The Petrine views

[frjohnmorris]

Hi Father Morris: In reading your reply to dvdjs, I see that you are beginning to at least see that there are many things between Catholic and Orthodox thinking that could be understood if the choice of words used were, gave a better understanding of what is believed. I remember the Baltimore Catechism as it was the book I learned from, However, I maybe wrong about it but I think that it is no longer used or not used much these days, as there are much better catechism books out there that explain much better than the old Baltimore catechism did.
I understand that you think us Catholic’s use too much legalistic terms in trying to describe the mysteries of our faith and that might be true, but I had not looked at it that way before since I tend to look at the mysteries in a more spiritual manor, but that’s just me.
As for purgatory, I see it more as a means of perfecting one rather than some place where one is punished for one’s sins. If one can offer up prayers, and you say that prayers help them then it would seem to me that what we offer call them indulgences is just another way to offering what graces we are given to them. I like to think that grace is love, God’s LOVE offered to us through the Church. I do not see the deposit as some treasury of merit, but more a deposit of faith given to the Church that was handed down from the Apostles and all who believed in what they taught. I think this way as no one can merit, earn or deserve anything from God, What God gives is pure gifts that are freely accepted, I like to think we can freely give what God gives to us t others especially those who have died. In the end no one can ever earn merit or deserve heaven as no one gets in unless God wills it.

My problem with your explanations is that such works as McBrien’s Catholicism and Rahner and Vorgimter’s Dictionary of Theology use terms like “satisfaction for sins” and “punishment” to describe what happens in purgatory. How do you reconcile your view of purgatory with the view described in these sources as a place where we undergo punishment for our sins before we can enter into Heaven?
I also have a problem with the concept of the “Beatific Vision,” as “an intuitive vision of God’s essence.” Dictionary, p. 42. According to Orthodox theology we experience God’s energies which are fully divine and flow directly from His essence, but never experience God’s essence which remains hidden to us creatures. The energies of God can be compared to the warmth and light that flows from the sun. This is what we call Palamite theology which is named after the teachings of St. Gregory Palamas (1296-1359). St. Gregory’s teaching was declared official Orthodox dogma at several councils in 1341, 1344, 1347 and 1351. He is so important to Orthodox theology that the Second Sunday of Great Lent is always dedicated to his memory. Thus according to Eastern Orthodox theology grace is an energy of God that is fully divine and uncreated. Therefore we believe that grace is not something added or infused but is the direct transforming Communion with God. Because of the divine nature of grace, Orthodox speak of salvation as deification, being made by grace what God is by nature. As a result we become “partakers of the divine nature.” I Peter 2:4.

Fr. John W. Morris

 

[SyroMalankara]

My problem with your explanations is that such works as McBrien’s Catholicism and Rahner and Vorgimter’s Dictionary of Theology use terms like “satisfaction for sins” and “punishment” to describe what happens in purgatory. How do you reconcile your view of purgatory with the view described in these sources as a place where we undergo punishment for our sins before we can enter into Heaven?
I also have a problem with the concept of the “Beatific Vision,” as “an intuitive vision of God’s essence.” Dictionary, p. 42. According to Orthodox theology we experience God’s energies which are fully divine and flow directly from His essence, but never experience God’s essence which remains hidden to us creatures. The energies of God can be compared to the warmth and light that flows from the sun. This is what we call Palamite theology which is named after the teachings of St. Gregory Palamas (1296-1359). St. Gregory’s teaching was declared official Orthodox dogma at several councils in 1341, 1344, 1347 and 1351. He is so important to Orthodox theology that the Second Sunday of Great Lent is always dedicated to his memory. Thus according to Eastern Orthodox theology grace is an energy of God that is fully divine and uncreated. Therefore we believe that grace is not something added or infused but is the direct transforming Communion with God. Because of the divine nature of grace, Orthodox speak of salvation as deification, being made by grace what God is by nature. As a result we become “partakers of the divine nature.” I Peter 2:4.

Fr. John W. Morris

Rev. Fr. John, St. Gregory Palamas’ work is wonderful and great from an Eastern Orthodox-Byzantine Catholic theological and scholasticism. It doesn’t exude the same brilliance when imported and transplanted into Latin theology/Patristics or Oriental Theology/Patristics. To say it was “declared official Orthodox dogma in 1341” is equal to a Latin saying Vatican II is Ecumenical (equivalent to Nicaea 325)… it is only within it’s proper context. There is much more to the statement than just the pronouncement.

As to the question of “reconciling” the middle ages Theology of the Latin Church with regard to “punishments” with today’s more profound and Eastern-minded emphasis on “mercy leaving it up to God” – why should there be any reconciliation? The Eastern Churches are infamous (notorious?) for being able to balance multiple paradoxical positions, such as St. Nicholas Casabilas’ Catechism with todays EO teachings, or some OO Churches allowing Chalcedonians to receive Eucharist while others deny it.

I’ve seen you do this many times with those outside your Communion, the question is does the EO get a pass for this because you are EO? Or is it worse when the Latins do so? Why declare such statements emphatically, when there are myriad of explanations easily understood and accessible?

 

[spina1953]

Hi Father Morris: I understand what you are saying about McBrien’s Catholicism and Rahner and Vorgemter’s dictionary of Therology using terms like satisfaction for sins and punishment to describe what happens in purgatory. However, I do not really agree with them because ! No one knows what purgatory really is or what it is like to be there. 2 I like to describe purgatory as a way of one being perfected or cleansed before entering heaven. I say this because some are not fully repentant of whatever sins they may have had that was forgiven and still have some little attachments to sin though they are not in sin by any means. There are those who when they die are in such a state of grace that they go to heaven directly.

I do not understand what you mean by something added or infused concerning God’s essence which I like to call God’s grace or LOVE. All of God’s grace or love or as you call essence does indeed come from God to us in many different ways as God choose to give in whatever manor He chooses There can also be an mystical union , and anyone who has ever experienced it knows what I am saying. I know this as a fact because it has happened to me once, and when one does experience the peace and the love that God gives, there is nothing on earth that will ever compare to it. The Beatific Vision is when one is in heaven seeing God face to face so to speak. That being said as I have posted before, there really are no human words that will describe in human terms Who and what God is and how He through His essence offers His love to us. We can only give it our best shot because God is more than human words will or can describe.

 

[spina1953]

I would like also to say that I like St. Gregory Palamas’s works and also St. Peter of Damaskos and St. Symen Metaphrostis and St. Makarios of Egypt. All great spiritual writers.

 

[frjohnmorris]

Rev. Fr. John, St. Gregory Palamas’ work is wonderful and great from an Eastern Orthodox-Byzantine Catholic theological and scholasticism. It doesn’t exude the same brilliance when imported and transplanted into Latin theology/Patristics or Oriental Theology/Patristics. To say it was “declared official Orthodox dogma in 1341” is equal to a Latin saying Vatican II is Ecumenical (equivalent to Nicaea 325)… it is only within it’s proper context. There is much more to the statement than just the pronouncement.

As to the question of “reconciling” the middle ages Theology of the Latin Church with regard to “punishments” with today’s more profound and Eastern-minded emphasis on “mercy leaving it up to God” – why should there be any reconciliation? The Eastern Churches are infamous (notorious?) for being able to balance multiple paradoxical positions, such as St. Nicholas Casabilas’ Catechism with todays EO teachings, or some OO Churches allowing Chalcedonians to receive Eucharist while others deny it.

I’ve seen you do this many times with those outside your Communion, the question is does the EO get a pass for this because you are EO? Or is it worse when the Latins do so? Why declare such statements emphatically, when there are myriad of explanations easily understood and accessible?

I have read statements from Oriental Orthodox that say exactly the same thing that St. Gregory Palamas said about the essence and energies of God and the uncreated nature of grace. St. Gregory Palamas was not original. He simply expressed the same teaching on the essences and energies of God that can be found in the writings of such Fathers as St. Basil the Great. The Eastern Orthodox Church considers the teachings of St. Gregory Palamas a correct expression of the dogma of the Church. When the councils of the 14th century condemned Barlaam for heresy for rejecting the teaching of St. Gregory Palamas, what else was it than an official declaration of the Eastern Orthodox Church that the teaching of St. Gregory Palamas is correct Orthodox doctrine? It is true that Eastern Orthodoxy did not accept Thomas Aquinas or Scholasticism. Scholasticism was born after the rediscovery of Aristotle in the West in an effort to reconcile Christian theology with Aristotle. The East never felt a need to reconcile theology with Aristotle, because it never lost Aristotle. Althogh, the East considered Aristotle’s ideas of value for science and philosophy, it never felt a need to reconcile Eastern Orthodox theology with Aristotle.
We do not usually use the term “Ecumenical Council” to the 7 Ecumenical Councils. Other councils are usually called Pan-Orthodox Councils out of respect for the 7 Councils that we share with the Catholic Church. The normalization of the teachings of St. Gregory Palamas became official dogma just like the other dogmas became official dogma through condemning contrary teaching as heretical. In This case the Church declared Barlaam, the chief critic of St. Gregory heretical.
I do not understand the point that you are trying to make in the rest of your post. I do not know what you mean by the statement, “The Eastern Churches are infamous (notorious?) for being able to balance multiple paradoxical positions…”

What do you mean by the following. I frankly do not understand the point that you are making. Perhaps you could offer further clarification.

I’ve seen you do this many times with those outside your Communion, the question is does the EO get a pass for this because you are EO? Or is it worse when the Latins do so? Why declare such statements emphatically, when there are myriad of explanations easily understood and accessible?

Tell me is there something wrong with an Eastern Orthodox Priest trying to understand Catholicism by asking probing questions of Catholics? I am not so stupid as to think that I am going to convert any devout Catholic to Orthodoxy on this blog. By asking questions and arguing a little, I am able to get a better understanding of Catholic theology and am able to see if our differences are semantic or real. It is only through discussion that we begin to understand each other. One cannot understand either Eastern Orthodoxy of Catholicism from reading about it, one must interact with Catholics and Eastern Orthodox to understand them. Does it offend you that I want to know more about the Catholic Church? I do admit that I would be very happy if we could reach agreement and restore Communion between the Eastern Orthodox Church and the Catholic Church. Is there something offensive to you about that?

Fr. John W. Morris

 

[frjohnmorris]

Hi Father Morris: I understand what you are saying about McBrien’s Catholicism and Rahner and Vorgemter’s dictionary of Therology using terms like satisfaction for sins and punishment to describe what happens in purgatory. However, I do not really agree with them because ! No one knows what purgatory really is or what it is like to be there. 2 I like to describe purgatory as a way of one being perfected or cleansed before entering heaven. I say this because some are not fully repentant of whatever sins they may have had that was forgiven and still have some little attachments to sin though they are not in sin by any means. There are those who when they die are in such a state of grace that they go to heaven directly.

I do not understand what you mean by something added or infused concerning God’s essence which I like to call God’s grace or LOVE. All of God’s grace or love or as you call essence does indeed come from God to us in many different ways as God choose to give in whatever manor He chooses There can also be an mystical union , and anyone who has ever experienced it knows what I am saying. I know this as a fact because it has happened to me once, and when one does experience the peace and the love that God gives, there is nothing on earth that will ever compare to it. The Beatific Vision is when one is in heaven seeing God face to face so to speak. That being said as I have posted before, there really are no human words that will describe in human terms Who and what God is and how He through His essence offers His love to us. We can only give it our best shot because God is more than human words will or can describe.

I finally got a chance to look at the official Catechism of the Catholic Church on purgatory. You are right all the medieval language of satisfaction, the fire of purgatory and temporal punishment is gone and purgatory is portrayed a further purification after death. Eastern Orthodox agree that we undergo further purification after death, but do not separate that from heaven in a separate state of existence. Even after we enter heaven we continue to grow spiritually. I am sorry that it took me so long to get to my office at the Church to look at the CC. I have been fighting a kidney stone since November and some times am in a great deal of pain. I have had two lithotripsy treatments without success.
If you have been reading about events in Eastern Orthodoxy this week, you can see in action our concept of primacy. The Ecumenical Patriarch called a gathering (Synaxis) of the leaders of the world’s 14 autocehalous (independent) Orthodox Churches. All the Patriarchs or their representatives came and met. They discussed issues of mutual concern and agreed to call a Great and Holy Synod of world Orthodoxy to meet in 2 years. The Synaxis decided that each autocephalous Church will be allowed to send 20 Bishops, but each Church will only have one vote. Thus despite their rank all Primates and their Churches will be treated equally. The Ecumenical Patriarch will preside, and will have the right to veto a decision, but so will all the other national Churches because all decisions must be by consensus. During the next two years a series of meetings will be held by various commissions to discuss the items that will be brought before the council so that the every proposal will have been thoroughly discussed and agreement reached before the council actually meets. Thus the Ecumenical Patriarch holds a primacy of honor as first among equals. The Great and Holy Synod will discuss administrative and disciplinary matters, but will not have the authority to change the doctrine or worship of the Eastern Orthodox Church.

Fr. John W. Morris

 

[frjohnmorris]

I found a list of the items to be considered by the Eastern Orthodox Great and Holy Synod in 2 years.

1. Fasting
2. Impediments to Marriage
3. Calendar
4. Diaspora
5. Relationship of the Orthodox Church to other Christian Churches
6. Diptychs (consistent ranking)
7. Autonomy and Autocephaly
8. Manner of granting Autocephaly
9. Presence of the Orthodox Church in the World Council of Churches
   10.Proclaiming Christian ideals to the work of Justice and Human Rights

Fr. John W. Morris

 

[spina1953]

Hi Father Morris: First off I would like to say how very sorry to hear that you have been fighting kidney stones and that so far two of the treatments have not been successful. I understand that it is very painful and hope that whatever treatment you decide on will be successful and I will be praying for you that you will get well soon.

   I am happy that you had the chance to read the CCC on purgatory and what it says. I think that in some ways the thinking of the middle ages far to stern in trying to describe in terms that has led in many ways to thinking in a negative light that really should have been in a more positive light, but that's just my take on it. It is obvious that medieval thinking is much different than what or how we think in our modern times. That is not to say that all of it needs to be tossed out the window but that it certainly needed to be updated in more modern terms with a more clearer scope of how one is to understand what it is we are to believe.

     I do not know if and when one goes to heaven if they continue to grow spiritually, but it would not really surprise me in the least if that is true.  Personally, it is rather beyond  my comprehension  as to what happens when one dies other than what we have been taught, but be as that may, for me if I am granted heaven, then I will be with my true love which is God in the Blessed Trinity and there is no greater gift than that!

     I have somewhat been trying to follow the events of the Eastern Orthodox of late and all of the many problems facing it like persecutions etc. that has been going on throughout the East and hope and pray that it will end. I did hear that there will be an Pan-ecumenical council in a year or so to hammer out some issues that are important to the Orthodox and do hope that they will be ironed out to the good of all. I also read the list you provided in the post after the one you replied to my post and that seems to me

to be important items that need to be discussed and resolved, and hope also that they will be fruitful. God bless and may the peace of God be will you.

 

[frjohnmorris]

Hi Father Morris: First off I would like to say how very sorry to hear that you have been fighting kidney stones and that so far two of the treatments have not been successful. I understand that it is very painful and hope that whatever treatment you decide on will be successful and I will be praying for you that you will get well soon.

   I am happy that you had the chance to read the CCC on purgatory and what it says. I think that in some ways the thinking of the middle ages far to stern in trying to describe in terms that has led in many ways to thinking in a negative light that really should have been in a more positive light, but that's just my take on it. It is obvious that medieval thinking is much different than what or how we think in our modern times. That is not to say that all of it needs to be tossed out the window but that it certainly needed to be updated in more modern terms with a more clearer scope of how one is to understand what it is we are to believe.

     I do not know if and when one goes to heaven if they continue to grow spiritually, but it would not really surprise me in the least if that is true.  Personally, it is rather beyond  my comprehension  as to what happens when one dies other than what we have been taught, but be as that may, for me if I am granted heaven, then I will be with my true love which is God in the Blessed Trinity and there is no greater gift than that!

     I have somewhat been trying to follow the events of the Eastern Orthodox of late and all of the many problems facing it like persecutions etc. that has been going on throughout the East and hope and pray that it will end. I did hear that there will be an Pan-ecumenical council in a year or so to hammer out some issues that are important to the Orthodox and do hope that they will be ironed out to the good of all. I also read the list you provided in the post after the one you replied to my post and that seems to me

to be important items that need to be discussed and resolved, and hope also that they will be fruitful. God bless and may the peace of God be will you.

Thank you for your kind comments. It does seem to me that Catholicism has moved beyond the legalistic and judicial language of the Middle Ages. Our problems are mainly administrative. Hopefully most of these will be resolved at the Great and Holy Synod.

Fr. John W. Morris

 

[spina1953]

Hi Father Morris: you are very welcome! I appreciate you taking the time to reply when it is obvious you have been in great pain. I agree with you and do hope that whatever administrative problem or issues are resolved for the good of all. As I have said before I tend to go with the spiritual more so than from any legal or judicial thinking. While it may be right to explain in a legal or judicial manor some of what we believe I think explanations that are more spiritual would be more helpful in understanding how one needs to or should live as Jesus taught. But that is just me and my own personal thinking on it. Trying to live the Gospels, as the Apostles taught us having learned it from Our Lord should always be the main thing, since while praying going to Church, Mass ,Liturgy are all good things we need to do it can’t just be only that but how we are living our lives as Christians. One just can’t listen to the Word of God or read it, but we must put it into practice in our lives. All we do should be out of love for God.

 

[MelCath]

I also have a problem with the concept of the “Beatific Vision,” as “an intuitive vision of God’s essence.” Dictionary, p. 42. According to Orthodox theology we experience God’s energies which are fully divine and flow directly from His essence, but never experience God’s essence which remains hidden to us creatures. The energies of God can be compared to the warmth and light that flows from the sun. This is what we call Palamite theology which is named after the teachings of St. Gregory Palamas (1296-1359). St. Gregory’s teaching was declared official Orthodox dogma at several councils in 1341, 1344, 1347 and 1351. He is so important to Orthodox theology that the Second Sunday of Great Lent is always dedicated to his memory. Thus according to Eastern Orthodox theology grace is an energy of God that is fully divine and uncreated. Therefore we believe that grace is not something added or infused but is the direct transforming Communion with God. Because of the divine nature of grace, Orthodox speak of salvation as deification, being made by grace what God is by nature. As a result we become “partakers of the divine nature.” I Peter 2:4.

Fr. John W. Morris

Dear fr. Morris
the topic of the distinction between essence and energies is a very complex one, but here are some comments on the position from a Latin:
-a Catholic can hold to palamite theology provided that they do not hold to an ontological essence-energies distinction (EED) but only a formal EED

-i think there is a difference between the Byzantine usage of the word essence(ousia) and the Latin usage of essence(esse). could you please clarify your definition of the term essence?

-there is a fundamental western concept to do with God that is essential to understanding the objections raised by Latin thomists
1.God is seen, as i am sure you know, as Ipsum esse subsistens; Subsistent Act of Existing. This idea comes from the concept of Being as the Ultimate transcendental which is common to all things and therefore all the other transcendentals(truth, goodness and beauty) are fundamental properties of Being. it is clear that given the multiplicity of beings and the incompleteness, imperfection and contingency of each particular beings existence that transcendental Being cannot be contained within finite things, which would be a contradiction in terms, therefore Being is transcendent of reality, subsistent and infinite, God. God therefore is the Actus Purus pure act of existing

taking this in to account how does a Latin view a EED, well the first question I would ask a EO believer as a Latin is what exactly makes divine energies Divine? because the traditional understanding of what makes God, God is his incomprehensibility and his lack of potentiality (among other things of course) both of which are not present in the eastern conception of Energies.
here are some more questions i might ask:
what is the fundamental nature of energeia?
what properties does it have?
in what way do erngies relate to the act of creation?
how does it relate to divine simplicity?
does Occam’s razor not make energies an unnecessary component?
while the eastern father did put an emphasise on the energeia and potentiality of God, why did the eastern churches make Palamas’ understanding Dogma?

when Latins talk about ‘infused’ righteousness you must understand that the terminology was created for the purpose of combating the Protestant heresy of ‘imputed’ righteousness , which made our salvation more of a legal action of God the father rather than the real change in the soul enacted by Christ, whereby his righteousness fills (infuses with) a baptised Christian. the Latin Church has a very strong history of talking about salvation in terms of divination. there is even a parallel between the eastern three spiritual stages and threeways of the west in the east they are katharsis, theoria, theosis in the west they are the purgative way, the illustrative way and the Unitive way.

 

[spina1953]

Dear fr. Morris
the topic of the distinction between essence and energies is a very complex one, but here are some comments on the position from a Latin:
-a Catholic can hold to palamite theology provided that they do not hold to an ontological essence-energies distinction (EED) but only a formal EED

-i think there is a difference between the Byzantine usage of the word essence(ousia) and the Latin usage of essence(esse). could you please clarify your definition of the term essence?

-there is a fundamental western concept to do with God that is essential to understanding the objections raised by Latin thomists
1.God is seen, as i am sure you know, as Ipsum esse subsistens; Subsistent Act of Existing. This idea comes from the concept of Being as the Ultimate transcendental which is common to all things and therefore all the other transcendentals(truth, goodness and beauty) are fundamental properties of Being. it is clear that given the multiplicity of beings and the incompleteness, imperfection and contingency of each particular beings existence that transcendental Being cannot be contained within finite things, which would be a contradiction in terms, therefore Being is transcendent of reality, subsistent and infinite, God. God therefore is the Actus Purus pure act of existing

taking this in to account how does a Latin view a EED, well the first question I would ask a EO believer as a Latin is what exactly makes divine energies Divine? because the traditional understanding of what makes God, God is his incomprehensibility and his lack of potentiality (among other things of course) both of which are not present in the eastern conception of Energies.
here are some more questions i might ask:
what is the fundamental nature of energeia?
what properties does it have?
in what way do erngies relate to the act of creation?
how does it relate to divine simplicity?
does Occam’s razor not make energies an unnecessary component?
while the eastern father did put an emphasise on the energeia and potentiality of God, why did the eastern churches make Palamas’ understanding Dogma?

when Latins talk about ‘infused’ righteousness you must understand that the terminology was created for the purpose of combating the Protestant heresy of ‘imputed’ righteousness , which made our salvation more of a legal action of God the father rather than the real change in the soul enacted by Christ, whereby his righteousness fills (infuses with) a baptised Christian. the Latin Church has a very strong history of talking about salvation in terms of divination. there is even a parallel between the eastern three spiritual stages and threeways of the west in the east they are katharsis, theoria, theosis in the west they are the purgative way, the illustrative way and the Unitive way.

Hi MelCath" I am not sure if Fr. Morris is posting anymore as I have not heard from him since about March. he was very sick at that time so do not know what happened to him since then hope that helps.