The Orthodox and the Hail Mary

[Cecilianus]

Diak, why would you NOT want an indulgence? If you happen to pray the prayer anyway, are you seriously going to spurn the graces the Church gives us - because it is a latinization? The Latins are our brothers in Christ, and brothers dignified by the pastorship of the Supreme Pontiff. To reject graces because it “comes from them” is schismatical. I am practicing in the same spiritual tradition you are, but I am first and foremost a Catholic, and for my part, I not only want but need all the graces I can get. Including pardon for purgatorial punishment, since purgatory is a state which I expect plenty of. (As a Catholic, I MUST believe in both Purgatory and Indulgences - the latter is de fide from the Council of Trent, and the former is de fide from both Trent and Florence.)

There is one and only one Faith; rite is frankly accidental - just different channels for expressing the same Faith. It may be easy - and provided we just dealing with the individual aspects of one’s rite and not the catholic faith - to become so engrained in one’s rite as to spurn everything perceived to be outside of it, but to those of us (like me) born outside of all the Church’s spiritual traditions and with no ethnic grounding in any of them (Latin or Byzantine), it is seems downright petty to reject the cross-fertilization of spiritual traditions by each other, and blatantly schismatical to reject Catholic dogma as “Latinizations”.

Unless a Latin tradition impedes with your own tradition, I see no reason to want to reject it.

Like Brother David, I would rather churches restore the LOTH than do the Rosary - but seeing as very few churches do, I would rather they said the Rosary than nothing. This doesn’t seem to me to be an East/West issue. If St. Seraphim of Sarov gave the Rosary to his spiritual children, then Eastern Catholics need to stop whining about it and follow his example. We say the Rosary (in Ukrainian, following the Byzantine form ending in “for thou hast born the Savior of our souls”) before Liturgy at my church.

 

[Aramis]

Several Popes have charged the eastern churches to reject latinizations other than the dogmatic definitions. That’s why. The Universal Vicar has, on Christ’s behalf, so ordered it.

 

[Cecilianus]

Several Popes have charged the eastern churches to reject latinizations other than the dogmatic definitions. That’s why. The Universal Vicar has, on Christ’s behalf, so ordered it.

Well, indulgences ARE a dogmatic definition - look at the Council of Trent.

 

[melekali]

Kind of a silly question, but do the EO pray the Hail Mary as those in the Western church (or those in communion with) do? And while we’re on that, do you guys pray the rosary as well?
Thanks, and sorry if this is naive or offensive.

I say the rosary often. In fact. my wife and I will be heading out soon to say the rosary with our rosary group from Church (when we don’t have RCIA, since they are on the same night). This devotion should not be confused with the Liturgy of Hours which I used to pray when I was single. I have the four volume set and was thinking of starting this practice again and including my wife if she is willing.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Well, indulgences ARE a dogmatic definition - look at the Council of Trent.

Can you provide the reference? Which session and which canon?

 

[Vico]

Can you provide the reference? Which session and which canon?

The Council of Trent (Sess, XXV, 3-4, Dec., 1563)
Continuation Of The Session On The Fourth Day Of December Decree Concerning Indulgences

You can find it here:

americancatholictruthsociety.com/docs/TRENT/trent25.htm#6

 

[SyroMalankara]

Diak, why would you NOT want an indulgence? If you happen to pray the prayer anyway, are you seriously going to spurn the graces the Church gives us - because it is a latinization? The Latins are our brothers in Christ, and brothers dignified by the pastorship of the Supreme Pontiff. To reject graces because it “comes from them” is schismatical. I am practicing in the same spiritual tradition you are, but I am first and foremost a Catholic, and for my part, I not only want but need all the graces I can get. Including pardon for purgatorial punishment, since purgatory is a state which I expect plenty of. (As a Catholic, I MUST believe in both Purgatory and Indulgences - the latter is de fide from the Council of Trent, and the former is de fide from both Trent and Florence.)

There is one and only one Faith; rite is frankly accidental - just different channels for expressing the same Faith. It may be easy - and provided we just dealing with the individual aspects of one’s rite and not the catholic faith - to become so engrained in one’s rite as to spurn everything perceived to be outside of it, but to those of us (like me) born outside of all the Church’s spiritual traditions and with no ethnic grounding in any of them (Latin or Byzantine), it is seems downright petty to reject the cross-fertilization of spiritual traditions by each other, and blatantly schismatical to reject Catholic dogma as “Latinizations”.

Unless a Latin tradition impedes with your own tradition, I see no reason to want to reject it.

Like Brother David, I would rather churches restore the LOTH than do the Rosary - but seeing as very few churches do, I would rather they said the Rosary than nothing. This doesn’t seem to me to be an East/West issue. If St. Seraphim of Sarov gave the Rosary to his spiritual children, then Eastern Catholics need to stop whining about it and follow his example. We say the Rosary (in Ukrainian, following the Byzantine form ending in “for thou hast born the Savior of our souls”) before Liturgy at my church.

The problem with this view, from the Eastern side, is that absolution given by the Church forgives completely - not just the spiritual but also the temporalities of the sin. There is no need for an indulgence, per se, to remove any aspect of an absolved sin, since Christ and His Church are able and capable to “loose completely” when the absolution is given to the penitent in the Holy Mystery of Confession. Now, of course, it is a laudable and pious practice to encourage the laity to pray whatever prayer is beneficial for their theosis, and if the practice of “indulgences” or “absolution certificates” encourages a HEARTFELT prayer - that is fine; but one should not pray a particular prayer simply for the possible ‘indulgence’ that may be gained. It seems to me that if that is the reason the prayer is being prayed, the indulgence [spiritual growth/ theosis] is not really gained…

 

[Vico]

The problem with this view, from the Eastern side, is that absolution given by the Church forgives completely - not just the spiritual but also the temporalities of the sin. There is no need for an indulgence, per se, to remove any aspect of an absolved sin, since Christ and His Church are able and capable to “loose completely” when the absolution is given to the penitent in the Holy Mystery of Confession. Now, of course, it is a laudable and pious practice to encourage the laity to pray whatever prayer is beneficial for their theosis, and if the practice of “indulgences” or “absolution certificates” encourages a HEARTFELT prayer - that is fine; but one should not pray a particular prayer simply for the possible ‘indulgence’ that may be gained. It seems to me that if that is the reason the prayer is being prayed, the indulgence [spiritual growth/ theosis] is not really gained…

Think about what happens when gaining a partial indulgence, without any theory:
general intention to receive the indulgence, carry out the works, baptized, not excommunicated, be in the state of grace at least at the completion of the work.

The work is one (or more) of four general things: pious invocation, compassionate giving or service, penitential abstinance, and giving explicit witness of faith before others.

So the the work is “banked” and can be assigned to the dead, or yourself at your death. And the Church grants this and doubles the effort for a partial indulgence.

So it is prayer (or a good work) for the dead, intentionally executed in good standing and grace.

 

[SyroMalankara]

Why bother with the “indulgence” at all, any Liturgical prayer that is “indulgenced” already enjoys God’s Grace when prayed genuinely, and when one is properly Confessed and intending to do an act of love toward God, another, for the dead, or for divinization.

Realistically, there is no literal “bank” and grace cannot be “doubled” - it is simply a manner of speech and a way to encourage prayer, piety, and charity.

 

[Vico]

Why bother with the “indulgence” at all, any Liturgical prayer that is “indulgenced” already enjoys God’s Grace when prayed genuinely, and when one is properly Confessed and intending to do an act of love toward God, another, for the dead, or for divinization.

Realistically, there is no literal “bank” and grace cannot be “doubled” - it is simply a manner of speech and a way to encourage prayer, piety, and charity.

The doubling is what the Church adds to your action. The Church can do that just as sins are handled in the mystery of reconcilliation. Plenary indulgence is complete and has more requirements.

There are two dogmas of faith regarding indulgences:
The Church possesses the power to grant Indulgences.
The use of Indulgences is useful and salutary to the faithful.

 

[SyroMalankara]

Grace is a gift, not an object which can be numerically calculated - how then can anyone call this a “doubling”? and why refer to spiritual gifts in such a way?

 

[Vico]

Grace is a gift, not an object which can be numerically calculated - how then can anyone call this a “doubling”? and why refer to spiritual gifts in such a way?

True, they are not measurable as is an object, yet they have subjective value. The norm of measurement for indulgences, explained in the 1967 Indulgentiarum Doctrina of H.H. Pope Paul VI. To whatever value there is from the act, it’s degree of charity, and it’s degree of perfection, the Church adds that value also. So that is the doubling.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

The Council of Trent (Sess, XXV, 3-4, Dec., 1563)
Continuation Of The Session On The Fourth Day Of December Decree Concerning Indulgences

You can find it here:

americancatholictruthsociety.com/docs/TRENT/trent25.htm#6

Thank you and here is the relevant point for this discussion (I believe);

; and It condemns with anathema those who either assert, that they are useless; or who deny that there is in the Church the power of granting them.
The decree in no way says that we must use them or even acknowledge them other than assenting that the Church has the power to grant them and that they are useful.

 

[Vico]

Thank you and here is the relevant point for this discussion (I believe);
; and It condemns with anathema those who either assert, that they are useless; or who deny that there is in the Church the power of granting them.
The decree in no way says that we must use them or even acknowledge them other than assenting that the Church has the power to grant them and that they are useful.

That is correct. Why they are recommended is explained in Indulgentiarum Doctrina, “And if the faithful offer indulgences insuffrage for the dead, they cultivate charity in an excellent way and while raising their minds to heaven, they bring a wiser order into the things of this world.”

and

“… the Church nevertheless leaves it to each to use these means of purification and sanctification with the holy and free liberty of the sons of God. It constantly reminds them, though, of those things which are to be given preference because they are necessary or at least better and more efficacious for the attainment of salvation.”

Also, there is explained the benefits of indulgences, trust, hope, charity, humility, purity:

1. metanoia (conversion of mentality) and unity with God are requisite
2. humility through realizing the need for God to remediate
3. the supernatural life of each can benefit the other to be closer to the Father (charity)
4. awakens trust and hope in full reconcilliation with God
5. submission to the Church pastors and Pontiff
6. that the Church appear before Christ without blemish

Yet indulgences do not diminish Divine Liturgy, sacraments, especially reconcilliation, sacramentals, other works of piety, penance, or charity.

 

[Hesychios]

… and It condemns with anathema those who either assert, that they are useless …

I guess that would be me.

When sin is properly and sincerely confessed and forgiven, there is normally no residual punishment or remittance.

or who deny that there is in the Church the power of granting them.

It’s hard to say.

Perhaps the church has or claims the power to limit what measure of forgiveness is granted for a confession, or to intentionally cleave absolution into two components. For what reason this is difficult to say.

"*May our Lord Jesus Christ absolve you; and by His authority I absolve you from every bond of excommunication and interdict, so far as my power allows and your needs require.

Thereupon, I absolve you from your sins in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.*" a Latin form

“May Our Lord and God, Jesus Christ, through the grace and bounties of His love towards mankind, forgive you, my Child [Name] all your transgressions. And I, an unworthy Priest, through the power given me by Him, forgive and absolve you from all yours sins.” an Orthodox form

It is interesting to note that after the Latin form of absolution there is a prayer, as such apparently an appendix to the rite.

It goes like this: Passio Domini nostri Jesu Christi, merita Beatae Mariae Virginis et omnium sanctorum, quidquid boni feceris vel mali sustinueris sint tibi in remissionem peccatorum, augmentum gratiae et praemium vitae aeternae (source: Wiki)

Or in English: “May the Passion of Our Lord Jesus Christ, the merits of the Blessed Virgin Mary and of all the saints and also whatever good you do or evil you endure merit for you the remission of your sins, the increase of grace and the reward of everlasting life.
Amen.”

Does anyone know when (approximately what year) this prayer was added to the penitential rite of the western church, and is there an equivalent prayer used in the Eastern Catholic churches?

 

[Vico]

…

When sin is properly and sincerely confessed and forgiven, there is normally no residual punishment or remittance. …

Perhaps the church has or claims the power to limit what measure of forgiveness is granted for a confession, or to intentionally cleave absolution into two components. …

Does anyone know when (approximately what year) this prayer was added to the penitential rite of the western church, and is there an equivalent prayer used in the Eastern Catholic churches?

It was written prior to the Council of Florence.

That there is residual after absolution, in the western teaching, should be clear from the following. Also one is given penance to do at confession. Of course some of this will appear odd to Orthodox due to the terms purgatory and punishment. Prayers for those fallen asleep in Christ are equivalent to “discharge of debt of temporal punishment in purgatory”, and “discharge of debt of temporal punishment in this world” is our penance while here.

Council of Trent, Session 6, Canon 30:
“If anyone says that after the reception of the grace of justification the guilt is so remitted and the debt of eternal punishment so blotted out to every repentant sinner, that no debt of temporal punishment remains to be discharged either in this world[131] or in purgatory before the gates of heaven can be opened,[132] let him be anathema.”

From the Baltimore Catechism No. 2:

“Perfect contrition is that which fills us with sorrow and hatred for sin, because it offends God, who is infinitely good in Himself and worthy of all love.”

“Imperfect contrition is that by which we hate what offends God, because by it we lose heaven and deserve hell; or because sin is so hateful in itself.”

“Imperfect contrition is sufficient for a worthy confession, but we should endeavor to have perfect contrition”

 

[Cecilianus]

It was written prior to the Council of Florence.

That there is residual after absolution, in the western teaching, should be clear from the following. Also one is given penance to do at confession. Of course some of this will appear odd to Orthodox due to the terms purgatory and punishment. Prayers for those fallen asleep in Christ are equivalent to “discharge of debt of temporal punishment in purgatory”, and “discharge of debt of temporal punishment in this world” is our penance while here.

Council of Trent, Session 6, Canon 30:
“If anyone says that after the reception of the grace of justification the guilt is so remitted and the debt of eternal punishment so blotted out to every repentant sinner, that no debt of temporal punishment remains to be discharged either in this world[131] or in purgatory before the gates of heaven can be opened,[132] let him be anathema.”

From the Baltimore Catechism No. 2:

“Perfect contrition is that which fills us with sorrow and hatred for sin, because it offends God, who is infinitely good in Himself and worthy of all love.”

“Imperfect contrition is that by which we hate what offends God, because by it we lose heaven and deserve hell; or because sin is so hateful in itself.”

“Imperfect contrition is sufficient for a worthy confession, but we should endeavor to have perfect contrition”

I wish the Church would state whether a plenary indulgence is in fact granted with absolution by Eastern rite priests - that would be interesting to find out. In that case, absolution would have to grant more than just the grace of justification, as is clear from the statement from Trent you quoted.

 

[SyroMalankara]

It was written prior to the Council of Florence.

That there is residual after absolution, in the western teaching, should be clear from the following. Also one is given penance to do at confession. Of course some of this will appear odd to Orthodox due to the terms purgatory and punishment. Prayers for those fallen asleep in Christ are equivalent to “discharge of debt of temporal punishment in purgatory”, and “discharge of debt of temporal punishment in this world” is our penance while here.

Council of Trent, Session 6, Canon 30:
“If anyone says that after the reception of the grace of justification the guilt is so remitted and the debt of eternal punishment so blotted out to every repentant sinner, that no debt of temporal punishment remains to be discharged either in this world[131] or in purgatory before the gates of heaven can be opened,[132] let him be anathema.”

From the Baltimore Catechism No. 2:

“Perfect contrition is that which fills us with sorrow and hatred for sin, because it offends God, who is infinitely good in Himself and worthy of all love.”

“Imperfect contrition is that by which we hate what offends God, because by it we lose heaven and deserve hell; or because sin is so hateful in itself.”

“Imperfect contrition is sufficient for a worthy confession, but we should endeavor to have perfect contrition”

I don’t know why we are debating Trent’s Latin theological constructs on the Eastern forum, but here goes:

Pocket Catholic Dictionary – Fr John Hardon SJ

Justification -. The process of a sinner becoming justified or made right with God. As defined by the Council of Trent. “Justification is the change from the condition in which a person is born as a child of the first Adam into a state of grace and adoption among the children of God through the Second Adam, Jesus Christ our Savior” (Denzinger 1524)

Depending on the sins from which a person is to be delivered, there are different kinds of justification.
An infant is justified by baptism and the faith of the one who requests or confers the sacrament.
Adults are justified for the first time either by personal faith, sorrow for sin and baptism, or by the perfect love of God, which is at least an implicit baptism of desire.
Adults who have sinned gravely after being justified can receive justification by sacramental absolution or perfect contrition for their sins. (Etym. Latin justus, just + facere, to make, do: justificatio.)[A Catholic who is in the state of grace i.e. not in the state of mortal sin is justified]

SANCTIFICATION. Being made holy. The first sanctification takes place at baptism, by which the love of God is infused by the Holy Spirit (Romans 5:5)…
The second sanctification is a lifelong process in which a person already in the state of grace grows in the possession of grace and in likeness to God by faithfully corresponding with divine inspirations.
The third sanctification takes place when a person enters heaven and becomes totally and irrevocably united with God in the beatific vision. (Etym. Latin sanctificare, to make holy.)

The following is from The Salvation Controversy - James Akin.
This book is available from Catholic Answers shop.

SALVATION. [Salvation basically means being saved.] In the New Testament the focus is primarily on the idea of eternal salvation - salvation from the eternal consequences of sin (hell.)
In the Old Testament the term salvation often used to refer to temporal dangers - war, famine, disease, and death (physical rather than eternal.)

So one could say that absolution justifies, sincere desire to conform to Christ’s image Sanctifies, so while Trent states “justification” alone leaves temporal deficiencies, the process of “sanctification” can remove those deficiencies [e.g. ‘temporal punishments’].

 

[Vico]

I wish the Church would state whether a plenary indulgence is in fact granted with absolution by Eastern rite priests - that would be interesting to find out. In that case, absolution would have to grant more than just the grace of justification, as is clear from the statement from Trent you quoted.

Since a Catholic can receive any of the sacraments from any Catholic particular church (all 23 of them) the sacraments are equivalent. In fact the particular churches have same faith, same sacraments, same top level government (i.e., Pope and Roman Curia).

The Code of Canon Law (1983) Canon 991 “All Christ’s faithful are free to confess their sins to lawfully approved confessors of their own choice, even to one of another rite.”

Baltimore Catechism (No. 4)
cin.org/users/james/ebooks/master/baltimore/bsacr-p.htm

**“Temporal Punishment, **Every sin has two punishments attached to it. one called the eternal and the other the temporal.”

"The priest gives us a penance after confession, that we may satisfy God for the temporal punishment due to our sins."

“In the Sacrament of Penance God forgives the insult offered by sinning, but requires us to make restitution for that of which the sin has deprived Him.”

“Purgatory is the state in which those suffer for a time who die guilty of venial sins, or without having satisfied for the punishment due to their sins.”

“The souls in Purgatory are sure of their salvation, and they will enter heaven as soon as they are completely purified and made worthy to enjoy that presence of God which is called the Beatific Vision.”

“The faithful on earth can help the souls in Purgatory by their prayers, fasts, alms, deeds; by indulgences, and by having Masses said for them.”

 

[SyroMalankara]

Since a Catholic can receive any of the sacraments from any Catholic particular church (all 23 of them) the sacraments are equivalent. In fact the particular churches have same faith, same sacraments, same top level government (i.e., Pope and Roman Curia).

The Code of Canon Law (1983) Canon 991 “All Christ’s faithful are free to confess their sins to lawfully approved confessors of their own choice, even to one of another rite.”

Baltimore Catechism (No. 4)
cin.org/users/james/ebooks/master/baltimore/bsacr-p.htm

**“Temporal Punishment, **Every sin has two punishments attached to it. one called the eternal and the other the temporal.”

"The priest gives us a penance after confession, that we may satisfy God for the temporal punishment due to our sins."

“In the Sacrament of Penance God forgives the insult offered by sinning, but requires us to make restitution for that of which the sin has deprived Him.”

“Purgatory is the state in which those suffer for a time who die guilty of venial sins, or without having satisfied for the punishment due to their sins.”

“The souls in Purgatory are sure of their salvation, and they will enter heaven as soon as they are completely purified and made worthy to enjoy that presence of God which is called the Beatific Vision.”

“The faithful on earth can help the souls in Purgatory by their prayers, fasts, alms, deeds; by indulgences, and by having Masses said for them.”

The Baltimore Catechism is an Catechism of the Latin Church in the United States, from around the year 1941. While, as Eastern Catholics, we do not have any arguments against its use for the Latin Church, it does not teach from the well-spring of any of the Eastern Churches nor their theology or language.

For another perspective - equally valid and Catholic, from the Holy Traditions of the Melkite Greek Catholic Church, scroll to pg.84:
dlibrary.acu.edu.au/digitaltheses/public/adt-acuvp147.26072007/02whole.pdf