Posted on 08/13/2008 9:02:31 AM PDT by Salvation
For the Catholic Purgatory is a period of purification after death.
When we die, our souls are judged immediately by Christ in what's called the "Particular Judgment":
Each man receives his eternal retribution in his immortal soul at the very moment of his death, in a particular judgment that refers his life to Christ: either entrance into the blessedness of heaven — through a purification or immediately, — or immediate and everlasting damnation. (Catechism, 1022)
Purgatory is this period of purification before heaven.
It's not always well understood by today's Catholics but Purgatory is still very much a part of Catholic doctrine.
Don't think that Purgatory is anything like a "second chance" for those who have not won the reward of heaven!
During our human life, we either accept or reject God's offer of divine grace. Once we die, our choice is definitive. We cannot change our mind after death. (Catechism, 1021)
Heaven and hell are real. They're part of a viewpoint that's fully Catholic and Purgatory is simply a transitional state for those who have merited heaven but still have aspects of their souls that are not yet fully purified. Purgatory is where that purification happens after death.
The souls in Purgatory are assured of salvation. They've died in God's grace and friendship, and will end up in heaven. But they're not yet in a full state of holiness — the holiness that's necessary to behold God "face to face" in heaven. (Catechism, 1030)
The Catholic Church is often accused of inventing the concept of Purgatory out of thin air. Not so!
You don't hear about it from many who aren't Catholic but Purgatory does have deep roots in Sacred Scripture as well as Catholic Tradition — the full, living faith of the Apostles as received from Christ.
First, it's based on the ancient Jewish practice of prayer for the dead, as mentioned in Scripture: "Therefore [Judas Maccabeus] made atonement for the dead, that they might be delivered from their sin." (2 Macc 12:46)
The early Christians continued this practice: "From the beginning the Church has honored the memory of the dead and offered prayers in suffrage for them, above all the Eucharistic sacrifice, so that, thus purified, they may attain the beatific vision of God." (Catechism, 1032)
Inscriptions on the walls and tombs of the Catacombs testify to the belief of many early Catholics in Purgatory.
The words of the Apostles in the New Testament also clearly tell us about being "tested by fire" (1 Pet 1:7). St. Paul warns us that if someone builds on the true foundation of Christ but doesn't take care to build well, "the person will be saved, but only as through fire" (1 Cor 3:15).
Finally, the Catechism quotes St. Gregory the Great:
As for certain lesser faults, we must believe that, before the Final Judgment, there is a purifying fire. He who is truth says that whoever utters blasphemy against the Holy Spirit will be pardoned neither in this age nor in the age to come. From this sentence we understand that certain offenses can be forgiven in this age, but certain others in the age to come. (Catechism, 1031)
(It's worth reading the Catechism's brief section on Catholic Purgatory to see the straightforward teaching of Catholics about Purgatory.)
Part of the faith of Catholics is that Purgatory is a good thing!
Purgatory reveals the depth of God's mercy: even those who are not yet perfect can attain the fullness of heaven.
For Catholics Purgatory helps us hope in perfection even when we can't completely achieve it in this life.
We pray to ease their suffering. We pray that they will soon be ready to enter heaven. Praying that their “purification as through fire” will end soon. And to ask them to pray for us here on earth as well.
It is said that the Holy Souls suffer, but are full of joy, because they know they will soon be with Jesus. They will enter heaven having been purged of the last stain of sin. “Purgatory” is not so much as place, as it is a process of preparation to be with God.
Question. I am trying to discuss this without offending anyone, but seeing that this is an ecumenical thread would it be better if I stopped and said no more in this thread?
There is no offense taken. As freeper Salvation already noted, 2 Maccabees is part of the Catholic Bible. During the Reformation, primarily for doctrinal reasons, Protestants removed seven books from the Old Testament: 1 and 2 Maccabees, Sirach, Wisdom, Baruch, Tobit, and Judith, and parts of two others, Daniel and Esther. They did so even though these books had been regarded as canonical since the beginning of Church history.
It was the Catholic Church that compiled the Canon of Scripture. For an in depth understanding of 1 & 2 Maccabees, click here.
Thanks for that additional information.
We are heading off topic with how times something is mentioned or what are the canonical books of the bible. We can find lots of side issues but the topic of purgatory is a very important one, probably best discussed in an open thread if you are really interested in what non catholics believe.
..., after all it would be absolutely necessary we know about it.
How do you figure? In general, what knowledge is necessary to be saved? In particular, why would knowledge of Purgatory be necessary to Salvation?
>>probably best discussed in an open thread if you are really interested in what non catholics believe.<<
What the non-Catholics don’t get is...Catholics don’t really care what you believe we believe. We don’t really even give much thought to what you believe, either. Many of us here are Americans and there is freedom of religion. Believe what you like. We don’t much care but will fight for your right to believe it.
We believe what we believe and are pretty comfortable in that.
Do you imagine Catholics are interested in your take on what we believe?
We believe what WE believe.
Well, of course we don't think there is an opposition. WE agree that He alone paid for all Sin. We would tend to make more of the problem of sins committed after one has been reborn. WE do NOT think that the sins need to be paid for in the sense that the "debt" they incur needs to be satisfied. But the "stains" and "chains" of sin &8212; that is the shame and the (1) strengthening of the tendency to desire and even to will evil and the (2) weakening of the ability to desire and will good &8212; are still in us. Even after we are saved I think we can understand Paul as saying that the old man still struggles, still is not quite put to death.
We ourselves are ambivalent, double-minded. We believe in God and still long for a winning Mega-Stupendo Lottery ticket.
I like to think that since sin damages us personally, we need healing. Because we are reckoned as righteous, God graciously works to heal us. That healing process, whenever it happens, is purgation.
Question. I am trying to discuss this without offending anyone, but seeing that this is an ecumenical thread would it be better if I stopped and said no more in this thread?
So far I think you're doing fine. It might have been a TAD more diplomatic to say, "I think this quote is in opposition to Jesus,.." or "We teach that this quote...." "... because it looks like Purgatory is paying for that for Jesus alone pays ..." But I saw no intention to give offense and certainly took none.
I did but I kept coming up with "Clinton White House" and "Democrat National Convention" so I gave up.
It is always good to pray for mercy.
I'm going to work my PT analogy to death here, because I really think Physical Therapy is a fine analogy to Purgatory.
And I'm remembering when the lovely young lady came up to me and invited me to lie on the funny skinny bed, and I'm thinking, "Wow, this just gets better and better!" ...
and then she tries to tear my arm out of its socket.
And for the first several sessions, I'm busy doing my Zen thing and saying, "I can handle this, I can handle this," until I caught a glimpse of her looking at me and realized that she was watching my face and gauging how far out of its socket she was going to tear my arm today by how anguished I looked.
So then I figured I should keep doing the Zen thing and let her yank away because it would speed up the process, maybe, I guess. But I'm here to tell you, that was NOT an easy decision.
Humor and braggadocio aside, it seems both physical and psycho therapy usually involve the patient suffering to get well. Certainly in psycho therapy one can prolong the suffering and delay its benefits. And I once had a patient who pretty much decided he'd rather be effectively paralyzed than man up and get weaned from the pain-killers and do what was necessary to get well again. So here was a guy who was resisting some suffering now and thus certifying more suffering later.
So I think we can see that there is good pain, well-handled pain, and there is not so good and not so well-handled pain. In a way, handling the pain of therapy well in the long run does ease one's pain, though at the time, despite one's extremely impressive manliness and fortitude and testosterone and all, there are still a few tears leaking out the corners of the eyes.
Does that come close to the question?
** like to think that since sin damages us personally, we need healing. Because we are reckoned as righteous, God graciously works to heal us. That healing process, whenever it happens, is purgation.**
And we all know that only “perfect” souls may enter the Kingdom of Heaven!
Since we all pray for people to ease our suffering on earth — I know I posted a prayer thread for myself for my hip replacement surgery — doesn’t it make perfect sense to pray for those souls who are suffering in Purgatory?
Since we all pray for people to ease their suffering on earth
— I know I posted a prayer thread for myself for my hip replacement surgery —
doesn’t it make perfect sense to pray for those souls who are suffering in Purgatory?
Have you ever asked anyone to pray for you?
Many of us used to be non-Catholics. Most of us understand what a lot of Protestants believe. We believe that most of what Protestants believe is valid but incomplete.
I would like to reply to those of you who have posted me but I just got home, it is late and I have to pack to leave town early tomorrow morning.
Great minds think alike.
On the contrary. For any discussion it is important to understand the source of one's argument. Catholic Bibles have 73 books, 46 in the Old Testament, and 27 in the New Testament. Protestant Bibles have 66 books with only 39 in the Old Testament. The books missing from Protestant Bibles are: Tobit, Judith, Baruch, Wisdom, Sirach, 1 and 2 Maccabees, and parts of Esther and Daniel. They are called the 'Deuterocanonicals' by Catholics and 'Apocrypha' by Protestants. Martin Luther, without any authority whatsoever, removed those seven books and placed them in an appendix during the reformation simply because they did not agree with his teaching. They remained in the appendix of Protestant Bibles until about 1826, and then they were removed altogether. The fact that praying for the dead is in the Catholic Canon and not in the Protestant version affirms Luther's determination to remove those books with which he disagreed.
surely if there was such a place God just come out and plainly state so in His Word, after all it would be absolutely necessary we know about it.
You have probably been told that the truth is to be found only in the Bible. However, the Bible never states that it is the sole and only authority of Christianity. The word "Bible" is not even mentioned in Scripture. Is the Bible the sole "teaching from God?" No. The Bible itself states that there are "oral" teachings and traditions that are to be carried on to the present-day (2 Thessalonians 2:15; 1 Corinthians 11:2; 2 Timothy 2:2; Romans 10:17; 1 Peter 1:24-25). These teachings are what the Catholic Church considers "Sacred Apostolic Tradition." This type of "Tradition" never changes because it was passed down by the Apostles themselves. It is not the same as the man-made traditions condemned in Scripture. The man-made traditions condemned in Scripture were those of the Jewish Pharisees. In fact, as Christians, we are suppose to disassociate ourselves from persons who do not follow Apostolic Tradition (2 Thessalonians 3:6). If oral tradition is not to be followed, why did St. Paul state Christ said something that is not recorded in the Gospels (Acts 20:35)? St. Paul must have "heard" this saying, not read it from any Gospel or "Scripture," thereby, proving that some things Christ said were not recorded in the Gospels (John 21:25) and were passed on orally among His disciples instead, but were just as valid as anything written since St. Paul himself used one of these oral passages in one of his own epistles.
When Martin Luther determined that anyone could interpret Scripture, he opened Pandora's box. Near the end of his life, Luther was afraid that "any milkmaid who could read" would found a new Christian denomination based on his or her "interpretation" of the Bible. To have the Bible as the only and sole authority of Christianity is to invite chaos into His Church. There are at least 5 Protestant denominations created every year based on a different interpretation of the Bible. Theoretically, anyone who owns a Bible can create their own denomination based on their own interpretation of Scripture. Taken to its logical conclusion, chaos is what happens when the doctrine of "Sola Scriptura" is applied.
For a clearer understanding of how the Canon of Scripture was compiled, I would recommend the following article.
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.