The Saints And The Resurrection Of The Body

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='kafka' post='1477750' date='Mar 15 2008, 05:48 PM']what do you mean by the vision of God? I agree that a person may experience God in moment or moments of contemplation where it is like a Timeless and Placeless experience, but as far as I know the only human to possess the actual Light of Glory while on earth was Christ.[/quote]
The vision of the uncreated Light is the goal of hesychastic prayer.

By the way, Jesus did not "possess" the uncreated Light of Glory; instead, He is its source, or – to be more precise – the Tri-hypostatic God is the uncreated Light.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='kafka' post='1477781' date='Mar 15 2008, 06:23 PM']So this is what we in the West call the Beautific Vision.

"becoming God?"[/quote]
Not exactly, at least if what you mean by the term "beatific vision" is what St. Thomas Aquinas teaches, i.e., that man will have an intellectual vision of the divine essence. In Eastern theology the divine essence is unapproachable and utterly incomprehensible, no man can or will ever see it; instead, theosis involves a real participation in the uncreated divine energies, which flow out from the three divine persons as a gift to all of humanity.

[quote name='kafka' post='1477781' date='Mar 15 2008, 06:23 PM']you mean becoming like God? Or like Christ said "gods" with a little g.[/quote]
Not "like" God, that is, if by that term you mean a mere similitude or created likeness. The Greek word [i]omoiosis[/i] (normally translated into English as "likeness") actually means to be assimilated to God, and not merely [i]like[/i] Him. In other words, it involves a real participation in His energies, which – by grace – become ours to such a degree that we become eternal and uncreated. St. Gregory Palamas spoke about this in great detail in one of his letters, for as he explained:

"According to the divine Maximus, the Logos of well-being, by grace is present unto the worthy, bearing God, Who is by nature above all beginning and end, Who makes those who by nature have a beginning and an end become by grace without beginning and without end, because the Great Paul also, no longer living the life in time, but the divine and eternal life of the indwelling Logos, became by grace without beginning and without end; and Melchisedek had neither beginning of days, nor end of life, not because of his created nature, according to which he began and ceased to exist, but because of the divine and uncreated and eternal grace which is above all nature and time, being from the eternal God. Paul, therefore, was created only as long as he lived the life created from non-being by the command of God. But when he no longer lived this life, but that which is present by the indwelling of God, he became uncreated by grace, as did also Melchisedek and everyone who comes to possess the Logos of God, alone living and acting within himself.” [St. Gregory Palamas, [i]Third Letter to Akindynos[/i]]

Edited March 16, 2008 by Apotheoun

[kafka]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1477783' date='Mar 15 2008, 08:23 PM']The vision of the uncreated Light is the goal of hesychastic prayer.

By the way, Jesus did not "possess" the uncreated Light of Glory; instead, He is its source, or – to be more precise – the Tri-hypostatic God is the uncreated Light.[/quote]
I was referring to the human nature of Christ. The Light of Glory is a gift, infused into to the soul which enables a human or angel to see God, face to face. The Light of Glory isnt the vision itself. A human cannot see God, intuitively, by his own abilities. I think we are mixing up some terms because of the East-West differences

[kafka]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1477793' date='Mar 15 2008, 08:37 PM']Not exactly, at least if what you mean by the term "beatific vision" is what St. Thomas Aquinas teaches, i.e., that man will have an intellectual vision of the divine essence. In Eastern theology the divine essence is unapproachable and utterly incomprehensible, no man can or will ever see it; instead, theosis involves a real participation in the uncreated divine energies, which flow out from the three divine persons as a gift to all of humanity.
Not "like" God, that is, if by that term you mean a mere similitude or created likeness. The Greek word [i]omoiosis[/i] (normally translated into English as "likeness") actually means to be assimilated to God, and not merely [i]like[/i] Him. In other words, it involves a real participation in His energies, which – by grace – become ours to such a degree that we become eternal and uncreated. St. Gregory Palamas spoke about this in great detail in one of his letters, for as he explained:[/quote]
I agree with most of what you say, though I admit there is a barrier with the concepts. But we do believe in the West that the Blessed and Angels see God, intuitivel, face to face, without medium, any sort of barrier. What we do not do is see God or know Him as He knows and see Himself. It was infallibly defined by Benedict XII:

We define that the souls of all the saints in heaven have seen and do see the Divine Essence by direct intuition and face to face [visione intuitivâ et etiam faciali], in such wise that nothing created intervenes as an object of vision, but the Divine Essence presents itself to their immediate gaze, unveiled, clearly and openly; moreover, that in this vision they enjoy the Divine Essence, and that, in virtue of this vision and this enjoyment, they are truly blessed and possess eternal life and eternal rest" (Denzinger, Enchiridion, ed. 10, n. 530--old edition, n, 456; cf. nn. 693, 1084, 1458 old, nn. 588, 868).


"The Greek word [i]omoiosis[/i] (normally translated into English as "likeness") actually means to be assimilated to God, and not merely [i]like[/i] Him. In other words, it involves a real participation in His energies, which – by grace – become ours to such a degree that we become eternal and uncreated."

To me this is a misnomer. How can something created become uncreated. I agree there is created and uncreated grace but humans merely possess these as gifts from God, they dont transform into God.

Maybe I am misreading. i dont want to relearn a whole new theological system, but I do appreciate learning more about your theological inheritance.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='kafka' post='1477794' date='Mar 15 2008, 06:38 PM']I was referring to the human nature of Christ. The Light of Glory is a gift, infused into to the soul which enables a human or angel to see God, face to face. The Light of Glory isnt the vision itself. A human cannot see God, intuitively, by his own abilities. I think we are mixing up some terms because of the East-West differences[/quote]
Christ's human nature is indivisible from His divine nature, because they have been united in the eternal hypostasis of the Logos. That said, we can only [i]think[/i] of them distinctly (i.e., in [i]theoria[/i]), but to actually separate them or declare them separable is to fall into the Nestorian heresy.

Moreover, Christ's human nature was deified from the first moment of His conception in the womb of the Theotokos, for as St. John Damascence said, ". . . the Word Himself became flesh, having been in truth conceived of the Virgin, but coming forth as God with the assumed nature which, as soon as He was brought forth into being, was deified by Him, so that these three things took place simultaneously, the assumption of our nature, the coming into being, and the deification of the assumed nature by the Word" [St. John Damascene, [i]De Fide Orthodoxa[/i], Book III, Chapter 12].

Edited March 16, 2008 by Apotheoun

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='kafka' post='1477797' date='Mar 15 2008, 06:47 PM']It was infallibly defined by Benedict XII:

We define that the souls of all the saints in heaven have seen and do see the Divine Essence by direct intuition and face to face [visione intuitivâ et etiam faciali], in such wise that nothing created intervenes as an object of vision, but the Divine Essence presents itself to their immediate gaze, unveiled, clearly and openly; moreover, that in this vision they enjoy the Divine Essence, and that, in virtue of this vision and this enjoyment, they are truly blessed and possess eternal life and eternal rest" (Denzinger, Enchiridion, ed. 10, n. 530--old edition, n, 456; cf. nn. 693, 1084, 1458 old, nn. 588, 868).[/quote]
I do not believe that Benedict XII's teaching is infallible on the "beatific vision"; and moreover, it is incompatible with the teaching of the Eastern Fathers who universally declare a vision of the divine essence to be impossible. Thus, as an Eastern Catholic, I must reject the teaching espoused in [i]Benedictus Deus[/i].

[kafka]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1477802' date='Mar 15 2008, 08:56 PM']I do not believe that Benedict XII's teaching is infallible on the "beatific vision"; and moreover, it is incompatible with the teaching of the Eastern Fathers who universally declare a vision of the divine essence to be impossible. Thus, as an Eastern Catholic, I must reject the teaching espoused in [i]Benedictus Deus[/i].[/quote]
why do you not believe it is not infallibe? Do you think it doesnt meet the criteria for infallibility or merely since it disagrees with the Eastern Fathers?

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='kafka' post='1477805' date='Mar 15 2008, 07:09 PM']why do you not believe it is not infallibe? Do you think it doesnt meet the criteria for infallibility or merely since it disagrees with the Eastern Fathers?[/quote]
I reject it because it contradicts more than 1,200 years of patristic tradition (cf. the writings of St. Irenaeus of Lyons, St. Clement of Alexandria, St. Athanasios, St. Gregory of Nyssa, St. Basil the Great, St. John Chyrsostom, St. Maximos the Confessor, St. John Damascene, St. Gregory Palamas, et al.).

Edited March 16, 2008 by Apotheoun

[kafka]

alright well I dont want to continue debating over whether or not it is an infallible teaching. It is not the purpose of the thread.

Any other comments, discussions, etc on the original subject are welcome.

[Servant of the Secret Fire]

I [i]did[/i] wonder if I should have posted that in one of the open forums, seeing as there generally isn't too much doctrine on what you might call the "specifics" of heaven ("not for us to know" and all that).

I'll post a proper reply once I've had time to read all of this thread.

[mortify]

It's [b]De Fide[/b] that the blessed in heaven have an immediate knowledge of God's Essence. Though it is also De Fide that the Essence remains incomprehensible to the blessed.

[color="#0000FF"]"For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face; now I know in part, but then I will know fully just as I also have been fully known." 1 Cor 13: 12

"Beloved, now we are children of God, and it has not appeared as yet what we will be We know that when He appears, we will be like Him, because we will see Him just as He is." 1 John 3: 2

"Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God." Mathew 5: 8

"See that you do not despise one of these little ones, for I say to you that their angels in heaven continually see the face of My Father who is in heaven." Mathew 18: 10
[/color]
Saint Irenaeus _Adversus Haereses_ IV 20 and V 7: 2

I'm getting this information from Ludwig Ott's _Fundementals of Catholic Dogma_ and he does mention that around mid 4th century some Eastern Fathers, began to suggest there isn't an immediate knowledge of God's essence:
[quote]"Their assertions in point of fact can, however, be explained as being directed against Eunomius, who claimed an immediate cognition of God, even in this world. In contrast to this, the Fathers stress that the knowledge of God in this world is mediate, in the next world immediate, but not comprehensive. St. John Chrysostom compares the vision of God in the other world with the sight of the transfigured Christ on Tabor and says: "What shall be said when Royalty Itself appears, when the palace is opened, and it is permitted to view the King Himself, no longer enigmatically nor in a glass, but face to face, no longer in faith bit in vision" (Ad Theodorum lapsum I ii)[/quote]
Ott, Ludwig. [u]Fundementals of Catholic Dogma[/u]. Rockford: Tan Publications, 1960: 21


There is more on the De Fide teaching of the Beatific Vision, but I limited myself to quoting on the issues disputed.

God bless

[mortify]

Kafka, I listened to an audio by Fr RIpperger at Sensus Traditionis on the topic of hell. He said the damned fear and hate the resurrection because they will get their body back, and when they do so their pain will be intensified in hell because the resurrected body is [i]qualitatively different[/i] and will therefore be able to sense and sustain an unimaginable amount of pain. Perhaps the opposite is true with regards to the blessed in heaven?

Just a thought,
God bless

[Servant of the Secret Fire]

Regarding the book of Revelation, I too think that it is a mistake to place too much emphasis on 70AD when seeking its meaning, although that may well be one aspect of it. On the other hand I also think that care must be taken when trying to understand what it says about the end of time: clearly it says a lot about that, but in more subtle ways than is sometimes said. I also think that its liturgical significances may be the best tools we have for interpreting what it says about the end of time. So far I have only really encountered this line of thought in Scott Hahn's book "The Lamb's Supper" but I'd like to explore it more at some point.

Returning to the specific topic of my question, I'd recommend anyone who is interested read Theoketos' repsonse in the Q&A forum. The idea of body and soul being more perfect when united makes sense to me, since that is how we were created. I suppose we then simply have to live with the paradox of adding heaven "getting better" for want of a better phrase.

In some ways this paradox probably ties in with our conceptual difficulties regarding time and timelessness that Apotheoun mentioned above.

Edited March 17, 2008 by Servant of the Secret Fire

[kafka]

[quote name='mortify' post='1478718' date='Mar 17 2008, 09:54 AM']Kafka, I listened to an audio by Fr RIpperger at Sensus Traditionis on the topic of hell. He said the damned fear and hate the resurrection because they will get their body back, and when they do so their pain will be intensified in hell because the resurrected body is [i]qualitatively different[/i] and will therefore be able to sense and sustain an unimaginable amount of pain. Perhaps the opposite is true with regards to the blessed in heaven?

Just a thought,
God bless[/quote]
definitely some interesting thoughts. What I would add is this:

Besides the pain of loss and the pain of hatred, another chief suffering the damned will experience in Hell is that they will always be stuck in a sort of passage of Time and stuck in a sort of Place.

". . .And the devil, who seduced them, was cast into the pool of fire and sulphur, where both the beast and the false prophetess shall be tortured, day and night, forever and ever." (Rev 20:10)

"day and night" represents the passage of Time. "Forever and ever" obviously means Hell will never end. So going back to what Father Ripperger taught, since Hell is in a sort of passage of Time and in a sort of Place and subject to fire, the material bodies of the damned will have to be given some sort of immaterial quality, in order to sustain suffering after suffering, moment after moment, forever and ever. In other words, they are given new bodies fitting for the New (Second) Hell. And these bodies are not like other corporeal things since they do not eventually come to dust.

In juxtaposition, the new resurrected-glorified bodies of the Saints, are fitting for the New Heaven. Although Heaven is created; it is Timeless and Placeless, since it is with God. Saints experience Timelessness (also Timefullness) and Placelessness(also Placefulness), since they are with God, who is Eternity. Therefore, I speculate the new glorified bodies of the Saints will given a Timeless and Placeless quality, since the whole Saint (glorified:
soul-body-spirit) will be with God and of Timeless and Placeless Heaven. Their new bodies will be given some sort of immaterial Timeless and Placeles quality, while retaining their flesh, organs, bones, blood, etc. With this in mind take a look at what Saint Paul wrote:

"Also, there are heavenly bodies and earthly bodies. But while the one, certainly, has the glory of heaven, the other has the glory of earth. . .So it is also with the resurrection of the dead. What is sown in corruption shall rise to incorruption. . . What is sown with an animal body shall rise with a spiritual body. If there is an animal body, there is also a spiritual one. . . So what is, at first, not spiritual, but animal, next becomes spiritual. The first man, being earthly, was of the earth; the second man, being heavenly, will be of heaven. . .For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will rise up, incorruptible. And we shall be transformed. . .Thus, it is necessary for this corruptibility to be clothed with incorruptibility, and for this mortality to be clothed with immortality. (Cor 1: 40-53)