Posted on 05/29/2005 7:55:52 AM PDT by kosta50
BARI, Italy (AP) -- Pope Benedict XVI visited the eastern port of Bari on his first papal trip Sunday and pledged to make healing the 1,000-year-old rift with the Orthodox church a "fundamental" commitment of his papacy.
Benedict made the pledge in a city closely tied to the Orthodox church. Bari, on Italy's Adriatic coast, is considered a "bridge" between East and West and is home to the relics of St. Nicholas of Myra, a 4th-Century saint who is one of the most popular in both the Roman Catholic and Orthodox churches.
Benedict referred to Bari as a "land of meeting and dialogue" with the Orthodox in his homily at a Mass that closed a national religious conference. It was his first pilgrimage outside Rome since being elected the 265th leader of the Roman Catholic Church on April 19.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
Yes, true enough - this is because of their character, since their commission is visited with "the undying penalty of hell". But to be more correct - we say in the absence of the sacrament or at least a true desire for its reception, coupled with perfect contrition and love of God.
At any rate, St. John makes the same distinction as we do: sins which are punished temporally with limited punishments, and sins which are punished eternally with hell.
Mark and Bessarion's argument is interesting (as I thought when I read the piece some time ago). But their linguistic arguments don't quite hold up. Liddell and Scott give, for sozo (the word used in 1 Cor. 3:15) two separate sets of definitions. The first, "of persons, to save from death, keep alive, preserve", the second,
II. with a sense of motion to a place, to bring one safe to, ton d' esaôsen es potamou prochoas Od.; sô. tina pros êpeiron Aesch.:--in Pass. to come safe, escape to a place, es oikon Hdt.; epi thalattan Xen.
2. to carry off safe, rescue from danger, ek polemou Il.; ek thanatoio Od.; apo strateias Aesch.:--c. gen., echthrôn sôsai chthona to rescue the land from enemies, Soph.; Pass., sôthênai kakôn Eur.
3. c. inf., hai se sôzousin thanein who save thee from dying, id=Eur.
4. absol., ta sôsonta what is likely to save, Dem.
So it can mean either. The same goes for zemiothesetai, which can also mean "to be punished" or "to be fined", which accord quite well with our doctrine.
St. Thomas argues that the "wood, hay, stubble" must be venial sins, since it would be impossible to build mortal sins on the foundation of Christ (in his commentary on the text):
Therefore, some, referring this to the superstructure of works, have said the gold, silver and precious stones mean the good works a person adds to his faith; but wood, hay and stubble mean the mortal sins a person commits after receiving the faith.However, this interpretation cannot stand: first, because mortal sins are dead works: “He will cleanse our consciences from dead works” (Heb 9:14), whereas only living works are built onto this building: “Be you also as living stone built up” (1 Pt 2:5). Consequently, those who have mortal sins along with faith do not build up, but rather destroy or profane. Against such persons he says: “But if anyone destroys God’s temple” (1 Cor 3:17).
Secondly, because mortal sins are better compared to iron or lead or stone, since they are heavy and not destroyed by fire but always remain in the thing in which they exist; whereas venial sins are compared to wood, hay and stubble, because they are light and easily cleansed from a person by fire.
Thirdly, because it seems to follow from this interpretation that a person who dies in mortal sin, as long as he keeps the faith, will finally attain to salvation after undergoing punishment. For he continues: If any man’s work is burned up he will suffer loss, though he himself will be saved, but only as through fire, which is obviously contrary to the Apostle’s statement below (6:9): “neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals....shall posses the kingdom of God”, and to Gal (5:21): “Those who do such things shall not possess the kingdom of God.” But one possesses salvation only in the kingdom of God; for everyone excluded from it is sent into eternal fire, as it says in Matt (25:41).
Fourthly, because faith can be called a foundation, only because by it Christ dwells in us, since it was stated that the foundation is Christ Jesus Himself. For Christ does not dwell in us by unformed faith; otherwise He would dwell in the devils, of whom Jas (2:19) says: “The devils believe and tremble.” Hence Eph (3:17) says: “that Christ by faith may dwell in your hearts.” This should be understood of faith informed by charity, since 1 Jn (4:16) says: “He that abides in love abides in God and God in him.” This is the faith that works through love, as it says below (13:4): “Love is not arrogant or rude.” Consequently, it is obvious that persons who commit mortal sins do not have formed faith, and so do not have the foundation. Therefore, it is necessary to suppose that the person who builds upon the foundation gold, silver and precious stones, as well as one who builds upon it wood, hay, stubble, avoids mortal sin.
"Mark and Bessarion's argument is interesting (as I thought when I read the piece some time ago). But their linguistic arguments don't quite hold up."
Here's the problem. +Mark and Bessarion spoke Greek and they believed they were "refuting" certain arguments of the Latins based in a selective reading of some Fathers along with some mistranslations. Now of course, maybe they didn't understand their own language, but I doubt it. I say this particularly because Bessarion was in favor of the reunion and was seeking a common ground between the East and the West but soundly condemned and continued to condemn the Latins for their sorry lack of knowledge and understanding of Greek.
Its funny you should mention this linguistics matter. I just got back from Greece where I was in a discussion of some Church matters involving a local situation of no great theological import but of practical importance to the people involved. At any rate, there was an English fellow there who appropriately took part in the discussion. His Greek was pretty good, but it was the Greek a foreigner learns in school and then applies on site over a period of time. Some of what he said, while gramtically correct, taken in the context of the time place and culture made no sense. In fact, one of the Greeks commented to me that the man was an idiot. He isn't an idiot, he just wasn't thinking like a Greek speaker when he spoke Greek. I think he thought he was quite profound...but he wasn't.
Its like a number of us have said before, sometimes we use different words to describe the same thing and at others the same words to describe very different things. I suggest your reliance on Liddell and Scott may be misplaced.
Hello my dear! Did you actually read through all our verbiage here?
"Torment" - I think a lot of misemphasis went into this from some Theologians. One of our newer old Doctors, St. Catherine of Genoa, noted that the pains of purgatory are incomparably more desirable than the most ecstatic pleasures on earth ("Purgatory, the Spiritual Dialog"). Purgatory is part of heaven, since those there are saved and therefore are not in eternal punishment; joyful, since those there know that they are saved and are therefore caught up in that unending joy despite the pain of longing to see God face to face and not yet being able to do so; sanctifying, where remaining faults and demerits are removed from those who are justified; and educational, where we come to a full understanding of remaining faults so that Christ might heal them as opposed to the false concept of the dead gaining merit after the judgement through the deed of suffering.
We don't think of our prayers "rescuing" the holy souls, as if they are in danger of damnation. Instead they are a "comfort" to them and they "relieve" them when they receive them.
if the HVM was given a soul full of Grace, she was unlike any other human being and therefore not someone we can call our own.
Are you saying we cannot become full of grace? What then is the purpose of the Sacraments?
On Macabees, is there any source that specifically says Jesus or His Mother actually slaughered sacrifical animals, as you seem to imply? Sacrifice, remember, is not required.
"And to offer a sacrifice, according as it is written in the law of the Lord, a pair of turtledoves or two young pigeons:" (St. Luke 2.24)
I am somewhat mystified by your line of argumentation that insists on finding a basis in the Scriptures for all that the Church knows and does. There is not basis in the Scriptures for the Feast of the Entry of the Theotokos, nor for making the sign of the Cross, nor for facing East in Prayer, nor fasting on Wednesdays and Fridays, nor (at the level of the text) for the Holy Icons (though the fact that Christ took our nature, and with it depictability, makes the entire history of the Incarnation an indirect support), nor for that matter for the solemnizing and keeping of festivals to note the passing from this life to Paradise of the various ranks of saints or events in the life of the Church, whether of during Christ's earthly ministry (as Transfiguration, Great Friday or Pascha) or subsequent (as the Exaltation of the Holy Cross or the Protection of the Theotokos).
For prayers for the dead, and their benefit, we have at least Second Maccabees, and yet you object that the Maccabees were still living under the Old Covenant and offered their prayers according to its customs and usages with animal sacrifices. Is not this simply the Old Covenant analog of what the priest does at the end of every Divine Liturgy when the particles of bread removed from the prosphoron in commemoration of the dead (and living) are swept from the diskos into the chalice, into the Very Blood of Christ with the words, "Wash away, Lord, by Your holy Blood, the sins of all those commemorated, through the intercessions of the Theotokos and all Your saints. Amen."?
Yet she shall be saved (sôthêsetai) through child bearing; if she continue in faith and love and sanctification with sobriety. (1 Tim. 2:15)For we are the good odour of Christ unto God, in them that are saved (sôzomenois) and in them that perish. (2 Cor. 2:15)
And he saith to them: Is it lawful to do good on the sabbath days, or to do evil? To save (sôsai) life, or to destroy? But they held their peace. (Mark 3:4)
And he besought him much, saying: My daughter is at the point of death, come, lay thy hand upon her, that she may be safe (sôthêi), and may live.
But he said to her: Daughter, thy faith hath made thee whole (sesôken). Go thy way in peace. (Luke 8:48)
For by grace you are saved (sesôsmenoi) through faith: and that not of yourselves, for it is the gift of God. (Eph. 2:8)
To deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved (sôthêi) in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ. (1 Cor. 5:2)
For how knowest thou, O wife, whether thou shalt save (sôseis) thy husband? Or how knowest thou, O man, whether thou shalt save thy wife? (1 Cor. 7:16)
I think it's pretty clear from context that both meanings, as provided by the lexicon, were in use during the writing of the NT. 1 Cor. 5:2 and 7:16 are good examples of the meaning that the Latins wanted. I'm not sure if 1 Cor 3:10-5 is actually a good prooftext for purgatorial fires, but I don't think that Mark and Bessarion rule it out with their argument. Origen also knew Greek and he interpreted it otherwise.
You wouldn't happen to know if any of the other Greek Fathers besides Chrysostom and Origen comment on the passage? Bellarmine couldn't enlist any in favor of purgatorial fire (from 1 Cor. 3:10-15) except for Origen, but I'm not sure how well-acquainted he was with the Eastern Fathers at any rate.
I suppose that the thing that springs to mind are all of the things in older Catholic materials that state, with official authority, that reading thus and such prayer grants an indulgence of so many days or years. That's a pretty straight-forward juridical contract, it seems to me... That whole idea is pretty foreign to us -- I can't remotely think of any Orthodox equivalent.
Okay, this should be easy to explain. In days of old, the Church set up what was known as the Canonical Penance for various sins. An adulterer upon repentance, might have to fast for ten years on bread and water and only then be readmitted to Holy Communion, for example. These Canonical Penances were codified in the penitential manuals used by confessors so that there could be uniformity in the penances.
The statement "Indulgence of five years" for reciting a certain prayer means five years off the canonical penance that you actually owe, by the determination of the Apostles and Fathers, for your sins, the Church in her mercy granting you a much lighter penance (say 10 Hail Mary's, for example) to speed up your readmission to Holy Communion.
As for an equivalent, please read these excerpts from the Letters of St. Cyprian on this very subject - the shortening of the Canonical Penance for grave sinners in view of the merits and prayers of the Martyrs on their behalf.
EPISTLE X. TO THE MARTYRS AND CONFESSORS WHO SOUGHT THAT PEACE SHOULD BE GRANTED TO THE LAPSED.1. Cyprian to the martyrs and confessors, his beloved brethren, greeting. The anxiety of my situation and the fear of the Lord constrain me, my brave and beloved brethren, to admonish you in my letters, that those who so devotedly and bravely maintain the faith of the Lord should also maintain the law and discipline of the Lord. For while it behoves all Christ's soldiers to keep the precepts of their commander; to you it is more especially fitting that you should obey His precepts, inasmuch as you have been made an example to others, both of valour and of the fear of God. And I had indeed believed that the presbyters and deacons who are there present with you would admonish and instruct you more fully concerning the law of the Gospel, as was the case always in time past under my predecessors; so that the deacons passing in and out of the prison controlled the wishes of the martyrs by their counsels, and by the Scripture precepts. But now, with great sorrow of mind, I gather that not only the divine precepts are not suggested to you by them, but that they are even rather restrained, so that those things which are done by you yourselves, both in respect of God with caution, and in respect of God's priest with honour, are relaxed by certain presbyters, who consider neither the fear of God nor the honour of the bishop. Although you sent letters to me in which you ask that your wishes should be examined, and that peace should be granted to certain of the lapsed as soon as with the end of the persecution we should have begun to meet with our clergy, and to be gathered together once more; those presbyters, contrary to the Gospel law, contrary also to your respectful petition, before penitence was fulfilled, before confession even of the gravest and most heinous sin was made, before hands were placed upon the repentant by the bishops and clergy, dare to offer on their behalf, and to give them the eucharist, that is, to profane the sacred body of the Lord, although it is written, "Whosoever shall eat the bread and drink the cup of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord."
2. And to the lasped indeed pardon may be granted in respect of this thing. For what dead person would not hasten to be made alive? Who would not be eager to attain to his own salvation? But it is the duty of those placed over them to keep the ordinance, and to instruct those that are either hurrying or ignorant, that those who ought to be shepherds of the sheep may not become their butchers. For to concede those things which tend to destruction is to deceive. Nor is the lapsed raised in this manner, but, by offending God, he is more urged on to ruin. Let them learn, therefore, even from you, what they ought to have taught; let them reserve your petitions and wishes for the bishops, and let them wait for ripe and peaceable times to give peace at your requests. The first thing is, that the Mother should first receive peace from the Lord, and then, in accordance with your wishes, that the peace of her children should be considered.
3. And since I hear, most brave and beloved brethren, that you are pressed by the shamelessness of some, and that your modesty suffers violence; I beg you with what entreaties I may, that, as mindful of the Gospel, and considering what and what sort of things in past time your predecessors the martyrs conceded, how careful they were in all respects, you also should anxiously and cautiously weigh the wishes of those who petition you, since, as friends of the Lord, and hereafter to exercise judgment with Him, you must inspect both the conduct and the doings and the deserts of each one. You must consider also the kinds and qualities of their sins, lest, in the event of anything being abruptly and unworthily either promised by you or done by me, our Church should begin to blush, even before the very Gentiles. For we are visited and chastened frequently, and we are admonished, that the commandments of the Lord may be kept without corruption or violation, which I find does not cease to be the case there among you so as to prevent the divine judgment from instructing very many of you also in the discipline of the Church. Now this can all be done, if you will regulate those things that are asked of you with a careful consideration of religion, perceiving and restraining those who, by accepting persons, either make favours in distributing your benefits, or seek to make a profit of an unlawful trade.
4. Concerning this I have written both to the clergy and to the people, both of which letters I have directed to be read to you. But you ought also to bring back and amend that matter according to your diligence, in such a way as to designate those by name to whom you desire that peace should be granted. For I hear that certificates are so given to some as that it is said, "Let such a one be received to communion along with his friends," which was never in any case done by the martyrs so that a vague and blind petition should by and by heap reproach upon us. For it opens a wide door to say, "Such a one with his friends;" and twenty or thirty or more, may be presented to us, who may be asserted to be neighbours and connections, and freedmen and servants, of the man who receives the certificate. And for this reason I beg you that you will designate by name in the certificate those whom you yourselves see, whom you have known, whose penitence you see to be very near to full satisfaction, and so direct to us letters in conformity with faith and discipline. I bid you, very brave and beloved brethren, ever heartily in the Lord farewell; and have me in remembrance. Fare ye well.
-----------------------------------------------
EPISTLE XI. TO THE PEOPLE.
1. Cyprian to his brethren among the people who stand fast, greeting. That you bewail and grieve over the downfall of our brethren I know from myself, beloved brethren, who also bewail with you and grieve for each one, and suffer and feel what the blessed apostle said: "Who is weak," said he, "and I am not weak? who is offended, and I burn not?" And again he has laid it down in his epistle, saying, "Whether one member suffer, all the members suffer with it; or one member rejoice, all the members rejoice with it." I sympathize with you in your suffering and grief, therefore, for our brethren, who, having lapsed and fallen prostrate under the severity of the persecution, have inflicted a like pain on us by their wounds, inasmuch as they tear away part of our bowels with them,--to these the divine mercy is able to bring healing. Yet I do not think that there must be any haste, nor that anything must be done incautiously and immaturely, lest, while peace is grasped at, the divine indignation be more seriously incurred. The blessed martyrs have written to me about certain persons, requesting that their wishes may be examined into. When, as soon as peace is given to us all by the Lord, we shall begin to return to the Church, then the wishes of each one shall be looked into in your presence, and with your judgment.
2. Yet I hear that certain of the presbyters, neither mindful of the Gospel nor considering what the martyrs have written to me, nor reserving to the bishop the honour of his priesthood and of his dignity, have already begun to communicate with the lapsed, and to offer on their behalf, and to give them the eucharist, when it was fitting that they should attain to these things in due course. For, as in smaller sins which are not committed against God, penitence may be fulfilled in a set time, and confession may be made with investigation of the life of him who fulfils the penitence, and no one can come to communion unless the hands of the bishop and clergy be first imposed upon him; how much more ought all such matters as these to be observed with caution and moderation, according to the discipline of the Lord, in these gravest and extremest sins! This warning, indeed, our presbyters and deacons ought to have given you, that they might cherish the sheep committed to their care, and by the divine authority might instruct them in the way of obtaining salvation by prayer. I am aware of the peacefulness as well as the fear of our people, who would be watchful in the satisfaction and the deprecation of God's anger, unless some of the presbyters, by way of gratifying them, had deceived them.
3. Even you, therefore, yourselves, guide them each one, and control the minds of the lapsed by counsel and by your own moderation, according to the divine precepts. Let no one pluck the unripe fruit at a time as yet premature. Let no one commit his ship, shattered and broken with the waves, anew to the deep, before he has carefully repaired it. Let none be in haste to accept and to put on a rent tunic, unless he has seen it mended by a skilful workman, and has received it arranged by the fuller. Let them bear with patience my advice, I beg. Let them look for my return, that when by God's mercy I come to you, I, with many of my co-bishops, being called together according to the Lord's discipline, and in the presence of the confessors, and with your opinion also, may be able to examine the letters and the wishes of the blessed martyrs. Concerning this matter I have written both to the clergy and to the martyrs and confessors, both of which letters I have directed to be read to you. I bid you, brethren beloved and most longed-for, ever heartily farewell in the Lord; and have me in remembrance. Fare ye well.
------------------------------------------------
EPISTLE XII. TO THE CLERGY, CONCERNING THE LAPSED AND CATECHUMENS, THAT THEY SHOULD NOT BE LEFT WITHOUT SUPERINTENDENCE.
1. Cyprian to the presbyters and deacons, his brethren, greeting. I marvel, beloved brethren, that you have answered nothing to me in reply to my many letters which I have frequently written to you, although as well the advantage as the need of our brotherhood would certainly be best provided for if, receiving information from you, I could accurately investigate and advise upon the management of affairs. Since, however, I see that there is not yet any Opportunity of coming to you, and that the summer has already begun--a season that is disturbed with continual and heavy sicknesses,--I think that our brethren must be dealt with;--that they who have received certificates from the martyrs, and may be assisted by their privilege with God, if they should be seized with any misfortune and peril of sickness, should, without waiting for my presence, before any presbyter who might be present, or if a presbyter should not be found and death begins to be imminent, before even a deacon, be able to make confession of their sin, that, with the imposition of hands upon them for repentance, they should come to the Lord with the peace which the martyrs have desired, by their letters to us, to be granted to them.
2. Cherish also by your presence the rest of the people who are lapsed, and cheer them by your consolation, that they may not fail of the faith and of God's mercy. For those shall not be forsaken by the aid and assistance of the Lord, who meekly, humbly, and with true penitence have persevered in good works; but the divine, remedy will be granted to them also. To the hearers also, if there are any overtaken by danger, and placed near to death, let your vigilance not be wanting; let not the mercy of the Lord be denied to those that are imploring the divine favour. I bid you, beloved brethren, ever heartily farewell; and remember me. Greet the whole brotherhood in my name, and remind them and ask them to be mindful of me. Fare ye well.
------------------------------------------
EPISTLE XIII. TO THE CLERGY, CONCERNING THOSE WHO ARE IN HASTE TO RECEIVE PEACE.
1. Cyprian to the presbyters and deacons, his brethren, greeting. I have read your letter, beloved brethren, wherein you wrote that your wholesome counsel was not wanting to our brethren, that, laying aside all rash haste, they should manifest a religious patience to God, so that when by His mercy we come together, we may debate upon all kinds of things, according to the discipline of the Church, especially since it is written, "Remember from whence thou hast fallen, and repent." Now he repents, who, remembering the divine precept, with meekness and patience, and obeying the priests of God, deserves well of the Lord by his obedience and his righteous works.
2. Since, however, you intimate that some are petulant, and eagerly urge their being received to communion, and have desired in this matter that some rule should be given by me to you, I think I have sufficiently written on this subject in the last letter that was sent to you, that they who have received a certificate from the martyrs, and can be assisted by their help with the Lord in respect of their sins, if they begin to be oppressed with any sickness or risk; when they have made confession, and have received the imposition of hands on them by you in acknowledgment of their penitence, should be remitted to the Lord with the peace promised to them by the martyrs. But others who, without having received any certificate from the martyrs, are envious (since this is the cause not of a few, nor of one church, nor of one province, but of the whole world), must wait, in dependence on the protection of the Lord, for the public peace of the Church itself. For this is suitable to the modesty and the discipline, and even the life of all of us, that the chief officers meeting together with the clergy in the presence also of the people who stand fast, to whom themselves, moreover, honour is to be shown for their faith and fear, we may be able to order all things with the religiousness of a common consultation. But how irreligious is it, and mischievous, even to those themselves who are eager, that while such as are exiles, and driven from their country, and spoiled of all their property, have not yet returned to the Church, some of the lapsed should be hasty to anticipate even confessors themselves, and to enter into the Church before them! If they are so over-anxious, they have what they require in their own power, the times themselves offering them freely more than they ask. The struggle is still going forward, and the strife is daily celebrated. If they truly and with constancy repent of what they have done, and the fervour of their faith prevails, he who cannot be delayed may be crowned. I bid you, beloved brethren, ever heartily farewell; and have me in remembrance. Greet all the brotherhood in my name, and tell them to be mindful of me. Fare ye well.
----------------------------------------------------
EPISTLE XIV. TO THE PRESBYTERS AND DEACONS ASSEMBLED AT ROME. AN ACCOUNT OF HIS WITHDRAWAL AND OF THE THINGS WHICH HE DID THEREIN.
1. Cyprian to his brethren the presbyters and deacons assembled at Rome, greeting. Having ascertained, beloved brethren, that what I have done and am doing has been told to you in a somewhat garbled and untruthful manner, I have thought it necessary to write this letter to you, wherein I might give an account to you of my doings, my discipline, and my diligence; for, as the Lord's commands teach, immediately the first burst of the disturbance arose, and the people with violent clamour repeatedly demanded me, I, taking into consideration not so much my own safety as the public peace of the brethren, withdrew for a while, lest, by my over-bold presence, the tumult which had begun might be still further provoked. Nevertheless, although absent in body, I was not wanting either in spirit, or in act, or in my advice, so as to fail in any benefit that I could afford my brethren by my counsel, acccording to the Lord's precepts, in anything that my poor abilities enabled me.
2. And what I did, these thirteen letters sent forth at various times declare to you, which I have transmitted to you; in which neither counsel to the clergy, nor exhortation to the confessors, nor rebuke, when it was necessary, to the exiles, nor my appeals and persuasions to the whole brotherhood, that they should entreat the mercy of God, were wanting to the full extent that, according to the law of faith and the fear of God, with the Lord's help, my poor abilities could endeavour. But afterwards, when tortures came, my words reached both to our tortured brethren and to those who as yet were only imprisoned with a view to torture, to strengthen and console them. Moreover, when I found that those who had polluted their hands and mouths with sacrilegious contact, or had no less infected their consciences with wicked certificates, were everywhere soliciting the martyrs, and were also corrupting the confessors with importunate and excessive entreaties, so that, without any discrimination or examination of the individuals themselves, thousands of certificates were daily given, contrary to the law of the Gospel, I wrote letters in which I recalled by my advice, as much as possible, the martyrs and confessors to the Lord's commands. To the presbyters and deacons also was not wanting the vigour of the priesthood; so that some, too little mindful of discipline, and hasty, with a rash precipitation, who had already begun to communicate with the lapsed, were restrained by my interposition. Among the people, moreover, I have done what I could to quiet their minds, and have instructed them to maintain ecclesiastical discipline.
3. But afterwards, when some of the lapsed, whether of their own accord, or by the suggestion of any other, broke forth with a daring demand, as though they would endeavour by a violent effort to extort the peace that had been promised to them by the martyrs and confessors; concerning this also I wrote twice to the clergy, and commanded it to be read to them; that for the mitigation of their violence in any manner for the meantime, if any who had received a certificate from the martyrs were departing from this life, having made confession, and received the imposition of hands on them for repentance, they should be remitted to the Lord with the peace promised them by the martyrs. Nor in this did I give them a law, or rashly constitute myself the author of the direction; but as it seemed fit both that honour should be paid to the martyrs, and that the vehemence of those who were anxious to disturb everything should be restrained; and when, besides, I had read your letter which you lately wrote hither to my clergy by Crementius the sub-deacon, to the effect that assistance should be given to those who might, after their lapse, be seized with sickness, and might penitently desire communion; I judged it well to stand by your judgment, lest our proceedings, which ought to be united and to agree in all things, should in any respect be different. The cases of the rest, even though they might have received certificates from the martyrs, I ordered altogether to be put off, and to be reserved till I should be present, that so, when the Lord has given to us peace, and several bishops shall have begun to assemble into one place, we may be able to arrange and reform everything, having the advantage also of your counsel. I bid you, beloved brethren, ever heartily farewell.
-----------------------------------------------
EPISTLE XVI. THE CONFESSORS TO CYPRIAN.
All the confessors to father Cyprian, greeting. Know that, to all, concerning whom the account of what they have done since the commission of their sin has been, in your estimation, satisfactory, we have granted peace; and we have desired that this rescript should be made known by you to the other bishops also. We bid you to have peace with the holy martyrs. Lucianus wrote this, there being present of the clergy, both an exorcist and a reader.
These letters detail out the granting of indulgences in the time of St. Cyprian.
1) The indulgences were granted at the direction of the Roman Church (by her clergy during a Papal interregnum in this case).
2) The indulgences granted a reduction in the penance imposed according to what St. Cyprian terms "the discipline of the Lord".
3) The indulgence was granted in view of the "privilege" and "help" the Martyrs will have with God after their Martyrdom - the martyrs are communicating some of the efficacy of their suffering to the lapsed to reduce the penance they owe. 4) The practice was not new. Tertullian wrote 50 years prior in AD 200: "Which peace some, not having it in the Church, are accustomed to beg from the martyrs in prison; and therefore you should possess and cherish and preserve it in you that so you perchance may be able to grant it to others." ("To the Martyrs", Chapter 1)
I've never heard of this bit of history, but as K says, venality amongst our hierarchs is hardly a surprise to us. We have a simple answer to that: they were *wrong.*
And yes, it does sound like a bit of Russian "one-upsmanship!" That particular game gets played back and forth over the centuries. :-)
Whether that particular bunch of hierarchs was selling time off in purgatory (which I doubt), or forgiveness for sins (more believable -- especially given how bishops needed money, since the Turks sometimes manipulated things such that they essentially sold episcopal thrones) -- this is not a part of the consensus teaching of the Church, and we would have no heartburn about saying that they were wrong, and were not in the tradition of the Church.
What I of course meant was that there is nothing in the Orthodox consensus through the centuries that is the equivalent. I carefully did not use the straw-man of talking about Popes and priests selling indulgences for money, but rather specifically talked about beliefs that have been consistent throughout the last millenium in Catholicism.
What you have shown is that Orthodox hierarchs are capable of perverting the faith for money -- we already know that that can, did, and does happen.
What you haven't shown is an equivalent to the Roman teaching of indulgences where, as the Baltimore Catechism says, the faithful can obtain, through prayer or deeds, a "remission of the temporal punishments due for their sins," and of course so that the temporal punishments due to those in purgatory can be remitted -- especially in a contractual fashion.
Of course, you could always follow our lead and just say that the Catechism was simply wrong!
I think this is an example of Fr. John Romanides dictum that 'with the exception of well-known differences' Orthodox Christianity has more in common with Orthodox Judaism than the Christian confessions which arose in the Augustinian West.
Whenever I hear Orthodox Christians discussing the canons, I can't help but think of the Isaac Bashevis Singer story in which after the one old Jew convinces his friend that the exception for 'the days of persecution' to lighting a menorah publicly means 'the days and lands of persecution', then returns to find that his friend has lit all eight candles. "What is this?" he asks. "School of Shemai" "No one has followed the School of Shemai for a 1000 years" "Yes, and they were all wrong!" (Oddly, the Jews have a feast for the miracle which accompanied the Maccabean revolt, while the event is recorded in Scriptures only we Christians keep in our canon.)
Merely because Catholics have attempted to codify Canon law does not mean that the entirety of it is not still hotly disputed whenever someone attempts to apply it. For example, see the 30 year long dispute with the SSPX and Rome over application of canonical sanctions, supression of the society, presumption of ability to incardinate, etc., etc. Or look at any discussion over annulments. Or interference by Bishops in parishes with abnormal canonical underpinnings in their foundation and control.
Well, this is the first that I have read these letters, and I will try to do so in detail.
On a quick perusal, the following strikes me:
1. Orthodox Christians familiar with our canons are completely familiar with "epitimia" -- or penances assigned to someone by a father confessor. These are of the most ancient provenance in the Church, and generally involve (according to the canons) periods of be restricted from receiving the Mysteries.
2. Epitimia can be shortened at the discretion of a bishop or his designee, if felt in the best spiritual interest of the penitant.
3. St. Cyprian appears not to be very fond of these letters that are floating around -- he seems torn between wanting to honor and respect the martyrs (or more precisely, those awaiting martyrdom for the faith who are supposedly interceding on behalf of others,) and feeling that strictness should be applied.
4. We have been discussing purgatorial indulgences -- I see no evidence in these letters that St. Cyprian is discussing anything but the matter of those wishing to return to communion earlier than canonical strictness allows. Are you meaning to imply that those indulgences that we read about in pre Vatican II materials weren't for purgatory, but were rather to allow people to return to receiving Communion a few years early, or are you finding something in these letters of St. Cyprian about the afterlife that I'm missing?
5. St. Cyprian seems to make clear that those making decisions on these things need to examine carefully each situation, to make sure that the wise thing is being done for the good of the soul of the ones in question. He praises those who want to return to communion as wanting something good, but he also cautions that allowing such a return too quickly on the basis of these "letters from the (soon to be) martyrs" can bring a soul to ruin. His approach strikes me as a quite familiar "case by case" one that any Orthodox Christian with a spiritual father instantly recognizes. This is a far cry from a blanket indulgence granted for a set prayer or work.
6. St. Cyprian seems to be trying to put some order on these petitions by making the martyrs personally designate the specific person on whose behalf they are appealing, and by asking that granting the wishes be generally restricted to those who are close to fulfilling their canonically appointed period of not receiving communion or who are in danger of death. Again, this is a pretty case by case approach, and one that gives people the benefit of the doubt, so to speak.
7. Again, overall, this is not a very positive portrayal, and would appear to be a practice that didn't take root and become part of the universal Christian phronema. It certainly doesn't have anything to do with remitting temporal punishments in the afterlife.
Well, I am mystified that people are willing to believe in something that the Church says is not in the Scriptures! I would like to believe that what the Church does is indeed in the Scriptures, or else where did it come from?
The standard answer to that is -- the Church did it from the beginning. I beg to differ. Our customs, making the sign of the Cross, length and content of our fasts, manners of worship, bowing, kneeling, ranks of clergy, you name it -- all of it is man-mande, is not in the Scriptures, does not make or break the faith, and were not implemented on the Pentecost.
I am trying to stay focused on faith (our personal relationship with God), and not on personal opinions of individual Fathers which range from one extreme to another.
My objection to the Maccabees is that they believed (of no fault of their own) that burnt offerings atoned for the sins of the departed. They had a longing for Christ but they did not know Him. We don't practice Judaism because the concept of salvation in Judaism is not the same as in Christianity. So how is it profitable to say that burnt offerings atone for our sins?
We are taught by the Christian Scripture that we are forgiven our sins by God's mercy and that nothing we do will make us worthy of such a gift. Nothing, not even prayer. That doesn't means we can "sin boldly" as Luther suggested, because faith leads to theosis, and no one can approach the likeness of Christ and "sin boldly!"
I think in all these discussions we forget our relationship with God, which always brings back to mind the spiritual purity of the Three Little Hermits of Leo Tolstoy who, by their own admission and humility, did not know how to serve God, but they walked on water. God is not a legalist. His is Love and what can love do but offer blessings?
Saint Paul says we die once and then we are judged. Period. Based on that, we foretaste eternal bliss or perdition. What possible suffering could our departed -- whom God just saved -- be in to require our prayers if, as St. Chrystostom says, they are "near Him?" We should rejoyce that they are finally free from temptations and corruption of the flesh. It is more likely that we -- ungreatful sinners in the ocrrupt world and tempted by flesh -- need their prayers because we can still repent.
If anything, we should pray for those poor souls who, at the moment of their death, rejected God in their pride and arrogance and made it impossible for God to save them. For Love does not force itself on anyone. If it is true that, as St. Genoa, mentioned by Hermann, the Purgatory is incomparably more glorious than anything on earth, does it not seem like we should be the subject of their prayer rather than we praying for their already accomplished but not finalized salvation?
But, don't get me wrong -- I am not against praying for the dead. I do pray for the dead. I pray for them because I love them and because through prayers I send them my love, even if they don't remember me. My prayers are not beseeching Almighty God to do what He has already done in His mercy, but praising Him. I don't think the saved are in need of much comfort being "close to Him." Believing otherwise would express doubt in the salvific Love that is our Lord, as something that needs our support and without which all of God's mercy is not sufficient.
" Origen also knew Greek and he interpreted it otherwise."
You know, I've always rather liked Origen, his condemnation by the Church to the contrary notwithstanding. One of the reasons I like him is that he was often quite frank about the fact that he didn't "know" something or was simply speculating. For that reason, though I appreciate him, I'm always a bit hesitant about using him as authority for much.
"You wouldn't happen to know if any of the other Greek Fathers besides Chrysostom and Origen comment on the passage?"
I did a quick search of what I have here and on the internet and find nothing but we have a very complete set of the Fathers up at the Church. I can't get there during the week. My court schedule is pretty heavy the next three days but perhaps Sunday after Liturgy I can hit the books if I don't forget! :)
This reminds me of a conversation I had with an Orthodox cleric who was very influential on me during my early days as an Orthodox Christian. I said something disparaging about Origen in a letter to him, basically saying that if Origen said it, it must be wrong.
His reply astounded me, but changed the entire way I approached Origen. He said, "Origen was the heretic of heretics -- but he was also the father of fathers." I asked my godfather, who is a patristics scholar about this, and he likewise responded "if you don't understand Origen, you won't understand any of the fathers."
This from a man who was fully capable of detailing, ad infinitum, the errors of Origen. Origen was one of the greatest minds in the history of the Church. If you read his reply to Africanus about the historicity of the passage of Daniel and Susanna, you taste of the brilliance of his Biblical knowledge and penetrating mind.
Origen had, in some ways, the great misfortune of being the first great mind to struggle, (ultimately unsuccessfully,) with the interaction of classical (pagan) philosophy and Christian (i.e. Hebrew) thought. He articulated the first "hellenization of the Gospel," and that hellenization was roundly rejected by the Church. One could say, however, that only someone like Origen, with his deep love for Christ and his unparalleled brilliance, could have forced the other fathers of the Church produce this rejection that went on to be much of the groundwork for how we articulate our faith.
In many ways he anticipated the errors of the second hellenization that resulted from another father's attempt to integrate Christianity with pagan philosophy, but that is another story.
An indulgence is what it is, and has no necessary connection to purgatory. Should I so wish, I could go about collecting indulgences soley for my own spiritual benefit, without any heed towards te Holy Souls.
What an indulgence is, specifically, is a remission of all (plenary) or a set amount (partial) of the canonical penance due a sin, in view of the excess merits of Christ and the Saints. For example, say a saint in their lifetime performed sufficent penance for their own sins 100 times over, plus they also suffered martyrdom. They could communicate this excess of penitential acts to other members of the body of Christ by applying them to the other person. Or it could be communicated for them by the Pope or Bishops in view of the power of the keys (St. Matthew 16.19, 18.18) to bind and loose all things.
Here is where what St. Cyprian is doing comes into view. He is permitting the Martyrs to promise a share of their suffering and future prayers to the lapsed to allow the lapsed to complete their penance. The only difference here from an indulgence as practiced today is that the Martyr is not yet dead and so is granting his merits in person, and the forgiveness of penance is not for a set period of time. If we truly believe in the communion of saints, the first difference should be irrelevant. The second is also irrelevant, because St. Cyprian could have set the letters of peace as having a set term if he had so chosen.
I think what is probably confusing you is the notion that some had that you could collect indulgences of 80 days or 3 years or 15 years and that these represented a fixed reduction of time in purgatory. That is certainly not the case in reality because it is creating an exact identity between canonical penance and the temporal satisfaction due to God. The penance represents the Church's estimation of what the sinner owes God and the body of Christ for the disorders he introduced by his sins. The temporal punishment is God's reckoning in the scales of justice.
Also an indulgence applied towards purgatory is done so in the mode of a suffrage or prayer, and not after the manner of an absolution from temporal punishment. The indulgence pays what is necessary for the soul to come towards bliss - we don't presume to judge the sincerity of the dead in finalizing their penance as we might on earth in reducing penance for a sincere confession.
What you describe in bold above is precisely what we call an indulgence.
but in common understanding among Orthodox, when a Latin speaks of indulgences, he is speaking of time off in Purgatory. Are we incorrect in this?
Yes. Most people I know who try to gain indulgences do so for themselves or their friends and family still living. Generally, indulgences are given for prayers and pilgrimages, so it is an appllication of excess merit to spiritual acts for the benefit of the person performing the act that they might dispose of it as they please.
For example, say my mother is angry with me. I might pray certain prayers for her that she might overcome her anger that have indulgences attached to them, and then apply any indulgence won towards the Lord forgiving the punishment due her anger.
If people are thinking of purgatory in all this gaining of indulgences, it is with a view to their own spiritual growth and perfection so that they and their living friends and family do not need to be detained there.
The aim of indulgences is primarily spiritual perfection here on earth, not in the next life.
This common example is perhaps the simplest way of thinking about it. Read through it. Then read through it again and think of yourself as the sinner, the father as God the Father, your brother as Christ, and your friend as a fellow Christian.
Sin is like hitting a baseball through your father's window. You can run and ask forgiveness of your father for your folly, and if he is a good father, he will forgive you.
But there is still a broken window on your father's house, and by strict rights, you ought to repair it, having broken it.
Now, your father might be generous and say he will take care of it himself, or have your especially generous older brother take care of it for you. Your father might also ask that you repair it, since this is the fifth window you've broken in two months of playing baseball in the backyard, and didn't he ask you not to play baseball back there anymore after the first broken window?
Should this latter situation be the case, you might pay and repair it yourself, or perhaps your friend or generous older brother might give you the money to repair it and hire a repairman.
Whatever happens, one thing is certain - your father doesn't want to live in a house with broken windows.
An indulgence is a payment of the penance required for sin, and the payment comes from Christ and the Saints in view of your own contrition and attempts to make up for what you have done. An indulgence can only be gained by one who is contrite for and detesting of their own sins for which they are gaining the indulgence through the spiritual act. If you are not contrite, you are hardly deserving of benevolence on the part of Christ and the Saints. On the contrary, you need that much more penance. If you are contrite, the Church feels you deserve a speeding up of the fullness of the mercy of God by applying extra merit, so to speak, to the meritorious penances that you perform to gain the indulgence.
This is why the Church does not (and cannot) merely hand out indulgences for nothing, but demands that they be connected to both outward acts of faith, and inward contrition for sin.
There is a story I was told about this that is directly related to the concept of the spiritual acts needed to gain indulgences forgiving or shortening penances.
A man goes into a confessional for the first time in 20 years. He has a long list of grave sins to confess, and does so with much sincereity and contrition over the lamentable life he had been leading. The priest listens very patiently, gives him a penance of 10 Our Fatherss and 10 Hail Mary's, and starts to absolve him. The man interjects: "But Father, I have been such a wretched sinner for 20 years - Surely I deserve a greater penance!" The priest thinks this over and decides the man should only say 5 Our Father's and 5 Hail Mary's. The man can hardly believe it. He protests again that he has been a worthless sinner who has greatly offended God, and begins to weep as he again recounts some of his worst acts, and how unworthy of mercy he is. The priest thinks this over again, and says to him, "Okay, okay. Your penance is 1 Our Father and 1 Hail Mary. No I absolve your from your sins, etc. Go in peace my child, your tears of contrition and protests of unworthiness have healed your soul and pleased God far more than any penance I could give you to perform."
It just doesn't fit well with the story of the Prodigal son, imo.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.