The Christian Discussion thread IX: Pelagius Rising.

[Hakons]

Except Judas's point was rebuked. There will always be another opportunity to help the poor, they will always exist. It's not wrong then, to spend money giving glory to God, instead of giving it to the poor.

"There will always be hungry children, so what's the point of feeding this one hungry child."

Jesus basically wanted to smell good rather than to actually help the poor.

Did you miss what He did in the rest of the Gospel?

[Salus Maior]

Now you're starting to see the light!

Sure, when the Orthodox Church does it is fine, but when the Latin Church does it we're "Gaining too much temporal power." And "Sacking Constantinople"

LOL xD

[Salus Maior]

Why are you on a computer then?

I assume you have a house as well? Pay for utilities like electricity? None of that is necessary to live, think of all the people you could help by forgoing that. Why are you so greedy for having these things? Shouldn't you sell all these things and give all your non-essential monies to the poor?

As I pointed out before, Judas was the one who chastised Christ for allowing someone to anoint Him with oil that cost "a year's wages" and told them to sell it to the poor, and Christ rebuked him.

Rather unfairly, since Judas actually had a point.

Judas was virtue-signalling. He was embezzling a significant amount of the ministry's funds for himself.

[Tarsonis]

Rather unfairly, since Judas actually had a point.

Judas was virtue-signalling. He was embezzling a significant amount of the ministry's funds for himself.

He was pretty progressive for his time.

[Stonok]

Sure, when the Orthodox Church does it is fine, but when the Latin Church does it we're "Gaining too much temporal power." And "Sacking Constantinople"

LOL xD

Your flags confuse me, lol. For a minute I thought Tarsonis was quoting laughing at his own post like some sort of madman.

[War Gears]

Rather unfairly, since Judas actually had a point.

Judas was virtue-signalling. He was embezzling a significant amount of the ministry's funds for himself.

Allegedly. No evidence or examples of this theft is given in the gospels and it's seriously doubtful that Jesus, Matthew, Mark, or any of the other disciples would've known about the embezzlement and then allowed it to go on. It sounds no different from character assassination. "Judas raised an objection but this objection is irrelevant because he (supposedly) stole from the ministry."

"There will always be hungry children, so what's the point of feeding this one hungry child."

Jesus basically wanted to smell good rather than to actually help the poor.

So why do you possess anything?

Because objecting to frivolous wasting of what could go to a better cause is not the same thing as giving away everything that you own...?

[Constantinopolis]

Judas was virtue-signalling. He was embezzling a significant amount of the ministry's funds for himself.

Allegedly. No evidence or examples of this theft is given in the gospels and it's seriously doubtful that Jesus, Matthew, Mark, or any of the other disciples would've known about the embezzlement and then allowed it to go on. It sounds no different from character assassination. "Judas raised an objection but this objection is irrelevant because he (supposedly) stole from the ministry."

It's entirely possible they only found out about the embezzlement later. The Gospels were written years later - you'd expect the authors to know some things they didn't know at the time when the events took place.

And it can't be "character assassination" when literally everything we know about Judas comes from the same source that tells us he embezzled money.

[Salus Maior]

LOL xD

Your flags confuse me, lol. For a minute I thought Tarsonis was quoting laughing at his own post like some sort of madman.

Maybe I am Tarsonis. Have you ever seen him and me in the same room?

[The Alexanderians]

Your flags confuse me, lol. For a minute I thought Tarsonis was quoting laughing at his own post like some sort of madman.

Maybe I am Tarsonis. Have you ever seen him and me in the same room?

No but we've never seen the same IP addresses from the two nation accounts.

[Salus Maior]

Maybe I am Tarsonis. Have you ever seen him and me in the same room?

No but we've never seen the same IP addresses from the two nation accounts.

Maybe you haven't

[Tarsonis]

Going back to an earlier debate, the more I consider the Toll House narratives the more I see the doctrine of Purgatory staring back at me.

[The Alexanderians]

Going back to an earlier debate, the more I consider the Toll House narratives the more I see the doctrine of Purgatory staring back at me.

In Orthodoxy the idea of Purgatory isn't explicitly condemned. Make of that what you will.

[Constantinopolis]

Going back to an earlier debate, the more I consider the Toll House narratives the more I see the doctrine of Purgatory staring back at me.

People have drawn parallels between them before. That's another reason why the Toll House narrative is controversial in Orthodoxy - some people claim that it sounds "too Catholic".

However, it's important to point out that all the accounts of the Toll Houses describe them as a relatively short experience (in terms of time). It's not clear how long it takes to go through the Toll Houses, but it's definitely something on the order of hours or days - not years or centuries, like in the Catholic idea of Purgatory. People are not so delayed in their journey to Heaven that only a minority of those who will eventually enter Heaven have made it by now (which is the Catholic view, as I understand it - only the saints are in Heaven, the rest of the Heaven-bound people are on their way but haven't reached it yet).

[Tarsonis]

Going back to an earlier debate, the more I consider the Toll House narratives the more I see the doctrine of Purgatory staring back at me.

In Orthodoxy the idea of Purgatory isn't explicitly condemned. Make of that what you will.

It's not doctrine either, which I'm lead to believe is another snag in reunification.

[Tarsonis]

Going back to an earlier debate, the more I consider the Toll House narratives the more I see the doctrine of Purgatory staring back at me.

People have drawn parallels between them before. That's another reason why the Toll House narrative is controversial in Orthodoxy - some people claim that it sounds "too Catholic".

However, it's important to point out that all the accounts of the Toll Houses describe them as a relatively short experience (in terms of time). It's not clear how long it takes to go through the Toll Houses, but it's definitely something on the order of hours or days - not years or centuries, like in the Catholic idea of Purgatory. People are not so delayed in their journey to Heaven that only a minority of those who will eventually enter Heaven have made it by now (which is the Catholic view, as I understand it - only the saints are in Heaven, the rest of the Heaven-bound people are on their way but haven't reached it yet).

Too which we would respond, well obviously their experience would be short, as they were saints.

[Constantinopolis]

People have drawn parallels between them before. That's another reason why the Toll House narrative is controversial in Orthodoxy - some people claim that it sounds "too Catholic".

However, it's important to point out that all the accounts of the Toll Houses describe them as a relatively short experience (in terms of time). It's not clear how long it takes to go through the Toll Houses, but it's definitely something on the order of hours or days - not years or centuries, like in the Catholic idea of Purgatory. People are not so delayed in their journey to Heaven that only a minority of those who will eventually enter Heaven have made it by now (which is the Catholic view, as I understand it - only the saints are in Heaven, the rest of the Heaven-bound people are on their way but haven't reached it yet).

Too which we would respond, well obviously their experience would be short, as they were saints.

The saints were the ones seeing the Toll Houses in visions; they weren't the ones actually going through them in those visions. If they were going through the Toll Houses themselves, they would be dead at that point and unable to write about it for us. So these are saints who saw other people go through the Toll Houses. All sorts of people - some made it to Heaven, some didn't.

[Tarsonis]

Too which we would respond, well obviously their experience would be short, as they were saints.

The saints were the ones seeing the Toll Houses in visions; they weren't the ones actually going through them in those visions. If they were going through the Toll Houses themselves, they would be dead at that point and unable to write about it for us. So these are saints who saw other people go through the Toll Houses.

But presumably these people who had no reliable charge against them, we're in pretty good standing.

All sorts of people - some made it to Heaven, some didn't.

This would be a problem for us, as Purgatory isn't a failable exercise. Everyone in purgatory is going to Heaven. If you're in hell, you don't even start the ascent.

[Constantinopolis]

The saints were the ones seeing the Toll Houses in visions; they weren't the ones actually going through them in those visions. If they were going through the Toll Houses themselves, they would be dead at that point and unable to write about it for us. So these are saints who saw other people go through the Toll Houses.

But presumably these people who had no reliable charge against them, we're in pretty good standing.

All sorts of people - some made it to Heaven, some didn't.

This would be a problem for us, as Purgatory isn't a failable exercise. Everyone in purgatory is going to Heaven. If you're in hell, you don't even start the ascent.

Oh yes, that's another major difference. The Toll Houses are supposed to be the universal after-death experience that everyone goes through. If you go to Heaven you pass through all of them (faster or slower, depending on your sins), whereas if you're going to Hell you may pass through some of the Toll Houses but eventually you hit one that you can't pass through.

As a reminder, none of this is actual Orthodox doctrine. It's an opinion backed up by a number of saints, so it is taken seriously, but it's still only an opinion.

[Diopolis]

Going back to an earlier debate, the more I consider the Toll House narratives the more I see the doctrine of Purgatory staring back at me.

People have drawn parallels between them before. That's another reason why the Toll House narrative is controversial in Orthodoxy - some people claim that it sounds "too Catholic".

However, it's important to point out that all the accounts of the Toll Houses describe them as a relatively short experience (in terms of time). It's not clear how long it takes to go through the Toll Houses, but it's definitely something on the order of hours or days - not years or centuries, like in the Catholic idea of Purgatory. People are not so delayed in their journey to Heaven that only a minority of those who will eventually enter Heaven have made it by now (which is the Catholic view, as I understand it - only the saints are in Heaven, the rest of the Heaven-bound people are on their way but haven't reached it yet).

You should know by now that both our churches believe only the saints are in heaven.
If you mean the attitude among some orthodox Catholics that only the canonized saints have managed to make it through purgatory yet, this is rather an innovation in historical terms. John Paul II chose to emphasize canonizations throughout his reign, with the general idea of canonizing more people so that more of those who are technically saints would be formally declared saints. This lead to an attitude that everyone in heaven was either canonized, or would be soon. Traditionally, Catholics expected that if the made it to heaven, they would only be canonized if there weren't any incidents in their life that would set bad examples(unless they explicitly repented from them) and they were somehow prominent people. Traditional Catholics even today have an attitude that most of the saints we've probably never heard of, because they didn't call enough attention to themselves to be noticed by enough people to have a cause for canonization.
As for the length of purgatory, the general consensus tends to be decades for religious(those under vows) and centuries for everyone else. But still centuries, not millennia. At least a decent chunk of those who've entered purgatory have gotten out again(and most Catholics who emphasize the doctrine of purgatory believe that staying out of Hell has gotten more difficult as time has gone on due to the aftershocks of the fall).

[Tarsonis]

But presumably these people who had no reliable charge against them, we're in pretty good standing.

This would be a problem for us, as Purgatory isn't a failable exercise. Everyone in purgatory is going to Heaven. If you're in hell, you don't even start the ascent.

Oh yes, that's another major difference. The Toll Houses are supposed to be the universal after-death experience that everyone goes through. If you go to Heaven you pass through all of them (faster or slower, depending on your sins), whereas if you're going to Hell you may pass through some of the Toll Houses but eventually you hit one that you can't pass through.

As a reminder, none of this is actual Orthodox doctrine. It's an opinion backed up by a number of saints, so it is taken seriously, but it's still only an opinion.

I can see it potentially as a parable for the particular judgment.

But that with the failability I can't reconcile it as purgatory.

[Constantinopolis]

Oh yes, that's another major difference. The Toll Houses are supposed to be the universal after-death experience that everyone goes through. If you go to Heaven you pass through all of them (faster or slower, depending on your sins), whereas if you're going to Hell you may pass through some of the Toll Houses but eventually you hit one that you can't pass through.

As a reminder, none of this is actual Orthodox doctrine. It's an opinion backed up by a number of saints, so it is taken seriously, but it's still only an opinion.

I can see it potentially as a parable for the particular judgment.

But that with the failability I can't reconcile it as purgatory.

The Toll Houses are very strongly associated with the particular judgment, yes. Most of the people who believe that the Toll Houses literally exist (as opposed to being a parable) believe that the Toll Houses are the particular judgment. They believe that this is what the particular judgment looks like.

Those who believe that the Toll Houses are a parable or metaphor, hold a range of views about what they mean.

[Salus Maior]

People have drawn parallels between them before. That's another reason why the Toll House narrative is controversial in Orthodoxy - some people claim that it sounds "too Catholic".

However, it's important to point out that all the accounts of the Toll Houses describe them as a relatively short experience (in terms of time). It's not clear how long it takes to go through the Toll Houses, but it's definitely something on the order of hours or days - not years or centuries, like in the Catholic idea of Purgatory. People are not so delayed in their journey to Heaven that only a minority of those who will eventually enter Heaven have made it by now (which is the Catholic view, as I understand it - only the saints are in Heaven, the rest of the Heaven-bound people are on their way but haven't reached it yet).

You should know by now that both our churches believe only the saints are in heaven.
If you mean the attitude among some orthodox Catholics that only the canonized saints have managed to make it through purgatory yet, this is rather an innovation in historical terms. John Paul II chose to emphasize canonizations throughout his reign, with the general idea of canonizing more people so that more of those who are technically saints would be formally declared saints. This lead to an attitude that everyone in heaven was either canonized, or would be soon. Traditionally, Catholics expected that if the made it to heaven, they would only be canonized if there weren't any incidents in their life that would set bad examples(unless they explicitly repented from them) and they were somehow prominent people. Traditional Catholics even today have an attitude that most of the saints we've probably never heard of, because they didn't call enough attention to themselves to be noticed by enough people to have a cause for canonization.
As for the length of purgatory, the general consensus tends to be decades for religious(those under vows) and centuries for everyone else. But still centuries, not millennia. At least a decent chunk of those who've entered purgatory have gotten out again(and most Catholics who emphasize the doctrine of purgatory believe that staying out of Hell has gotten more difficult as time has gone on due to the aftershocks of the fall).

Wow that is depressing.

[Constantinopolis]

People have drawn parallels between them before. That's another reason why the Toll House narrative is controversial in Orthodoxy - some people claim that it sounds "too Catholic".

However, it's important to point out that all the accounts of the Toll Houses describe them as a relatively short experience (in terms of time). It's not clear how long it takes to go through the Toll Houses, but it's definitely something on the order of hours or days - not years or centuries, like in the Catholic idea of Purgatory. People are not so delayed in their journey to Heaven that only a minority of those who will eventually enter Heaven have made it by now (which is the Catholic view, as I understand it - only the saints are in Heaven, the rest of the Heaven-bound people are on their way but haven't reached it yet).

You should know by now that both our churches believe only the saints are in heaven.

No, we don't.

Or, to be more exact: The Orthodox Church does not believe in Purgatory. We believe that people reach Heaven or Hell relatively quickly after death. Traditionally, it is believed that they get to their final destination 40 days after death. This isn't doctrine, so the number may not be exact, but in any case that is the general order of magnitude we're dealing with. Something on the order of days. Definitely not years.

Therefore, except for the recently-deceased, all the dead who were going to Heaven are already in Heaven.

Now the thing is, the term "saints" in Orthodoxy is not precisely defined. The saints are people in Heaven, but we don't refer to all the people in Heaven as saints. Sainthood is seen as more of a continuum than a binary value. A saint is someone who is not only in Heaven, but has achieved a high degree of union with God.

The vast majority of saints are not canonized, of course. On this matter we agree with you. That is why we use the phrase "all saints, known and unknown" in our prayers on the Sunday of All Saints. Nevertheless, the "unknown saints" are not typically thought to include everyone in Heaven who isn't formally canonized.

[Tarsonis]

You should know by now that both our churches believe only the saints are in heaven.
If you mean the attitude among some orthodox Catholics that only the canonized saints have managed to make it through purgatory yet, this is rather an innovation in historical terms. John Paul II chose to emphasize canonizations throughout his reign, with the general idea of canonizing more people so that more of those who are technically saints would be formally declared saints. This lead to an attitude that everyone in heaven was either canonized, or would be soon. Traditionally, Catholics expected that if the made it to heaven, they would only be canonized if there weren't any incidents in their life that would set bad examples(unless they explicitly repented from them) and they were somehow prominent people. Traditional Catholics even today have an attitude that most of the saints we've probably never heard of, because they didn't call enough attention to themselves to be noticed by enough people to have a cause for canonization.
As for the length of purgatory, the general consensus tends to be decades for religious(those under vows) and centuries for everyone else. But still centuries, not millennia. At least a decent chunk of those who've entered purgatory have gotten out again(and most Catholics who emphasize the doctrine of purgatory believe that staying out of Hell has gotten more difficult as time has gone on due to the aftershocks of the fall).

Wow that is depressing.

not as depressing as the alternative

[Constantinopolis]

You should know by now that both our churches believe only the saints are in heaven.
If you mean the attitude among some orthodox Catholics that only the canonized saints have managed to make it through purgatory yet, this is rather an innovation in historical terms. John Paul II chose to emphasize canonizations throughout his reign, with the general idea of canonizing more people so that more of those who are technically saints would be formally declared saints. This lead to an attitude that everyone in heaven was either canonized, or would be soon. Traditionally, Catholics expected that if the made it to heaven, they would only be canonized if there weren't any incidents in their life that would set bad examples(unless they explicitly repented from them) and they were somehow prominent people. Traditional Catholics even today have an attitude that most of the saints we've probably never heard of, because they didn't call enough attention to themselves to be noticed by enough people to have a cause for canonization.
As for the length of purgatory, the general consensus tends to be decades for religious(those under vows) and centuries for everyone else. But still centuries, not millennia. At least a decent chunk of those who've entered purgatory have gotten out again(and most Catholics who emphasize the doctrine of purgatory believe that staying out of Hell has gotten more difficult as time has gone on due to the aftershocks of the fall).

Wow that is depressing.

Catholicism is a lot darker and edgier than most people (including most Catholics) realize.

This is actually one of the things I like about Catholicism. To be clear, I don't believe they are correct in taking such a dark view of the afterlife. But I admire their courage in doing so.

Give me a religion of struggle against overwhelming odds rather than mushy pop-Christianity claptrap any day.