Universal salvation

[Antonios Spartan]

In my readings, I have recently come across the idea of Universal Salvation, that is, the view held that everything in creation will eventually be saved, including those souls in Hell, the demons, even Satan himself! Origen was anamathetized (sp?) because of this view, (as well as the view of the pre-existense of souls). However, St. Gregory of Nyssa held this believe and he is regarded as a saint.

This view is obviously against the dominant Western view of eternal damnation in Hell; however, it seems to make more sense to me, believing in an All-merciful, All-powerful God.

[Eugene]

The Western view accepted in both Catholic and protestant denominations is based on legalistic approach to God's judgement that traces it's origin to St. Augustine - that God will damn people "out of anger" based on their beleifes and behavoiur during their lives.

Orthodox theology has a different deeper view on this subject. The process of salvation is the process of constant turnng the man's free will towards God and growing in God - aquiring the Holy Spirit, becoming a temple of Christ, becoming a member of the Church - the body of Christ, abiding on His wine and growing on it. This is an "organic" process of dying of a worldly person, and growing of a new spiritual person. This is called "deification". Those who refuse to participate in the Divine life during their life on Earth will not be able to partake in it after resurrection. The only thing that can prevent us from participating in Christ is the choice of our free will. The God's judgement is going to be not a judgement of an angry judge, but rather a judgement of a compassionate, but truthfull doctor - He will just testify the condition of our will and our spiritual state - is there a new spiritual person born and grown in us, have we let the Holy Spirit enter our hearts and abide in us? The state of man in gehenna wil be a state of eternal rebellion against God from men's side. God, being allmighty, merciful and loving, still can not force anyone to love Him, because love can only be free. Still, some Orthodox saints expressed a view that it is possible that all creation will be eventually saved, but they expressed it as a hope rather than a sure statement. ("It is not impossible that everyone can be saved" St. John the Ladder). But the firm claim of the universal salvation would violate the fundamental principle of God's creation - mens' the free will. Even if everyone, including demons, will somehow eventually cease rebelling against God, it's still going to be the choice of their free will, so we can never claim that it is going to happen for sure.

But in any case, God will not condemn anyone. "Those in hell are tortured by the fire of God's love" St. Isaak of Syria.

[Fr Raphael Vereshack]

This topic already came up on a seperate thread of the monachos discussion group.


The following post from Matthew S. also came from the same page:


Keep in mind that not all apokatastasis is 'Origenist' or counter-orthodox. Gregory of Nyssa, for example, taught a certain sort of apokatastasis which has never come under fire and with regard to which his Orthodoxy has never been questioned. Irenaeus of Lyons taught something similar as well (though not as directly as St Gregory).

The temptation to see any and all presentation of an apokatastasis as 'Origenist' is age-old and widespread. It is nonetheless incorrect.

In Christ- Fr Raphael

[Anthony]

I once heard an Orthodox bishop say that it is wrong to believe that all will be saved, but legitimate to hope that all might.

Anthony

[Fr Raphael Vereshack]

I was wondering Matthew if you could explain more fully what the Orthodox explanation of apokatastasis would be.

I would be particularly interested to know whether this Orthodox explanation implies that all will be saved or does it mean some sort of culmination of all things which would include the sufferings of those who have rejected God?

In Christ- Fr Raphael

[Antonios Spartan]

As Father Maximos has stated "The only thing we can be totally certain about is that God will judge us with absolute love and absolute compassion."

Will every creature attain salvation eventually? Will everything be restored to its primordial condition and at which time a hymn will be lifted up to God chanted by the entire Creation? I don't know. What ever God wills. We can hope, and more importantly, we can pray.

In Christ,
Whose love is infinite and everlasting,
Antonios

[Eugene]

Dear Fr. Raphael, there was an exellent theological study on the comaprison of understanding of apokatastasis in the teachings of St. Gregory of Nyssa and St. Maximos:

Brian E. Daley "Apokatastasis and “Honorable Silence” in the Eschatology of St. Maximus the Confessor", Felix Heinzer - Christoph Scönborn (ed.), Actes du Symposium sur Maxime le Confeseur (Fribourg, 2-5 september 1980), Éditions Universitaires, Fribourg Suisse 1982.

Its Russian translation is available here: http://www.myriobiblos.gr/texts/russian/daley_maxim.html

This paper gives the answer to your question.

In Christ
Evgeny

[Fr Raphael Vereshack]

Dear Evgeny,

Thank you for the link but my Russian is too poor to be able to understand the article. I did a Google search & was unable to find the original English version online.

Could you briefly outline what Brian E. Daley says in the article about apokatastsis & St Maximos the Confessor? Many thanks.

In Christ- Fr Raphael

[Eugene]

Dear Fr. Raphael,

There is also another paper by russian theologian Peter Malkov that also describes the differences between understanding of apokatastasis in Origen's, St. Gregory's and St. Maximos's teaching (well, in Russian again http://www.st.mrezha.ru/apokatas.htm ).

Please forgive my "free" translation. Briefly, both St. Gregory of Nyssa and St. Maximos undersotood apokatastasis as a full restoration of human nature. However, there are important differences:

St. Gregory:
- Adam was created as an image and likeness of God from the beginning, so the human nature posessed the likeness of God, but then lost it after fall.
- The state of the human nature after the restoration is understood as equal to the original state of Adam, not exceeding it in the degree of deification.
- The human nature was created before Adam was created, Adam and Eve were just an individual representatives of the human nature. The image and likeness of God are related to the human nature, not individuals. They were lost to all mankind immediately after fall, and they will be restored and granted back to the whole human nature after the restoration/resurrection.
- The free will of man is also related to the nature. So after restoration the will of the whole mankind will inevitably become in accordance with the will of God, no possibility of rebellion or any other choice of will may be available.
- The whole human nature will be restored and clensed from sin in the eschatological fire.

St. Maximos also used the term "apokatastasis", however his view on this was different:
- Image of God was granted to the numan nature at the moment of Adam's creation, however the likeness of God is only achievable in future as a result of deification of each hypostasis. After apokatastasis the state of human nature will be superior to it's initial state.
- St. Maximos never considered an abstract human nature as something that exists apart from human hypostases.
- The most important difference lays in understanding of the human will. St. Maximos attributes two kinds of will to men: natural will (that belongs to human nature) and individual will of choice - «gnèmh», that only belongs to individual hypostases. The latter one began to exist only after the fall. (God doesn't have gnemh will, He never hesitates between any choices). The natural will is always in accordance to the God's will and with the God's logos of men. Gnemh will may make a choice either according to the natural will, or against it. Every person is called to live according to his logos and God's will, so that his gnemh would always follow the logos and natural will - this will lead him to deification. In a state of full deification the gnemh will totally dissapear.
- The restoration of the human nature will not include a "compulsive annihilation" of individual gnemh will. There are two states after restoration (resurrection). The first one available to everyone will be the restoration of human being - granting eternal life ( being and ever-being) in a new body and granting communion with God to the whole human nature. The second one is deified state - restoration of goodness and wisdom, annihilation of gnemh will - this will be available only to those who lived in accordance to their logos.
- The state of those who still have their gnemh will rebelling against logos will still be a communion with God, but this will become a torture for them, they will precept God's love and goodnes as absolutely alien to their state of gnemh will.
- The state of paradise, according to St. Maximos, is a state of restoration of both human nature and human hypostasys in an image and likeness of God and in full communion with God. The state of gehenna is a state of restoration of only human nature, with individual gnemh will turned against it's own restored nature and agianst God's will and love.

Of course, this is wery brief outline, there is much more on the topic in those papers.

In Christ
Evgeny

[Theopesta]

dear All, if you please I try to find the idea of apokatastasis and the universal salvation on both teachings of St. Gregory of Nyssa and Origen, in volume iv and xxviii of nicene gp. but I need a help where exectly I find this idea, thanks. in christ, theopesta

[Fr Raphael Vereshack]

For St. Greogory of Nyssa- see his On the Soul & Resurrection Chap. 7. printed by SVS Press.

For Origen- I believe he wrote about apokatastasis in his Peri Archon (De Principiis). In the Handbook of Patrology (Hamell) it says that the original of this work has been lost but it is preserved in a paraphrase by Rufinus.

In Christ- Fr Raphael

[Byron Jack Gaist]

On apokatastasis in the Fathers:

Eschatology and final restoration (apokatastasis) in Origen, Gregory of Nyssa and Maximos the Confessor (http://www.theandros.com/restoration.html)

ICXC
Byron

[Gregorios]

In my readings, I have recently come across the idea of Universal Salvation, that is, the view held that everything in creation will eventually be saved, including those souls in Hell, the demons, even Satan himself! Origen was anamathetized (sp?) because of this view, (as well as the view of the pre-existense of souls).

Fr. Henri Crouzel has pointed to some significant problems with the assumption that Origen was indeed anathematized at the Fifth Ec. Council (Fr. Henri Crouzel Origen T&T Clark LTD, Edinburgh, Scotland: 1989, 176) . It is beyond doubt that Origen's name pops up in later councils even if they are affirmations of a condemnation which can be doubted. Clearly in the anathema against Origen (even if not in the 5th Ec. Council) we hear the Church speak out against the 6th century mixture of Evagrian-Origenist speculative theology perverted into a pantheist denial of even the Most Holy Trinity (such as we find in Stephen Bar Sudaili's The Book of the Holy Hierotheos). It is common belief among Origen-scholars that Origen (nor Evagrios see the works of Fr. Gabriel Bunge especially his: "Mysterium Unitatis: Der Gedanke der Einheit von Schöpfer und Geschöpf" Freiburger Zeitschrift für Philosophie und Theologie 36: 1989, 449-469 and his "Origenismus-Gnostizismus: Zum Geistesgeschichtlichen Standort des Evagrios Pontikos Vigiliae Christianae 40: 1986, 24-54) held the perversions of their doctrine that these Origenists propagated on his authority.

Concerning the pre-existence of souls Origen-scholars have cast significant doubt on the usefulness of that term. For in Origen soul and body never exist separately in time (see Mark Edwards "Origen no Gnostic; or, On the Corporeality of Man" Journal of Theological Studies 43: 1992, 23-37 and P. Tzamalikos The Concept of Time in Origen Peter Lang, New York: 1991). It is also doubted that Origen believed bodies are the result of pre-cosmic fall. What Origen describes in terms that can be interpreted that way is actually speaking of foreknowledge and not a fall from pre-existence into bodies (Fr. John Behr The Way to Nicea SVS Press, Crestwood New York: 2001, 195-197).


However, St. Gregory of Nyssa held this believe and he is regarded as a saint.

St. Gregory of Nyssa held a version of apokatastasis even more rigid than Origen's. In his Great Catechism he bluntly states that the author of evil will be saved. He leaves no room for doubt it seems.


This view is obviously against the dominant Western view of eternal damnation in Hell; however, it seems to make more sense to me, believing in an All-merciful, All-powerful God.

The problem with the doctrine of apokatastasis is that it very easily perverts into predestination and completely rules out the free will of the created agent. HG Bp Kallistos (Ware) of Diokleia has wisely said that we may hope for the salvation of all but free will must be maintained:

"Hell exists as a final possibility, but several of the Fathers have none the less believed that in the end all will be reconciled to God. It is heretical to say that all must be saved, for this is to deny free will; but it is legitimate to hope that all may be saved."

Bp Kallistos (Ware) of Diokleia The Orthodox Church (Penguin Books LTD, Harmondsworth, Middlesex, England: 1963), 266-267.

What exactly this would mean with regard to St. Gregory of Nyssa's version of apokatastasis I don't know. Perhaps his insistence on universal reconciliation is related to a theory of foreknowledge? I am not aware of any studies in this regard.

But certainly the God revealed in His human birth, Jesus Christ, is most merciful and loves us His creatures. Of that we can be sure.

Gregorios

[Scott Pierson]

Stephen Bar Sudaili's The Book of the Holy Hierotheos).If someone could direct me to a book which discusses the theology of Stephen Bar Sudaili ( In English) I would be very appreciative. Or maybe an English translation of " The book of the Holy Hierotheos"? What do the folks here feel about the claim that Stephen Bar Sudaili was the "Hierotheos" who taught St Dionysus the Aeropagite ?

[Gregorios]

If someone could direct me to a book which discusses the theology of Stephen Bar Sudaili ( In English) I would be very appreciative. Or maybe an English translation of " The book of the Holy Hierotheos"? What do the folks here feel about the claim that Stephen Bar Sudaili was the "Hierotheos" who taught St Dionysus the Aeropagite ?

"The Book of the Holy Hierotheos" has been translated by Frank S. Marsh in the early 20-ieth century under that title. I don't have my copy of it here, but you might try it at a library (inter library loan probably).

Gregorios

[Gregorios]

"The Book of the Holy Hierotheos" has been translated by Frank S. Marsh in the early 20-ieth century under that title. I don't have my copy of it here, but you might try it at a library (inter library loan probably).

Gregorios

"The book which is called the Book of the holy Hierotheos, with extracts from the Prolegomena and Commentary of Theodosios of Antioch and from the "Book of excerpts" and other works of Gregory bar-Hebræus"

by Stephen bar-Ṣūdhailē.; Jacobite Theodosius, patriarch of Antioch; Bar Hebraeus;

Translator: Fred Shipley Marsh

* Type: English : Book
* Publisher: London, Pub. for the Text and Translation Society by Williams and Norgate, 1927.

http://www.worldcatlibraries.org/wcpa/top3mset/42d0c0a5acbde92a.html

Gregorios

[Scott Pierson]

Thank you ! Is it possible to get the book transfered to one of my local public library's. I Will go to my Library and ask the librarian.

they are all over 300 miles away.

[Theophrastus]

Concerning the pre-existence of souls Origen-scholars have cast significant doubt on the usefulness of that term. For in Origen soul and body never exist separately in time (see Mark Edwards "Origen no Gnostic; or, On the Corporeality of Man" Journal of Theological Studies 43: 1992, 23-37 and P. Tzamalikos The Concept of Time in Origen Peter Lang, New York: 1991). It is also doubted that Origen believed bodies are the result of pre-cosmic fall. What Origen describes in terms that can be interpreted that way is actually speaking of foreknowledge and not a fall from pre-existence into bodies (Fr. John Behr The Way to Nicea SVS Press, Crestwood New York: 2001, 195-197).

Now that I think about it, the condemnation of Origenism only condemned Origenism's specific theory of pre-existence of the soul-without-a-body. Other sorts of pre-existences were not addressed.

[John Charmley]

Now that I think about it, the condemnation of Origenism only condemned Origenism's specific theory of pre-existence of the soul-without-a-body. Other sorts of pre-existences were not addressed.

Dear Jetavan,

You are quite correct in this. There is a good discussion of this specific issue on the thread on Origen on this site (under specific individuals).


In Christ,

John

[Scott Pierson]

Other sorts of pre-existences were not addressed.

So one could hold to the view that the soul existed before the physical body with some sort of extreamly subtle noetic body which was eventual lost bringing about a fall into a (human) material , angelic or demonic body later? Its only pre-existence without some sort of body that was addressed and anathmatized ?

I was discussing this topic on the "prexistence of the soul in wisdom of solomon " topic and it seems that St Anthony held to some form of the souls prexistence of the physical body.

[Peter Farrington]

Hi Scott

Personally I don't think this view is acceptable within Orthodoxy, whether or not every possible idea or concept of pre-existence is covered.

For myself the only pre-existence I believe is compatible with Orthodoxy would be the sense of the pre-existence in the mind of God of all those whom He wills to come into being. This is, even as I type it, rather a thought-provoking idea. That God had me in mind even before He created the universe and willed that I come into being for His glory and to experience His love.

And by extension that the driver who cuts me up on the motorway is also a person who was in the mind of God before creation and whom God willed to bring into being - how should I relate to such a one?

Or the starving millions whom God knew before He made them? And made them because He loved them? This is something that I want to reflect on. It seems important in my own way of living with other people.

Has anyone written about such a view?

Peter

[Kyprian Galbraith]

While mine is just my own opinion and understanding, and please excuse any errors:

I often consider what Paul meant when saying "from Glory to Glory"...

I personally don't see "salvation" at all in the legalistic sense of "His blood atoned for our sins", at least in the way that many Christians mean it today.

My understanding of Orthodoxy is that it was His sacrifice that atoned for us yes, but it wasn't because His blood was somehow "magic monopoly money" (please pardon the reference)...it was His *Kenosis* (I believe the proper word is) His "emptying of Himself" and uniting with our suffering and falleness, purifiying, transforming it, and all of creation. But this didn't begin on the Cross...in regards to the Lord's Eathly existence it began with His conception and continues on even today.

While certainly a debt was paid for our salvation, it was not simply and only the action of Christ on the Cross, but His entire "existence" (I can't think of a better word.) And this is done *by example* hence the Fathers saying God became a man that man might become (like) God, or Theosis. Theosis IS part and parcel the plan of salvation imo.

The way "universal salvation" was explained to me by my priest, was that all created beings, apparently including the angels, as some fell from heaven, have free will to lesser or greater extent...Therefor while it is certainly within God's omnipotence to save all created beings, it is not very likely...Similarly he would tell me that "we know beyond any shadow of doubt that Christ is fully present within the Apostolic (Orthodox) Church, which is the agent, organ, and body of salvation, however, He "could" certainly save any one, at any time, in any circumstance, that to think otherwise is to make impotent was is clearly Omnipotent."

Certainly, many martyrs never having been baptized in water, were baptized in their own blood; And Orthodoxy clearly refers to this many times when speaking of the first martyrs...I tend to believe the utter possiblity that any one and any thing can never be outside of the possiblity of coming closer to God.

Hell, is being burnt and blinded by the unwanted, unrecognized, and rejected Love and Glory of God...Heaven the opposite.

I ponder the "glory to glory" scripture, and think it much like my experience in this life, but on a far grander scale. That after death, in the presence of God, even returned to his feet, throughout eternity, we as humans both at once experience coming closer to Him, and the closer we become the farther we realize we actually are, and that this will go on through timeless eternity.

Again, I apologize for my ignorance should I be misleading in any of this.

Also, when scripture refers to "eternal damnation" "eternal blessedness" what are they actually refering to? One possiblity, "eternal" not in an eschatological sense, nor in a teleological sense, but in an ontological one...hence "glory TO glory" not simply "to Glory and then its 'over' ".

Were this not the case, would could not justify praying for the "dead." Those who are baptized in Christ (Potentially) are and remain alive in Christ, beyond the death of the body. I think it a fair assumption that those nearest Christ, throughout timeless eternity will continually "grow closer" to Him....

But then again, what do I know?

While I can make the claim that I am "widely enough read" of the Fathers, I am not nearly schooled enough to quote them consistently. Many of my ideas I've gleaned from St. Symeon the New Theologian, St. Gregory Palamas, and St. John Chrisostumos, although it would be quite an excersize for my LD brain to find all the references, again, please forgive any error.

What I'd like is if ya'll could respond in regards to my post and how it relates to your knowledge of the writings of the Church Fathers.

'umbly,
Kyprian

[Kyprian Galbraith]

So one could hold to the view that the soul existed before the physical body with some sort of extreamly subtle noetic body which was eventual lost bringing about a fall into a (human) material , angelic or demonic body later? Its only pre-existence without some sort of body that was addressed and anathmatized ?

I was discussing this topic on the "prexistence of the soul in wisdom of solomon " topic and it seems that St Anthony held to some form of the souls prexistence of the physical body.

The only reference I can think of that comes even close to a (human) pre-existence would be the words in (I believe) Jeremiah "I knew you before you existed in your mother's womb." That, in itself does not really even speak of pre-existence. And while we are not Jews, I would mention an ancient Hebrew notion; That man is tripartite, like the Holy Trinity, in this way:

God creates the spirit and the body simulteneously at conception, and when man takes his first breath out of the womb, these two are a unity, such as when we say Christ is fully human and fully divine, they cannot be (ultimately) seperated...and this "fusion" produces what we call the soul or the Fathers refered to as the nous, the "connective tissue", if you will, between the spirit and the body.

This idea exists in the Babylonian Talmud, and was the basis for the doctrine of resurrection of the physical body...we in fact are "uncomplete" without the body, hence the general resurrection at the end of times, all will stand before the throne of Christ in judgment, good and evil.

This being said, I agree with Peter, that pre-existence, particularly in the way that the Mormon(LDS cult) believes it would most likely be considered heresy.

'umbly,
in Him
Kyprian

[Terry McGee]

Is there a train of thought that addresses the nature of man as the offspring of God? Thinking this way, we may assume that God's act of "breathing" life into the body was a rationing of His own eternal spirit into the newly created soul and body of the man. In essence, God gave up a measure of Himself to create each of us. Considering this, it seems that pre-existance of the spirit part of man makes sense. However, the soul (which encompases our individuality) and the body (which came from dust and will return to dust) did not share in this pre-existance.

The spirit then could be viewed as a line extending forever in both directions as God exists.
The soul could be viewed as a ray with a beginning and extending indefinitely in one direction.
The body could be viewed as a line segment with a definite beginning and a definite end.

This view would reveal the difference between the 3 realms of existance that constitute a human being made in the immage of God. Although the soul and body did not pre-exist, the spirit which is essentially a measure of God Himself did always exist.

Are there any teachings that support this view?

[Herman Blaydoe]

Are there any teachings that support this view?

Not within Orthodoxy there aren't. I don't think that God "gives up" anything, and we do not believe that the spirit exists before conception. I have heard that the act of conception actually involves three parties, the man, the woman and the Holy Spirit. Our immortality is not innate, we have no immortality independent of God but is the result of His continuous act of Creation. Hopefully someone who can explain it better will step in soon...

Herman

[Owen Jones]

I have always felt that the doctrine of free will as it is espoused by most Christians today to be very rudimentary at best. My belief and faith are not sole acts of my will in any sense. I cannot account for the influences on me. I do not believe that I am simply a billiard ball being bashed about, but the idea that my free will acts independently is just as absurd. So I see no conflict between universal salvation, in some sense, and the continued exercise of free will.

[Father David Moser]

I have heard that the act of conception actually involves three parties, the man, the woman and the Holy Spirit. Our immortality is not innate, we have no immortality independent of God but is the result of His continuous act of Creation.


This being new calendar Christmas and old calendar St Herman's (by the way congratulations on your angel day Herman) I don't have the leisure to search out the exact quotes, but iirc, the fathers are actually divided on the generation of the soul in conception. There is one view that the soul is produced by the intercourse of the souls of the parents just as the body is produced by the intercourse of their bodies. Another view is that God creates a new soul at each conception. Both are generously supported by the fathers and neither has been condemned by the Church. Me, personal, I tend toward the view that the soul of the child is generated by the parents.

As for the pre-existence of the soul - St Basil (I beleive) is quite clear that the soul does not pre-exist the body, but that they both come into existence at the same instant - whether it is through a creative act of God or whether it is the result of conception. Also I do not believe that the fathers ever really speak of the spirit as a distinct entity of the soul, but rather the two are always joined.

Fr David Moser

[Terry McGee]

Hebrews 4:12 talks about the "word" being strong enough to divide between the spirit and the soul.

1 Thes 5:23 has Paul wishing His converts have their spirits and souls and bodies preserved blameless unto the coming of Christ. (That sounds like a definite division of soul and spirit)

If in deed they serve different functions, it would stand to reason that we should explore the difference between them.

I agree that the soul and body are created together at the same time, but the soul will continue after the body has died. The spirit seems to be associated with the conscience and a source of knowlege that is inate. It is the part of us that knows the Father's ways and will.

All three parts of a human being (spirit, soul, and body) are what make us a being created in the immage of God, who is also a triune being. (Father, Son, Holy Spirit)

I appreciate your patience with me. Please excuse any offense these coments may cause.

[Herman Blaydoe]

Body, soul and spirit are a trinitarian model. In the fullness of time we will once again have all three. The soul is not meant to exist alone, and only continues to exist at the will of God and will be reunited with the body and spirit at the Last Judgement. At least that is how this bear of little brain understands it. I look forward to correction if I am mistaken.

I find it interesting that the terms "soul" and "spirit" are sometimes interchanged in the writings of certain Fathers, what one calls "soul" another defines as "spirit".

Herman the Pooh

[Father David Moser]

I agree that the soul and body are created together at the same time, but the soul will continue after the body has died. The spirit seems to be associated with the conscience and a source of knowlege that is inate. It is the part of us that knows the Father's ways and will.

All three parts of a human being (spirit, soul, and body) are what make us a being created in the immage of God, who is also a triune being. (Father, Son, Holy Spirit)

I appreciate your patience with me. Please excuse any offense these coments may cause.

The separation of the soul and body is an unnatural occurrence. It was not a condition that was part of our created nature. This unnatural separation of soul and body is brought about as the effect of sin. That mankind loves life so much and seeks to hold onto it is evidence of the naturalness of that condition for it is the unnatural that we fear. Thus we can say that the body was never meant to be without the soul and vice versa.

The connection between the soul and the body however is not dissolved at their separation, but the soul, in a mystical manner maintains a connection with the body. To quote Monk Mitrophan in his book How our departed ones live:
"St Paul teaches that not only the soul but the body also continues its life in the earth, in corruption itself; and he explains this mystery of God's wisdom as a seed sown in the ground. The matter of the seed is secretly bound up with the power of growing life, and in the decomposition of the seed's matter into its component elements there lies the flowering, the development of further life. Just so, the Apostle continues, an immortal spirit is natural to the body of one deceased. (1Cor 15:51-54).
"This apostolic teaching on the life of the body even after its separation from the soul is explained thus by St. Gregory of Nyssa: 'As in a living man, the spirit, without complication, embraces and penetrates the whole complexity (composite nature) of the body, with the decomposition of the latter, our spirit, by its nature, finds it just as convenient and simple to have a relationship with the whole complexity (composite nature) of its body that has perished, while remaining in one or another realm of the spiritual world...'
"All that takes place with the body in the time of its decomposition into its elements, as well as after that, all its flowering and development for a new life, does not take place without the involvement and sympathy of the spirit. The body ripens for its future spirituality; and the soul, at the same time as the body, gradually matures into a consciousness of its lot corresponding to its earthly life, a consciousness of bliss or ruin together with its inseparable earthly companion, the body which now new and spiritual.
"And so, the soul has a relationship and sympathy with its body that is located on earth."

The eternal relationship of the soul and body also brings up the subject of the Resurrection for even if the soul and the body are separated now in physical death, they will not always be so, but the body will be resurrected (not re-created mind you) and the body and soul will be reunited thus restoring the natural and created condition of the human person.

Fr Michael Pomazansky in Orthodox Dogmatic Theology (http://www.holytrinitymission.org/books/english/dogmatics_pomazansky.htm)in speaking about the nature of man describes first the relationship of soul and body also emphasizes this relationship "Even with the death of the body, the bond of the soul with the body is not cut off forever. The time will come when the bodies of men will arise in a renewed form and will again be united forever with their souls..."

Fr Michael also goes into great detail describing the relationship of the soul and the spirit. He says, "...the spirit is evidently considered by the Apostle as the hidden part of the soul of a man." and "this same idea of the spirit as the higher, grace-given form of the life of the human soul is evidently what is meant by those Christian teachers and Fathers of the Church in the first centuries who distinguished in man a spirit as well as a soul. ..."

I have only referenced very brief and out of context remarks of Fr Michael in an attempt to give the sense of the more complete work. His book can be found online here (http://www.holytrinitymission.org/books/english/dogmatics_pomazansky.htm#_Toc514547747).

Fr David Moser

[Herman Blaydoe]

The shortest verse in Holy Scripture is John 11:35.

He weeps over the body of Lazarus, four days dead. I believe He weeps for the unnatural condition that Fr. David is explaining in his post above. According to the OSB, "As true man, Jesus shows by example that weeping is the natural human response to death. As true God He shows compassion upon His creation when the soul is torn from the body."

Herman

[Vasiliki D.]

In my readings, I have recently come across the idea of Universal Salvation, that is, the view held that everything in creation will eventually be saved, including those souls in Hell, the demons, even Satan himself! Origen was anamathetized (sp?) because of this view, (as well as the view of the pre-existense of souls). However, St. Gregory of Nyssa held this believe and he is regarded as a saint.

This view is obviously against the dominant Western view of eternal damnation in Hell; however, it seems to make more sense to me, believing in an All-merciful, All-powerful God.

St Gregory held this view but St. Basil the Great and the other St. Gregory did not and it was a point of contention between them. St. Gregory apparantly changed his mind shortly before he passed away.

Anyone who is re-bringing up this argument is clearly not reading his Scripture ... Jesus himself tells us the answer to this question ... the Rich man and Lazarus!

[Hieromonk Ambrose]

The teaching of apokatastasis (universal salvation, recapitulation in Christ) has always tugged at the hearts of the Eastern Orthodox and I have always thought this inclination towards mercy is a wonderful balance to the Western tendency, following St Augustine, to present mankind as the massa damnata atque damnabilis.

If you have the interest, please read through a recent lecture of the young Russian theologian-Bishop Hilarion Alfeyev of Vienna. You can feel, almost palpably, how he longs to hold to universal salvation and he expresses this deep longing through the words and insights of Saint Isaac the Syrian.

http://thedivinemercy.org/news/story.php?NID=3132

The Congress Catches Fire!
Russian Orthodox Bishop: God's Mercy is immeasurable love of the Father
By Dan Valenti (Apr 6, 2008)


"In an amazing, even surprising ecumenical moment in the Catholic Church’s first World Congress on Divine Mercy, Russian Orthodox Bishop Hilarion Alfeyev, bishop of Vienna and Austria as well as temporary administrator of the Diocese of Budapest and Hungary, took Divine Mercy to its logical conclusion. God is Love, all He created and sustains is always loved by Him. Even the creation that rejects Him continues in existence by His love. This unfathomable Divine Mercy can even make hell, “Gehenna,” temporary, according to Bishop Hilarion, who spoke on Day 3 of the Congress (Friday, April 5) at St. John Lateran Basilica.

"After Bishop Hilarion’s presentation, Cardinal Christoph Schönborn, who is presiding over the Congress in the name of Pope Benedict XVI, chatted warmly with Bishop Hilarion, shaking his hand and thanking him for his “courageous witness on the absolute mercy of God.”

One most surprising thing here is that in fact His Grace Bishop Hilarion was voicing a teaching condemned by the Roman Catholic Church but his hearers responded with fervent enthusiasm to his words.

[Hieromonk Ambrose]

Somebody, either Origin or Saint John Chrysostom (the former I think) wrote that Judas hung himself in a act of repentance so that he could ask forgiveness of Christ in the afterlife. Peter denied Christ before men with a curse and was forgiven. Judas betrayed him for thirty pieces of silver. Was it impossible for him to be forgiven by Christ?


The fate of souls is not finally determined until the great day of the final Judgement. It is then that we will all stand before the Judgement Seat of the Saviour. While we would be certain that the souls who are saved cannot be lost while they await this day, we are not so certain that the souls that may seem to be damned cannot find salvation (in ways about which we honestly have no idea.)

Here is another article from His Grace Bishop Hilarion in which he speaks of the universal salvation of all those who lived and died before the death of our Lord, God and Saviour Jesus Christ.

"The Descent of Christ into Hades in Eastern and Western Theological Traditions"
A lecture delivered at St Mary's Cathedral, Minneapolis, USA, on 5 November 2002

http://orthodoxeurope.org/page/11/1/5.aspx
[For full article]

Extract:
__________________________________________
The descent of Christ into Hades is one of the most mysterious, enigmatic and inexplicable events in New Testament history. In today's Christian world, this event is understood differently. Liberal Western theology rejects altogether any possibility for speaking of the descent of Christ into Hades literally, arguing that the scriptural texts on this theme should be understood metaphorically. The traditional Catholic doctrine insists that after His death on the cross Christ descended to hell only to deliver the Old Testament righteous from it. A similar understanding is quite widespread among Orthodox Christians.

On the other hand, the New Testament speaks of the preaching of Christ in hell as addressed to the unrepentant sinners: 'For Christ also died for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit; in which he went and preached to the spirit in prison, who formerly did not obey, when God's patience waited.

However, many Church Fathers and liturgical texts of the Orthodox Church repeatedly underline that having descended to hell, Christ opened the way to salvation for all people, not only the Old Testament righteous. The descent of Christ into Hades is perceived as an event of cosmic significance involving all people without exception. They also speak about the victory of Christ over death, the full devastation of hell and that after the descent of Christ into Hades there was nobody left there except for the devil and demons.
_________________________________________


I am sure if I had been born prior to the ecumenical condemnation of apocatastasis that I would have been an apocatastasian. It is interesting that while St Augustine disapproved of apocatastasis (who would expect otherwise?) but he mentions that it was the majority belief among Christians and those whom he calls "the fathers" before him.


-oOo-

[Terry McGee]

The separation of the soul and body is an unnatural occurrence. It was not a condition that was part of our created nature. This unnatural separation of soul and body is brought about as the effect of sin. That mankind loves life so much and seeks to hold onto it is evidence of the naturalness of that condition for it is the unnatural that we fear. Thus we can say that the body was never meant to be without the soul and vice versa.


I also see the evidence for this in scripture. The seperation between soul and body is eaier to understand than the difference between spirit and soul. So, do you feel also that the spirit is just a part of the soul? Or do you see more of a division between them?

[Peter S.]

I also see the evidence for this in scripture. The seperation between soul and body is eaier to understand than the difference between spirit and soul. So, do you feel also that the spirit is just a part of the soul? Or do you see more of a division between them?

I think some of the answer to your question to Father David is here, in John 1:4-5.

Peter

[Anna Stickles]

I also see the evidence for this in scripture. The seperation between soul and body is eaier to understand than the difference between spirit and soul. So, do you feel also that the spirit is just a part of the soul? Or do you see more of a division between them?

In the reading that I have done there is a lot of confusion of terminology in that body, soul, and spirit are not always used to refer to the same things among the different Orthodox writers, but are often used interchangeably. As best as I can make out an Orthodox anthropology there is the body, the rational soul (our normal psychoemotional life and rational thought), the noetic soul (that which can know and experience spiritual reality just as the body and rational soul knows and experiences sensible reality), and the spirit which is the breath of God which God Himself breathed into us in the beginning.

With this last, I think that normally when different writers say that Adam died after eating of the fruit, what they mean is that Adam was separated from this breath of God. Also when various writers mention the death of the soul, it often refers to the separation of the rational and noetic souls and the fact that we have become insensible to the noetic realm.

It is wrong to think that God breathed once and then that breath existed within man independently from God. Rather God continually breathes into Adam this breath of life and in fact He is breathing into Adam Himself, His own life and action) In rebelling against God, Adam separates Himself from God and this life.

[Ilaria]

It seems to me that the only comfort come to us from the special prayers for the dead ones.this is not heresy and not forbidden.
Remember that st. Gregory the Great prayed for Traian and his prayer was heard...Traian was saved:the Roman emperor,he who was a pagan, he who killed Christians in the Colosseum!
some may say:yes, St Gregory, he was a saint, he could do it!
(Anyway I am curious what determined him to pray for Traian but.. yet he did and he was heard)
Maybe this was just an example for us, to see how the prayer works...no one will dare to pray for...Hitler, unless he is a saint:)
remember st Silouan praying for EVERYBODY...and the athonite father who cried and said "if I could only hold them and take them away from hell"
Is it right, dear fathers, to think that maybe God keep waiting for our prayers to "help" universal salvation?

[Father David Moser]

I also see the evidence for this in scripture. The seperation between soul and body is eaier to understand than the difference between spirit and soul. So, do you feel also that the spirit is just a part of the soul? Or do you see more of a division between them?

Terry,

Did you look at the link to Fr Michael Pomazansky's work that I included in my answer? Please do, as he goes into much more detail, both from the scriptures and from the Holy Fathers. His conclusion, as I stated (and which I share) is that the spirit is a part of the soul.

Fr David Moser

[Hieromonk Ambrose]

It seems to me that the only comfort come to us from the special prayers for the dead ones.this is not heresy and not forbidden.
Remember that st. Gregory the Great prayed for Traian and his prayer was heard...Traian was saved:the Roman emperor,he who was a pagan, he who killed Christians in the Colosseum!
some may say:yes, St Gregory, he was a saint, he could do it!
(Anyway I am curious what determined him to pray for Traian
Why did he pray for Trajan?

Because there was a time when the holy Church of Rome was joined with her sister Churches and grace flowed through her in abundance. There was a time when the Romans believed that in exceptional circumstances God would deliver souls from hell. But since their falling away from the unity of the Church this teaching has been rejected. An ever increasing spirit of logic and legalism slowly overwhelmed the earlier inner life of grace and freedom.

We see the belief in the great prayer which still remains in the Roman liturgy:

"Libera animas omnium fidelium defunctorum de poenis inferni et de profundo lacu."

Roman scholars will say that this prayer means exactly what it says. Roman theologians will say that this was an error in the belief of the ancient Church and they have corrected it. They have retained the prayer but they no longer understand it as their ancestors in the faith understood it.

But there is no doubt that my ancestors in the faith, during the millennium when they were Orthodox believed that souls could be released from hell. In four days (19 December/ 1 January) it will be the commemoration of Saint Samthann of Clonbroney. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/celt-saints/message/3274 She was well known for the ability to get a soul out of hell. Saint Aidan of Ferns was also known for this. Praying a soul out of hell was, however, not an uncommon accomplishment for Irish saints; one scholar Lisa Bitel has claimed it to be an "almost exclusively Celtic motif."


So, certainly in the early days when Christianity was fresh and strong they thought that they could pray a man out of hell. Now it may be seen as rather questionable theology in our days, for either Church. Maybe the early Christians were wrong. Who can say? Once again, their old belief places a gentle question mark over some of the things that we have declared certain.

Here is something from the Rule of Saint Maelruain, from the holy monastery of Tallaght. It is 8th century:

"There is nothing which a person does for a soul that has departed that does not help it, both vigil and abstinence, and singing the intercession and frequent blessings. Filii pro mortuis parentibus debent poenitere.

A whole year therefore was Saint Maidoc of Ferns, with all his people, living on water and biscuit so as to ransom the soul of Brandubh, son of Eochaidh, from hell."

[Hieromonk Ambrose]

Ilaria: Remember that st. Gregory the Great prayed for Traian and his prayer was heard...Traian was saved:the Roman emperor,he who was a pagan, he who killed Christians in the Colosseum!
some may say:yes, St Gregory, he was a saint, he could do it!
(Anyway I am curious what determined him to pray for Traian


Why did he pray for Trajan?

Because there was a time when the holy Church of Rome was joined with her sister Churches and grace flowed through her in abundance. There was a time when the Romans believed that in exceptional circumstances God would deliver souls from hell. But since their falling away from the unity of the Church this teaching has been rejected. An ever increasing spirit of logic and legalism slowly overwhelmed the earlier inner life of grace and freedom.

We see the belief in the great prayer which still remains in the Roman liturgy:

"Libera animas omnium fidelium defunctorum de poenis inferni et de profundo lacu."

Roman scholars will say that this prayer means exactly what it says. Roman theologians will say that this was an error in the belief of the ancient Church and they have corrected it. They have retained the prayer but they no longer understand it as their ancestors in the faith understood it.

Dear Ilaria,

This quote comes from the Catholic Encyclopedia. It shows that they remember that there was a time when the Church of Rome was more fluid in her beliefs about these matters...

"...........In itself, it is no rejection of Catholic dogma to suppose that God might at times, by way of exception, liberate a soul from hell. Thus some argued from a false interpretation of 1 Peter 3:19 sq., that Christ freed several damned souls on the occasion of His descent into hell. Others were misled by untrustworthy stories into the belief that the prayers of Gregory the Great rescued the Emperor Trajan from hell. But now theologians are unanimous in teaching that such exceptions never take place and never have taken place, a teaching which should be accepted."

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07207a.htm

[Terry McGee]

Terry,

Did you look at the link to Fr Michael Pomazansky's work that I included in my answer? Please do, as he goes into much more detail, both from the scriptures and from the Holy Fathers. His conclusion, as I stated (and which I share) is that the spirit is a part of the soul.

Fr David Moser

Thank you Father Moser.
I will read the article this morning. I look foreword to further discussion.

[M.C. Steenberg]

From the above:

In my readings, I have recently come across the idea of Universal Salvation, that is, the view held that everything in creation will eventually be saved, including those souls in Hell, the demons, even Satan himself! Origen was anamathetized (sp?) because of this view, (as well as the view of the pre-existense of souls). However, St. Gregory of Nyssa held this believe and he is regarded as a saint.


St Gregory held this view but St. Basil the Great and the other St. Gregory did not and it was a point of contention between them. St. Gregory apparantly changed his mind shortly before he passed away.

We need to be careful when attempting to provide wrote summaries of the fathers' writings. So far as I am aware, this matter was never one of contention between St Gregory and St Basil, or between the two Sts Gregory. St Gregory of Nyssa did write speculatively on the issue (as has been discussed at great length in various threads: I encourage interested readers and new members to spend some time with the Search feature and read them), but I do not know of any justification for the claim that 'St Gregory apparently changed his mind shortly before he passed away.' If there are any texts one wishes to put forward to substantiate these comments, I am sure we would all be grateful.

INXC, Dcn Matthew

[Anna Stickles]

Now it may be seen as rather questionable theology in our days, for either Church.


Not I think for Orthodoxy, at least not among those who are respected as knowing something about spriitual realities, those in fact who are considered the real theologians. "The theologian is one who prays."

This story from The Mountain of Silence (http://www.monachos.net/forum/showthread.php?t=5223)is told of Elder Ephraim, described by Fr Maximos as "one of the greatest elders and ascetics of the 20th centruy, a real contemporary saint, one endowed with extraordinary divine gifts"



"One day while Elder Ephraim was in deep prayer, he had a vision. With the Grace of the Holy Spirit he realized that his elder, upon his death, was cut off from God and was suffering in Hell...."

"But right at that moment,", Fr Maximos continued, "elder Ephraim undertook a mercurial spiritual undertaking that lasted for years, a struggle of prayer, fasting and charity, in order to free his elder from Hell. He fell to his knees and implored God's mercy to spare his deceased elder and free his soul from that tormented state. For the next four years elder Ephraim prayed continuously for the sake of his late elder. Every time he prayed he saw the soul of PapaNikeforos moving away from Hell until he was completely liberated. He exited Hell thanks to the prayers of his disciple that he had tyrannized for four decades."

"I still cannot see how that is possible," Maria said, and shook her head in disbelief.

"You see Maria, the Ecclesia has the power, through the prayers of the saints to save the souls of the departed. Believe me, the Ecclesia does have that power. Of course for those exposed to the life of Mt Athos, elder Ephraim's story is not so extraordinary...." Fr Maximos said.

[Hieromonk Ambrose]

This quote comes from the Catholic Encyclopedia. It shows that they remember that there was a time when the Church of Rome was more fluid in her beliefs about these matters...

"...........In itself, it is no rejection of Catholic dogma to suppose that God might at times, by way of exception, liberate a soul from hell. Thus some argued from a false interpretation of 1 Peter 3:19 sq., that Christ freed several damned souls on the occasion of His descent into hell. Others were misled by untrustworthy stories into the belief that the prayers of Gregory the Great rescued the Emperor Trajan from hell. But now theologians are unanimous in teaching that such exceptions never take place and never have taken place, a teaching which should be accepted."

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07207a.htmThis is, I think, germane to this thread (although some forums seem to welcome the inclusion of Oriental Orthodox and other forums do not.)


I was reading an article recently by Bishop Hilarion Alfeyev called "Orthodox Worship as a School of Theology", and I was surprised to come across the following quote:-

Bishop Hilarion: Several years ago I came across a short article in a journal of the Coptic Church where it stated that this Church had decided to remove prayers for those held in hell from its service books, since these prayers “contradict Orthodox teaching”. Puzzled by this article, I decided to ask a representative of the Coptic Church about the reasons for this move. Recently I had the possibility to do so, and a Coptic Metropolitan replied that the decision was made by his Synod because, according their official doctrine, no prayers can help those in hell. I told the metropolitan that in the liturgical practice of the Russian Orthodox Church and other local Orthodox Churches there are prayers for those held in hell, and that we believe in their saving power. This surprised the Metropolitan, and he promised to study this question in more detail.

Here is the original article ...

http://orthodoxeurope.org/page/12/1.aspx

And there is a brief thread here on the Forum about this recent change in Coptic Orthodox doctrine

http://www.monachos.net/forum/showthread.php?t=4026

[Andreas Moran]

Re: Elder Ephraim and his elder - I find it alarming that an Athonite elder can end up in hell!

[Anna Stickles]

This Elder was evidently very abusive.



"Father Nikeforos was a notorious elder with a reputation for being a very harsh and authoriatrian man. I can't describe to you the difficulties that elder Ephraim had to go through during his apprenticeship with this elder. Father Nikeforos was merciless, had no discernment, no trace of human sympathy, no compassion. Other elders who knew him well used to say, 'We would go there to visit Fr Ephraim, but we could not tolerate his elder for more than fifteen or twenty minutes so we had to take our leave.' Fr Maximos in The Mountain of Silence.


Just yesterday I started reading the biography of Elder Arsenios the Cave Dweller which shed some more light on this story.



"When Fr Ephraim first came to the Holy Mt he stayed with Fr Nikiphoros at Katounakia.... Fr Nikiphoros was very strict with his monks. They had to do handiwork all day and strict fasts. However, when it came to prayer and conduct, he was in the dark. A monk without prayer does not differ from a lay-person. But what did the all-loving God provide, seeing this well-intentioned and thirsty you man? ...

The story goes on to show how God arranged for Elder Joseph the Hesychast to have Fr Ephraim come to do Liturgies for him and he said to the young man,

"Well from now on be obedient to your elder but as for prayer, that is my job." He took young Fr Ephraim under his wing and taught him much and took care of him in many ways.

It is a long story, too long to type, but it is a beautiful story of how God formed the future elder Ephraim between harshness on one hand and love on the other.

[Paul Cowan]

Re: Elder Ephraim and his elder - I find it alarming that an Athonite elder can end up in hell!

No one is exempt. Pity the elder of this elder who was unable to train him. He will also be called to account for his "fruit" as we all are. Pray for me THE worst of sinners

Paul

[Andreas Moran]

Pray for me THE worst of sinners

Paul

Pray for me, the weakest of men and the worst of sinners!

[Evan]

Dear friends,

I'm aware that this is a very old thread, but a nagging interest in the question of whether one can or cannot hope -- indeed, whether one may dare to hope-- for universal restoration has drawn me to it.

Specifically, I'm having difficulty reconciling the propriety of such a hope with the parables of the Last Judgment and the wedding feast(s) and the vineyard and the talents in the synoptic Gospels, the more apocalyptic books of the New Testament (Second Thessalonians, Second Peter, and Revelation) and the absolutely bone-chilling passages one finds in St. Gregory Palamas, St. Augustine, and St. John Chrysostom concerning the final separation.

Then there's St. Athanasius' account of Arius' demise in his letter to Serapion: " And he (St. Alexander of Constantinople) besought these two things, saying, 'If Arius is brought to communion tomorrow, let me Your servant depart, and destroy not the pious with the impious; but if You will spare Your Church (and I know that You will spare), look upon the words of Eusebius and his fellows, and give not your inheritance to destruction and reproach, and take off Arius, lest if he enter into the Church, the heresy also may seem to enter with him, and henceforward impiety be accounted for piety.'"

Yes, I know that some among the Fathers have speculated as to a final restoration. I've read St. Gregory of Nyssa "On the Soul and the Resurrection." That's why this is such a difficult matter for me to engage with. Dare we hope for the salvation of a man struck dead by the judgment of God for his persistent impiety prior to receiving communion? Do we not run the risk of substituting our own notions of what is loving for God's love, which St. John the Theologian seemed to think compatible with lakes of fire and burning sulfur? The same St. John, of course, who tells us so often that God is love. And yet, some Fathers seemed to have so hoped regardless.

Dare we even pray for Arius, whom the Church has pronounced cursed and in Her hymnography describes as being in Satan's bosom?


In Christ,
Evan

[Aidan Kimel]

FYI: I came across this article today which may be of interest to some members of Monachos:

John Sachs, "Apocatastasis in patristic theology (http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_hb6404/is_n4_v54/ai_n28631386/?tag=content;col1)"

[Evan]

Well, it's certainly comprehensive!

[Antonios]

FYI: I came across this article today which may be of interest to some members of Monachos:

John Sachs, "Apocatastasis in patristic theology (http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_hb6404/is_n4_v54/ai_n28631386/?tag=content;col1)"

Thank you Father Alvin for the link!