Nature of the OCA

[ArmyMatt]

Keep checking it out, keep praying, and no rush

 

[AlaskaFan]

Silly question, please forgive me - but what is ACROD? I may have seen it mentioned, but it's not familiar?

American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese. Here is their website: www.acrod.org

 

[~Anastasia~]

American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese. Here is their website: www.acrod.org

Thanks - looks like they are going to remain a mystery to me. The map only goes out 500 miles, and nothing found. So I put in places I go every year or two about 700 miles out - plus the 500 the map covers, and nothing found.

Maybe the OP will have better luck.

 

[ZaidaBoBaida]

Wouldn't "temporal punishments due to sin" basically be a way of saying "you reap what you sow?" If I commit the sin of murder, I'm going to experience the very real temporal punishment of going to prison.

But, yeah - I think they're all wet on indulgences and papal infallibility. I have no opinion on mortal/venial sins.

 

[~Anastasia~]

Wouldn't "temporal punishments due to sin" basically be a way of saying "you reap what you sow?" If I commit the sin of murder, I'm going to experience the very real temporal punishment of going to prison.

But, yeah - I think they're all wet on indulgences and papal infallibility. I have no opinion on mortal/venial sins.

It's not just that. The Orthodox also believe there are consequences of sin. Many denominations do.

A Catholic should explain temporal punishment though. I'd probably mess it up. But it's a disagreement I have with them as well.

 

[ALoveDivine]

From what I've read the idea strikes me as if sin, even when forgiven, still has suffering attached to it. Like for every "mortal" sin you commit, you can get it forgiven, but you still have to suffer for it. Historically the RCC has always considered purgatory to involve real pain and suffering, and actually literal burning fire, not just "purification" as is common among post-Vatican II theologians.

The God painted by traditional Catholicism is like a vengeful deity that demands pain and suffering for all human transgressions of his law. You live a saintly life serving the poor and needy, miss mass willingly one time, get hit by a car before making it to confession, and bam you burn in Hell for all eternity. That's the essense of "mortal" sin. And if you avoid dying in mortal sin (which includes masturbation, contraception, anger, lust, being drunk, and most other things you can imagine), you still have to suffer pain for the minor sins you committed in life.

You know what the essence of Catholic soteriology is? If you die without mortal sin, you go to heaven. If you die with mortal sin, you burn in Hell forever, regardless of the overall course of your life. Oh and they are absolutely certain about God damning you for that list of sins, he will not and cannot show mercy to one who dies in mortal sin.

Traditional Catholic theology honestly makes me want to puke. Vatican II was a massive public relations make-over of the church, which changed most of the terminology and emphasis though paradoxically reaffirming the morbid and absurd doctrines.

 

[ArmyMatt]

Wouldn't "temporal punishments due to sin" basically be a way of saying "you reap what you sow?" If I commit the sin of murder, I'm going to experience the very real temporal punishment of going to prison.

I think it could be viewed that way. I think the issue is that ancient Christianity viewed sin more of a sickness, rather than breaking some Divine Law.

 

[rusmeister]

Silly question, please forgive me - but what is ACROD? I may have seen it mentioned, but it's not familiar?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Carpatho-Russian_Orthodox_Diocese

 

[~Anastasia~]

From what I've read the idea strikes me as if sin, even when forgiven, still has suffering attached to it. Like for every "mortal" sin you commit, you can get it forgiven, but you still have to suffer for it. Historically the RCC has always considered purgatory to involve real pain and suffering, and actually literal burning fire, not just "purification" as is common among post-Vatican II theologians.

The God painted by traditional Catholicism is like a vengeful deity that demands pain and suffering for all human transgressions of his law. You live a saintly life serving the poor and needy, miss mass willingly one time, get hit by a car before making it to confession, and bam you burn in Hell for all eternity. That's the essense of "mortal" sin. And if you avoid dying in mortal sin (which includes masturbation, contraception, anger, lust, being drunk, and most other things you can imagine), you still have to suffer pain for the minor sins you committed in life.

You know what the essence of Catholic soteriology is? If you die without mortal sin, you go to heaven. If you die with mortal sin, you burn in Hell forever, regardless of the overall course of your life. Oh and they are absolutely certain about God damning you for that list of sins, he will not and cannot show mercy to one who dies in mortal sin.

Traditional Catholic theology honestly makes me want to puke. Vatican II was a massive public relations make-over of the church, which changed most of the terminology and emphasis though paradoxically reaffirming the morbid and absurd doctrines.

I'm still trying to understand it. I was just looking at Athanasuis' post about All Souls Day and the picture with it of souls in purgatory being in the flames outside heaven - those presumably being "purified" in order to enter heaven.

It seems to me that grace for the Catholic involves forgiveness of sins in terms of "penalty" so that one may enter heaven - all this being in a rather legal sense. But even if one is "forgiven" and so "allowed" to go to heaven, one still isn't "pure enough" - not having been purged of one's sins. And it further seems to me that "punishment" is the only thing that "purges" one and purifies one of sin, in the Catholic thinking? So that "temporal punishment" MUST occur for EVERY sin, or else the sinner remains defiled by it, even if forgiven, such that they still cannot enter heaven?


The real problem that I have with this - because Orthodox still believe (please correct me, my brothers and sisters, if I miss any part of this!) ... While Orthodox DO believe that we must conform to the likeness of Christ - and this is essentially theosis, which IS our salvation, NOT a "legal transaction" of forgiveness ... The process of theosis - becoming formed into the likeness of Christ - is not dependent solely on "suffering punishment". I think it is indeed possible, in Orthodox thinking, that "punishment" - or rather suffering of some kind - CAN cause this process of purification to occur, if God uses such a method and we cooperate with it, but on the other hand, it is NOT the sole method (and so not strictly necessary).

So we CAN BE formed in Christ's image through our right response to Him in times of suffering - but we can also be formed in His image through living a life of prayer, through receiving of the Sacraments, through acts of mercy and love to others, through battling and overcoming sin, and so on, and so on. I think it is true in Orthodox thought that there are many ways to change us, and God is not limited only to necessary "punishment" equal to our sins. Rather, our sins have a negative effect on our souls (the disease model of sin) and God uses many methods of "cure" to reverse those effects and restore us to spiritual health and wholeness. And THIS IS our salvation.

I hope I have that right, from both sides? Correction is very much appreciated.

 

[~Anastasia~]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Carpatho-Russian_Orthodox_Diocese

Thank you, Rus. The history is rather interesting.

 

[Jesus4Madrid]

From what I've read the idea strikes me as if sin, even when forgiven, still has suffering attached to it. Like for every "mortal" sin you commit, you can get it forgiven, but you still have to suffer for it. Historically the RCC has always considered purgatory to involve real pain and suffering, and actually literal burning fire, not just "purification" as is common among post-Vatican II theologians.

The God painted by traditional Catholicism is like a vengeful deity that demands pain and suffering for all human transgressions of his law. You live a saintly life serving the poor and needy, miss mass willingly one time, get hit by a car before making it to confession, and bam you burn in Hell for all eternity. That's the essense of "mortal" sin. And if you avoid dying in mortal sin (which includes masturbation, contraception, anger, lust, being drunk, and most other things you can imagine), you still have to suffer pain for the minor sins you committed in life.

You know what the essence of Catholic soteriology is? If you die without mortal sin, you go to heaven. If you die with mortal sin, you burn in Hell forever, regardless of the overall course of your life. Oh and they are absolutely certain about God damning you for that list of sins, he will not and cannot show mercy to one who dies in mortal sin.

Traditional Catholic theology honestly makes me want to puke. Vatican II was a massive public relations make-over of the church, which changed most of the terminology and emphasis though paradoxically reaffirming the morbid and absurd doctrines.

Can any Roman Catholics here confirm this understanding. Is this official RC doctrine?

 

[ALoveDivine]

From Paul VI Indulgentiarum Doctrina 1
"An indulgence is a remission before God of the temporal punishment due to sins whose guilt has already been forgiven, which the faithful Christian who is duly disposed gains under certain defined conditions through the Church’s help when, as a minister of redemption, she dispenses and applies with authority the treasury of the satisfactions won by Christ and the saints"

New Advent Catholic Encyclipedia
"The whole penitential system of the Church testifies that the voluntary assumption of penitential works has always been part of true repentance and the Council of Trent (Sess. XIV, can. xi) reminds the faithful that God does not always remit the whole punishment due to sin together with the guilt. God requires satisfaction, and will punish sin, and this doctrine involves as its necessary consequence a belief that the sinner failing to do penance in this life may be punished in another world, and so not be cast off eternally from God."
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12575a.htm

"Mortal sins ((Latin)peccata mortalia) in Catholic theology are wrongful acts that condemn a person to Hell after death if unforgiven. These sins are considered "mortal" because they constitute a rupture in a person's link to God's saving grace: the person's soul becomes "dead", not merely weakened."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mortal_sin

This is all RCC theology, its just cloaked in nicer language these days. I should know, I'm a disaffected Catholic myself. What stood out to me in all those quotes was the phrase "God demands satisfaction". There you have it, God in the image of a vengeful midevil monarch. Can you all see now where the phenomenon of "Catholic Guilt" comes from?

 

[MilesVitae]

This is all RCC theology, its just cloaked in nicer language these days. I should know, I'm a disaffected Catholic myself. What stood out to me in all those quotes was the phrase "God demands satisfaction". There you have it, God in the image of a vengeful midevil monarch. Can you all see now where the phenomenon of "Catholic Guilt" comes from?

I do believe the term "satisfaction" here is in the sense of "the payment of a debt or fulfillment of an obligation or claim," not in the sense of personal pleasure - that is, it is saying, God requires temporal punishment due to sin as a matter of fulfilling justice, not as a matter of his personal, vengeful pleasure.

 

[MilesVitae]

For what it's worth for, adding to ALoveDivine's quotations, here is the explanation as currently found in the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

1471 The doctrine and practice of indulgences in the Church are closely linked to the effects of the sacrament of Penance.

What is an indulgence?

"An indulgence is a remission before God of the temporal punishment due to sins whose guilt has already been forgiven, which the faithful Christian who is duly disposed gains under certain prescribed conditions through the action of the Church which, as the minister of redemption, dispenses and applies with authority the treasury of the satisfactions of Christ and the saints."81

"An indulgence is partial or plenary according as it removes either part or all of the temporal punishment due to sin."82 The faithful can gain indulgences for themselves or apply them to the dead.83

The punishments of sin

1472 To understand this doctrine and practice of the Church, it is necessary to understand that sin has a double consequence. Grave sin deprives us of communion with God and therefore makes us incapable of eternal life, the privation of which is called the "eternal punishment" of sin. On the other hand every sin, even venial, entails an unhealthy attachment to creatures, which must be purified either here on earth, or after death in the state called Purgatory. This purification frees one from what is called the "temporal punishment" of sin. These two punishments must not be conceived of as a kind of vengeance inflicted by God from without, but as following from the very nature of sin. A conversion which proceeds from a fervent charity can attain the complete purification of the sinner in such a way that no punishment would remain.84

1473 The forgiveness of sin and restoration of communion with God entail the remission of the eternal punishment of sin, but temporal punishment of sin remains. While patiently bearing sufferings and trials of all kinds and, when the day comes, serenely facing death, the Christian must strive to accept this temporal punishment of sin as a grace. He should strive by works of mercy and charity, as well as by prayer and the various practices of penance, to put off completely the "old man" and to put on the "new man."85

 

[ALoveDivine]

And all of that is quite frankly unscriptural and nonsensical. Romans 8 says there is now therefore no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. If you are in Christ, walking in an obedient and repentant faith, your sins are covered by the blood of Christ. No Christian will be damned for a single sin, of that I am certain. Only apostasy can damn a Christian, which would involve forsaking and abandoning Christ choosing to live in unrepentant sin and unbelief all the remaining days of one's life.

Catholic doctrine leads to scrupulosity and a fearful disdain of God, rather than an obedient love and pure devotion to Christ. How one can have any assurance or joy while believing that a single slip up will damn them is utterly beyond me. I reject this doctrine and all that follow from it without any reservation as a doctrine of demons.

 

[ArmyMatt]

God requires temporal punishment due to sin as a matter of fulfilling justice, not as a matter of his personal, vengeful pleasure.

(great to see you back Miles!) and this is an issue that we have because God requires NOTHING being that He is God.

For what it's worth for, adding to ALoveDivine's quotations, here is the explanation as currently found in the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

1471 The doctrine and practice of indulgences in the Church are closely linked to the effects of the sacrament of Penance.

What is an indulgence?

"An indulgence is a remission before God of the temporal punishment due to sins whose guilt has already been forgiven, which the faithful Christian who is duly disposed gains under certain prescribed conditions through the action of the Church which, as the minister of redemption, dispenses and applies with authority the treasury of the satisfactions of Christ and the saints."81

"An indulgence is partial or plenary according as it removes either part or all of the temporal punishment due to sin."82 The faithful can gain indulgences for themselves or apply them to the dead.83

The punishments of sin

1472 To understand this doctrine and practice of the Church, it is necessary to understand that sin has a double consequence. Grave sin deprives us of communion with God and therefore makes us incapable of eternal life, the privation of which is called the "eternal punishment" of sin. On the other hand every sin, even venial, entails an unhealthy attachment to creatures, which must be purified either here on earth, or after death in the state called Purgatory. This purification frees one from what is called the "temporal punishment" of sin. These two punishments must not be conceived of as a kind of vengeance inflicted by God from without, but as following from the very nature of sin. A conversion which proceeds from a fervent charity can attain the complete purification of the sinner in such a way that no punishment would remain.84

1473 The forgiveness of sin and restoration of communion with God entail the remission of the eternal punishment of sin, but temporal punishment of sin remains. While patiently bearing sufferings and trials of all kinds and, when the day comes, serenely facing death, the Christian must strive to accept this temporal punishment of sin as a grace. He should strive by works of mercy and charity, as well as by prayer and the various practices of penance, to put off completely the "old man" and to put on the "new man."85

these quotes are pretty problematic, I must say.

but seriously, welcome back man!

 

[MilesVitae]

(great to see you back Miles!) and this is an issue that we have because God requires NOTHING being that He is God.

Oops, I could have put that better. I should have said something like "God calls for/holds us to the temporal punishment due to sin." I didn't mean He was incapable of it doing otherwise.
Note to self: when clarifying words with multiple possible interpretations, avoid further words with multiple possible interpretations.

these quotes are pretty problematic, I must say.

Personally, I'm not sure how to interpret the RCC's teaching on this matter. The CCC seems to lean more towards the notion of purification from the effects of sin than an actual matter of punishment. Other sources seem to suggest a matter of justice, and/or some suggest it is to teach us the evils of sin.

Personally, it's not a topic I know much about - I used to sit pretty comfortably with the first explanation, but more recently have began to rethink it and consider that it may be more problematic than that... So there's my two cents (if that)

but seriously, welcome back man!

Thanks, Matt!

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

The problem with all of this stuff is that Orthodox just plain don't think this way about sin and life. Mortal sins and venial sins, temporal ramifications and eternal ones, all these rubrics and legal terms just aren't a part of the Orthodox life. We go to Confession and are sacramentally touched by God and forgiven. We lose our way and sin is a missing the mark. It is a deviation from true aim. It is a jumble, a detour, a failure. Christ Jesus wipes away our sins quite literally and fully. We don't have to pay off some lease for temporal leftovers. We just don't look at all these things through Western eyes. Thanks be to God!

 

[ArmyMatt]

"God calls for/holds us to the temporal punishment due to sin."

I think we would find issue with this as well. God does not call for/hold us being punished, but does allow us to punish ourselves if that is our will. He Is that He Is.

The CCC seems to lean more towards the notion of purification from the effects of sin than an actual matter of punishment. Other sources seem to suggest a matter of justice, and/or some suggest it is to teach us the evils of sin.

yeah, but the way it is mapped out, and the idea that there is some third purifying place is one glaring issue

 

[ArmyMatt]

Thanks, Matt!

no probs dude! and we just had another conversation NOT talking about Papal Infallibility! woohoo!