Talk:Synod of Jerusalem (1672)

[Untitled]

Purgatory is not accepted by the Eastern Orthodox Churches ; in fact, it is considered one of the principal points of difference with the Roman Catholic Church. Could you point to the conclusions of the Synod of Jerusalem that state otherwise? Porfyrios 19:18, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Untitled

This article is substantially a repost of the 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica article. Additionally, I'm not into defending a fond thing vainly invented so I won't go there. Ultimately, I do not know Greek <comment> I would have loved to have learned it. </comment> so this translation of Dositheus' confession could be argued until the rapture comes and those of us left below can watch the fights over iotas of difference or the filioque.

DECREE XVIII.

We believe that the souls of those that have fallen asleep are either at rest or in torment, according to what each hath wrought; — for when they are separated from their bodies, they depart immediately either to joy, or to sorrow and lamentation; though confessedly neither their enjoyment, nor condemnation are complete. For after the common resurrection, when the soul shall be united with the body, with which it had behaved <151> itself well or ill, each shall receive the completion of either enjoyment or of condemnation forsooth.

And such as though envolved in mortal sins have not departed in despair, but have, while still living in the body, repented, though without bringing forth any fruits of repentance — by pouring forth tears, forsooth, by kneeling while watching in prayers, by afflicting themselves, by relieving the poor, and in fine {in summation ELC} by shewing forth by their works their love towards God and their neighbour, and which the Catholic Church hath from the beginning rightly called satisfaction — of these and such like the souls depart into Hades, and there endure the punishment due to the sins they have committed. But they are aware of their future release from thence, and are delivered by the Supreme Goodness, through the prayers <152> of the Priests, and the good works which the relatives of each do for their Departed; especially the unbloody Sacrifice availing in the highest degree; which each offereth particularly for his relatives that have fallen asleep, and which the Catholic and Apostolic Church offereth daily for all alike; it being, of course, understood that we know not the time of their release. For that there is deliverance for such from their direful condition, and that before the common resurrection and judgment we know and believe; but when we know not. [1]

From what I can tell falling asleep is a euphemism for death a la Dormition which ultimately leads to paradise - enjoyment or hell - condemnation. But immediately after said permanent narcoleptic episode there is an unnamed process which requires fruits of repentence - which is satisified using some sort of temporal good works. Sadly this line of logic could lead to indulgences and other inventions or doctrinal developments. On the topic of new things, the final theosis is new to me. Either way, not my fight. Luis F. Gonzalez 17:33, 27 May 2007 (UTC)