Hieromonk Maximos, at the Anastasis Dialogue, takes issue with some comments by Father Thomas Hopko on the issue of the Latin Catholic understanding of Purgatory.
There are, in my opinion, some pretty crazy “pious” speculations on the afterlife on both sides of the isle. And it’s crucial to isolate the actual official teachings of the Roman Church on the subject from both the “pious” elaborations (which can be tolerated to an extent) and the misconceptions/polemical distortions of outsiders (which, with a little charity and humility on both sides, can be easily set aside).
The Roman Church only affirms two things about Purgatory: (1) That it exists (that is, a state or process of purification for the faithful departed on their way to eternal bliss); and (2) that we ought to offer our prayers for them here on earth.
As far as I know, the Orthodox beef with Purgatory at the Council of Florence was with an overly literalistic description of the “fires” of Purgatory (again, such things fall outside of the category of official dogma in the Roman Church). There was no dispute over the existence of a kind of purification after death, nor with the idea that our prayers can assist the faithful departed in their preparation to meet the Lord in eternity.
As an Orthodox Christian, I can’t see anything church-dividing here. There are a lot things about the way that Roman Catholics sometimes talk about Purgatory that will be provocative and offensive to Eastern ears; but, again, this should be distinguished from serious dogmatic disagreement.
I agree entirely. This and many other issues of this sort have been bent to misperception and bias without real understanding. Many people treat churches as glorified clubs when a more sober approach to salvation should be at the forefront. Excellent post.
Purgatory is pretty low on my list of issues dividing Rome from Orthodoxy. Not saying it’s not an issue at all. But its not a big one IMO.
ICXC
John
I don’t have any problem with the Roman teaching on purgatory. I do have a problem with the closely related Roman teaching on indulgences. I’m guessing if it weren’t for indulgences, there wouldn’t be much of a problem with purgatory. Joe
There’s a lot of misunderstanding re indulgences. I like then-Cardinal Ratzinger’s take on the subject in The Ratzinger Report–a book well worth reading for many reasons.
Indulgences are essentially yet another grace, another help, another means of salvation. I for one need all the help I can get…and I’ll take whatever help Christ gives me through His Church!
Diane
>Indulgences are essentially yet another grace, another help, another means of salvation. I for one need all the help I can get…and I’ll take whatever help Christ gives me through His Church!
As officially taught, indulgences cannot be “a means of salvation” because they only remit temporal punishment for venial sins. Only someone already saved can receive an indulgence. Joe
Thanks for not taking all the “pious” talk about purgatory and making it what we Catholics actually believe. It’s true that some mystics have had visions of Purgatory, but these are not to be taken as official doctrine.
joe’s comments above are a bit inaccurate about indulgences. Indulgences remit the temporal punishment due for sins (mortal or venial) already forgiven in confession. Indulgences can only be obtained for either yourself or for the souls in purgatory, they cannot be obtained for another living person. However, like I said, you can obtain indulgences for yourself, which makes sense since when we do penance for our sins, we are in fact obtaining partial indulgences for ourselves. So, you don’t necessarily have to be saved to receive an indulgence. (Though obviously you can’t gain an indulgence for someone in hell.)
It’s the plenary indulgences that most people have a problem with. “An indulgence is the remission in the eyes of God of the temporal punishment due to sins whose culpable element has already been taken away [i.e. forgiven in Sacramental Confession]. The Christian faithful who are rightly disposed and observe the definite, prescribed conditions gain this remission through the effective assistance of the Church, which, as the minister of redemption, authoritatively distributes and applies the treasury of the expiatory works of Christ and the Saints.” – Handbook of Indulgences (the official book of Catholic Church’s teachings on indulgences).
From the Catholic perspective the possibility of indulgences comes from the Church’s authority to dispense the mercy of Christ.
Still, it should be remembered that indulgences only remit temporal punishment, not sin itself. If we only have venial sin, then that does not keep us from being saved (even if we might have to suffer some temporal punishment in purgatory), but mortal sin does separate us from God and can only be forgiven by Sacramental Confession.
Thank you, Roman Sacristan!
Sacristan-
I dide misspeak- indulgences would also apply to the temporal punsihment for forgiven mortal sins. But my point remains- indulgences do not have to do with salvation, because they only remit temporal punishment, not eternal. Joe
[…] apparently done by Cardinal Newman. For further clarification on a rather difficult topic, refer to this post from blogger Cathedra Unitatis, an Eastern Orthodox Christian writing about the East-West […]