Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
is purgutory real ?
Options
Comments
-
-
Hmm... I have a strange feeling I have already seen these quotes somewhere....
LOL, let's face it, the reason why, is that they are 'around' a VERY long time
...obviously, looking at the dates, we can 'reject' or 'accept'....some do and obviously some 'don't'!
...nonetheless, they're 'there'! We MUST deal with em
0 -
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
Is the bible the word of god? YES!
Was it written before of after the alleged JC? Both before and after! We know when....LOL
Did the catholic church design the bible by destoying all the other gospels? Dan Brown eat yer heart out....lol...Conspiracy Theorists :rolleyes:
You cannot post something that happened 200 - 400 years AD and imply they meant to put it in the bible. They are the Church Fathers ; incredulous that you refute something you know so little about...
Purgatory NOT in the bible,
Limbo NOT in the bible,
Celibacy NOT in the bible,
Wearing of a uniform NOT in the bible,
Owning palaces NOT in the bible,
Lack of female power etc
check out the debate
http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055756555
You, my friend, have clearly never read the bible. Your knowledge is self evident! ie None...and what's the 'debate' got to do with anything on this thread...??
I'll have a better look at it later, just saw Dicky ( If I were a yorkee bar I'd eat myself ) Dawkins, and decided to have my dinner first.....0 -
Purgatory NOT in the bible,
Matt. 12:32 – Jesus says, “And anyone who says a word against the Son of man will be forgiven; but no one who speaks against the Holy Spirit will be forgiven either in this world or in the next.” Jesus thus clearly provides that there is forgiveness after death. The phrase “in the next” (from the Greek “en to mellonti”) generally refers to the afterlife (see, for example, Mark 10.30; Luke 18.30; 20.34-35; Eph. 1.21 for similar language). Forgiveness is not necessary in heaven, and there is no forgiveness in hell. This proves that there is another state after death, and the Church for 2,000 years has called this state purgatory.Celibacy NOT in the bible,
chruch celibacy is church practice not dogma
Matt. 19:11-12 - Jesus says celibacy is a gift from God and whoever can bear it should bear it. Jesus praises and recommends celibacy for full-time ministers in the Church. Because celibacy is a gift from God, those who criticize the Church's practice of celibacy are criticizing God and this wonderful gift He bestows on His chosen ones.Owning palaces NOT in the bible,
eh does king solomon ring a bell?
finally it doesnt have to be in the bible for it to be true, as even scripture alone disproves the ''scripture alone'' theory. the word ''Bible'' isnt even in the bible yet you call it a ''bible''. the following are scriptural qoutes that disprove bible alone theology.
Acts 17:28 – Paul quotes the writings of the pagan poets when he taught at the Aeropagus. Thus, Paul appeals to sources outside of Scripture to teach about God.
John 20:30; 21:25 - Jesus did many other things not written in the Scriptures. These have been preserved through the oral apostolic tradition and they are equally a part of the Deposit of Faith.
I am not interested in a debate with you or anyone else here, but if your interested in one and are convinced of your position, then e-mail John Salza and see how far you get www.scripturecatholic.com
God bless
Stephen
check out the debate
http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=20557565550 -
Stephentlig wrote: »
Matt. 12:32 – Jesus says, “And anyone who says a word against the Son of man will be forgiven; but no one who speaks against the Holy Spirit will be forgiven either in this world or in the next.” Jesus thus clearly provides that there is forgiveness after death. The phrase “in the next” (from the Greek “en to mellonti”) generally refers to the afterlife (see, for example, Mark 10.30; Luke 18.30; 20.34-35; Eph. 1.21 for similar language). Forgiveness is not necessary in heaven, and there is no forgiveness in hell. This proves that there is another state after death, and the Church for 2,000 years has called this state purgatory.
chruch celibacy is church practice not dogma
Matt. 19:11-12 - Jesus says celibacy is a gift from God and whoever can bear it should bear it. Jesus praises and recommends celibacy for full-time ministers in the Church. Because celibacy is a gift from God, those who criticize the Church's practice of celibacy are criticizing God and this wonderful gift He bestows on His chosen ones.
eh does king solomon ring a bell?
finally it doesnt have to be in the bible for it to be true, as even scripture alone disproves the ''scripture alone'' theory. the word ''Bible'' isnt even in the bible yet you call it a ''bible''. the following are scriptural qoutes that disprove bible alone theology.
Acts 17:28 – Paul quotes the writings of the pagan poets when he taught at the Aeropagus. Thus, Paul appeals to sources outside of Scripture to teach about God.
John 20:30; 21:25 - Jesus did many other things not written in the Scriptures. These have been preserved through the oral apostolic tradition and they are equally a part of the Deposit of Faith.
I am not interested in a debate with you or anyone else here, but if your interested in one and are convinced of your position, then e-mail John Salza and see how far you get www.scripturecatholic.com
God bless
Stephen
check out the debate
http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055756555
Well Stephenlig, I am a Catholic, and understand the the Vulgate and the transcribing of St. Jerome, and the teaching within my faith...and about the importance of the Fathers in doing so......and of course, without a shadow of doubt 'tradition' and understanding 'not' to allign oneself with something that is beyond reason, the bible is meant to last forever ( that's the genius...:), which is truely inspired..imo of course ) and have meaning to all who 'seek' it truthfully, and with historical context......by no means do I think non belief in 'purgatory' is a huge area of contention....but something that I wish and would 'like' others to understand in a purely magnanimous way about Catholicism, and have people take comfort in....
I ( personally) would prefer it if we 'discussed' the topic right here, rather than a stand-off??????? by 'email'?????????
*Grumbles* Stupid standoffs!!!
Nahhh, don't think so!
Come back here and discuss, your more than welcome, and that comes from a friend?
God bless..0 -
-
You, my friend, have clearly never read the bible. Your knowledge is self evident! ie None...and what's the 'debate' got to do with anything on this thread...??
I'll have a better look at it later, just saw Dicky ( If I were a yorkee bar I'd eat myself ) Dawkins, and decided to have my dinner first.....
Of course I have read the bible, I had it force fed down my throat in primary school and then as luck would have it the christian brothers in the late 70's. This was THE golden age of education in our pathetic little country. I can assure you that the brothers would have no problem whatsoever of BEATING it into you.0 -
Advertisement
-
-
By no means do I think Purgatory is a huge are of contentionI appreciate your optimism but I think history proved the opposite: Purgatory was the major obstacle in East-West reunion in 13-15 centuries and then it ignited Reformation (at least the theological part of the movement).
Slav, I was talking about the 'tone' of this forum, and present day, as opposed to 'history'...this forum, I think is unique, in that, it's moreso about understanding, and learning?? Then 'Contention'? I would have thought that we have moved on from the reformation and it's contentious ways - especially on this little Island...
My reply was in response to this comment:
but something that I wish and would 'like' others to understand in a purely magnanimous way about Catholicism, and have people take comfort in...Then please educate us!..
Again, 'magnanamous' in the spirit of Jesus himself who trancends our differences and binds us.
Also, I have no wish to educate you pmsl..
I think it has been adequately demonstrated for the op, tht the first few responses on this thread that mentioned purgatory, just being made up, are inaccurate, leading and flawed. It's quite apparent, that some Christians don't believe this.......the thread shows why.....it's also been demonstrated that purgatory is tied up with the earliest beliefs and traditions within the Christian faith - of praying for the dead.....and even prior to Christianity itself to the jews....
So, I think it's been establised that the Catholic Church didn't just 'make it up'.......they 'named' a concept that was always part of the teaching even to the earliest times....Which was later disagreed with.
I'm not arguing the case 'for' purgatory, just correcting an assumption that I read.:)
Again, I respect that your views are different, but just needed to clear up the 'made up' bit! Which I think has been aptly demonstrated.
God bless.0 -
-
-
Thanks mate. I did not become an atheist because of anger, I became one because we were lied to .. by man.
That, my friend is a matter of opinion
and you know what they say about those...lol...
I turned away from agnosticism because I fell 'in love' with a man / God...Jesus - I found out I never really 'knew' him beforehand until I sat down and read up on him, a great source of inspiration was the book I read by the current Pope, called 'Jesus of Nazareth'! It brought the one dimensional fictional character out of the bible and gave him a dynamic for me that I can't describe. I tried the 'no faith'..lol... and it didn't answer everything for me, I made a crap agnostic...The description and worldview taken of life, love, beauty, friendship, and even 'emotions' themselves, consciousness etc. that science alone had to offer left me unfullfilled and still 'nagging'....So, I found God first, and then I shopped around as to where I felt best about meditating and following that path...and it's gotton stronger.
I don't make excuses for it to anybody. I believe I have the right to self define, as you do! and, I've found an equilibrium in my life and balance between knowledge, reason and faith....with the tools that are currently available in my era!
Wish I could see 10,000 years from now, but I can't! Hey ho!!0 -
-
Thanks lmaopml but I think my views are irrelevant here, really. I was trying to see the logic behind Purgatory purely from the Roman Catholic perspective.
No problem. Slav, I guess the difference is to be truely found in the fact that we pray for the souls of the dead, and indeed ask them to pray for us....and if there is only heaven and hell - then this would be a pointless exercise. The truth is that the earliest Christians did this too, as we know from the Church Fathers, depictions of prayers in the Catacombs etc.....As a Roman Catholic, and you yourself another denomination? I'm sure you would be aware that we don't only go by sacred scripture ( you must be aware that we have a few extra books to you too?? )..We also go by ancient tradition and magesterium...because 'we' believe, with respect to your good selves that they give us the fuller picture in interpretation.
In a very condensed nutshell: That's our position. 0 -
The difference between what?I guess the difference is to be truely found in the fact that we pray for the souls of the dead, and indeed ask them to pray for us
I'll ask you the same question as I've asked kelly1 few posts ago if you don't mind: if there is only hell with no way out, if there is heaven that you can't lose and if there is Purgatory that will end sooner or later with heaven as the only possible destination then does not it make the final judgment a pointless exercise as well?and if there is only heaven and hell - then this would be a pointless exercise
That's all very well but Purgatory is more then just praying for the dead (which no question has always been practiced); the doctrine developed somehow to its Trent definition and I'm wondering how it developed. What exactly made it look like this?The truth is that the earliest Christians did this too, as we know from the Church Fathers, depictions of prayers in the Catacombs etc
Yep, I've heard about that!As a Roman Catholic, and you yourself another denomination? I'm sure you would be aware that we don't only go by sacred scripture ( you must be aware that we have a few extra books to you too?? )
That's not fair!We also go by ancient tradition and magesterium...because 'we' believe, with respect to your good selves that they give us the fuller picture in interpretation.
Why do they give the fuller picture to you RC brethern but no to my good self?
I want to have the fuller picture too, but I cannot see it yet: there is a huge gap between those prayers for the dead and the council of Trent.
I'm well aware of it. The question is why RCC adheres to this position. As a Roman Catholic yourself do you have a full picture of the doctrine? Do you understand every aspect of it and why it's there, for instance do you know why Purgatory is considered to have only one exit door to Heaven and how far can you trace it back?In a very condensed nutshell: That's our position.0 -
Hi Slav,The difference between what?
[quote= Slav I was trying to see the logic behind Purgatory purely from the Roman Catholic perspective. [/quote]
I was basically just saying the logic behind praying for the dead as an RC practice and the doctrine of Purgatory as being the 'different' element between our branches of Christianity - that leads 'logically' to being able to help them by our prayers after they die - which leads again to the RC dogma of Purgatory.I'll ask you the same question as I've asked kelly1 few posts ago if you don't mind: if there is only hell with no way out, if there is heaven that you can't lose and if there is Purgatory that will end sooner or later with heaven as the only possible destination then does not it make the final judgment a pointless exercise as well?
Not at all Slav. We believe there is a third place - I think some protestant denominations believe this too?? between the 1st and 2nd judgement. If we were to say we are judged straight after death and go to heaven or hell, then equally there would logically be no need for the final judgement no?That's all very well but Purgatory is more then just praying for the dead (which no question has always been practiced):) the doctrine developed somehow to its Trent definition and I'm wondering how it developed. What exactly made it look like this?
Well, Slav, sometimes in the RC church they may 'practice' something that is common knowledge amongst it's flock for many many years before it is proclaimed an official dogma (particularly in the early church) - you must remember originally it was the 1st Christian Church, and prior to it's unity, the traditions were passed on orally and scripturally, with no firm canon. The church had the same canon for, I dunno 1200 years before the reformation and all Christians practiced praying for the dead and the concept of 'purgatory' or a place of sanctification was well establised.....then as a result of a breakaway, the Church would for the sake of the faithful give a commonly held practice a firmer declaration, so as there is no confusion......as far as I can see the practice of praying for the dead, long before our new Testament was ever actually written, along with official scriptural interpretation from the magesterium, as well as the Church Fathers alluding to the fact that we require sanctification to behold God, and to be absolutely free from sin. The dogma and practice was always there, it was just officially given a term of 'reference' because of the need for distinction and affirmation of it's reality during the reformation.Yep, I've heard about that!
Yes, and that would be a whole other thread ..lol...:)That's not fair! Why do they give the fuller picture to you RC brethern but no to my good self?
I'm quite sure that you can have access to the same information as I have about tradition and scripture, but it seems that you have come to a different view...However, I'm not as free to interpret the bible in my own way where an official dogma has been declared...I would be pointed towards, why, where, when, how and by whom it may have been practiced, and written to see the truth of it....and then once the Church 'names' it, it's clearer for the faithful.I'm well aware of it. The question is why RCC adheres to this position. As a Roman Catholic yourself do you have a full picture of the doctrine? Do you understand every aspect of it and why it's there, for instance do you know why Purgatory is considered to have only one exit door to Heaven and how far can you trace it back?
Yes, we can trace it back scripturally to the OT as the quotes provided before on this thread do, and to the NT, and to common traditons...We always knew praying for the dead helped them to be free from sin, and them praying for us helps us and they reside in the place between the first and second judgement. We know 'Purgatory' is not mentioned by name in scripture, but then neither is Trinity either iykwim, it's implicitly referred to throughout the book.
Catholics would look on Purgatory as a 'saving' place. A place where we are wiped clean of sins we may not even realise we were committing, sins of the ego etc. that aren't bad enough to be damned forever, but require us to acknowledge and be 'sorry' for because we're just not quite pure enough to behold God either....as it says in scripture, anything impure won't enter heaven.
I hope this helps....I'm only learning a lot of it myself.
P.S. Sorry for the typos etc. I'm in work and typed it up very very quick...0 -
I was basically just saying the logic behind praying for the dead as an RC practice and the doctrine of Purgatory as being the 'different' element between our branches of Christianity
The difference between your and my denominations? You are mistaken then, they both are perfectly fine with praying for the passed away (and I'm not a Protestant btw). But as I said it's not relevant here: consider me a catholic neophyte in this thread!
This is exactly the place where I see a gap in logic.that leads 'logically' to being able to help them by our prayers after they die - which leads again to the RC dogma of Purgatory
Well, to be perfectly honest I do have my own view on how it reached from praying for the dead to Purgatory. I think it's very logical but very clumsy as it's based mostly on other RCC doctrines that can be criticised for the lack of scriptural support or consensus patrum (pretty much the same as Purgatory on its own). I'd like to be wrong in my conclusions and see if there is a more elegant way to defend Purgatory.
Absolutely! I see no difference between the two and in both cases there is no need for the final judgment as far as I can see.
Not at all Slav. We believe there is a third place - I think some protestant denominations believe this too?? between the 1st and 2nd judgement. If we were to say we are judged straight after death and go to heaven or hell, then equally there would logically be no need for the final judgement no?I'll ask you the same question as I've asked kelly1 few posts ago if you don't mind: if there is only hell with no way out, if there is heaven that you can't lose and if there is Purgatory that will end sooner or later with heaven as the only possible destination then does not it make the final judgment a pointless exercise as well?
Once again, praying for the dead != Purgatory. It's a long way from one to another as far as I can see. As for the Church Fathers I can only see one third (at best) of what is understood by Purgatory in modern Catholicism. However even that third cannot always be count as very often it was just a part of another afterlife theory that somehow contradicts to Purgatory.Well, Slav, sometimes in the RC church they may 'practice' something that is common knowledge amongst it's flock for many many years before it is proclaimed an official dogma (particularly in the early church) - you must remember originally it was the 1st Christian Church, and prior to it's unity, the traditions were passed on orally and scripturally, with no firm canon. The church had the same canon for, I dunno 1200 years before the reformation and all Christians practiced praying for the dead and the concept of 'purgatory' or a place of sanctification was well establised.....then as a result of a breakaway, the Church would for the sake of the faithful give a commonly held practice a firmer declaration, so as there is no confusion......as far as I can see the practice of praying for the dead, long before our new Testament was ever actually written, along with official scriptural interpretation from the magesterium, as well as the Church Fathers alluding to the fact that we require sanctification to behold God, and to be absolutely free from sin. The dogma and practice was always there, it was just officially given a term of 'reference' because of the need for distinction and affirmation of it's reality during the reformation.
If you feel you have the relevant sources they belong to this thread I think!..Yes, and that would be a whole other thread ..lol...
I'm not ruling out completely the idea that I've missed all this why, where, when, how and by whom. So can I be pointed out to things like the time spent in Purgatory depends on the amount of personal guilt? Or that it's only Heaven you can go to after the Purgatory? Who, when and why taught that?I would be pointed towards, why, where, when, how and by whom it may have been practiced, and written to see the truth of it...
I know very well what you believe in; my question was why and how far you trace it back in Tradition and Scripture.
...for instance do you know why Purgatory is considered to have only one exit door to Heaven and how far can you trace it back?
Catholics would look on Purgatory as a 'saving' place. A place where we are wiped clean of sins we may not even realise we were committing, sins of the ego etc. that aren't bad enough to be damned forever, but require us to acknowledge and be 'sorry' for because we're just not quite pure enough to behold God either....as it says in scripture, anything impure won't enter heaven.0 -
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
Apparently the confession of sins won't save you from Purgatory:
"If anyone says that after the grace of justification has been received the guilt is so remitted and the debt of eternal punishment so blotted out for any repentant sinner, that no debt of temporal punishment remains to be paid, either in this world or in the other, in purgatory, before access can be opened to the kingdom of heaven, let them be anathema!" (Council of Trent, Canon 30)
Something like that. A place distinct from heaven and hell. A place from where sooner or later everybody will move to heaven after serving their sentences in Purgatory (the length of the term depends on the personal guilt).
Yes I think you can put it this way but it depends on the definition of 'holy'. It's better to say saved but not punished or having enough good deeds on the personal balance sheet for punishment clearing.
Yes, I thinks both supporters and critics of Purgatory would agree with that.
Hi Slav,
the length of the term depends on the personal guilt...
I'm not sure this is the understanding of most Catholics, I think it's got more to do with us not being perfect 'judges' and we don't put ourselves in Purgatory by default of our 'guilt' as such, but by submitting the final judgement to God. and moreso, we believe that no matter how much we confess our sins, that 'bad deeds' leave a stain, and we have to be made aware of it.....We go to Purgatory to remove the stains of our sins...It's a redeeming place - a place where even though we aren't actually saints when we die, that we are more or less made like the saints to enter the glory of heaven.it's based mostly on other RCC doctrines that can be criticised for the lack of scriptural support or consensus patrum (pretty much the same as Purgatory on its own). I'd like to be wrong in my conclusions and see if there is a more elegant way to defend Purgatory.
Your right, it does emerge from some very basic elements in the Catholic Faith. The very basic of which is that we believe baptism covers original sin in the eyes of God, at Confirmation we receive the Holy Spirit and accept Jesus as our Saviour, we also recite the baptismal vows again... However, although we believe that we are saved by Grace, we believe that it's an ongoing and working relationship, that we have to follow the commandments and keep ourselves on the right path.......However, we believe in God's infinit mercy and love too...he wants us to be with him, but there are rules....and it's ongoing...
Personally, I believe there is plenty of supporting scriptural evidence for the above, and for the dogma of purgatory - It's obvious that praying for the dead has a purpose, especially since it has been practiced without any apparent objections during the life of Jesus and well beyond. If it was wrong, surely someone would have put it right long beforehand?? We know from Scripture of a third place, we also know that Scripture warns us many many times of the damage that sin can do, and we are told that there are some sins which are neither forgiven in this life or the next, which implies some sins are forgiven in the next life.....Why? again from Scripture, nothing sinful can enter heaven.
The quotes are all there, so is the history, so is the tradition, and of course as Catholics we believe that if the church declares something dogma that it is for a very good reason and there would have to be scriptural evidence.
I think the problem arises understanding Purgatory from a Catholic perspective when one is coming at them from an alternate view on the fundamentals of another faith. The Faith itself, and all the teachings fit together like a Jigsaw with proper context....
Sometimes it sounds as if the Church puts Catholics on a 'guilt trip' of sorts - However, to my mind, it's not about that at all, it's just providing all the tools to avail of the mercy of God through the grace of Jesus Christ....It's better to say saved but not punished or having enough good deeds on the personal balance sheet for punishment clearing.
Again, I think there is a misconception about having to have so many 'good deeds' in order to enter heaven. I don't think this is the case at all, I think Purgatory is basically about removing the stain of sin, not about having to balance out anything. For example we would believe that if we made our confirmation and accepted Jesus as our saviour and then went out and robbed our friends purse, spent the money, went to confession and confessed cause we felt bad- that even though we have been forgiven, the stain of our sin is still there. The purse was still stolen and somebody felt the effect of our sin.
Anyway, there are some pretty cool links on all of this....and the Catechism is good for anybody interested in refining their knowledge or eliminating some preconceived notions of the RC, would do a great job starting with that.
Sorry again if typos etc. in work, typing like crazy 0 -
the length of the term depends on the personal guilt...
I'm not sure this is the understanding of most Catholics, I think it's got more to do with us not being perfect 'judges' and we don't put ourselves in Purgatory by default of our 'guilt' as such, but by submitting the final judgement to God. and moreso, we believe that no matter how much we confess our sins, that 'bad deeds' leave a stain, and we have to be made aware of it.....We go to Purgatory to remove the stains of our sins...It's a redeeming place - a place where even though we aren't actually saints when we die, that we are more or less made like the saints to enter the glory of heaven.
I'm not sure what's wrong with my interpretation. If we read the Trent canon on Purgatory I think it's quite clear that the stains of sin are equated with guilt in this context. The time spent in Purgatory is temporal (as well as the Purgatory itself), I think it's quite clear too. The amount of time spent there is determined on a personal basis as it follows from the teachings of purgatory and indulgences.
Baptism and Confirmation? No, I have to admit I see virtually no connection between them and the purgatory. I was thinking more in the lines of the Original Sin, satisfaction view on atonement, Church's Treasure, differentiating sins to mortal and venial, etc. And I would not call them basic.Your right, it does emerge from some very basic elements in the Catholic Faith. The very basic of which is that we believe baptism covers original sin in the eyes of God, at Confirmation we receive the Holy Spirit and accept Jesus as our Saviour, we also recite the baptismal vows again... However, although we believe that we are saved by Grace, we believe that it's an ongoing and working relationship, that we have to follow the commandments and keep ourselves on the right path.......However, we believe in God's infinit mercy and love too...he wants us to be with him, but there are rules....and it's ongoing...
You're still talking about praying for the dead, I think we have already moved one step forwards from there, haven't we?Personally, I believe there is plenty of supporting scriptural evidence for the above, and for the dogma of purgatory - It's obvious that praying for the dead has a purpose, especially since it has been practiced without any apparent objections during the life of Jesus and well beyond. If it was wrong, surely someone would have put it right long beforehand??
Could you please remind me which verses are interpreted in support of a third place?We know from Scripture of a third place
Yes, all are there, but the question is what's in these quotes, history and tradition.The quotes are all there, so is the history, so is the tradition
Praying to God about destiny of the passed away? Most certainly!
Everything else attributed to Purgatory like some distinct third place, possibility to leave it before the Last Judgment or impossibility to go to hell after that third place -- I cannot see all these in either Scripture or Tradition (at least for the first thousand of years). As I said before, quoting for instance Chrysostom or Gregory of Nyssa (as in that list of Greek and Latin authors quotes that you and kelly1 have posted in this thread) can only puzzle anyone who has actually read these Fathers.
As for me, in this thread I'm trying to look at Purgatory purely from a Catholic perspective.I think the problem arises understanding Purgatory from a Catholic perspective when one is coming at them from an alternate view on the fundamentals of another faith
Exactly. The only thing I'm not very comfortable with is that there are too many teachings it's based on and very few of them can be easily traced down to apostolic times. This does not automatically make them invalid but makes the whole construction rather clumsy. I think the natural desire here is to find a bit more straightforward explanation of the dogma.The Faith itself, and all the teachings fit together like a Jigsaw with proper context....
Well, I'm not inventing anything here. It's just the jigsaw you were mentioning. Put Purgatory in the context of the Church Treasury and Indulgences and I see nothing wrong in putting the "=" sign between balancing the consequences of sins on one side with good deeds and removing the stains of sin in this life or in Purgatory on the other.
Again, I think there is a misconception about having to have so many 'good deeds' in order to enter heaven. I don't think this is the case at all, I think Purgatory is basically about removing the stain of sin, not about having to balance out anything.It's better to say saved but not punished or having enough good deeds on the personal balance sheet for punishment clearing.
The Catechism is a shallow source of information IMO. Its primary goal is to tell (very briefly) what does RCC believe in; the question why they have such beliefs is out its scope.Anyway, there are some pretty cool links on all of this....and the Catechism is good for anybody interested in refining their knowledge or eliminating some preconceived notions of the RC0 -
That ultimately ONLY He knows. Thus only HE has power and might and knowledge.
I think it's very Christian and very mature.
Yes, we all know that dogmatic theology is no good; something that we should keep clear of unless it's completely unavoidable.
But it's so tempting sometimes!.. 0 -
Thank you, my friend, for the respectful tone.With the utmost respect, and I sincerely mean that Wolfsbane. I understand that we come from the same 'Christianity' but obviously we have different interpretations...and hey that's ok, I, generally speaking have chosen the Catholic way for many reasons...and I do understand that there are areas where we 'cross' each other in faith that are far more important than the dogma of purgatory. It's a minor, in the bigger scheme of things, and I know that anybody posting on this board who falls under the banner of Christian undoubtedly means well....Even some of the 'majors' are minors in some ways, because I don't think we do the important stuff any different to eachother..imo of course.
We would say that the 'deeds' are done, and they can't be 'purified by fire' anymore, and take the meaning to refer to the soul of the person who has passed. There is a semi colon there for a reason...Although I know the ancients never used punctuation as we know it - mores the pity lol...
My intention isn't to argue the dogma of purgatory, but to put the opening posts mind at ease when questioning the issue.......The 'concept' of purgatory is a long and old one- the ancient Jews prayed for their dead, and continue even today to do so for 11 months after they lose a loved one.....There would be no point in praying for people who have passed if everything is all set up and there is only 'heaven' and 'hell'.....Catholics believe there is a third place.....so too do some Protestants ( I think )??
I believe it's fairly clear, (although I understand different people have different interpretations from the bible) and from the early Church, that there was / is a third place, and that it was common practice amongst the earliest Christians and before Christianity to pray for the souls of the dead.
My reason for posting on the topic ( as I view it as a VERY small area of contention ) is to assure the op that the Catholic church didn't just pull it out of their back pocket in the middle ages.....
I'll post another post with reference to early Church teaching, and also another with quotes from the bible that allude to a need for a cleansing entirely before we behold God in heaven, and the importance of 'sin' and of 'holiness' and the need to truely confess...We believe that we are saved by Grace and by accepting Jesus as our saviour, but that it is a working relationship, and we can, and do, fall from Grace by our actions, thoughts, and egos....We also believe there is a 'third' place, which is very clear in scripture.
I hope this post is taken the way it is meant, with respect, because I think everybody means well at the end of the day....and it's a minor imo.
I agree we should all have that in our debates - respect for the person, if not for their error. Error is never right, and some error is monstrous, but we all err in some matters and the object of our discussion should be to find more and more Truth. At times that will mean revising our position, at times it is others who must change.
Purgatory is not a fundamental issue, but it is a degrading issue - it makes the sacrifice of Christ insufficient to pay for all our sins, and the work of the Holy Spirit insufficient to sanctify us fully. Protestantism teaches that at death God completes the good work He begun at our conversion, by perfecting our souls immediately and bringing them into His prescence. We become the spirits of just men made perfect:
Hebrews 12:22 But you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, to an innumerable company of angels, 23 to the general assembly and church of the firstborn who are registered in heaven, to God the Judge of all, to the spirits of just men made perfect, 24 to Jesus the Mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling that speaks better things than that of Abel.
So, yes, we do need to be totally purified before we enter heaven - but God does that for us the moment we die. Like Lazarus, the angels carry us to Paradise - not purgatory.
BTW, the 'loss' we may experience is of the rewards our works would have brought, had they been acceptable. It is not us suffering in the flames.
No doubt purgatory was held by some from early generations after the apostles. That is when much error began to enter the Church. Some of it was excised, some not. Eventually the Roman Church sank under the weight of doctrinal error and worldly practice. The Church of Christ continued, both inside and outside the imperial Church, and at the Reformation it gained widespread effect. So today there are true believers inside the RCC, although most are outside of it.
For Protestants purgatory is just another error of Rome, accompanying worse ones like its Priesthood, Sacrifice of the Mass, Mary, and especially its take on Justification.0 -
Thank you, my friend, for the respectful tone.
I agree we should all have that in our debates - respect for the person, if not for their error. Error is never right, and some error is monstrous, but we all err in some matters and the object of our discussion should be to find more and more Truth. At times that will mean revising our position, at times it is others who must change.
Purgatory is not a fundamental issue, but it is a degrading issue - it makes the sacrifice of Christ insufficient to pay for all our sins, and the work of the Holy Spirit insufficient to sanctify us fully. Protestantism teaches that at death God completes the good work He begun at our conversion, by perfecting our souls immediately and bringing them into His prescence. We become the spirits of just men made perfect:
Hebrews 12:22 But you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, to an innumerable company of angels, 23 to the general assembly and church of the firstborn who are registered in heaven, to God the Judge of all, to the spirits of just men made perfect, 24 to Jesus the Mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling that speaks better things than that of Abel.
- but God does that for us the moment we die. Like LaSo, yes, we do need to be totally purified before we enter heaven zarus, the angels carry us to Paradise - not purgatory.
BTW, the 'loss' we may experience is of the rewards our works would have brought, had they been acceptable. It is not us suffering in the flames.
No doubt purgatory was held by some from early generations after the apostles. That is when much error began to enter the Church. Some of it was excised, some not. Eventually the Roman Church sank under the weight of doctrinal error and worldly practice. The Church of Christ continued, both inside and outside the imperial Church, and at the Reformation it gained widespread effect. So today there are true believers inside the RCC, although most are outside of it.
For Protestants purgatory is just another error of Rome, accompanying worse ones like its Priesthood, Sacrifice of the Mass, Mary, and especially its take on Justification.
Hi Wolfsbane,
I agree with you that the differing opinions are stemming from the differing views on Justification. Catholics don't believe in once saved always saved...This was a doctrine that stemmed from the new reformed church. I understand that your take on this would be that Catholics reduce the sufficiency of Christ by not agreeing with this...
I would respectfully disagree. Catholics believe in baptism that we are saved by the Grace of Jesus Christ and that he actually 'lives' in us, and it's this 'image' that the father sees in us......we are called to be an 'image' of him in our earthly lives, we are now temples of the living God....We are not meant to 'sin' at all, as we are now living vessels of the son of God....He has given us everything, his body, his blood, his soul and his grace....We must strive to be totally like him. We don't believe that Christ is a 'substitute' for our sins, and thereafter our sins don't point towards us anymore, that he has substituted himself so we're ok. This in no way limits or underestimates or disgraces the sufficiency of Christs sacrifice, it holds it up as the single reason why we can say we are justified....
I have posted Scripture references a few pages back...
The Fathers also...
Traditions also....
as did Kelly1 before me, thankyou Kelly1
Purgatory is not a fundamental issue, but it is a degrading issue - it makes the sacrifice of Christ insufficient to pay for all our sins
I will again respectfully disagree. Catholics believe that purgatory is far from a degrading issue - it is anything but - it saves us from degrading ourselves by standing before God without being absolutely pure.....
No doubt purgatory was held by some from early generations after the apostles.
Thankyou, yes it was, and I believe it still is in the Eastern Churches too...
but God does that for us the moment we die. Like LaSo, yes, we do need to be totally purified before we enter heaven zarus, the angels carry us to Paradise - not purgatory.
Where do you think we get 'purified before we enter heaven', but purgatory??? This is exactly it! Lazarus went to Abraham's bosom - not heaven. Catholics believe that after we die, we get judged, if we are saved we get 'purified' for heaven or we are sent to hell. The Catholic Church teaches that this purification MUST take place, it doesn't testify as to how long it takes, it could be the blink of an eye....However, it dogmatically states that we MUST be purified before heaven 'as by fire', which is found in sacred scripture.
BTW, the 'loss' we may experience is of the rewards our works would have brought, had they been acceptable. It is not us suffering in the flames.
1 Cor 3:12 Now if any man build upon this foundation, gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble: 13 Every man's work shall be manifest; for the day of the Lord shall declare it, because it shall
be revealed in fire; and the fire shall try every man's work, of what sort it is. 14 If any man's work abide, which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. 15 If any man's work burn, he shall suffer loss; but he himself shall be saved, yet so as by fire. 16 Know you not, that you are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you? 17 But if any man violate the
temple of God, him shall God destroy. For the temple of God is holy, which you are.
Let's face it Wolfsbane if we are 'saved' always and forever then the 'suffering' and 'loss' that Paul refers to here sounds very much like Purgatory...He is saying we must be purified to behold God - totally!
The Church of Christ continued, both inside and outside the imperial Church, and at the Reformation it gained widespread effect. So today there are true believers inside the RCC, although most are outside of it.
I am sorry you believe this is the case. I think you may just be badly informed of the Catholic churches teachings and the anti Catholic propoganda. I wish we could explore things without the creeping animosity and bias between our two faiths, because I truely believe the Church is entirely misunderstood, and sometimes purposefully so...
Anyway, I consider myself a true believer, but not a perfect one, and I love Jesus very very much, as I'm sure you do
This particular video on Youtube, explains the position on purgatory far more eloquently than I could hope to...
Here is the link if anybody is at all interested
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ifKJSuKaNk&NR=1
0 -
Advertisement
-
Advertisement