Is purgatory an indulgence?

[Catholica]

But the Truths of today should be the Truths of the past as well seeing nothing is new under the sun.

Isn't the New Covenant something "new under the sun"?

I've never read anything in Jewish texts about a place of purification.

The Jews prayed for their dead for up to a year after they died.  What for?

[mclees8]

Abraham's bosom being synonymous with heaven also makes sense, because in scripture I don,t find a middle ground. suffering loss will be a punishment but i don't see it like doing a stint in prison or some dungeon. How long would one have to serve?

god bless

Abraham's bosom is not "synonymous with heaven", as the word "synonym" means two words that mean the same thing or nearly the same thing.  Heaven was not yet open for the Jews - Jesus through his work on the cross opened heaven up.  It is only because heaven is now open and we are able to receive the beatific vision that there is a need for purgatory, because we as sinful people are mostly not ready to be in God's presence when we die.

Another thing to consider is that, when Jesus died, he descended to the dead.  This is in the creed.  The reason he was there was to bring those in Abraham's bosom into heaven.  I don't know why the righteous dead would need to await the great white throne judgment.  They are already judged as saved from hell.

No one knows how long one must remain in purgatory.  It could be very quick, or it could be a long time.  Logically, it makes sense that one who is less pure would spend more time there than one who is more pure, or one who has more attachment to sin would need to spend more time there than one who has less attachment to sin. 

I believe that once one understands what Catholics say that purgatory actually is, they can better understand how to interpret 1 Corinthians 3:10-15, because we will suffer loss, though we will still be saved, but only as through fire.

God Bless.

Andre

Let me put it another way. I believe  Abraham's bosom is in heaven and not a place out side of it. In fact I think it is more metaphorical in this verse.

Jesus descended to hell to take the keys. it says nothing of retrieving anyone from purgatory or Abraham's bosom. This was more a symbolic  act that says Jesus has defeated Satan, and  death. Now death has no more dominion over those who believe

Suffering loss for ones works is that for them, because of wrong attitudes and motives for what they have done his half hearted works have no honor or recognition. His works are straw hay, and stubble.

[chestertonrules]

Jesus descended to hell to take the keys. it says nothing of retrieving anyone from purgatory or Abraham's bosom. This was more a symbolic  act that says Jesus has defeated Satan, and  death. Now death has no more dominion over those who believe

Suffering loss for ones works is that for them, because of wrong attitudes and motives for what they have done his half hearted works have no honor or recognition. His works are straw hay, and stubble.

What do you make of this:

1 Peter 3
18For Christ died for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, to bring you to God. He was put to death in the body but made alive by the Spirit, 19through whom also he went and preached to the spirits in prison 20who disobeyed long ago when God waited patiently in the days of Noah while the ark was being built.

[LightHammer]

But the Truths of today should be the Truths of the past as well seeing nothing is new under the sun.

Isn't the New Covenant something "new under the sun"?

I've never read anything in Jewish texts about a place of purification.

The Jews prayed for their dead for up to a year after they died.  What for?

The Jews prayed for the dead because they believed the dead were meant to rejoin their ancestors in the afterlife. The Torah teaches that Sheol is dark and lowly and therefor living Jews prayed for guidance for their dead so that they my find their to the halls of the ancestors and not wander the underworld lost and confused before the resurrection.

Where is the Bosom of Abraham even separated into a purification realm and a place of punishment? I know through Christ's story of Lazarus and the Rich Man that there existed a place of punishment but never have I heard of a place of purification in Judaism.

[Selene]

The Jews prayed for the dead because they believed the dead were meant to rejoin their ancestors in the afterlife. The Torah teaches that Sheol is dark and lowly and therefor living Jews prayed for guidance for their dead so that they my find their to the halls of the ancestors and not wander the underworld lost and confused before the resurrection.

Where is the Bosom of Abraham even separated into a purification realm and a place of punishment? I know through Christ's story of Lazarus and the Rich Man that there existed a place of punishment but never have I heard of a place of purification in Judaism.

According to the Jewish weblink below, the Jews believed that the soul must be purified before he/she goes to Heaven.  According to the article: 

Then why is Kaddish recited for only 11 months, when the mourning period is 12 months? According to Jewish tradition, the soul must spend some time purifying itself before it can enter heaven. The maximum time required for purification is 12 months, for the most evil person. To recite Kaddish for 12 months would imply that the parent was the type who needed 12 months of purification! To avoid this implication, the Sages decreed that a son should recite Kaddish for only eleven months.

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/death.html

[Macrina]

Let me put it another way. I believe  Abraham's bosom is in heaven and not a place out side of it. In fact I think it is more metaphorical in this verse.

That is what you call a theolegoumenon (theological opinion). Roman Catholics from what I understand, are allowed to make such speculations about "limbo". They are not allowed to speculate about purgatory because it is not a theolegoumenon but a dogma of their churches.

Jesus descended to hell to take the keys. it says nothing of retrieving anyone from purgatory or Abraham's bosom. This was more a symbolic  act that says Jesus has defeated Satan, and  death. Now death has no more dominion over those who believe

Purgatory and Abrahams bosom are both related to 'death'. Here is an icon by Manuel Panselinos


"The Lord is depicted with bright garments within a transparent and interrupted circular "glory" that follows the contour of the cross-engraven crown of light around His head. The "glory" is faintly noticeable above His head. The Lord, having descended into Hades with authority, is seen with a firm footing and a powerful stance upon the gates of Hades, fallen in the shape of an X. In His left hand, Christ is holding a huge Cross, the symbol of victory. With His right hand (where "the mark of the nails" is obvious, as well as on His feet) Christ is raising out of the cave of Hades the forefather Adam, who symbolizes the human race, with a vigorous and unilateral motion. As a result of this movement, the garment of the triumphant Christ is shown as being blown upwards by the wind.

Together with Adam, Eve also stretches forth her arms in a beseeching manner. Behind them and a little higher is St. John the Forerunner, who is indicating the Lord. The space is completed with the righteous Abel, a young, beardless man with a long shepherd's staff and an ecstatic expression. In the dark cave of Hades, "the locks of death," the age-old bars and chains are seen as if shattered by a supernatural power.

At the top of the trapezoid composition two angels are bending over behind the craggy peaks and are sharing in the triumph of the cosmic and eschatological victory of the Theanthropos Lord." info from orthodoxinfo.com

Icons are written theology although they are pictures. If words are to confusing for a person, or they are illiterate as were many in the early church, icons spoke in a manner written words could not.

[winsome]

Scriptural basis for purgatory?

From a different thread -

Jesus didn't mention "purgatory" because it's a new word. The word purgatory is just another word to describe Abraham's Bosom. Jesus didn't spend a whole lot of time on that because he was dealing with good, God fearing Jews, just like himself. They all new all of this stuff because they had grown up as Jews. Are you following me? When Jesus, Peter, Paul, or anyone else in the Bible is talking to someone or some people, they aren't speaking to you or me, they are speaking specifically to the audience they are addressing.

According to the beliefs of Jews like Jesus, when you die you go to Sheol. Sheol got translated to Hades, and from that to Hell. Are you still with me?

Sheol is divided into 2 parts. One part is for the punishment of sins, the other part is a place where you go to be "purged" of your sins so that you may enter Heaven sinless. "Purged" as in Purgatory. This is where that comes from. The reason it isn't "biblical" is because it didn't need to be, everyone at the time already knew it.

It's these and other reasons why "Sola Scriptura" just does not work as a basis for a belief system.

But the Truths of today should be the Truths of the past as well seeing nothing is new under the sun. I've never read anything in Jewish texts about a place of purification. Sola Scriptura isn't at fault here. It is those in power who think they can create any belief from any reasoning and it is absolute.

To add to what Selene posted:

"According to Judaism, the purifying process that a sullied soul undergoes to cleanse it from its spiritual uncleanliness is a temporary one, and is restorative in its intent, and not punitive, as many mistakenly believe. Ultimately, all Jews have portion in the World to Come, as do Righteous Gentiles, non-Jews who observe the Seven Noahide Commandments.

[winsome]

Some more scripture.
And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come. (Mt 12:32)

So some sins can be forgiven in the world to come. Now what world would that be?
Can sins be forgiven in hell.
Can you enter heaven with sins unforgiven?

No, you have approached Mount Zion and the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and countless angels in festal gathering, and the assembly of the firstborn enrolled in heaven, and God the judge of all, and the spirits of the just made perfect, (Heb 12:22-23).

The spirits of the just have been made perfect. Where were they made perfect? You must be perfect to enter heaven.

[desertknight]

The vast majority of Protestants believe in a final purification before entering heaven as well.  As nothing unclean is even allowed to approach Mt. Zion, it is a certainty that we must undergo a purification before entering.  It was universally believed and adhered to by faithful Jews and by all Christians until very recent history within Protestantism.  Even Wiki gets it right...

"Glorification is the Protestant alternative to purgatory, as it is "the means by which the elect receive perfection before entering into the kingdom of Heaven."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glorification#Receiving_of_Perfection

It is highly problematic to describe how the impure can enter heaven without it.  The Orthodox leave it largely as a mystery, which is the norm for them.  We Catholics define it through scholasticism.  The Protestants call it something else and then claim that it is something different than "Purgatory" which of course...it isn't.

[Macrina]

Then however we look at it, purgatory is an indulgence, that is according to the Roman catholic understanding or dogma of indulgence.
It just is not an indulgence given by the Church herself, but rather by God.

Do we agree?

[winsome]

Then however we look at it, purgatory is an indulgence, that is according to the Roman catholic understanding or dogma of indulgence.
It just is not an indulgence given by the Church herself, but rather by God.

Do we agree?

How is it an indulgence?

From the Oxford English Dictionary
indulgence
   noun
1   the action or fact of indulging. a thing that is indulged in; a luxury.
2   the state or attitude of being indulgent or tolerant.
3   an extension of the time in which a bill or debt has to be paid.
4   chiefly historical (in the Roman Catholic Church) a grant by the Pope of remission of the temporal punishment in purgatory still due for sins after absolution.

I can't see that usages 1 & 2 have relevance here.

Usage 3 - Purgatory is not an extension of time in which a debt has to be paid, but the occasion of the paying of the debt.

Usage 4 - The Indulgence as a remission of temporal punishment by the Church is not Purgatory but something applied to those in Purgatory.

[Macrina]

Winsome have you been following the thread. There seemed to be a strong consensus that purgatory is related to purification.

It was established in the beginning of the thread that the Roman church, along with others in their fashion, granted "indulgence" to sinners in the church so they could make more than their final confession (just before their death) after baptism. As this was more merciful than excommunicating folks for sinning after baptism.

Then what point are you making now. That the church, specifically the Roman church, has authority of some kind over the purification which occurs in purgatory. If so, I believe that is out of bounds to declare such.

Am I understanding you?

[mclees8]

Let me put it another way. I believe  Abraham's bosom is in heaven and not a place out side of it. In fact I think it is more metaphorical in this verse.

That is what you call a theolegoumenon (theological opinion). Roman Catholics from what I understand, are allowed to make such speculations about "limbo". They are not allowed to speculate about purgatory because it is not a theolegoumenon but a dogma of their churches.

Jesus descended to hell to take the keys. it says nothing of retrieving anyone from purgatory or Abraham's bosom. This was more a symbolic  act that says Jesus has defeated Satan, and  death. Now death has no more dominion over those who believe

Purgatory and Abrahams bosom are both related to 'death'. Here is an icon by Manuel Panselinos


"The Lord is depicted with bright garments within a transparent and interrupted circular "glory" that follows the contour of the cross-engraven crown of light around His head. The "glory" is faintly noticeable above His head. The Lord, having descended into Hades with authority, is seen with a firm footing and a powerful stance upon the gates of Hades, fallen in the shape of an X. In His left hand, Christ is holding a huge Cross, the symbol of victory. With His right hand (where "the mark of the nails" is obvious, as well as on His feet) Christ is raising out of the cave of Hades the forefather Adam, who symbolizes the human race, with a vigorous and unilateral motion. As a result of this movement, the garment of the triumphant Christ is shown as being blown upwards by the wind.

Together with Adam, Eve also stretches forth her arms in a beseeching manner. Behind them and a little higher is St. John the Forerunner, who is indicating the Lord. The space is completed with the righteous Abel, a young, beardless man with a long shepherd's staff and an ecstatic expression. In the dark cave of Hades, "the locks of death," the age-old bars and chains are seen as if shattered by a supernatural power.

At the top of the trapezoid composition two angels are bending over behind the craggy peaks and are sharing in the triumph of the cosmic and eschatological victory of the Theanthropos Lord." info from orthodoxinfo.com

Icons are written theology although they are pictures. If words are to confusing for a person, or they are illiterate as were many in the early church, icons spoke in a manner written words could not.

Both related to death. How so? The true picture is quit clear. the insensitive rich man was clearly in hell, which is the second death, while the beggar was resurrected to life because he was with Abraham. it says there was a great gulf between them so that one could no longer pass from one to the other. This clearly depicts heaven and hell.  Abraham's bosom is picture of heaven and a place f comforting, not a place of further punishment for sin.

As for purgatory well we all probably deserve more punishment. Let God be the judge

Remember Jesus said there are two resurrections. The resurrection to life and the resurrection to death. Hence we have the resurrection to heaven and hell. No middle ground.

God bless

[winsome]

Winsome have you been following the thread. There seemed to be a strong consensus that purgatory is related to purification.

It was established in the beginning of the thread that the Roman church, along with others in their fashion, granted "indulgence" to sinners in the church so they could make more than their final confession (just before their death) after baptism. As this was more merciful than excommunicating folks for sinning after baptism.

Then what point are you making now. That the church, specifically the Roman church, has authority of some kind over the purification which occurs in purgatory. If so, I believe that is out of bounds to declare such.

Am I understanding you?

Yes, Purgatory is bout purification but that does not make Purgatory an indulgence.

You claimed at the beginning:
It is my understanding that according to the Latin understanding, this situation of the faithful in the church came to be known as an "indulgence" of the church.
Meaning sinners are tolerated by the church, with the ideal they will become saints.
But I didn't see anyone agreeing with that.

[desertknight]

Winsome is correct.  An indulgence has nothing to do with "purifying".  The only thing an indulgence is, is the remission of temporal punishment that the Church through her authority has the right to impose on the faithful.  If a priest through the Church, both east or west, has the power to impose penance on the faithful, then they certainly have the authority to remit it.  It is that simple.  The specifics of what happens in purgatory is unknown to us.

[Macrina]

Both related to death. How so? The true picture is quit clear. the insensitive rich man was clearly in hell, which is the second death, while the beggar was resurrected to life because he was with Abraham. it says there was a great gulf between them so that one could no longer pass from one to the other. This clearly depicts heaven and hell.  Abraham's bosom is picture of heaven and a place f comforting, not a place of further punishment for sin.

Semantics.....aahhh

Aren't both persons of the parable dead, as in not on the earth? Yes they are.

The 'gulf' is representative of sin. At the time the parable was spoken Jesus had not broken down those doors of death (as seen in the icon I posted).
Jesus was speaking to the Jews about their situation and trying to get them to understand who He was and why He was sent.

The new covenant replaced the old with that which is better.

I have not agreed in this thread, that Abraham's bosom is a place of further punishment. You may have me confused with another poster.

[Macrina]

Winsome have you been following the thread. There seemed to be a strong consensus that purgatory is related to purification.

It was established in the beginning of the thread that the Roman church, along with others in their fashion, granted "indulgence" to sinners in the church so they could make more than their final confession (just before their death) after baptism. As this was more merciful than excommunicating folks for sinning after baptism.

Then what point are you making now. That the church, specifically the Roman church, has authority of some kind over the purification which occurs in purgatory. If so, I believe that is out of bounds to declare such.

Am I understanding you?

Yes, Purgatory is bout purification but that does not make Purgatory an indulgence.

You claimed at the beginning:
It is my understanding that according to the Latin understanding, this situation of the faithful in the church came to be known as an "indulgence" of the church.
Meaning sinners are tolerated by the church, with the ideal they will become saints.
But I didn't see anyone agreeing with that.

I just related the historical facts of the matter. If you disagree with the church's history, then show me the facts otherwise.

[Macrina]

Winsome is correct.  An indulgence has nothing to do with "purifying".  The only thing an indulgence is, is the remission of temporal punishment that the Church through her authority has the right to impose on the faithful.  If a priest through the Church, both east or west, has the power to impose penance on the faithful, then they certainly have the authority to remit it.  It is that simple.  The specifics of what happens in purgatory is unknown to us.

If indulgence has nothing to do with 'purifying' in the sense of sanctifying the saints, then why bother doing it.

I believe I already stated I'm Orthodox and do not understand this. In Orthodoxy it's pretty simple. The priest hears your confession as a witness, but has no power to remit any sins, as only God has such authority.
So our confession is like that of confessing sin before the church and asking forgiveness. While the church does forgive us, that does not guarantee that God has. That includes the result of penance.

[winsome]

Winsome is correct.  An indulgence has nothing to do with "purifying".  The only thing an indulgence is, is the remission of temporal punishment that the Church through her authority has the right to impose on the faithful.  If a priest through the Church, both east or west, has the power to impose penance on the faithful, then they certainly have the authority to remit it.  It is that simple.  The specifics of what happens in purgatory is unknown to us.

If indulgence has nothing to do with 'purifying' in the sense of sanctifying the saints, then why bother doing it.

Take Jesus' parable of the man who owed a huge debt (Mt 18:23-34). At the end he says: Then in anger his master handed him over to the torturers until he should pay back the whole debt.

There is an implication that when the debt was paid he would be released. Now where was the man until he paid the debt? Not in Hell because you cannot get out of there. Not in heaven because there are no torturers in heaven. This is taken as a parable about forgiveness, but also about Purgatory.

We will be let out when we pay back the whole debt.

The Church believes it has the keys to an infinite treasury of merit, of Christ and of all the good deeds of the saints. The Church can pay some of that debt for us out of that treasury of merit. This is an indulgence

[winsome]

I believe I already stated I'm Orthodox and do not understand this. In Orthodoxy it's pretty simple. The priest hears your confession as a witness, but has no power to remit any sins, as only God has such authority.
So our confession is like that of confessing sin before the church and asking forgiveness. While the church does forgive us, that does not guarantee that God has. That includes the result of penance.

If you do not bvelieve that the priest has the authority to forgive sins then how do you understand:
(Jesus) said to them again, "Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, so I send you.

[Catholica]

If indulgence has nothing to do with 'purifying' in the sense of sanctifying the saints, then why bother doing it.

Indulgence is not a verb, but a noun - an indulgence.  It is a thing, not an action.  I just wanted to clarify that.

Purgatory exists for two purposes, as I see it: one is purifying from attachments to sin, the other is to remit temporal punishment due to sin.  When a person gains an indulgence (or someone else gains it and then applies it to them when they are in purgatory), then our Lord remits part of the temporal punishment due to sin.

For example (this is not theologically precise but I am using it as a means to prove a point - the "years" are just for example, and the amount of time is truly unknown):

1. A person commits sins that God's justice requires 500 years in Purgatory due to temporal punishment for sin (this is in separate from purification needed for attachment to sin).
2. They gain a partial indulgence or have a partial indulgence applied to their soul.
3. Now that same person now only requires 400 years in Purgatory due to temporal punishment for sin (in addition to purification).

So an indulgence reduces the time that a person must spend in purgatory because of the sins that they have committed.  They still need to be made pure from their attachments to sin.

Does that make more sense to you, Macrina?  Purgatory to a Catholic is not just for purification from attachments to sin, but also a place for God's just punishments for evil works committed (forgiven but not fully paid for through penance).  In his mercy, as we are one body of Christ, and through the Church's power to bind and loose, we are able to receive the benefits from penance that others have performed, and thus have that mercy from applied to our souls (reducing the time needed for God's Just punishment).

Andre

[chosenone]

If indulgence has nothing to do with 'purifying' in the sense of sanctifying the saints, then why bother doing it.

Indulgence is not a verb, but a noun - an indulgence.  It is a thing, not an action.  I just wanted to clarify that.

Purgatory exists for two purposes, as I see it: one is purifying from attachments to sin, the other is to remit temporal punishment due to sin.  When a person gains an indulgence (or someone else gains it and then applies it to them when they are in purgatory), then our Lord remits part of the temporal punishment due to sin.

For example (this is not theologically precise but I am using it as a means to prove a point - the "years" are just for example, and the amount of time is truly unknown):

1. A person commits sins that God's justice requires 500 years in Purgatory due to temporal punishment for sin (this is in separate from purification needed for attachment to sin).
2. They gain a partial indulgence or have a partial indulgence applied to their soul.
3. Now that same person now only requires 400 years in Purgatory due to temporal punishment for sin (in addition to purification).

So an indulgence reduces the time that a person must spend in purgatory because of the sins that they have committed.  They still need to be made pure from their attachments to sin.

Does that make more sense to you, Macrina?  Purgatory to a Catholic is not just for purification from attachments to sin, but also a place for God's just punishments for evil works committed (forgiven but not fully paid for through penance).  In his mercy, as we are one body of Christ, and through the Church's power to bind and loose, we are able to receive the benefits from penance that others have performed, and thus have that mercy from applied to our souls (reducing the time needed for God's Just punishment).

Andre

None of this is in anyway Biblical.

[Catholica]

None of this is in anyway Biblical.

Thanks for your opinion, but neither Catholics nor Orthodox (as the OP, Macrina, is) are believers in the man-made sola scriptura doctrine.  So you saying that something is unbiblical (even after copious amounts of biblical support for purgatory has already been provided ad nauseum) is irrelevant and off topic.

The Catholic Church has the power to bind and loose.  That is where indulgences come from.  Binding and loosing and Jesus' conveying of authority to His Church are both biblical.

[desertknight]

If indulgence has nothing to do with 'purifying' in the sense of sanctifying the saints, then why bother doing it.

One does not "do" an indulgence, one receives one.    

I believe I already stated I'm Orthodox and do not understand this. In Orthodoxy it's pretty simple. The priest hears your confession as a witness, but has no power to remit any sins, as only God has such authority.

As much as it is an Orthodox obsession to stress it's differences with Catholicism, your sacrament of confession and it's doctrinal definition are no different than Catholicism's.   Orthodox priests do have the authority to absolve sin given them through Christ, but it is only He that actually does so.  It is no different than with we Catholics.  The priest, as in the Mass or Divine Liturgy, acts in persona Christi.   As the Catholic Encyclopaedia states it, "No Catholic believes that a priest, simply as an individual man, however pious or learned, has power to forgive sins. This power belongs to God alone; but He can and does exercise it through the ministration of men."

So our confession is like that of confessing sin before the church and asking forgiveness. While the church does forgive us, that does not guarantee that God has. That includes the result of penance.

Well, either I am not understanding what you are saying or you do not understand your own church's doctrine concerning this.  The Orthodox priest, as the representative of Christ and His Church very much has the power to pronounce the forgiveness of sins as the act of absolution is virtually identical to the Catholic one, i.e., "The Grace of the All-Holy Spirit, through my insignificance, has loosened and granted to you forgiveness.

[desertknight]

"after this confession and with a firm intention to no longer commit such sins, with God's help, receives from the Priest, who has the power to bind and loose received via the Apostles and their successors in the Church, Absolution. "Absolution" is actually expressed by the Priest praying that the Lord God "may forgive, through His Grace and love of mankind, all thy sins." This prayer is guaranteed its effectiveness by the aforementioned bestowal: "whatsoever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven." The Priest also, as a simple human being and member of the Church, adds his own personal forgiveness (as every Christian is bound to do: "forgive one another your trespasses")"

http://www.orthodoxresearchinstitute.org/articles/liturgics/tikhon_penance.htm

"Christ wrought a miracle to show that He had power to forgive sins and that this power could be exerted not only in heaven but also on earth. This power, moreover, He transmitted to Peter and the other Apostles. To Peter He says: "And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven" (Matthew 16:19). Later He says to all the Apostles: "Amen I say to you, whatsoever you shall bind upon earth, shall be bound also in heaven; and whatsoever you shall loose upon earth, shall be loosed also in heaven" (Matthew 18:18)."

"Finally, the confession is made not in the secrecy of the penitent's heart nor to a layman as friend and advocate, nor to a representative of human authority, but to a duly ordained priest with requisite jurisdiction and with the "power of the keys", i.e., the power to forgive sins which Christ granted to His Church."

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11618c.htm

[mclees8]

Both related to death. How so? The true picture is quit clear. the insensitive rich man was clearly in hell, which is the second death, while the beggar was resurrected to life because he was with Abraham. it says there was a great gulf between them so that one could no longer pass from one to the other. This clearly depicts heaven and hell.  Abraham's bosom is picture of heaven and a place f comforting, not a place of further punishment for sin.

Semantics.....aahhh

Aren't both persons of the parable dead, as in not on the earth? Yes they are.

The 'gulf' is representative of sin. At the time the parable was spoken Jesus had not broken down those doors of death (as seen in the icon I posted).
Jesus was speaking to the Jews about their situation and trying to get them to understand who He was and why He was sent.

The new covenant replaced the old with that which is better.

I have not agreed in this thread, that Abraham's bosom is a place of further punishment. You may have me confused with another poster.

We are all destined to die the first death in this mortal body but that is not what we are to fear, neither does it have anything to do with spiritual life and death. It is spiritual life and death that we must be concerned with for they are both eternal and final. This is the point Jesus was making. the time to make eternal choices  is now and before the first death.   The story was not just for the Jews, but a solemn look at the consequences of a self centered life that knows not Christ   The gulf is a picture of a resolute finality. There is no changing things at this point. The chance to find life in heaven is over for those in hell.

God bless

[Macrina]

"after this confession and with a firm intention to no longer commit such sins, with God's help, receives from the Priest, who has the power to bind and loose received via the Apostles and their successors in the Church, Absolution. "Absolution" is actually expressed by the Priest praying that the Lord God "may forgive, through His Grace and love of mankind, all thy sins." This prayer is guaranteed its effectiveness by the aforementioned bestowal: "whatsoever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven." The Priest also, as a simple human being and member of the Church, adds his own personal forgiveness (as every Christian is bound to do: "forgive one another your trespasses")"

http://www.orthodoxresearchinstitute.org/articles/liturgics/tikhon_penance.htm

________________________________

As an Orthodox I can tell you exactly what the priest says to me at confession. Verbatim, "while I do not have the power to absolve thee of thy sins, I pray that the Lord may forgive you through His grace....etc (see bolded in above article), and then he forgives me himself. However, as you can see he makes no absolute pronouncement, but rather prays for my forgiveness.

Forgiveness is paramount to not offending Christ. If we offend someone we have offended the Lord Himself. Without such forgiveness the Lord could not forgive us. 

And btw, we do not do penance as Catholics do. ie. saying some number of prayers. Orthodox have a prayer rule given them to keep, if they ask for one. And if they don't then they have to confess that, and the priest as physician in the church, makes inquiry to heal the illness.

[Macrina]

Winsome is correct.  An indulgence has nothing to do with "purifying".  The only thing an indulgence is, is the remission of temporal punishment that the Church through her authority has the right to impose on the faithful.  If a priest through the Church, both east or west, has the power to impose penance on the faithful, then they certainly have the authority to remit it.  It is that simple.  The specifics of what happens in purgatory is unknown to us.

If indulgence has nothing to do with 'purifying' in the sense of sanctifying the saints, then why bother doing it.

Take Jesus' parable of the man who owed a huge debt (Mt 18:23-34). At the end he says: Then in anger his master handed him over to the torturers until he should pay back the whole debt.

There is an implication that when the debt was paid he would be released. Now where was the man until he paid the debt? Not in Hell because you cannot get out of there. Not in heaven because there are no torturers in heaven. This is taken as a parable about forgiveness, but also about Purgatory.

We will be let out when we pay back the whole debt.

The Church believes it has the keys to an infinite treasury of merit, of Christ and of all the good deeds of the saints. The Church can pay some of that debt for us out of that treasury of merit. This is an indulgence

Ok, I don't understand that parable in the same sense as you do. To me God is showing in the parable that we are to be as forgiving as He is.

The fathers give spiritual interpretation to the punishment described here. The man represents the soul, the wife represents the body, and the children represent the person's deeds. Thus, the body and the deeds are given over to slavery, that is to Satan, so that the soul might  possibly be saved (also see 1 Cor. 5:5)


"The Church believes it has the keys to an infinite treasury of merit, of Christ and of all the good deeds of the saints. The Church can pay some of that debt for us out of that treasury of merit. This is an indulgence

Orthodox call that the concept of "created" grace. Something we don't agree with because we believe that grace is uncreated, so you can't create more for whatever reason.

[Macrina]

If indulgence has nothing to do with 'purifying' in the sense of sanctifying the saints, then why bother doing it.

Indulgence is not a verb, but a noun - an indulgence.  It is a thing, not an action.  I just wanted to clarify that.

Purgatory exists for two purposes, as I see it: one is purifying from attachments to sin, the other is to remit temporal punishment due to sin.  When a person gains an indulgence (or someone else gains it and then applies it to them when they are in purgatory), then our Lord remits part of the temporal punishment due to sin.

For example (this is not theologically precise but I am using it as a means to prove a point - the "years" are just for example, and the amount of time is truly unknown):

1. A person commits sins that God's justice requires 500 years in Purgatory due to temporal punishment for sin (this is in separate from purification needed for attachment to sin).
2. They gain a partial indulgence or have a partial indulgence applied to their soul.
3. Now that same person now only requires 400 years in Purgatory due to temporal punishment for sin (in addition to purification).

So an indulgence reduces the time that a person must spend in purgatory because of the sins that they have committed.  They still need to be made pure from their attachments to sin.

Does that make more sense to you, Macrina?  Purgatory to a Catholic is not just for purification from attachments to sin, but also a place for God's just punishments for evil works committed (forgiven but not fully paid for through penance).  In his mercy, as we are one body of Christ, and through the Church's power to bind and loose, we are able to receive the benefits from penance that others have performed, and thus have that mercy from applied to our souls (reducing the time needed for God's Just punishment).

Andre

I understand purgatory is meant in the sense of a noun. ie. a provision given to the faithful
Which is why I said, can't God provide such a thing if He so desires to. I don't see why not.

As I originally stated, I'm Orthodox so I don't understand this penal approach.
If your forgiven, then, well your forgiven.
Orthodox don't teach you can pay for sin. Or that God paid for sin. God just forgives sin.
This doesn't make you perfect either, just forgiven.
Purification from attachments to sin, in Orthodoxy is overcoming the passions as did Christ. Something that is a life long ordeal.

[Macrina]

Both related to death. How so? The true picture is quit clear. the insensitive rich man was clearly in hell, which is the second death, while the beggar was resurrected to life because he was with Abraham. it says there was a great gulf between them so that one could no longer pass from one to the other. This clearly depicts heaven and hell.  Abraham's bosom is picture of heaven and a place f comforting, not a place of further punishment for sin.

Semantics.....aahhh

Aren't both persons of the parable dead, as in not on the earth? Yes they are.

The 'gulf' is representative of sin. At the time the parable was spoken Jesus had not broken down those doors of death (as seen in the icon I posted).
Jesus was speaking to the Jews about their situation and trying to get them to understand who He was and why He was sent.

The new covenant replaced the old with that which is better.

I have not agreed in this thread, that Abraham's bosom is a place of further punishment. You may have me confused with another poster.

We are all destined to die the first death in this mortal body but that is not what we are to fear, neither does it have anything to do with spiritual life and death. It is spiritual life and death that we must be concerned with for they are both eternal and final. This is the point Jesus was making. the time to make eternal choices  is now and before the first death.   The story was not just for the Jews, but a solemn look at the consequences of a self centered life that knows not Christ   The gulf is a picture of a resolute finality. There is no changing things at this point. The chance to find life in heaven is over for those in hell.

God bless

Mclees are you a LDS or Mormon? I kinda get that sense from your posts.just curious

On "Abraham's bosom" from an Orthodox perspective.
Abraham's bosom means heaven. Abraham is mentioned among all the righteous because, in stark contrast to the rich man, Abraham showed hospitality to strangers (Gen. 18:1-8). The "rich man....was buried": The fathers see this as illustrating the state of his merciless soul, buried by the pleasures of the flesh. He was already buried in life by "couches, rugs, furnishings, sweet oils, perfumes, large quantities of wine, varieties of food, and flatterers" St John Chrysostom. That the rich man remains unnamed indicates that he is ultimately forgotten (see Ps 9:6)

On the subject you brought up of "first and second death". (ref. Rev. 20:4-6)
In Orthodoxy, those who have died for their "their witness to Jesus" are in heaven living and reigning with Christ (Rev. 5:9, 10, Matt 19:18, 2 Tim 2:12) as royal priests (Rev. 1:6, 5:9, 10, Is 61:6, 1 Pet 2:9,10) while the church serves Him here on earth. "The first resurrection" is the heavenly life of souls who have died in Christ before His Second Coming. Those not in Christ who die are in Hades awaiting the resurrection of the body at His coming. For the righteous saints with Christ, the "second death has no power". These righteous spirits (Heb 12:23) await only the reuniting of soul and body after their final judgment, when all things are made new. Hell or Hades (Sheol), where sinners' souls are separated from their bodies, will give up its dead to Gehenna, the lake of fire that burns with sulfur, which is eternal damnation. Sinners will be excluded from the blessedness of the age to come. Hell cannot harm the victorious in Christ.

[desertknight]

"after this confession and with a firm intention to no longer commit such sins, with God's help, receives from the Priest, who has the power to bind and loose received via the Apostles and their successors in the Church, Absolution. "Absolution" is actually expressed by the Priest praying that the Lord God "may forgive, through His Grace and love of mankind, all thy sins." This prayer is guaranteed its effectiveness by the aforementioned bestowal: "whatsoever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven." The Priest also, as a simple human being and member of the Church, adds his own personal forgiveness (as every Christian is bound to do: "forgive one another your trespasses")"

http://www.orthodoxresearchinstitute.org/articles/liturgics/tikhon_penance.htm

________________________________

As an Orthodox I can tell you exactly what the priest says to me at confession. Verbatim, "while I do not have the power to absolve thee of thy sins, I pray that the Lord may forgive you through His grace....etc (see bolded in above article), and then he forgives me himself. However, as you can see he makes no absolute pronouncement, but rather prays for my forgiveness.

I'm not sure what your bolded and highlighted parts are supposed to be an argument for or against, as I have stated twice now that the Catholic doctrine is the same as far as the question of "who" is the one who actually absolves sin, so is the act of Catholic absolution which is also a prayer.  When you are absolved a Catholic priest absolves you in Christ's name as well as his own.  It is only through Christ that we are absolved.  This is the official Catholic position that I posted from the Catholic Encyclopaedia earlier on that key point.  It bears the Nihil Obstat and Imprimatur of the Church, meaning it is doctrinally true and without error...

"No Catholic believes that a priest, simply as an individual man, however pious or learned, has power to forgive sins. This power belongs to God alone; but He can and does exercise it through the ministration of men."

So you are saying that the Orthodox source I quoted is incorrect?  Because that Orthodox Bishop very specifically states that such forgiveness is guaranteed by the divine power granted to priests through the Apostles to "bind and loose".  Did you really read what I posted and just not get that?  It states it very clearly in the sentence just before the one you bolded...

"...receives from the Priest, who has the power to bind and loose received via the Apostles and their successors in the Church, Absolution.

Did you actually bother to read my link from the, "Orthodox Research Institute"?  Sounds pretty authoritative to me as when the good bishop describes the verbatim pronouncement of absolution used in Russian and other Slavic Orthodox churches...

"And I, an unworthy priest, through the power given unto me by Him, do forgive and absolve..."

Hear is what Wiki has to say about it...

The Greek Orthodox Church has always believed that the Church has power to forgive sin. This is made clear by the formulæ of absolution in vogue among all branches within Eastern Orthodoxy; also from the decrees of synods which since the Reformation have again and again expressed this belief (Alzog on Cyril Lucaris III, 465; Synod of Constantinople, 1638; Synod of Jassy, 1642; Synod of Jerusalem, 1672). In the Synod of Jerusalem the Church reiterates its belief in Seven Sacraments, among them Penance, which the Lord established when He said: "Whose sins you shall forgive they are forgiven them, and whose sins you shall retain they are retained."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absolution#In_the_Greek_Church

Exactly according to Catholic doctrine as well.  If you really don't understand that your priest has the authority to absolve you of your sins in Christ name, Macrina, I mean this in all seriousness...I don't think you actually understand what your church believes.  

And btw, we do not do penance as Catholics do. ie. saying some number of prayers. Orthodox have a prayer rule given them to keep, if they ask for one. And if they don't then they have to confess that, and the priest as physician in the church, makes inquiry to heal the illness.

Well, again, no, not exactly.  Not only is penance, (Orthodox=Epitimia), part of the Orthodox Sacrament of Penance, aside from the obviousness of it's name   , here is a good example from an Orthodox Archbishop...

"Now, you may find those who argue that the pronouncement of an epitimia comes from Latin practice. This is popular among individuals influenced by some of the leaders of certain super-correct groups. I believe that the views of these leaders are the result of two things: first, sadly enough, the perverse sexual practices that they justify, as we have heard, in the name of supposed secret Patristic teachings, which obviously distort their views of the link between purity and asceticism; and second, the "witch hunts" that they and their followers persistently conduct in a wild search for "Western influences" in Orthodoxy. The first issue speaks for itself. The second one is more subtle. There are many Western influences in Orthodoxy, and we should try to identify and control them. But there are many Orthodox things in Western Christianity, too. "  

Gee, that rings a bell with me.  

http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/praxis/epitimia.aspx

Pax

[mclees8]

Both related to death. How so? The true picture is quit clear. the insensitive rich man was clearly in hell, which is the second death, while the beggar was resurrected to life because he was with Abraham. it says there was a great gulf between them so that one could no longer pass from one to the other. This clearly depicts heaven and hell.  Abraham's bosom is picture of heaven and a place f comforting, not a place of further punishment for sin.

Semantics.....aahhh

Aren't both persons of the parable dead, as in not on the earth? Yes they are.

The 'gulf' is representative of sin. At the time the parable was spoken Jesus had not broken down those doors of death (as seen in the icon I posted).
Jesus was speaking to the Jews about their situation and trying to get them to understand who He was and why He was sent.

The new covenant replaced the old with that which is better.

I have not agreed in this thread, that Abraham's bosom is a place of further punishment. You may have me confused with another poster.

We are all destined to die the first death in this mortal body but that is not what we are to fear, neither does it have anything to do with spiritual life and death. It is spiritual life and death that we must be concerned with for they are both eternal and final. This is the point Jesus was making. the time to make eternal choices  is now and before the first death.   The story was not just for the Jews, but a solemn look at the consequences of a self centered life that knows not Christ   The gulf is a picture of a resolute finality. There is no changing things at this point. The chance to find life in heaven is over for those in hell.

God bless

Mclees are you a LDS or Mormon? I kinda get that sense from your posts.just curious

On "Abraham's bosom" from an Orthodox perspective.
Abraham's bosom means heaven. Abraham is mentioned among all the righteous because, in stark contrast to the rich man, Abraham showed hospitality to strangers (Gen. 18:1-8). The "rich man....was buried": The fathers see this as illustrating the state of his merciless soul, buried by the pleasures of the flesh. He was already buried in life by "couches, rugs, furnishings, sweet oils, perfumes, large quantities of wine, varieties of food, and flatterers" St John Chrysostom. That the rich man remains unnamed indicates that he is ultimately forgotten (see Ps 9:6)

On the subject you brought up of "first and second death". (ref. Rev. 20:4-6)
In Orthodoxy, those who have died for their "their witness to Jesus" are in heaven living and reigning with Christ (Rev. 5:9, 10, Matt 19:18, 2 Tim 2:12) as royal priests (Rev. 1:6, 5:9, 10, Is 61:6, 1 Pet 2:9,10) while the church serves Him here on earth. "The first resurrection" is the heavenly life of souls who have died in Christ before His Second Coming. Those not in Christ who die are in Hades awaiting the resurrection of the body at His coming. For the righteous saints with Christ, the "second death has no power". These righteous spirits (Heb 12:23) await only the reuniting of soul and body after their final judgment, when all things are made new. Hell or Hades (Sheol), where sinners' souls are separated from their bodies, will give up its dead to Gehenna, the lake of fire that burns with sulfur, which is eternal damnation. Sinners will be excluded from the blessedness of the age to come. Hell cannot harm the victorious in Christ.

No am neither, but why would think that.  i am of no denomination. I am just a believer. If i have a certain background though it would be more pentecostal but i do not hold to all their doctrines.  Their is only one church and that is the church of all believers. God will judge his own from there. I have respect for orthodox beliefs.

In your last sentence i would change only one thing. All unbelievers will be exclude from the life to come. When it comes down to it we are judge for our unbelief. Hell holds  no place for those believe and live for Christ. I assume when you say sinners you mean the unbelieving.

It is Christ who makes us righteous.

God bless

[Macrina]

So you are saying that the Orthodox source I quoted is incorrect?  Because that Orthodox Bishop very specifically states that such forgiveness is guaranteed by the divine power granted to priests through the Apostles to "bind and loose".  Did you really read what I posted and just not get that?  It states it very clearly in the sentence just before the one you bolded...

Recognize. God->Church.....not.....Church->God..and surely not...Church=God

I am not refuting the source, but your understanding of the source. The Apostolic authority given bishops and priests are within the authority of the Church. Which is why I stated that being forgiven by the church doesn't automatically get you off with God.

As an older Christian I can tell you without a doubt that you will pay the consequences of your actions forgiven or not.
Jesus Christ was God Incarnate, and yet even He had to pay the consequences of that action.
It's an inescapable fact. And I don't mean 'pay' in the sense of exchange, but that we all must suffer in this life. Ultimately God sees this to His glory.

Now I do realize that mankind has a very hard time dealing with human suffering in terms of his mind.
C.S. Lewis wrote a book titled "The Problem of Pain" How Human Suffering Raises Almost Intolerable Intellectual Problems which addresses many aspects of this that we think about. The book isn't any kind of doctoral. Lewis was an Anglican, so his thoughts shouldn't be that hard for either of us to be able to understand.

But I'm humble enough to say that maybe us Orthodox aren't as confident as Roman Catholics are. We are taught to fear the dread judgment day, as even Christians will not escape the final judgment. And we just really don't know how that is going to go for us. Throughout our liturgy we pray Lord Have Mercy! over and over with our prayers.

[winsome]

So you are saying that the Orthodox source I quoted is incorrect?  Because that Orthodox Bishop very specifically states that such forgiveness is guaranteed by the divine power granted to priests through the Apostles to "bind and loose".  Did you really read what I posted and just not get that?  It states it very clearly in the sentence just before the one you bolded...

Recognize. God->Church.....not.....Church->God..and surely not...Church=God

I am not refuting the source, but your understanding of the source. The Apostolic authority given bishops and priests are within the authority of the Church. Which is why I stated that being forgiven by the church doesn't automatically get you off with God.

As an older Christian I can tell you without a doubt that you will pay the consequences of your actions forgiven or not.
Jesus Christ was God Incarnate, and yet even He had to pay the consequences of that action.
It's an inescapable fact. And I don't mean 'pay' in the sense of exchange, but that we all must suffer in this life. Ultimately God sees this to His glory.

Now I do realize that mankind has a very hard time dealing with human suffering in terms of his mind.
C.S. Lewis wrote a book titled "The Problem of Pain" How Human Suffering Raises Almost Intolerable Intellectual Problems which addresses many aspects of this that we think about. The book isn't any kind of doctoral. Lewis was an Anglican, so his thoughts shouldn't be that hard for either of us to be able to understand.

But I'm humble enough to say that maybe us Orthodox aren't as confident as Roman Catholics are. We are taught to fear the dread judgment day, as even Christians will not escape the final judgment. And we just really don't know how that is going to go for us. Throughout our liturgy we pray Lord Have Mercy! over and over with our prayers.

So when an Orthodox priest consecrates the bread at the Eucharist you can't be sure if it has become the body of Christ or not?

It's an exact equivalent in terms of authority.

[desertknight]

I am not refuting the source, but your understanding of the source. The Apostolic authority given bishops and priests are within the authority of the Church. Which is why I stated that being forgiven by the church doesn't automatically get you off with God.

That is exactly my understanding of the source.  That is the same as Catholicism.  Being absolved of sin through the sacrament of penance does not remove the burden you may bear from that sin, but it does act as the sacramental way in which we are reconciled.   That is what both Catholic and Orthodox views of the sacrament are.

As an older Christian I can tell you without a doubt that you will pay the consequences of your actions forgiven or not.
Jesus Christ was God Incarnate, and yet even He had to pay the consequences of that action.
It's an inescapable fact. And I don't mean 'pay' in the sense of exchange, but that we all must suffer in this life. Ultimately God sees this to His glory.

Now I do realize that mankind has a very hard time dealing with human suffering in terms of his mind.
C.S. Lewis wrote a book titled "The Problem of Pain" How Human Suffering Raises Almost Intolerable Intellectual Problems which addresses many aspects of this that we think about. The book isn't any kind of doctoral. Lewis was an Anglican, so his thoughts shouldn't be that hard for either of us to be able to understand.

But I'm humble enough to say that maybe us Orthodox aren't as confident as Roman Catholics are. We are taught to fear the dread judgment day, as even Christians will not escape the final judgment. And we just really don't know how that is going to go for us. Throughout our liturgy we pray Lord Have Mercy! over and over with our prayers.

Then you grossly misunderstand Catholic thinking if you think we are.  NONE of us know with certainty what our fate will be.  NONE of us, not one, are deserving of salvation except through the gift of Christ's Grace.

We must all suffer the burdens of sin in this life and in purgatory, absolved or not.  That is what purgatory is-the suffering we endure in purification that allows us to approach Mt. Zion.  That suffering is to be used as a tool, a medicine, to heal us spiritually, both in this life and when we are purified after life on earth.

Where you may be wrong and where I am now unsure of your position is in whether or not you actually believe that your priest has the authority to absolve you of mortal sin in Christ name. The sources that I have posted and the ones that I have found from numerous other Orthodox sources, seem quite clear on this.  The power of the priest, acting in behalf of the bishop, (same as Catholicism- a Catholic priest cannot hear confessions outside of a bishop's approval, outside of his diocese, normally), is that power granted in Sacred Scripture by Christ, Himself.  i.e., You will not be condemned to hell for a sin that you, in a true and contrite confession, made within that sacrament and received absolution for.  THAT is the very definition of absolution, otherwise, it is meaningless.  The Orthodox position is not, "We sure hope this works...", it is one of assurance.  When a priest consecrates bread and wine during Divine Liturgy he does not "hope" it works.  His authority is clear.  Again, as I posted from the ORI...

"...receives from the Priest, who has the power to bind and loose received via the Apostles and their successors in the Church, Absolution."

That does not mean that you are "off the hook".  Epitimia, penance, is the spiritual medicine that is a reminder to us of that fact.  Purgatory is the purifying burden that we will suffer, even for sins forgiven in this life.  That is the Catholic position.