Do Orthodox Believe in Purgatory?

[St. Tikon]

I don't think the problem is "prooftexting." The problem is a kind of knee-jerk anti-Romanism and the concomitant fear of using latinate terms like Purgatory.

Try using the word transubstantiation among some Orthodox and you will get the same reaction, even though that doctrine, properly understood, is the Orthodox understanding.

I was not arguing for the fully-developed RC doctrine of Purgatory.

And I was not talking about punishment either.

The idea is one of purging, not punishment. That is why it's called Purgatory rather than Penaltory or - better yet - Hell.

It's in the Fathers; it's in the New Testament.

And it is Orthodox.

The Latins seem to have this great love for defining everything! We as Orthodox just accept things. Transubstantiation for example.

 

[Bastoune]

I don't think the problem is "prooftexting." The problem is a kind of knee-jerk anti-Romanism and the concomitant fear of using latinate terms like Purgatory.

Try using the word transubstantiation among some Orthodox and you will get the same reaction, even though that doctrine, properly understood, is the Orthodox understanding.

I was not arguing for the fully-developed RC doctrine of Purgatory.

And I was not talking about punishment either.

The idea is one of purging, not punishment. That is why it's called Purgatory rather than Penaltory or - better yet - Hell.

It's in the Fathers; it's in the New Testament.

And it is Orthodox.

Even Catholic theology on purgatory is vague, following exactly what you are saying, Maximus.

What is the point of praying for the dead? This is indeed an orthodox practice, no?

 

[Bastoune]

The Latins seem to have this great love for defining everything! We as Orthodox just accept things. Transubstantiation for example.

Different mentalities! The Western people (lay people) demand definitions -- the Church only defines when there is someone contesting a doctrine.

 

[nyj]

The Latins seem to have this great love for defining everything! We as Orthodox just accept things.

What was the Seven Ecumenical Councils then? Did the Orthodox Sees just sit by as the Bishop of Rome did all the hard work?

 

[St. Tikon]

What was the Seven Ecumenical Councils then? Did the Orthodox Sees just sit by as the Bishop of Rome did all the hard work?

That is a contradiction of sorts....the "Bishop" of Rome only attended maybe one of the 7 Councils.

 

[nyj]

That is a contradiction of sorts....the "Bishop" of Rome only attended maybe one of the 7 Councils.

Let me ask this again. If the Orthodox "just accept things" can you explain to me what the Seven Ecumenical Councils are?

Also, which one of the seven councils did the Bishop of Rome attend, and why was he absent from the others, in your opinion?

 

[St. Tikon]

Let me ask this again. If the Orthodox "just accept things" can you explain to me what the Seven Ecumenical Councils are?

Also, which one of the seven councils did the Bishop of Rome attend, and why was he absent from the others, in your opinion?

I am not sure which Council he attended, but the reason he didn't attend most of them, was because of the distance between Rome and the Eastern Empire. He did send Legates to represent him.

Let me clarify something: The basic beliefs of the Church were hammered out during the councils, but the Latins define a dogma for everything.

Example: Concerning Holy Communion, Orthodox refer to as the "Holy Mysteries, and are not concerned with the exact moment of the change of gifts, how it happens, etc. The Latins developed a term, and an exact description of what takes place.

 

[St. Tikon]

Let me ask this again. If the Orthodox "just accept things" can you explain to me what the Seven Ecumenical Councils are?

Also, which one of the seven councils did the Bishop of Rome attend, and why was he absent from the others, in your opinion?

Why as a Roman Catholic are you interested in the Orthodox way of doing things anyway? Especially if you live in Vatican City?

If you are attempting to "bait" me into an argument, well it isn't going to work. You guys chose your path in 1054AD, and I am not the least bit interested in trying to convert you.

 

[nyj]

Let me clarify something: The basic beliefs of the Church were hammered out during the councils...

Which was the point. The beliefs of the Church were defined during those seven councils, and the Orthodox abide by those definitions. No? So really, the Orthodox don't simply "just accept things", they do have definitions for a lot of things. Without definitions, there can be no way to judge "right thinking" versus "wrong thinking".

 

[St. Tikon]

Correct, but not to the extent the Roman Catholics do.....since those councils, we haven't at all, as far as I know.

 

[nyj]

If you are attempting to "bait" me into an argument, well it isn't going to work.

Nope, not trying to bait you into anything but a reasonable answer. What you wrote ("just accepts things"), and what I see from the history of the Church (defining of dogma in the 7 Ecumenical Councils), appears to be in conflict. I was asking for you to reconcile what you said with what history documents*.

*Which I just noticed you have done. Thanks.

 

[nyj]

Correct, but not to the extent the Roman Catholics do...

Thank you.

...since those councils, we haven't at all, as far as I know.

Perhaps you could answer these questions for me, as I have long sought for an answer to them.

What prevents another Ecumenical Council from being called? Is it the lack of an existing Emperor to call one into session, is it the fact of the schism preventing the Council from being truly Ecumenical, or is it the lack of a Church-threatening heresy to combat?

Thanks in advance.

 

[ChoirDir]

NYJ
I believe the Schism is probably the number 1 factor. There has been great progress in relations and who knows maybe in our lifetime we will see such a council

 

[St. Tikon]

Thank you.

Perhaps you could answer these questions for me, as I have long sought for an answer to them.

What prevents another Ecumenical Council from being called? Is it the lack of an existing Emperor to call one into session, is it the fact of the schism preventing the Council from being truly Ecumenical, or is it the lack of a Church-threatening heresy to combat?

Thanks in advance.

The reason is quite simple: We believe that a valid ecumenical council can only be convened with the ENTIRE undivided church.

Also, if you study your history you will note that an Ecumenical Council was only called for the very gravest of reasons, or as you put it, a "Church threatening heresy." We have had Synods that have resolved minor issues, but there really hasn't been a need at this point.

I personally feel that once the filioque and the Papal Supremacy issues are hammered out that a Council will be called to reconcile the remaining differences between the East and West. But the first two are a HUGE hurdle.

 

[Maximus]

Bastoune: Even Catholic theology on purgatory is vague, following exactly what you are saying, Maximus.

What is the point of praying for the dead? This is indeed an orthodox practice, no?

Exactly.

We pray for the dead because they need our prayers and because our prayers can help them through the process of purgation.

If they all just went straight to heaven, why would they need our prayers?

Can our prayers deliver souls condemned to hell for eternity?

Conclusion: there must be a class of departed believers who benefit by our prayers.

 

[isshinwhat]

...maybe in our lifetime we will see such a council...

And may we pray for that every day.

God Bless,

Neal

 

[The Prokeimenon!]

What is the point of praying for the dead? This is indeed an orthodox practice, no?

We pray for the dead because we love them. We don't know exactly what effect it has on them. Some Saints have seen visions of the torments of hell being eased by the prayers of the Church. (I don't have a quote or reference for those stories though).

Also, the seperation of soul and body is the most unnatural thing that can happen, and it can be traumatic for the person involved. I'm told that prayers can help ease this trauma.

I'm a recent convert, (I have much zeal, but little knowlege so forgive me if I'm incorrect. It's my understanding that upon death a person is judged by their works and enters immediately into a foretaste of either blessedness or torment. Since they won't experience the fullness of either, our prayers can be used to ease their torment or enhance their blessedness.

with Love,
Moses

 

[Eusebios]

[/font]

And may we pray for that every day.

God Bless,

Neal

Amen! So be it!
His unworthy servant,
Eusebios.

 

[prodromos]

I'm still reading "The Orthodox Church" by Bishop Kalistos Ware.

In the seventeenth century a number of Orthodox writers - most notably Peter of Moghila and Dositheus in his Confession - upheld the Roman Catholic doctrine of Purgatory, or something very close to it (According to the normal Roman teaching, souls in Purgatory undergo expiatory suffering, and so render 'satisfaction' or 'atonement' for their sins. It should be remarked, however, that even in the seventeenth century there were many Orthodox who rejected the Roman teaching on Purgatory. The statements on the departed in Moghila's Orthodox Confession were carefully changed by Meletius Syrigos, while in later life Dositheus specifically retracted what he had written on the subject in his Confession).

Part II: Faith and Worship, The Church of God, The living and the dead: The Mother of God

It seems there is less support for the doctrine of purgatory in Orthodoxy than some have thought.

John.