Posted on 11/05/2005 9:15:01 PM PST by Coleus
No, I'm not.
Most catholics still believe in purgatory; it's Limbo that isn't talked about that much any more. Was this thread posted in a time appropriate manner?
I was going to thank you for that (when/if you responded).
Two men die - one lived a saintly life, the other a sinful life but repents on his death bed. Do both go immediately to heaven?
Totally. Now, if only we can destroy that straw man that Protestants keep in the closet to vilify Catholics as if we believe in works salvation.
Recall during the Mass, when the Priest elevates Christ's Body and Blood during the Great Amen - 'Through Him, With Him, In Him, in unity with the Holy Spirit, all Glory and Honor are Yours Almighty Father, forever and ever'. All is given to the Father, through Christ with the Holy Spirit!
WE unite our sacrifices at this moment with Christ's one-time sacrifice. With and through the Son and the Spirit.
Brother IN Christ
The ONLY way that the second person would is if he was baptized on his death bed...
THUS, if are Protestant friends are aware of the practice, the DESIRE to HOLD OFF BAPTISM UNTIL JUST BEFORE DEATH was a common practice in the early Church! One could be a catechumen, and as such, be a "member of the Church" for social or political reasons, and then become actually baptized at the end of their lives, avoiding the widely believed idea of Purgatory.
If Purgatory didn't exist, the idea of withholding Baptism until one's final days was pointless.
Regards
This seemed appropriate
Meditation on the Crucifixion
I
I kneel here,
pebbles and sand grinding into my knees,
at this place dedicated to death,
and ignore the flies,
the smells of blood
and fear
and dying,
longing to shield my eyes
from the reality of what we have wrought
with our anger
and greed
and pride
and hate,
and yet,
as he calls my name
and I look up into those eyes
in spite of myself,
in spite of my guilt,
in spite of my remorse,
"It's really about love, you know," he whispers,
and I collapse
and watch him die,
knowing never
can I deserve this gift
so freely offered
in pain,
in knowlege,
in love.
Deo gratias.
Amen.
II
Forget
the pie crust promises
and santa claus wishes
passing itself off
as truth in the name
of what's holy.
In the darkness of confusion,
here, then, up on the ridge
where all men can see,
is the truth,
a burning torch,
where heaven
and earth meet,
cruciform,
embracing,
one
who is true God
and true man
offering all
for love.
Transformation, then,
is the gift
in the fire
of a God
who held nothing back for love.
Hold on to the wood,
rough hewn,
blood stained,
and look into those eyes,
and if you let them pierce your heart,
like the spear would pierce his,
you will be reborn,
reshaped
breath by breath
step by step
until you can be
truly his,
a lantern
shining in the darkness
filled with his light.
III
O Lord,
so much is there,
this day,
and every day,
such hatred, anger, pain, suffering,
all caused by the hand of man,
that makes me wonder
why you chose the path you took,
the pain of atoning sacrifice,
the bloody stripes
by which we might be healed,
the foolishness that was a slave's death
by which you chose to set your people free.
O Lord,
what do you see in us,
a petty, angry, hateful people,
who ruin the world you gave us
through greed, and hate, lust and pain,
a people who will use any reason,
even the love of you
to strike out at our fellows,
who trample the poor,
who steal from the weak,
who rise up and kill our neighbors?
And yet, Lord,
you chose that path of old,
to bring us salvation
by your words of truth
and by the blood of your own body,
spilled in pain
and sorrow,
and grief
and love.
We are the works of your hand, O Lord,
and even though we reject you too often,
and even though we do evil, even in your name,
and even though no matter how much we try by our own
strength and power,
we fall short,
You treat us with love,
and hold out your hands
in love and forgiveness and acceptance.
Heal us Lord,
and teach us,
that we may learn to walk in your footsteps,
and bring your light and message everywhere we go,
for your glory,
as willing tools of your love,
today, tomorrow, and always,
Amen.
Thanks.
Joe
"I believe the Bible says "King James" not "Martin Luther"."
Did you know that the original King James Bible had Maccabees and the other books that Luther wanted to remove? They were in all the editions of the King James Bible for about 20 years until some Calvinists at the print shop took them out.
Based upon some of your other posts I think you perhaps pay a bit too much attention to what you sense or feel. Truly, I was not baiting you but was curious as to what your story had to do with a thread about purgatory or Mass for that matter. But it sounds as though you were hurt or feel betrayed by the Catholic Church. My experiences have not always been good but for the last 10 years I have been very fortunate to be in a great parish with devout priests and a pastor that actually insists on teaching the congregation their Catholic faith.
A resounding YES!!!! The thief on the cross is a most excellent example.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
Jump to: navigation, search
2 Maccabees is a deuterocanonical book of the Bible which focuses on the Jews' revolt against Antiochus and concludes with the defeat of the Syrian general Nicanor in 161 BC by Judas Maccabeus, the hero of the work. Catholics and Orthodox consider the work to be canonical and part of the Bible, while Protestants regard it as apocryphal. Most Jews, while not considering it to be Scripture, consider it useful as a historical supplement to 1 Maccabees, but reject most of the doctrinal innovations present in the work.
As the second installment in the Maccabees trilogy, the book chronicles the painful trials of Judas Maccabeus as he ventures to defeat King Antiochus IV. As a parallel story within 2 Maccabees, Judah's young brother, Simon Maccabaeus, leaves to seek his fortune across the sea in Carthage. He meets Salome Alexandra, the princess and daughter of King Hannibal. Though they are from worlds apart, they fall in love and return to Judea. Meanwhile, Judas faces Antiochus in mortal combat. Judas is about to slay Antiochus, when the king reveals he is Judas's father. The cliff-hanger ending leaves the mood ripe for the final installment, 3 Maccabees.
No books of the Bible were taken out or added by Martin Luther. Martin Luther had problems with some of what was said in the books but he never had them taken out.
As noted in a previous post, Lutheran and Anglican versions of the Bible have included the Deuterocanonicals. Lutheran and Anglican caveats dictate that although canonical, no doctrine may be derived from these books.
From 1885, the American Bible Society has published the KJV without the Deuterocanonicals. The reason is that with the election of the 12th President of the ABS, Reformed Christians who rejected the canonicity of the Deuterocanonicals gained controling interest in the ABS. They, therefore, began to publish the KJV without the Deuterocanonicals and with the mass distribution of the KJV during WWI and WWII, the most Christians in the US now associate the KJV text with Reformed theology and without the Deuterocanonicals.
The KJV may be found complete with Deuterocanonicals in England or in the combined Book of Common Prayer or from Hendrickson Publishers, ISBN 1565631609.
The LDS Church also publishes a version of the KJV complete with cross references to the Book of Mormon.
OK, I'll bite. WHO took them out then? Because they were "IN" there for some 1100 years since the Councils of Rome, Carthage, and Hippo, all around the year 400. These are authoritative councils that were re-affirmed by Trent. So what happened to the Protestant Bibles? Why do they have an incomplete number of books ("6" is an incomplete number, and you have 66 books...how ironic)
Regards
Look into your crystal ball. Sounds like psychic reasoning that you use.
Thank you for pointing that out. I should have been more straightforward instead of telling you that I sensed an attitude.
I referred to what you told me, as follows:
"...they wear a head covering not thinking it ridiculous at all."
"...mantilla is a better word, don't you think?"
"...your little story?"
You definitely did display a critical attitude in your response to me.
I cleared up your confusion in a previous post.
At one time it was considered sinful for a woman to go to Mass without a hat, mantilla, or even a folded tissue on her head. Sin = time in Purgatory. Yes, there is a connection and that is what we were taught in Catholic school. Purgatory is a "state" of suffering, doing penance, for venial sins, according to Catholic Church teaching. Women did not dare go to Mass bare-headed. (Is that word okay with you?)
Hmmm....I THOUGHT there was a reason for the incomplete Protestant Bible.
Regards
It doesn't matter whether it is ok with me. Have you left the Catholic Church? I just wnat to be clear, that's why I'm asking.
placekeeper
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.