Can you please tell me if Divine Mercy Sunday services will be incorpoated into the Byzantine faith in the future? I understand Pope John Paul II approved this feast day and asked that it be propagated throughout the Catholic world. It would be such a loss for our Byzantine Catholics not to know about this very important feast day. I'd appreciate anything you can share with me on this. Thanks and God bless!

No they will not. Pope John Paul promulgated the Feast of Divine Mercy for the Latin Church and said nothing of it to Eastern Catholics. It would be a loss if we Byzantine Catholics lost the Sunday of St. Thomas, which we celebrate on the Sunday after Pascha.

Fr. Deacon Lance

Divine Mercy Sunday is a strictly Latin thing, and is based on a theology of salvation that is foreign to the East:

The Latin Church view on salvation is legalistic, based on "satisfactionalism." In their view, even when the penitent is spared eternal "punishment" in the sacrament of reconciliation, "temporal punishment" remains (this is where the idea of purgatory came from).

In the East, there is no distinction between "eternal" and "temporal" punishment. In the sacrament of repentance, your sins are completely absolved; no further "satisfaction" is needed. Thus, in light of our theology, such a feast makes no sense.

For us, EVERY Sunday is "Divine Mercy" Sunday!

God bless,

Karen

Why is there such a disagreement between the East and West in this regards? To me it seems odd that there would be divergent views within the Catholic Church on this matter. Is there some sort of agreement that since it isn't permanent punishment, it's a doctrine that "doesn't matter?" Does this mean that Eastern Catholics don't have to suffer in the afterlife at all? What about us Latin Catholics? If so, maybe I should switch soon because if I'm lucky enough to get in I would still probably be in the waiting room for awhile.

I also wonder what we should take from other religions and incorporate into our own. As a Latin Catholic, should I deny the practices of the East that may help me grow in my spirituality and closeness to God? Should I only embrace them and practice them as my own if I am willing to completely make the change to Byzantine Catholic? I think it's difficult because our traditions/histories/cultures mean so very much to us, as they should. Is the answer to take up a devotion on a personal level? I really don't know.

By the way, I'm not just trying to get my post count up. Also, I'm not saying the Byzantine Church should just adopt the Feast (unless Rome orders them), especially if there is an important feast such as for St. Thomas that was mentioned.

Also, for future reference, how should I refer to the Eastern Catholic Churches? Is Byzantine all right for the board? What about in general?

Hey T-bone (I want steak for supper now, ha!)

It's hairy, I admit.

Remember, Byzantine Rite Catholics were Orthodox until the 17th century... so even though we are in communion with Rome and assent to RC dogma such as the Immaculate Conception and papal primacy, we are Orthodox in theology.

You raise an excellent question, btw, about whether these two views of salvation can be reconciled to each other. This is something that I am personally struggling with.

For now, I'll just say that the West and the East speak totally different languages. :rolleyes:

God bless,

Karen

Dear T-Bone,

You asked:

This is my belief: Since we do not have much in the way of Scriptures regarding the afterlife, we can only hold onto certain theological ideas presented in the East. One such thought is tied to the teaching of Theosis.

From Wikipedia [en.wikipedia.org] :

As we move into our next state of existence, we rest, hopefully, close to the Light of God. Some feel this Light is purifying us towards the last stages of Divinization, where it will be completed during our Eternal Resurrection! Glory be to Jesus Christ! Glory forever!

I have read where others feel the Light of God may not be pleasant on those who have not carried Christ in their hearts. I guess that could be like a purgation of sins, or a painful purifying of the spirit. The point is no one knows for sure.

As Karen states, we are absolved from our sins when we truly and with our whole heart participate in the Sacrament of Reconciliation.

I hope this helps.

In Christ,

Michael

I sometimes wonder if the topic under discussion is what St. Ephrem was teaching about in the segment of his hymn I quote below. If it is, may I also be granted worthy to be drenched in the shower of Christ�s mercy as I (hopefully!) approach Paradise.


~Isaac

Dear All,
I have noticed in several threads a mention of a forty-day post-mortem period when the soul of the departed remains near the body. Could some kind friend provide a link where I can learn more about this?

Thanks

[I can't comment on the other posts, but I want to address the first question and this post is directed to the first question]

SueB, in brief I would say that the Divine Mercy Sunday should not be incorporated into the public prayer of a particular Byzantine- parish because it's not part of the Byzantine liturgy. But it could definitely be part of one's private prayer, and if someone wishes they should definitely do Divine Mercy-type activities with a good Roman parish.

Why do I say this?

Liturgy is the way men publicly worship God (and teach how to worship and understand God!) according to a fixed rite given by the past and by culture. In Christian liturgy, we worship according to what is given to us by our bishops and their predecessors. In the Byzantine tradition, there is a detailed, fixed calendar, a VERY complex and fixed Liturgy of the Hours, and as a culmination the Divine Liturgy. The Liturgy of the Hours is so fixed and theologically dense that it's very difficult to learn and, in my view attendance, at the full Liturgy at a monastery for a year is equivalent to a master's in Byzantine rite theology. A Byzantine parish's worship ought to focus on a pastorally appropriate taste of the full Byzantine Liturgy of the Hours and other prayers of the Byzantine calendar, topped off by the Divine Liturgy.

Now, in your average Roman parish* the Roman liturgy -for better or worse, and despite the Vatican's efforts - consists mostly of the Mass and only the Mass according to a calendar different from the Byzantine one. The remainder of one's prayer life is filled with private prayers of one's own choosing - the privatized Roman Liturgy of the Hours, the Rosary, the Little Office of the Virgin, the Divine Mercy chaplet, etc. The last three have all been given by God through private revelation, promulgated by popular devotion, and are NOT part of the formal Roman Liturgy.

So, we have a fundamentally different spiritual practice between a "good" Byzantine and Roman parish. In my view, the Byzantine Rite has very a fixed liturgy (public prayer) according to a complex and fixed calendar, whereas your average Roman parish has a daily Mass and the faithful supplement this with various private prayers outside of the formal Liturgy. They're both perfectly fine, but I think the average Roman usage should not enter the liturgy of the Byzantine Church because it alters the Byzantine Liturgy in a way out of line with its nature.

Well, there you have my longwinded answer, in a subject I'm really not qualified to babble about. I hope you find it helpful. I also pray that any Divine Mercy-type devotions you may undertake will aid in your spiritual growth.

Markos


* this isn't of course the case in monasteries, where things are more than a bit different.

Glory to God that a Divine Mercy Sunday is celebrated by my Romano-Catholic brethren.

Glory to God that for my Byzantine-Catholic brethren every Sunday is a Divine Mercy Sunday.

God's mercy be our bread, to His hands let us hasten our steps.

Each day must be lived as a Day of Ressurection, a Pascha to Life. Every hour, every moment. See? God's name is wonderful in His works!

If I were a Roman-Catholic or Byzantine-Catholic I would have been faithful to Father Pope and Catholic Church, as Orthodox I am faithful in all to the Orthodox Church. Let us keep our eyes on Christ, as Saint Gregory of Nyssa said.

My brethren, obedience is life.

In Risen Christ, Marian

Thank you everybody for responding to my post. For Deacon Lance, since Divine Mercy Sunday is a Roman Rite thing and cannot easily be incorporated into the Byzantine faith, why not propagate it another way by telling Byzantines they are free to participate in their local Roman Catholic Church? The late Pope John Paul II opened the doors of the Church on this day for everybody, not just Roman Catholics. I realize this would have to be addressed and approved by Byzantine Church superiors, but I think it would be so well worth it to do this. Divine Mercy Sunday is a special day BEYOND comprehension. Every sin from the day you were born is washed away completely and it brings your soul to the state it was on the day you were baptized. When I found out about Divine this day, my heart jumped for joy. I felt compelled to share this to members of my Byzantine Catholic faith. SUEB

More info. on Divine Mercy Sunday.

St. Faustina commented to Our Lord: "They (her superiors) tell me that there is already such a feast and so why should I talk about it?" Jesus answered: "And who knows anything about this feast? No one! Even those who should be proclaiming My mercy and teaching people about it often do not know about it themselves. That is why I want the image to be solemnly blessed on the First Sunday after Easter, and I want it to be venerated publicly so that every soul may know about it." (Diary 341) St. Faustina wrote, "It will be a new splendor for the Church, although it has been dormant in it from long ago." (Diary, 378) Isn't this feast just what we need to bring hope and healing to our alienated and lapsed Catholics and for our Church in this time of unrest and uncertainty?

Sadly, I just attended a Ukrainian Catholic (Eastern Rite) mass. When Father did what he called "meditation on death" he focused on the concept of time. He was explaining that God has no concept of time, and that the deceased could have expereinced, in our terms, thousands of years even though he had been dead for less than four days. He also went on about how the deceased was in a place, closer to God now.

I am anything but knowledgable in Eastern theology, but I thought that this "meditation on death" would be somewhat relevant to your question. Father made no mention of this 40 day period, and suggested quite the opposite.

Speaking of the latin Divine Mercy apparition, would anyone happen to know the name of the person who wrote the icon below?

[Linked Image]


~Isaac

Now I see the problem well meaning private revelations like Fatima and the Divine Mercy can cause for Eastern Rite Catholics. There can be pressure to adopt something new from the West, I mean if someone is speaking from heaven and promoting a particular private devotion, the pressure to adopt it can be great. Instead of looking and searching for something that the East has which can fill the bill just nicely.
P.S. I am not against the Divine Mercy Revelations.

Why would we do this???

Firstly, as I previously explained, we believe that ANYTIME you make a sincere and complete confession, your sins are removed completely, and your soul is restored to its baptismal state. So the whole idea behind "Divine Mercy" Sunday doesn't make sense in our theology.

Secondly, the Byzantine rite is infested with Latinizations to begin with, and is in danger of disappearing. Many Byzantine Catholics attend Roman Catholic churches; the LAST thing we should do is ENCOUAGE said Latinizations and defections to the Latin rite just to promote a private devotion that is based on a theology that contradicts our own! That would be suicide.


God bless,

Karen

UC,
I talked to a priest of our Eparchy and he said that you should definitely write a letter to the Chancellor.

Karen, I'll try to explain this a little better. Something VERY special happens on Divine Mercy Sunday. Jesus opens the floodgates of Heaven and pours out his mercy all over the Earth. Not only are your sins forgiven, all of the temporal weight and punishment of every sin you ever made from your birth to that point are REMOVED/RELEASED. When you go to confession, your sins are absolved but the weight of your sins remain until you do good deeds and works to make up for them. That is the difference between confession and DIVINE MERCY SUNDAY. You are as pure as you were on the day you were baptized. You would have to do a hundred of years of good works to make up for what God gives you on this day of mercy. I'm afraid I don't understand why people make divisions when it comes to propagating something our Pope advocates. Divine Mercy Sunday is not Eastern or Western or Northern...it's a gift Jesus gave to the entire world. Instead of placing doubt and fear in our hearts that this will westernize the Byzantine faith...we should embrace it with love. There is no way this feast day will interfere with what God has put in place in the Byzantine faith. DIVINE MERCY SUNDAY is an extension of God's love to His children. It's as simple as that, and what a wonderful gift God has given us in these last days! SueB

[QUOTE]Originally posted by SueB:
Karen, I'll try to explain this a little better. Something VERY special happens on Divine Mercy Sunday. Jesus opens the floodgates of Heaven and pours out his mercy all over the Earth. Not only are your sins forgiven, all of the temporal weight and punishment of every sin you ever made from your birth to that point are REMOVED/RELEASED. When you go to confession, your sins are absolved but the weight of your sins remain until you do good deeds and works to make up for them.

Dear Sue,

I understand, but my point is that this is the theology of the LATIN Church; it is NOT the belief of the Eastern Church. We know no distinction between eternal and temporal "punishment." In the sacrament of repentance/confession, we believe that we are TOTALLY forgiven. Of course, this doesn't mean that we don't do penance. But we don't do it to "make it up" to a vengeful God, but rather to heal the damage caused by our sins.

I'm afraid I don't understand why people make divisions when it comes to propagating something our Pope advocates.

Because it IS a Western devotion, based on a private revelation, and it is completely foreign to the East. And it should be pointed out that our former Holy Father also exhorted the Eastern rites to throw out the Latinizations and be true to the tradition of their own rites.

It's not that we don't believe in the boundless mercy of Christ, btw... it's just that we don't believe that God works by a calendar-- "Okay, if you do this on this particular day, before 11 am, you'll be COMPLETELY forgiven!" Personally, I think that smacks of works-based righteousness rather than genuine mercy.

There's a reason that some Byzantines (like myself) are so dead-set against Latinizations in the public devotional life of the Byzantine rite, and it's not because we hate the West: it's because we have been made to adopt Roman customs and practices in the past, and it almost destroyed us; a great many Byzantine Catholics returned to Orthdoxy because of this. You've heard of the Orthodox Church in America? Well, it was formed by former Byzantine Catholics.

If the Byzantine rite is to survive, we must be true to our own spirituality, theology, and tradition (and I think the Latin rite ought to be true to its own spirituality, theology, and tradition too).

I make a lot of sacrifices to attend a Byzantine Rite church, including a 30-minute ride each way; frankly, if I wanted "Divine Mercy" Sunday, I'd go to the Roman Catholic church across the street.

God bless,

Karen

The theology underlying the private revelations given to Faustina Kowalska does not reflect the doctrinal tradition of the Byzantine Church, and so the Latin feast of Divine Mercy Sunday should not be added to the Byzantine liturgical calendar. The integrity of the Byzantine liturgy must be protected from Latinizations, whether modern or ancient.

I have no objection to the Divine Mercy chaplet as a private devotion. Prayer is a good thing. But you are correct that the feast is Latin and shouldn't be added to our calendar.

Karen,

I understand completely. I have to admit, it bothered me when they make changes in our Easter music. We were used to singing "Christ is Risen from the Dead, by Death He conquered Death and to those in the graves He granted life". Conquered has now become "trampled" and graves have now become "tombs". I'm not sure I understand why they made these changes but if that is what our leaders want us to do, I will obey. Back to Divine Mercy Sunday, it's not a question of who is right and who is wrong, who believes in private revelations and who doesn't....isn't this what the Pharisees did to Jesus? They were so caught up in the law and theology that they didn't even recognize the Son of God standing in front of them. I think it's very important not to get caught up in divisions. No matter how different Byzantine theology is from Roman Rite theology, we share a common bond, we're Catholic. Jesus makes no divisions so why should we? Feel free to share more thoughts on this. God Bless you too! SueB

Well, division as far as faith goes is a bad thing; but we're not talking really about division, but diversity. The Catholic Church contains several rites, each with its own liturgy, customs, and traditions... and that's a good thing. IMO, it would be a BAD thing if all the rites started "blending" their traditions with each other. What will happen if we adopt Latin devotions and traditions publically is that we'll simply get swallowed up and become extinct. I think this is why John Paul II wanted the Eastern rites (of which he was very fond) to be Eastern once again.

God bless,

Karen

The fact that there is a common bond between Eastern and Western Catholics does not mean that the two doctrinal traditions can be blended together. In fact quite the contrary, the two traditions cannot be blended together without doing harm to both of them. An example of this can be seen when one looks at the doctrine of grace within the two traditions, because within the Eastern tradition deifying grace is an uncreated reality, i.e., it is God Himself as energy; while in the Western tradition (at least since the Scholastic period) sanctifying grace is a created thing, i.e., it is a created habitus, which is meant to connect man to God by somehow allowing him to experience the uncreated divine life. Now, these two doctrinal traditions on the nature of grace cannot be blended together, because they are based upon metaphysical presuppositions that are very different.

The same holds true when one looks at the liturgical traditions of the two groups, because the liturgy is informed by the doctrinal tradition that gives rise to it, and ultimately supports the tradition of the particular Church in question as an incarnation of its underlying metaphysical principles. Thus, to change the Byzantine liturgical tradition by including elements that are in fact foreign to it, does violence to it in the long run. Sadly, these distinctions have not always been borne in mind in the past and that is why the Byzantine Catholic Churches where heavily Latinized, and why they are still today undergoing the painful process of de-Latinization. That being said, the pressure by many people (whether Eastern or Western) to add new Latinizations within the Byzantine Churches, even if it is done with good intentions, is harmful and unwise, and will only lead to further disruptions and divisions, and could even add to ecumenical problems between East and West, because the West will once again look like an imperialist power trying to Latinize everything that it comes into contact with.

The Latin Church's celebration of Divine Mercy Sunday is a new liturgical feast of the Roman Rite, and as such it does not belong within the liturgical calendar of the Byzantine Churches.

This is merely an assertion no matter how many times it is asserted or how many different people assert it.

Perry Robinson tried to make this kind of assertion stick, here on the Internet, and was eventually countered by a philosophy professor whose brief demolition of Robinson's premises have gone, as far as I can tell, unanswered, which tells me that there is no response, no true response, possible. This public discussion is a year old or better now, and still no rebuttal from the graduate student Robinson.

You make this claim as a biased observer and it doesn't stand up except in places where no one has the background to truly and succinctly take you to task or even to follow the public argument. That makes you temporarily unassailable. It does not make you right.

Eli

Everytime I see the Divine Mercy apparitions/chaplet in a topic it seems to center on the East Vs. West topic and everyone argues pro and con and seem to miss the real message.

Let's put that aside and look at a deeper understanding. These devotions have actually brought the Western Church closer to the theology of the East. Remember that Sister Faustina was strongly criticized for claiming that God could be so merciful. At the time God was not thought of as so merciful, but rather the Western Church had taken on a hard stand about mortal sin, that upon death the soul would definitely be lost. Yet the diary actually allowed mercy at the time of death and even immediately after if the prayers of mercy were offered (if I understood correctly). The conservative Western Church of the time thought that this mercy was too easy and too liberal.

The Gift of Tears (definitely Eastern) was very clear in the life of Sister Faustina.

The Divine Mercy prayers should be directed direcly to the soul and an Eastern Christian,who repeatedly seeks God's mercy publicly (the Lord have Mercy response to our ektenia and privately as in the Jesus Prayer.

The opening prayer of each decade, " Eternal Father, I offer you the Body and Blood of you dearly beloved Son, our Lord Jesus Christ Eternal Father, I offer you the Body and Blood of you dearly beloved Son, our Lord Jesus Christ"....should remind any Eastern Christian of the priest's words "We offer to You, yours of your own, in behalf of all and for all" "We offer to You, yours of your own, in behalf of all and for all" which occur immediately after the Consecration as the Deacon raises with crossed arms the Body and Blood of Christ.
The first time I read the Diary of Sister Faustina I was amazed at how much closer it was to Eastern theology than to the West.
The message of Divine Mercy is a message of a forgotten gift of deification.
Thanks be to God for the holy obedience of Saint Faustina and to Pope John Paul that they could bring God's love closer to humanity through this wonderful devotion.

The gift of tears has been a common teaching among Carmelites throughout their long history. And the idea of divine mercy has never been lacking in the west.

That being said, you are quite right that Sister Faustina did enter the picture at a time when the Church had been gripped by Jansenist heresy and it had been denied even among some monastics that any and all of the faithful could enter into direct union with God through contemplative prayer.

This two-hundred+ year period has been documented by the Dominican, Father Jordan Aumann and the reversal of this trend has been the principle contribution of theological teaching in the west in the 20th century. Sister Faustina was instrumental in bringing the simplicity of the teachings to ordinary people in ways that did not confuse or overwhelm them.

To say that it is simply contrary to the teachings of the east, requires, as I noted above, making assertions that cannot really be made to stick on the Church in the west as a whole, and is truly not, nor has it ever been, the magiterial teaching of the papal Church.

Eli

Thanks for your informative post, Eli. The Carmelites are indeed special and have their origin in the Holy Land (Mt Carmel) and so they have an Eastern monastic influence.
I might add that even few Eastern Christians have heard of the Gift of Tears. Almost anyone who has been to Medjugorje has experienced it even if they aren't aware of its name.

The Chaplet of Divine Mercy's closing prayer, "Holy God, Holy and Mighty, Holy and Immortal, have mercy on us and on the whole world" makes a Latin feel more comfortable at Our Divine Liturgy as we sing the Trisagion. How wonderful is God's wisdom and He tries to bring His churches closer together, not as twins, but as fraternal brothers.

I have read Dr. Blosser's and Perry Robinson's dialogue on Divine Simplicity (at Pontifications and at Dr. Blosser's and Mr. Robinson's own blogs) and Mr. Robinson has responded to Dr. Blosser's essays, so I do not know what you are talking about on this issue. Mr. Robinson has also responded to Michael Liccione and Al Kimel, et al., on various topics at Pontifications, so perhaps you can give the links to the various sites where they have discussed this particular issue, and then I can assess your statements in fairness.

But as far as my comments about the Scholastic notion of "created" grace are concerned, it is a doctrine that has no foundation in the Fathers of the East. I stand happily in line with the Byzantine tradition on this issue. Now as far as my "being biased" are concerned, everyone is biased to one degree or another, including you, so that really is irrelevant.

God bless you,
Steven Todd Kaster, Th.M.

P.S. - I stand by my comments in my previous post, because I do not think that the Divine Mercy celebration should be added to the liturgy of the Byzantine Churches. Clearly, further Latinizations will only cause greater harm to the Byzantine Catholic Churches, and could add new stumbling blocks to true ecumenism with the Eastern Orthodox Churches.

I spent over 20 years in the academy. There is nothing about a credential that impresses me, more than the reliability and accuracy of the knowledge held by the person also holding the credential.

A false assertion is a false assertion whether I hold it, you hold it, or Einstein holds it. BTW Einsteins first wife is finally getting the credit she deserves as a theoretical physicist in her own right and the one who corrected Albert's original errors.

As for Perry Robinson and Dr. Blosser, if you read ALL that is there in ALL of the various locations you will find a link to a professor of philosophy who simply pulls the pins out of Robinson, as I said. So if you've read all that it should be familiar to you and the link will not be hard to find.

Till then I will assert in opposition to your assertion that you and many others have a very false understanding of the western eccliastical teaching concerning created grace and have used secular humanism and nominalsim, claiming it as the magisterial teaching of the Catholic Church, to warp it even further to suit your own purposes. One who truly knows philosophy and Church teaching, Church history, and Thomism well has no difficulty in demolishing your false and facile claims.

Eli

I have read the links on the various blogs, but I hoped that you had some additional links, because Perry Robinson did respond to Dr. Blosser's essay on divine simplicity, both in the comments section of Dr. Blosser's own blog, but also at his own blog entitled Energies of the Trinity [energeticprocession.com] . Mr. Robinson showed quite nicely that the appeal to necessity ex suppositione does not refute his argument against the Scholastic notion of divine simplicity.

But if you have additional links I would be happy to read them, and if you have links that deal with the particular issue I raised, i.e., the notion of "created" grace, by all means, please post them.

God bless you,
Steven Todd Kaster, Th.M.

The link is there, Steven. There is no reason for me to go back and search through all of that text again. I have read it all to my satisfaction, and the philosophical data is clear to me as is Church teaching.

Even without the philosophical data to slog through it is a fact that the Church does not hew precisely to the philosophical arguments, but takes them and molds them to fit revealed truth.

So even without the parallel arguments you've still got the meaning of "created" grace as a part of Church teaching all wrong. I can't help you there and do not intend to try to dissuade you. If you are that interested then you are free to go and continue your search for truth. If you think you have it already, what good is it for me to try to change your mind.

I have every right to exercise the same personal authority you exercise here to assert publicly that the meaning of Catholic teaching, and say in rebuttal that you've made some very bad presuppositions and you are wrong about Catholic teaching. I can add to that as I go along writing on this Forum but I don't have to write a thesis here on demand. It will come out in manageable bits and pieces with time and people will see it, I have no fear.

Catholic teaching and medieval scholasticism, humanism and nominalism are not equivalents. That is a fact that is not too much of a secret, at least among Catholic theologians who are faithful to Church teaching and to revealed truth.

Eli

Eli,

I looked for the link and couldn't find it either. However, I find your argument more appealing than Perry's so I have therefore decided it is correct

Matt

I say, good thinking!

Periodically the Thomist who wrote the reply writes to me. I'll have him send me the link when I hear from him. It may be in the commentary from the Pontifications blog also which may be why you can't find it directly in Blosser or Robinson. In fact I think that is the case.

It is one thing to say that the expression of the Divine Mercy as a devotion is very western, although that icon,posted earlier, is most compelling and vast improvement on the comic-book like western rendering. It is nonetheless a western invocation, and might well be appreciated in its integrity by eastern Orthodox and eastern Catholics.

It is quite another thing to posit a absolute rupture between east and west over the concept of grace. If the west thought St. Gregory Palamas was a heretic then they would never allow him to be celebrated as a saint in the west, and he is.

Eli

It is quite another thing to posit a absolute rupture between east and west over the concept of grace. If the west thought St. Gregory Palamas was a heretic then they would never allow him to be celebrated as a saint in the west, and he is.

I think that's a good point and I've said it myself when talking with Eastern Orthodox. As someone who is drawn to eastern theology in at least some respects I am considering becoming a palamite, but I don't think that precludes me from being in communion with Rome. And interestingly enough it's usually Orthodox who say Catholics can't be "Eastern"; there is almost always a great deal of respect for the East on the Catholic side.

In Scholastic theology "created" grace is ". . . a quality, a light that enables the soul to receive worthily the indwelling of the three divine Persons," [Charles Journet, The Meaning of Grace, page 19], but in Eastern theology this Light (or "quality") is the very uncreated energy of God. In other words, the effects of grace in man in Western theology are seen as "created"; while in Eastern theology these "effects" are seen as a participation in the uncreated God Himself as energy. In fact St. Gregory Palamas points out that, ". . . the divine Maximos has not only taught that it [i.e., the gift of theosis] is enhypostatic, but also that it is unoriginate (not only uncreated), indescribable and supratemporal. Those who attain it become thereby uncreated, unoriginate, and indescribable, although in their own nature, they derive from nothingness." [St. Gregory Palamas, The Triads, page 86] Thus, in Eastern theology there is no such thing as "created" grace, nor can there ever be such a thing, because grace is God Himself.

Now the differences between East and West on the issue of grace were highlighted by Fr. Joseph Gill, S.J., in his book on the Western Council of Florence, for as he pointed out in his treatment of the topic of grace, the doctrinal differences between the two sides became particularly evident during the discussions between John Montenero, O.P., and St. Mark of Ephesus in the fifth session of the Council on March 14, because during a very heated exchange on the issue of the effects flowing from power of grace, Fr. Montenero ". . . pressed Mark [of Ephesus] as to whether the gifts of the Spirit were different from the Spirit Himself," which is what the Latins believed, or if the gifts flowing from the Spirit were the Spirit Himself, which is what the Byzantine Church holds. St. Mark of course rejected the Latin position and this caused further heated exchanges, culminating in an intervention by the Emperor ordering that the subject be dropped. Now even though the exchange ended abruptly (i.e., because of the Emperor's interference), it did show that the two sides disagree on the nature of grace, and in fact as Fr. Gill went on to say, it was this line of debate that brought up the ". . . Palamitic question of the divine energies, which Mark with most Greeks held to be really distinct from the divine essence, an opinion that the Latins both then and now consider wrong." [Fr. Joseph Gill, The Council of Florence, pages 205-206] Thus, it is clear that East and West understand the nature of grace differently, because for the West the effects of the Spirit within man are "created" realities, i.e., they are a "created" grace; while for the East the effects are a true participation in the uncreated divine energy, which is God Himself as He exists outside of His ineffable essence.

Please, if I am all wrong on "created" grace, then by all means, correct me and give the Latin definition of it.

I have looked up Garrigou-Lagrange's views on the subject, and Charles Journet's, but by all means, show where they are wrong and give me the correct definition of "created" grace.

You really ought to try other sources besides Saint Gill.

Eli

Eli,

Which books would you recommend on the subject? I can always use a longer reading list

That's tough to do blind. Church documents are most critical in learning Church teaching of course, but I'd suggest the reformed Carmelite saints to begin. SS John of the Cross and Teresa of Avila. Way of Perfection and Interior Castle in particular.

Surnaturel by Henri de Lubac also.

These things won't substitute for learning the teachings of St. Thomas from a Thomist though. I learned my reading of the Theological Summa from priests at Holy Apostle's Seminary.

Eli

Here [mliccione.blogspot.com] is Professor Liccione's reply to Perry Robinson.

Eli

My grandmother has an enormous portrait of Divine Mercy Christ, she says that she's received a lot of miracles through that image of Christ! (as in most cases I don't know if she knows how this devotion originated and so on)

I would add that all private devotions to Christ, the Blessed Virgin and the Saints are healthy but I don't think it's convenient for Eastern Christians to adopt the feast, as the Divine Mercy Sunday does not enjoy full acceptance in the Latin Church.

I have read that this devotion was declared non-Orthodox by the Roman Church before JPII, Sister Faustina's book was part of the index of forbidden books by Pope John XXIII, there were many doubts of its authenticity as the text had to be fixed and it as written in poor language.

The devotion had many connections with un-orthodox movements such as Charismaticism.

Do you know about this?