not as much of the negative of attachment to sin. The more we grow in commion/union with God (theosis) the more we will live our lives for Him whereas the western approach is more in the reverse; the more we seperate ourselves from sin the more we can serve God. So in the west there is the emphasis on purgation from sin whereas in the east there is the emphasis on theosis. This theosis will never end because God is infinely beyond us and we will never be able to completely know Him and we will never have complete union/communion(I am not sure which word is more accurate).

 

[holdencaulfield]

I have to agree with ralphinal in that we are really not so different, the Orthodox Church and the Catholic Church.

 

[bobzills]

ralphinal,

recently, the Chaldean Catholic Church revised her liturgy and the Church asked us to go back to the creed without the Filioque clause. You can read about it here. God Bless.

It then looks like the Catholic Church has two different teachings, depending on which Catholic Church you belong to:

1. In one group of Catholic Churches, according to the Creed, the Holy spirit proceeds from the Father and from the Son. And this was enforced by statements from a Council of the Church.
2. In another group of Catholic Churches, according to the Creed said at the Divine Liturgy, the holy Spirit proceeds from the Father.
   This is not the only area where there are two different teachings. For example, in some Catholic Churches it is said that the Blood has been shed for all, whereas in other Catholic Churches it is said that the Blood has been shed for many.

 

[Nicholas82]

Well you should of course cite that quote. Could you, that would give it more backing to everyone else. I think that many Eastern Orthodox Christians would agree that the Filioque is theologically correct as they did agree to it at the Council of Florence. However if that is true, they cannot say that Pope Leo IX changed tradition to add the Filioque. That still however leaves the issue of whether it was a Licit insertion or not. However that is beyond this thread.

Yes the ancient Jews did believe in some form of Purgatory, just as the Eastern Orthodox do today. There really is no theological difference here as the Orthodox understanding of Prayers for the Dead is the same as the Catholic understanding of Purgatory, although it is less refined and defined.

Hope this helps.

Brother, the Filioque is not theologically correct, at least, not as it is stated, nor is it’s addition to the creed correct… with nothing but brotherly love I recommend as an inquirer to Catholicism(and this is good advice for all of us) that you do more listening than teaching, especially for where you are in your journey, particularly as I have seen you write things regarding Catholicism and Orthodoxy that are incorrect. I wish you nothing but the most spiritually rewarding journey in your faith, but I sincerely worry about some of the things you state as fact, being somewhat incorrect, being taken as fact by others particupating or simply reading these forums.

God Bless.

 

[bobzills]

Brother, the Filioque is not theologically correct, at least, not as it is stated, nor is it’s addition to the creed correct… .

In Roman Catholicism, as I understand it to be, they will accept the creed with the filioque or without the filioque. As I understand the RC teaching, it is correct either way?

 

[ralphinal]

It then looks like the Catholic Church has two different teachings, depending on which Catholic Church you belong to:

1. In one group of Catholic Churches, according to the Creed, the Holy spirit proceeds from the Father and from the Son. And this was enforced by statements from a Council of the Church.
2. In another group of Catholic Churches, according to the Creed said at the Divine Liturgy, the holy Spirit proceeds from the Father.

As long as you do not mean “and the Son” to imply another Spiration. Biblically, we see Jesus say that He would have the Father send the Spirit. We also see Jesus breath on them and say “receive the Spirit.” Wouthout Christ, the spirit would not have been sent to all who believe and recieve the Sacraments.

The filioque was done to combat Arianism in the West, and it did. Linguistically, it does not translate into Greek. There is the problem.

This is not the only area where there are two different teachings. For example, in some Catholic Churches it is said that the Blood has been shed for all, whereas in other Catholic Churches it is said that the Blood has been shed for many.

That is a result of poor translation of the Scriptures, not multiple teachings. The word used in the Latin was from the Greek meaning multitude. Some translators say all some say many.