Orthodox version of Purgatory?

[Christ's_Warrior]

The Eastern Orthodox Synod of Jerusalem, held in 1672, declared that "the souls of those that have fallen asleep are either at rest or in torment, according to what each hath wrought" (an enjoyment or condemnation that will be complete only after the resurrection of the dead); but the souls of some "depart into Hades, and there endure the punishment due to the sins they have committed. But they are aware of their future release from there, and are delivered by the Supreme Goodness, through the prayers of the Priests, and the good works which the relatives of each do for their Departed; especially the unbloody Sacrifice benefiting the most; which each offers particularly for his relatives that have fallen asleep, and which the Catholic and Apostolic Church offers daily for all alike. Of course, it is understood that we do not know the time of their release. We know and believe that there is deliverance for such from their direful condition, and that before the common resurrection and judgment, but when we know not."
​

 

[Etsi]

1672, not buying it. The closest I've seen an Orthodox declare a state of purgatory is with "tollhouses" and then that is a matter of controversy, not canon.

 

[Joshua G.]

Do you mean you think this text is made up? I've come across several Local councils that declared affirmatively on very Western sounding doctrines from purgatory to indulgences... and I have some others in mind but I am not 100% sure that I was reading excerpts from a council or something else so I won't mention them specifically.

 

[Magnus Maximus]

As I undersyand it, some of the Russian Orthodix teachings state the Hell is not permanant

 

[Etsi]

The text may or may not be. I question it having been made canon rather than someone's opinion. It was one specific question I had asked before entering the EO.

The Orthodox Response to the Latin Doctrine of Purgatory

Sounds like it's not cut and dried in the EO, but it's not the Roman form of Purgatory either.

I *personally* will stick with the view of "absent from the body, present with the Lord"

 

[Joshua G.]

This council is was attempting to undo the harm committed by a former Patriarch who was very influenced by Calvinism.

Calvinism, being a very western heresy that born out of westernism, had already been refuted with mastery by the Roman Catholics. The problem is that this Synod, rather than taking the due time to realize and formulate an ORTHODOX response to the heresy of Calvinism, took the already boxed refutations of the Catholic Church which meant they inadvertently adopted doctrines that were uniquely Roman in content and feel.

Also, it should be known that many of the bishops and theologians involved in this and other local councils of this time had been HEAVILY influenced by western thoughts because for various reasons (wars, persecution, etc in the East) Orthodoxo clergy and would-be clergy had to study in Western (Catholic) seminaries-- there was really no other choice for some Orthodox regions and I imagine that, over time, even if there was a choice, it just became the accepted norm.

So for these two reasons (using foreign responses to foreign heresies and recieving doctrinal formation from the Roman Church during this period) this council had very little chance of actually being a truly Orthodox Council.

This leads to a bigger discussion that may be helpful to you about Councils and how we view them. To make it short, we do not believe councils are magic nor are any of them TRULY known to be ecumenical (i.e. representing truth) until some considerable time has passed. Besides that, local councils are generally taken even less seriously and precedent setting than Great Councils. They are definitely placed under more scruitiny.

Josh

 

[Joshua G.]

As I undersyand it, some of the Russian Orthodox teachings state the Hell is not permanant

I'm not saying that's not possible (I mean, it wouldn't be correct, but it's possible that such has been stated erroneously... Russia is a big place lol), but where?

 

[Joshua G.]

The text may or may not be. I question it having been made canon rather than someone's opinion. It was one specific question I had asked before entering the EO.

The Orthodox Response to the Latin Doctrine of Purgatory

Sounds like it's not cut and dried in the EO, but it's not the Roman form of Purgatory either.

I *personally* will stick with the view of "absent from the body, present with the Lord"

Well, I don't know exactly what you mean by "made canon". I apologize for my slowness here. But it was a synod that decreed these things and many other Roman doctrines. You and I know that Councils can be pretty... unOrthodox even if held by technically Orthodox people.

Anyway, here's the link. Synod of Jerusalem (1672) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Magnus Maximus]

The Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox Churches teach that Heaven and Hell are within the same realm, which is in the presence of God.[9][10] Some theologians have compared the Eastern view of Hell with the Western view of Purgatory.[citation needed]
The Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox Churches teach that both the elect and the lost enter into the presence of God after death, and that the elect experience this presence as light and rest, while the lost experience it as darkness and torment.[11] The Orthodox see this doctrine as supported by Scripture and by the patristic tradition.
The afterlife for the damned is dreadful anticipation of Judgment Day, while the elect happily await the resurrection of the dead. Orthodox Christians pray for the dead, and believe that such prayers are beneficial for the dead. Some have misunderstood the Orthodox Church to teach that sometimes a lost soul can't be saved after death through the prayers of the living. Rather, the Orthodox teaching is that the souls of the departed - in either Heaven or Hell - do not receive "Final Judgment" until "Judgment Day". Thus, the living pray for the souls of the dead, that God grant them Eternal Life, and asking for the intercession of the Most Holy Theotokos on-behalf of the departed.

 

[Joshua G.]

The Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox Churches teach that Heaven and Hell are within the same realm, which is in the presence of God.[9][10] Some theologians have compared the Eastern view of Hell with the Western view of Purgatory.[citation needed]
The Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox Churches teach that both the elect and the lost enter into the presence of God after death, and that the elect experience this presence as light and rest, while the lost experience it as darkness and torment.[11] The Orthodox see this doctrine as supported by Scripture and by the patristic tradition.
The afterlife for the damned is dreadful anticipation of Judgment Day, while the elect happily await the resurrection of the dead. Orthodox Christians pray for the dead, and believe that such prayers are beneficial for the dead. Some have misunderstood the Orthodox Church to teach that sometimes a lost soul can't be saved after death through the prayers of the living. Rather, the Orthodox teaching is that the souls of the departed - in either Heaven or Hell - do not receive "Final Judgment" until "Judgment Day". Thus, the living pray for the souls of the dead, that God grant them Eternal Life, and asking for the intercession of the Most Holy Theotokos on-behalf of the departed.

I thought you meant that perhaps hell is something that will disappear which is not an Orthodox belief.

What you state there is what I would call more of a theolgumena but a widely held one. Many saints have claimed to have been granted visions of a person they were praying for being pulled up from hell. We don't base doctrine on this. In the OC, we don't try to officially explain why we must pray for the dead other than the fact that that's what the Early Church did and we do that because we are God's children and God's children, by definition love all people and God's Children, by definition, pray for people they love.

But, yes, from what I know it is fully Orthodox to believe that God can pull someone out of hell as a result of our prayers or the prayers of His Mother, etc. But note that in the part you quoted, it also says "before the Final Judgement" and that's kind of the key.

Josh

 

[Typikon]

The Eastern Orthodox Synod of Jerusalem, held in 1672, declared that "the souls of those that have fallen asleep are either at rest or in torment, according to what each hath wrought" (an enjoyment or condemnation that will be complete only after the resurrection of the dead); but the souls of some "depart into Hades, and there endure the punishment due to the sins they have committed. But they are aware of their future release from there, and are delivered by the Supreme Goodness, through the prayers of the Priests, and the good works which the relatives of each do for their Departed; especially the unbloody Sacrifice benefiting the most; which each offers particularly for his relatives that have fallen asleep, and which the Catholic and Apostolic Church offers daily for all alike. Of course, it is understood that we do not know the time of their release. We know and believe that there is deliverance for such from their direful condition, and that before the common resurrection and judgment, but when we know not."
​

It's not the Orthodox version of Purgatory as such but rather Patriarch Dositheos version of Purgatory (BTW, revised by him in 1690). In short, it was a reaction by a council that was was not really a council to a heresy that did not really exist.

It is also a good example of what can happen to Orthodoxy when it's getting involved into Western "Protestantism vs Catholicism" debates: their reflections on foreign problems using a foreign to Orthodoxy language of scholastics is hardly recognized as Orthodox these days.

 

[Typikon]

This council is was attempting to undo the harm committed by a former Patriarch who was very influenced by Calvinism.

I think there is absolutely no evidence he was. It was a forgery which was born when the two camps of the Western schism tried to find allies in Eastern Christianity.

 

[Livindesert]

It's not the Orthodox version of Purgatory as such but rather Patriarch Dositheos version of Purgatory (BTW, revised by him in 1690). In short, it was a reaction by a council that was was not really a council to a heresy that did not really exist.

It is also a good example of what can happen to Orthodoxy when it's getting involved into Western "Protestantism vs Catholicism" debates: their reflections on foreign problems using a foreign to Orthodoxy language of scholastics is hardly recognized as Orthodox these days.

So what council did the revising take place? Also dose this mean councils are not binding on the Orthodox?

 

[Magnus Maximus]

Even tough I am Catholic I really like, I guess like isn't the best word. The Orthodox notion of Sin makes a lot more sense to me than the Catholic one. There a lot of things a love in the Catholic church but two things I wish we could copy from the Orthodox is the sin concept and the need to tend towrds perfection at least how I undersyand it. Then again I also like the Anglican version of just.. by faith.

 

[Joshua G.]

So what council did the revising take place? Also dose this mean councils are not binding on the Orthodox?

They are once they are. lol

Councils in and of themselves are not binding just because there was a council. Bishops can come together and say any crazy thing they want to say. Just because they came together does not mean the Holy Spirit forced them into Truth.

A council is proven to be ecumenical (or, as you might put it "binding" or authoritative) when it is shown to reflect truth and not falsehood over time.

The Seven Ecumenical Councils have done just this and each one has been affirmed by a later council. Yes, if I am not mistaken there was technically an 8th Ecumenical Council (although I think it only affirmed what had already been declared... nothing new was clarified... anyone, please correct me if I am wrong on this). However, one of the reasons we don't count it amng the 7 (or, in this case, 8) is because there wasn't a 9th later on to affirm it. Mind you, there isn't some canonical law about if and how we go about considering a council ecumenical or not. It's not a strict rubric we follow in which there must be three little boxes checked off before it be considered official and "binding". It's just how the mind of the Church works.

If you ask me what that 8th Ecumenical Council was, I will have to ask you to patiently wait for another to answer that. I am not expert. I am just telling you some of what I have learned... and the details escape me

What is frustrating to many, especially Protestants and Catholics who each have their own version of a one infallibile source to deal with any adn all confusion (Bible and Pope respectively), is that we don't claim to have that ONE infallible source (please understand, we staunchly believe the Scriptures to be inerrant and unique, but it lives only through the voice of the Church... otherwise it is just paper and ink). God works in mysterious ways and as frustrating as it may be for our linear minds (especially in the West), history is messy and the Spirit moves us as He wills. The interesting thing, though, is that as messy as this is, it works and I think the OC is evidence of that. I beleive firmly that this only works because of God's divine intervention.... because it shouldn't. It doesn't make sense. That's only a matter than can be accepted as "proof" AFTER the initial premise (that OC is the True Church) has been accepted... so it's not an entirely useful point to make for it only makes sense when preaching to the choir. lol

 

[Joshua G.]

Even tough I am Catholic I really like, I guess like isn't the best word. The Orthodox notion of Sin makes a lot more sense to me than the Catholic one. There a lot of things a love in the Catholic church but two things I wish we could copy from the Orthodox is the sin concept and the need to tend towrds perfection at least how I undersyand it. Then again I also like the Anglican version of just.. by faith.

If I had to be reductionist about it (which I don't have to since I am Orthodox... thanks to God!) I would stick only with the "By Grace Alone" mantra.

 

[Typikon]

So what council did the revising take place?

It was not a council but it was Dositheos himself who edited the original version which supports the view that even Dositheos himself did not see Jerusalem-1672 as a Church Council.

Actually the OP quote is from the writings of Dositheos (called the Confession of Dositheos) - it was not a product of the Jerusalem synod. In 1672 a number of bishops gathered in Jerusalem/Bethlehem to celebrate the consecration of the Nativity church and he used the occasion to ask them to sign it which they did. The reason behind this document is to defend Orthodoxy from accusations in Calvinism so it's not surprising that it did not pay any attention to differences between Orthodoxy and Catholicism. As the result the Confession looked almost like Roman Catholic; I suppose realizing that Dositheos edited it in 1690 so it became more balanced and more accurate in expressing the Church Tradition.

So the Confession of Dositheos is undoubtedly a very important historical document defending the Orthodox faith. At the same time its theological value is not that great.

Also dose this mean councils are not binding on the Orthodox?

Not the councils themselves but rather their ecumenical acceptance.

 

[buzuxi02]

Much of what took place in 1672 under Dositheos was intentionally 'western sounding'. For instance the term 'transubstantiation' was used. It was meant to show what Orthodoxy believes to western ears during the roman catholic-protestant controversies.
The only thing the excerpt in the OP is trying to show is that we believe prayers for the departed have a positive effect on those who have fallen asleep with minor faults, Or as scrupture says, 'But whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit, it will not be foregiven him, either in this age or in the age to come." (Matt 12.32)
Anotherwords some sins are foregiven in the next life.

 

[ArmyMatt]

well, Elder Joseph the Hesychast and St Ksenia of St Petersburg are two that I can think of that have had relatives who reposed sinners (St Ksenia's husband and Elder Joseph's aunt) who both somehow repented and went from Hades to Paradise. while possible (because hell is God's love rejected, so all one has to do is accept God's mercy and one can be saved), this is extremely rare.

the reason, I think, that the Final Judgment is called the Final Judgment, is because those on the left hand are those who are so darkened by their sinfulness and desire that corruption so much, that the salvation that God offers they will eternally refuse. as Fr Thomas Hopko states, it's never too late for a timeless God, it can become too late, however, for man.

 

[RobNJ]

Purgatory for the Orthodox? Of course it exists! It's called the GH forum here!