Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies.
Locked on 07/22/2009 7:38:29 PM PDT by Admin Moderator, reason:

Childish behavior.



Skip to comments.

The Doctrine of Purgatory [Ecumenical]
Catholic Culture ^ | 12/01 | Fr. John A. Hardon, S.J.

Posted on 07/20/2009 9:32:05 PM PDT by bdeaner



God created man that he might possess his Creator forever in the beatific vision. Those who die in the state of enmity toward God are deprived of this happiness. Between these extremes are people who are neither estranged from God nor wholly dedicated to Him when they die. What will be their lot after death?

The response of faith is that nothing defiled can enter heaven (Rev 21:27), and therefore anyone less than perfect must first be cleansed before he can be admitted to the vision of God.

If this doctrine of Catholicism is less strenuously opposed than the one on hell, over the centuries it has nevertheless become something of a symbol of Rome. Historically, the Reformation was occasioned by a dispute over indulgences, with stress on indulgences for the souls in purgatory. Since that time, the existence of an intermediate state between earth and heaven has remained a stumbling block to reunion and its final acceptance by the Protestant churches would mean a reversal of four hundred years of divergence.

Too often the eschatology of the Catholic Church is considered her own private domain, when actually the whole of Eastern Orthodoxy subscribes (substantially) to Catholic teaching on the Last Things, including the doctrine on purgatory.

Those In Purgatory

When we speak of the souls of the just in purgatory we are referring to those that leave the body in the state of sanctifying grace and are therefore destined by right to enter heaven. Their particular judgment was favorable, although conditional: provided they are first cleansed to appear before God. The condition is always fulfilled.

The poor souls in purgatory still have the stains of sin within them. This means two things. First, it means that the souls have not yet paid the temporal penalty due, either for venial sins, or for mortal sins whose guilt was forgiven before death. It may also mean the venial sins themselves, which were not forgiven either as to guilt or punishment before death. It is not certain whether the guilt of venial sins is strictly speaking remitted after death, and if so, how the remission takes place.

We should also distinguish between the expiatory punishments that the poor souls in purgatory pay and the penalties of satisfaction which souls in a state of grace pay before death. Whereas before death a soul can cleanse itself by freely choosing to suffer for its sins, and can gain merit for this suffering, a soul in purgatory can not so choose and gains no merit for the suffering and no increase in glory. Rather, it is cleansed according to the demands of Divine Justice.

We are not certain whether purgatory is a place or a space in which souls are cleansed. The Church has never given a definite answer to this question. The important thing to understand is that it is a state or condition in which souls undergo purification.

The Catholic practice of offering prayers and sacrifices for the dead is known as offering suffrages. These suffrages are offered both by the individuals and by the Church. They are intended to obtain for the poor soul, either partial or total remission of punishment still to be endured.

Who are the faithful that can pray effectively for the poor souls? They are primarily all baptized Christians but may be anyone in a state of grace. At least the state of grace is probably necessary to gain indulgences for the dead.

The angels and saints in heaven can also help these souls in purgatory and obtain a mitigation of their pains. When they do so, the process is not by way of merit or of satisfaction, but only through petition. A study of the Church's official prayers reveals that saints and the angelic spirits are invoked for the Church Suffering (i.e., those in purgatory), but always to intercede and never otherwise.

Contrary Views

Since patristic times there have been many who have denied the existence of purgatory and have claimed it is useless to pray for the dead. Arius, a fourth-century priest of Alexandria who claimed that Christ is not God, was a prime example. In the Middle Ages, the Albigenses, Waldenses, and Hussites all denied the existence of purgatory. Generally, the denial by these different groups of heretics was tied in with some theoretical position on grace, or merit, or the Church's authority. But until the Reformation, there was no major reaction to Catholic doctrine on the existence of purgatory.

With the advent of the Reformers, every major Protestant tradition — the Reformed (Calvinist), Evangelical (Lutheran), Anglican (Episcopal) and Free Church (Congregational) — took issue with Roman Catholicism to disclaim a state of purification between death and celestial glory.

John Calvin set the theological groundwork for the disclaimer, which he correctly recognized to be a part of the Protestant idea that salvation comes from grace alone in such a way that it involves no human cooperation:

"We should exclaim with all our might, that purgatory is a pernicious fiction of Satan, that it makes void the cross of Christ, that it intolerably insults the Divine Mercy, and weakens and overturns our faith. For what is their purgatory, but a satisfaction for sins paid after death by the souls of the deceased? Thus the notion of satisfaction being overthrown, purgatory itself is immediately subverted from its very foundation."

It has been fully proved that the blood of Christ is the only satisfaction, expiation, and purgation for the sins of the faithful. What, then, is the necessary conclusion but that purgation is nothing but a horrible blasphemy against Christ? I pass by the sacrilegious pretences with which it is daily defended, the offences, which it produces in religion, and the other innumerable evils, which we see to have come from such a source of impiety."
Institutes of the Christian Religion, III, 5.

Calvin's strictures have been crystallized in the numerous Reformed Confessions of Faith, like the Westminster Confession of the Presbyterian Church. "Prayer is to be made," says the Confession, "for things lawful, and for all sorts of men living, or that shall live hereafter; but not for the dead, nor for those of whom it may be known that they have sinned the sin unto death" (Chapter XXI, Section 4).

In the Augsburg Confession of the Lutheran churches, it is stated that "the Mass is not a sacrifice to remove the sins of others, whether living or dead, but should be a Communion in which the priest and others receive the sacrament for themselves" (Chapter XXIV, The Mall).

The Thirty-nine Articles of the Anglican Communion, which in the United States is the Protestant Episcopal Church, are equally clear. They place the existence of purgatory in the same category with image worship and invocation of the saints:

"The Romish Doctrine concerning Purgatory, Pardons, Worshipping and Adoration, as well of Images as of Relics, and also Invocation of Saints, is a fond thing, vainly invented, and grounded upon no warranty of Scripture, but rather repugnant to the Word of God" (Article XXII).

Standard formularies of the Free Church tradition simply omit mention of purgatory from their Confessions of Faith, with a tendency in the United Church of Christ towards universalism. Thus life everlasting is univocally equated with blessedness, the "never-ending life of the soul with God," which means "the triumph of righteousness (in) the final victory of good over evil, which must come because God wills it" (Christian Faith and Purpose: A Catechism, Boston, p. 21).

A fine testimony to the ancient faith in purgatory occurs in the authoritative Confession of Dositheus, previously referred to. This creed of the Orthodox Church was produced by a synod convened in Jerusalem in 1672 by Patriarch Dositheus. The occasion for the creed was Cyril Lucaris, who had been elected Patriarch of Alexandria in 1602 and of Constantinople in 1621, Lucaris was strongly influenced by Protestantism and especially by Reformed theology. His Protestant predilections aroused the opposition of his own people. He was finally strangled by the Turks, who thought he was guilty of treason.

The Confession of Dositheus defines Orthodoxy over against Protestantism. It is the most important Orthodox confession of modern times:

"We believe that the souls of those that have fallen asleep are either at rest or in torment, according to each hath wrought. For when they are separated from their bodies, they depart immediately either to joy or to sorrow and lamentation; though confessedly neither their enjoyment nor condemnation are complete. For, after the common resurrection, when the soul shall be united with the body, with which it had behaved itself well or ill, each shall receive the completion of either enjoyment or of condemnation. Such as though involved in mortal sins have not departed in despair but have, while still living in the body, repented, though without bringing any fruits of repentance — by pouring forth tears, by kneeling while watching in prayers, by afflicting themselves, by relieving the poor, and in fine by showing forth by their works their love towards God and their neighbor, and which the Catholic Church hath from the beginning rightly called satisfaction — of these and such like the souls depart into Hades, and there endure the punishment due to their sins which they have committed.

But they are aware of their future release from thence, and are delivered by the Supreme Goodness through the prayers of the priests and the good works which the relative of each perform for their departed — especially the unbloody Sacrifice availing the highest degree — which each offers particularly for his relatives that have fallen asleep, and which the Catholic and Apostolic Church offers daily for all alike. It is not known, of course, when they will be released. We know and believe that there is deliverance for them from their dire condition, before the common resurrection and judgment, but we do not know when" (Decree XVII).

An unexpected development in contemporary Episcopalianism is the verbal admission of Article XXII of the Thirty-nine Articles alongside a belief in prayers for the dead sanctioned by the American Book of Common Prayer. Among others, one oration reads: "O God, whose mercies cannot be numbered, accept our prayers on behalf of the soul of thy servant, and grant him (her) an entrance into the land of light and joy, in the fellowship of thy saints" (p. 34). Masses for the faithful departed are also offered in the High Church Episcopalianism.

Biblical Elements Of Purgatory

The definition of the Catholic Church on the existence of purgatory is derived from Sacred Scripture and the Sacred Tradition, which Christ promised would enable the Church to interpret Scripture without error. In particular, the Church relied on the writings of the early Fathers in defining this article of faith.

The classic text in the Old Testament bearing witness to the belief of the Jewish people in the existence of a state of purgation where souls are cleansed before entering heaven is found in the Book of Maccabees. Judas Maccabeus (died 161 BC) was a leader of the Jews in opposition to Syrian dominance, and Hellenizing tendencies among his people. He resisted a Syrian army and renewed religious life by rededicating the temple; the feast of Hanukkah celebrates this event.

In context, Judas had just completed a successful battle against the Edomites and was directing the work of gathering up the bodies of the Jews who had fallen in battle. As the bodies were picked up, it was found that every one of the deceased had, under his shirt, amulets of the idols of Jamnia, which the Law forbade the Jews to wear. Judas and his men concluded that this was a divine judgment against the fallen, who died because they had committed this sin of disobedience. The sacred writer describes what happened next:

"So they all blessed the ways of the Lord, the righteous Judge, who reveals the things that are hidden and fell to supplication, begging that the sin that had been committed should be wholly blotted out.

And the noble Judas exhorted the people to keep themselves from sin, after having seen with their own eyes what had happened because of the sin of those who had fallen. He also took a collection, amounting to two thousand silver drachmas, each man contributing, and sent it to Jerusalem, to provide a sin offering, acting very finely and properly in taking account of the resurrection. For if he had not expected that those who had fallen would rise again, it would have been superfluous and foolish to pray for the dead; or if it was through reward destined for those who fall asleep in godliness, it was a holy and pious thought. Therefore he made atonement for the dead, so that they might be set free from their sin" (2 Mac 12:42-46).

The Maccabean text shows that Judas, and the Jewish priests and people believed that those who died in peace could be helped by prayers and sacrifices offered by the living. Luther denied the canonicity of seven books of the Old Testament (the Deuterocanonical books), including the two books of Maccabees. But even if the text were not inspired, as an authentic witness to Jewish history in pre-Christian times it testifies to the common belief in a state of purgation after death and in the ability to help the faithful departed by prayers of intercession on their behalf. Jewish tradition since the time of Christ supports this view.

There are also certain passages in the New Testament that the Church commonly cites as containing evidence of the existence of purgatory. In the Gospel of Matthew, Christ warns the Pharisees that anyone who speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven either in this world or in the next (Mt. 12:32). Here Christ recognizes that there exists a state beyond this world in which the penalty due for sins, which were pardoned as to guilt in the world, is forgiven. St. Paul also affirms the reality of purgatory. In his first letter to the Corinthians, he says that "the fire will assay the quality of everyone's work," and "if his work burns he will lose his reward, but himself will be saved, yet so as through fire" (1 Cor 3:13, 15). These words clearly imply some penal suffering. Since he connects it so closely with the divine judgment, it can hardly be limited to suffering in this world, but seems to include the idea of purification through suffering after death, namely in purgatory.

The Fathers On Purgatory

During the first four centuries of the Christian era, the existence of purgatory was commonly taught in the Church, as seen in its universal practice of offering prayers and sacrifices for the dead.

The most ancient liturgies illustrate the custom in such prayers as the following: "Let us pray for our brothers who have fallen asleep in Christ, that the God of the highest charity towards men, who has summoned the soul of the deceased, may forgive him all his sin and, rendered well-disposed and friendly towards him, may call him to the assembly of the living" (Apostolic Constitutions, 8:41).

Equally ancient are the inscriptions found in the catacombs, which provide numerous examples of how the faithful offered prayers for their departed relatives and friends. Thus we read from engravings going back to the second century such invocations as: "Would that God might refresh your spirit . . . Ursula, may you be received by Christ . . . Victoria, may your spirit be at rest in good . . . Kalemir, may God grant peace to your spirit and that of your sister, Hildare . . . Timothy, may the eternal life be yours in Christ."

Writers before Augustine explicitly teach that souls stained with temporal punishment due to sins are purified after death. St. Cyprian (died 258) taught that penitents who die before the Sacrament of Penance must perform the remainder of any atonement required in the other world, while martyrdom counts as full satisfaction (Epistola 55, 20). St. Cyril of Jerusalem (315-386) described the sacred rites of the Liturgy with the comment, "Then we pray also for the dead, our holy fathers, believing that this will be a great help for the souls of those for whom the prayer is offered" (Catechesis, 32).

St. Augustine not only presumed the existence of purgatory as a matter of divine faith, but also testified to this belief from the Scriptures. Among other statements, he said, "some believers will pass through a kind of purgatorial fire. In proportion as they loved the goods that perish with more of less devotion, they shall be more of less quickly delivered from the flames." He further declared that the deceased are "benefited by the piety of their living friends, who offer the Sacrifice of the Mediator, or give alms to the Church on their behalf. But these services are of help only to those lives had earned such merit that suffrages of this could assist them. For there is a way of life that is neither so good as to dispense with these services after death, nor so bad that after death they are of not benefit" (Enchiridion 69, 110).

Augustine's most beautiful tribute to purgatory occurs in the book of his Confessions, where he describes the death of his mother Monica and recalls her final request, "Lay this body anywhere at all. The care of it must not trouble you. This only I ask of you, that you remember me at the altar of the Lord wherever you are." Augustine complied with his mother's desire and admits that he did not weep "even in those prayers that were poured forth to Thee while the sacrifice of our redemption was offered for her" (Confessions, IX, 11).

After the Patristic period, the Church did not significantly develop the doctrine of purgatory for many centuries. Then in the twelfth century, Pope Innocent IV (1243-54), building upon the writings of the Fathers, expounded in detail upon the doctrine. In context, Innocent was concerned with reuniting the Greek Church which had been in schism since the Photian scandal in the ninth century. He appealed to the Greek's belief in a state of purgation as a point of departure from which to bring them into communion with Rome. In a doctrinal letter to the apostolic delegate in Greece, he discussed the common belief:

"It is said that the Greeks themselves unhesitatingly believe and maintain that the souls of those who do not perform a penance which they have received, or the souls of those who die free from mortal sins but with even the slightest venial sins, are purified after death and can be helped by the prayers of the Church.

Since the Greeks say that their Doctors have not given them a definite and proper name for the place of such purification, We, following the tradition and authority of the holy Fathers, call that place purgatory; and it is our will that the Greeks use that name in the future.

For sins are truly purified by that temporal fire — not grievous or capital sins which have not first been remitted by penance, but small and slight sins which remain a burden after death, if they have not been pardoned during life" (DB, 456).

The Second Council of Lyons, convened in 1274, used the teaching of Pope Innocent IV in its formal declaration on purgatory. This declaration stated:

"If those who are truly repentant die in charity before they have done sufficient penance for their sins of omission and commission, their souls are cleansed after death in purgatorial or cleansing punishments . . . The suffrages of the faithful on earth can be of great help in relieving these punishments, as, for instance, the Sacrifice of the Mass, prayers, almsgiving, and other religious deeds which, in the manner of the Church, the faithful are accustomed to offer for others of the faithful."

The next major pronouncement by the Catholic Church regarding purgatory came shortly before the Council of Trent, from Pope Leo X who condemned a series of propositions of Martin Luther, including the following:

"Purgatory cannot be proved from the Sacred Scripture which is the Canon. The souls in purgatory are not sure about their salvation, a least not all of them. Moreover it has not been proved from reason or from the Scriptures that they are beyond the state of merit or of growing in charity" (DB 777-778).

The Council of Trent went further, including in the Decree on Justification an anathema of those who deny the debt of temporal punishment, remissible either in this life or in the next:

"If anyone says that, after receiving the grace of justification the guilt of any repentant sinner is remitted and the debt of eternal punishment is blotted out in such a way that no debt of temporal punishment remains to be paid, either in this life or in purgatory, before the gate to the kingdom of heaven can be opened: let him be anathema" (DB 840).

Fifteen years after the Decree on Justification, and shortly before its closing sessions, the Council of Trent issued a special Decree on Purgatory, as well as corresponding decrees on sacred images, invocation of the saints and indulgences. It was a summary statement that referred to the previous definition and that cautioned against some of the abuses that gave rise to the Protestant opposition:

"The Catholic Church, by the teaching of the Holy Spirit, in accordance with Sacred Scripture and the ancient tradition of the Fathers, has taught in the holy councils, and most recently in this ecumenical council, that there is a purgatory, and that the souls detained there are helped by the prayers of the faithful, and especially by the acceptable Sacrifice of the Altar.

Therefore, this holy council commands the bishops to be diligently on guard that the true doctrine about purgatory, the doctrine handed down from the holy Fathers and the sacred councils, be preached everywhere, and that Christians be instructed in it, believe it, and adhere to it.

But let the more difficult and subtle controversies, which neither edify nor generally cause any increase of piety, be omitted from the ordinary sermons to the poorly instructed. Likewise, they should not permit anything that is uncertain or anything that appears to be false to be treated in popular or learned publications. And should forbid as scandalous and injurious to the faithful whatever is characterized by a kind of curiosity and superstition, or is prompted by motives of dishonorable gain" (DB 983).

Most recently, the Second Vatican Council in its Constitution on the Church renewed the teaching of previous councils on eschatology, including the doctrine of purgatory. "This sacred Council," it declared, "accepts with great devotion this venerable faith of our ancestors regarding this vital fellowship with our brethren who are in heavenly glory or who, having died, are still being purified . . . At the same time, in conformity with our own pastoral interests, we urge all concerned, if any abuses, excesses or defects have crept in here or there, to do what is in their power to remove or correct them, and to restore all things to a fuller praise of Christ and of God" (Chapter VII, no. 51).

Meaning Of The Doctrine

Although not defined doctrine, it is certain that the essential pain in purgatory is the pain of loss, because the souls are temporarily deprived of the beatific vision.

Their suffering is intense on two counts: (1) the more something is desired, the more painful its absence, and the faithful departed intensely desire to possess God now that they are freed from temporal cares and no longer held down by the spiritual inertia of the body; (2) they clearly see that their deprivation was personally blameworthy and might have been avoided if only they had prayed and done enough penance during life.

However, there is no comparison between this suffering and the pains of hell. The suffering of purgatory is temporary and therefore includes the hope of one day seeing the face of God; it is borne with patience since the souls realize that purification is necessary and they do not wish to have it otherwise; and it is accepted generously, out of love for God and with perfect submission to His will.

Moreover, purgatory includes the pain of sense. Some theologians say that not every soul is punished with this further pain, on the premise that it may be God's will to chastise certain people only with the pain of loss.

Theologically, there is less clarity about the nature of this pain of sense. Writers in the Latin tradition are quite unanimous that the fire of purgatory is real and not metaphorical. They argue from the common teaching of the Latin Fathers, of some Greek Fathers, and of certain papal statements like that of Pope Innocent IV, who spoke of "a transitory fire" (DB 456). Nevertheless, at the union council of Florence, the Greeks were not required to abandon the opposite opinion, that the fire of purgatory is not a physical reality.

We do not know for certain how intense are the pains in purgatory. St. Thomas Aquinas held that the least pain in purgatory was greater than the worst in this life. St. Bonaventure said the worst suffering after death was greater than the worst on earth, but the same could not be said regarding the least purgatorial suffering.

Theologians commonly hold, with St. Robert Bellarmine, that in some way the pains of purgatory are greater than those on earth. At least objectively the loss of the beatific vision after death, is worse than its non-possession now. But on the subjective side, it is an open question. Probably the pains in purgatory are gradually diminished, so that in the latter stages we could not compare sufferings on earth with the state of a soul approaching the vision of God.

Parallel with their sufferings, the souls also experience intense spiritual joy. Among the mystics, St. Catherine of Genoa wrote, "It seems to me there is no joy comparable to that of the pure souls in purgatory, except the joy of heavenly beatitude." There are many reasons for this happiness. They are absolutely sure of their salvation. They have faith, hope and great charity. They know themselves to be in divine friendship, confirmed in grace and no longer able to offend God.

Although the souls in purgation perform supernatural acts, they cannot merit because they are no longer in the state of wayfarers, nor can they increase in supernatural charity. By the same token, they cannot make satisfaction, which is the free acceptance of suffering as compensation for injury, accepted by God on account of the dignity of the one satisfying. The sufferings in purgatory are imposed on the departed, without leaving them the option of "free acceptance" such as they had in mortal life. They can only make "satispassion" for their sins, by patiently suffering the demand of God's justice.

The souls in purgatory can pray, and, since impetration is the fruit of prayer, they can also impetrate. The reason is that impetration does not depend on strict justice as in merit, but on divine mercy. Moreover, the impetratory power of their prayers depends on their sanctity.

It is therefore highly probable that the poor souls can impetrate a relaxation of their own (certainly of other souls') sufferings. But they do not do this directly; only indirectly in obtaining from God the favor that the Church might pray for them and that prayers offered by the faithful might be applied to them.

However, it is not probable but certain that they can pray and impetrate on behalf of those living on earth. They are united with the Church Militant by charity in the Communion of Saints. At least two councils approved the custom of invoking the faithful departed. According to the Council of Vienne, they "assist us by their suffrages." And in the words of the Council of Utrecht, "We believe that they pray for us to God." St. Bellarmine wrote at length on the efficacy of invoking the souls in purgatory. The Church has formally approved the practice, as in the decree of Pope Leo XIII granting an indulgence for any prayer in which the intercession of the faithful departed is petitioned (Acta Sanctae Sedis, 1889-90, p.743).

A Problem

A major problem arises regarding the forgiveness of venial sins in a person who is dying in the state of grace. When and how are they remitted? Is the forgiveness before death? If so, by what right? What has the person done to deserve forgiveness, since it is not likely God would remove the guilt of sins that were not repented of. Or is it after death? But then how can this take place, since ex hypothesi the person can no longer merit or truly satisfy, but can only suffer to remove the reatus poenae

According to one theory (Alexander of Hales), venial sins are always removed in this life through the grace of final perseverance, even without an act of contrition. Remission takes place "in the very dissolution of body and soul," when concupiscence is also extinguished. Few theologians look on this opinion favorably, both because there is nothing in the sources to suggest that final perseverance remits guilt, and because everything indicates the need for some human counterpart in the remission of sin.

Others claim (e.g., St. Bonaventure) that forgiveness occurs in purgatory itself by a kind of "accidental merit" which allows for the removal of guilt and not only satispassion in virtue of Divine Justice. If anything, this theory is less probable than the foregoing because it presumes there is a possibility of merit after death.

Blessed Dun Scotus and the Franciscan school say the deletion takes place either in purgatory or at the time of death. If in purgatory, it is on the assumption that the expiating venial sins is nothing more than remitting the penalty they deserve; if at the time of death, it could be right at the moment the soul leaves the body or an instant after. In any case, Scotists postulate that remission occurs because of merits previously gained during life on earth. This position is not much favored because it seems to identify habitual sin with its penalty and claim that venial sins are remissible without subjective penance.

The most common explanation is that venial sins are remitted at the moment of death, through the fervor of a person's love of God and sorrow for his sins. For although a soul on leaving the body can no longer merit or make real satisfaction, it can retract its sinful past. Thus, it leaves its affection for sin and, without increasing in sanctifying grace or removing any penalty (as happens in true merit), it can have deleted the reatus culpae The latter is incompatible with the exalted love of God possessed by a spirit that leaves the body in divine friendship but stained with venial faults.


TOPICS: Apologetics; Catholic; Ecumenism; Theology
KEYWORDS: catholic; purgatory; salvation; soteriology
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 241-260261-280281-300 ... 341-346 next last
To: Mr Rogers

And, by the way, I did not say that Scripture was confusing, I said that Luther altered or edited out the parts of Scripture that he did not like.
I also said that Luther completely ignores some of the Scripture that remains, in his own reworking of the Bible.

There is CLEARLY a designation, by Jesus, to make Peter the head of the Church.

Peter CLEARLY had the authority to navigate and establish a system for his own replacement.


261 posted on 07/22/2009 11:38:18 AM PDT by Kansas58
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 256 | View Replies]

To: ET(end tyranny)
Is that a sin or the result of a temporal effect from sin?

Good question! I take it that a will not perfectly aligned with the Lord is not yet sin, but it strongly inclines one to sin, as a result of past sin. So, I would say the latter--a perverted will is the result of the temporal effects of sin.
262 posted on 07/22/2009 11:40:40 AM PDT by bdeaner (The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? (1 Cor. 10:16))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 248 | View Replies]

To: Mr Rogers
Well, the fact you bring up, that the disciples did argue, makes MY point, not yours!
Though all of Scripture is Sacred, we must understand that even the first 12 did not agree, and that Paul did not always agree with the remaining 11.

So, Scripture is the work of man, inspired by God, but even Scripture shows us differences of opinion, among good, solid, Saintly Christians.

Also, Peter was head of the Church, on Earth, AFTER Crucifixion and Resurrection.

Jesus appointed his Successor on Earth, before Jesus left this Earth.

Peter did the same thing.

263 posted on 07/22/2009 11:41:50 AM PDT by Kansas58
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 260 | View Replies]

To: Mr Rogers
Folks, the Law has finished its purpose.

What exactly do you take this to mean? Jesus told us that he did NOT come to abolish the Law and that NOT one jot or tittle (terms use in Hebriac writing) would fade from the Law until the heavens and earth passed away. The heavens and the earth are STILL here, so is the Law. It didn't go anywhere and hasn't been abolished.

264 posted on 07/22/2009 11:44:31 AM PDT by ET(end tyranny)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 247 | View Replies]

To: Marysecretary
He sends tribulation for us to purge out our sins here on earth before we die, not after.

So you agree we experience "tribulation" as a way to purge us of our sins. That's what Catholics mean by purgatory! Same concept. Why can't it also happen after death, prior to our entering heaven? Plenty of Scripture supports this, as have been cited already.
265 posted on 07/22/2009 11:49:10 AM PDT by bdeaner (The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? (1 Cor. 10:16))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 244 | View Replies]

To: Kansas58

“Luther also had some rather hateful things to say about the Jews. It is entirely possible that Luther’s antisemitism, and his “goal oriented” approach to Scripture, led Luther to get rid of any trace of Jewish tradition at the actual time of Christ, or just before Jesus was here on Earth.”

One of the nice things about being a Protestant is that I don’t hold anyone up as perfect...nor do Catholics about the Pope. I see no sign Luther was trying to scrub Jewish traditions from Christianity, except for where they were already dealt with by Jesus and Paul.

“That would help explain why Luther stripped the Deuterocannonical Books, books which Jesus honored, from Luther’s corrupted Bible.”

Ummm...no. For one thing, Luther wrote in his Bible translation in 1534: “APOCRYPHA, that is, Books which are not to be esteemed like the Holy Scriptures, and yet which are useful and good to read.”

Also, this from wikipedia: “Martin Luther translated the Bible into German during the early part of the 16th century, first releasing a complete Bible in 1534. His Bible was the first major edition to have a separate section called Apocrypha. Books and portions of books not found in the Hebrew Tanakh were moved out of the body of the Old Testament to this section. Luther placed these books between the Old and New Testaments. For this reason, these works are sometimes known as inter-testamental books. The books 1 and 2 Esdras were omitted entirely. Many twentieth century editions of the Luther Bible omit the Apocrypha section.”

If Luther took his actions because he was anti-Semitic, then why did he follow the Jews in not accepting those books not found in the Tanakh? If anything, you should accuse him of giving too much weight to Jewish opinion...


266 posted on 07/22/2009 11:49:33 AM PDT by Mr Rogers (I loathe the ground he slithers on!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 259 | View Replies]

To: ET(end tyranny)
"Jesus told us that he did NOT come to abolish the Law and that NOT one jot or tittle (terms use in Hebriac writing) would fade from the Law until the heavens and earth passed away."

No, what Jesus said was, "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished."

267 posted on 07/22/2009 11:52:46 AM PDT by Mr Rogers (I loathe the ground he slithers on!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 264 | View Replies]

To: Kansas58

“Luther altered or edited out the parts of Scripture that he did not like.”

Simply untrue.

“Luther completely ignores some of the Scripture that remains, in his own reworking of the Bible.”

Odd. I’ve read passages of Luther speaking very highly of James, and James’ emphasis on works.

“There is CLEARLY a designation, by Jesus, to make Peter the head of the Church.”

Odd, then, that the Apostles didn’t understand it, and Jesus didn’t clarify it for them. And, BTW, JESUS is the Head of the Church. Period. Dot.


268 posted on 07/22/2009 11:55:48 AM PDT by Mr Rogers (I loathe the ground he slithers on!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 261 | View Replies]

To: Marysecretary
If they don’t repent of any sin, and turn away from it, I would think they would not make it to heaven.

Ok, but if a person repents of their sin after having broken a commandment, is there still any consequences, in this life or the next, of having broken the commandment? You suggested in another post that tribulation would be the consequence. Tribulations is defined as "great affliction, trial, or distress; suffering." This suffering, in the context you are using it, implies that suffering serves a cleansing function -- it serves in the process of sanctification of the saved. For Catholics, that's exactly what "purgatory" means -- a cleansing of the soul through suffering that results from the temporal effects of sin. However, whereas you see this kind of "tribulation" as restricted to this life only, Catholics believe that such "tribulation" can also happen in the afterlife as a preparation of (some of) the saved for heaven.
269 posted on 07/22/2009 11:56:06 AM PDT by bdeaner (The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? (1 Cor. 10:16))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 252 | View Replies]

To: TheBattman
Here are the only versus I have read that remind me of purgatory.

Luke 12:54-59

He said to the crowd: "When you see a cloud rising in the west, immediately you say, 'It's going to rain,' and it does. And when the south wind blows, you say, 'It's going to be hot,' and it is. Hypocrites! You know how to interpret the appearance of the earth and the sky. How is it that you don't know how to interpret this present time?

"Why don't you judge for yourselves what is right? As you are going with your adversary to the magistrate, try hard to be reconciled to him on the way, or he may drag you off to the judge, and the judge turn you over to the officer, and the officer throw you into prison. I tell you, you will not get out until you have paid the last penny.

Restated in Matthew 5:23-26

"Therefore, if you are offering your gift at the altar and there remember that your brother has something against you, leave your gift there in front of the altar. First go and be reconciled to your brother; then come and offer your gift.

Settle matters quickly with your adversary who is taking you to court. Do it while you are still with him on the way, or he may hand you over to the judge, and the judge may hand you over to the officer, and you may be thrown into prison. I tell you the truth, you will not get out until you have paid the last penny.
270 posted on 07/22/2009 11:57:45 AM PDT by Scythian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Mr Rogers
Mr Rogers, note I did respond to your previous criticism of using Matt 5 and Luke 12 to support the doctrine of Purgatory. I addressed that issue HERE just in case you missed it.

In your exegesis here -- and I will have more to say about it later -- it seems you have ignored the clear parallel between the teaching in Matt 5 and Luke 12 with the parable in Matthew 18. This parallel suggests they should not be read in isolation, but together -- that they are mutually illuminating, not only for their obvious implications for how to behave in this life -- obvious, when taken on face value--, but also for what they reveal about Our Father in Heaven, and the process of salvation.

Yes, the parable is about forgiveness, just as Matt 5 is about settling with one's adversary--but both teachings are also saying something about the way justice is fulfilled in the order of things, by Our Father. "And in anger his master delivered him to the jailers, until he should pay all his debt," suggests that justice for sin requires sin to have consequences -- a debt that requires payment AND a payment that is finite rather than infinite, which suggests purgation of sin, not eternal damnation, in this context. And note, Christ tells us that this is occuring in the kingdom of heaven! So, the suffering is not happening in Hell. So where is it happening? In the portal to heaven, where the soul is purified for the beatific vision -- "purgatory."
271 posted on 07/22/2009 12:15:49 PM PDT by bdeaner (The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? (1 Cor. 10:16))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 247 | View Replies]

To: bdeaner

If Jesus didn’t die for those sins, why should he have bothered at all?


272 posted on 07/22/2009 12:18:39 PM PDT by Marysecretary (GOD IS STILL IN CONTROL!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 265 | View Replies]

To: Kansas58

I don’t do Greek translations. I KNOW what Jesus spoke. He said upon THIS ROCK, himself, I will build my Church.


273 posted on 07/22/2009 12:20:04 PM PDT by Marysecretary (GOD IS STILL IN CONTROL!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 255 | View Replies]

To: Kansas58

I don’t do Greek translations. I KNOW what Jesus spoke. He said upon THIS ROCK, himself, I will build my Church.


274 posted on 07/22/2009 12:20:12 PM PDT by Marysecretary (GOD IS STILL IN CONTROL!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 255 | View Replies]

To: Kansas58

Won’t he though? And you folks thought Peter was the Rock. I’m sure He’ll get a big kick out of that one.


275 posted on 07/22/2009 12:21:05 PM PDT by Marysecretary (GOD IS STILL IN CONTROL!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 253 | View Replies]

To: Kansas58

And what’s prideful about expecting God to show me the truth? You must have a problem with His ability, through the Holy Spirit, to tell me what HE wants me to know.


276 posted on 07/22/2009 12:22:08 PM PDT by Marysecretary (GOD IS STILL IN CONTROL!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 253 | View Replies]

To: Kansas58
Also, Peter was head of the Church, on Earth, AFTER Crucifixion and Resurrection.

That is NOT what is shown in Acts. It is JAMES that gave the final directive. And Eusebius gives two accounts in his Ecclesiastical History.

In Galatians 2:1-10,  Paul gives more information about the pre-eminence of James in the confrontation in Antioch that follows his discussion of what transpired in Jerusalem in regard to 'the Gospel as he proclaimed it among the Gentiles.'
This event is also called the Jerusalem Council, and its parrallel is in Acts 15.

Acts15
13   And after they had held their peace, James answered, saying, Men and brethren, hearken unto me:
14   Simeon hath declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name.
15   And to this agree the words of the prophets; as it is written,
16   After this I will return, and will build again the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down; and I will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it up:
17   That the residue of men might seek after the Lord, and all the Gentiles, upon whom my name is called, saith the Lord, who doeth all these things.
18   Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world.
19   Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God:
20   But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood.

21   For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day.28 For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things;

 29 That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well.


Galatians 2:6,9
6   But of these who seemed to be somewhat, (whatsoever they were, it maketh no matter to me: God accepteth no man's person:) for they who seemed to be somewhat in conference added nothing to me:

9   And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision.
10   Only they would that we should remember the poor; the same which I also was forward to do.

Paul must have forgotten about this part:
20   But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood.

James was the successor of Jesus.  James was the Leader of the Jerusalem Community (Assembly) and of the Church as a whole.  James was the Head of Christianity of his day, whatever this may have been said to be.  Bishop of Jerusalem is not simply one among equals, but the leader.  This is why Paul resented James so much, and it is why James sent others to spy on Paul.  And this is why Peter left the table at Antioch.  If Peter had been 'in charge', why feel guilty about breaking table fellowship with gentiles?  Answer, because James was in charge and Head of the Church

Galatians 2
11   But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed.
12   For before that certain came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision.
13   And the other Jews dissembled likewise with him; insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation.

They left because James who was in authority sent people to check up on things in Antioch, and they got caught with their hands in the cookie jar so to speak.

Eusebius:  Ecclesiastical History
http://biblefacts.org/ecf/cvol1/euseb_b2.html

Book  II

CHAPTER I. The Course pursued by the Apostles after the Ascension of Christ. First, then, in the place of Judas, the betrayer, Matthias, who, as has been shown was also one of the Seventy, was chosen to the apostolate. And there were appointed to the diaconate, for the service of the congregation, by prayer and the laying on of the hands of the apostles, approved men, seven in number, of whom Stephen was one. He first, after the Lord, was stoned to death at the time of his ordination by the slayers of the Lord, as if he had been promoted for this very purpose. And thus he was the first to receive the crown, corresponding to his name, which belongs to the martyrs of Christ. Then James, whom the ancients surnamed the Just on account of the excellence of his virtue, is recorded to have been the first to be made bishop of the church of Jerusalem. This James was called the brother of the Lord because he was known as a son of Joseph, and Joseph was supposed to be the father of Christ, because the Virgin, being betrothed to him, "was found with child by the Holy Ghost before they came together," as the account of the holy Gospels shows. But Clement in the sixth book of his Hypotyposes writes thus: "For they say that Peter and James and John after the ascension of our Savior, as if also preferred by our Lord, strove not after honor, but chose James the Just bishop of Jerusalem."

277 posted on 07/22/2009 12:24:33 PM PDT by ET(end tyranny)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 263 | View Replies]

To: Kansas58

Jesus had an agenda. He KNEW He was going to raise Lazarus from the dead. He wouldn’t have prayed for Lazarus if He thought He couldn’t do what He intended. Go ahead and pray for the dead if it makes you feel better, but it will do absolutely nothing for you OR them.


278 posted on 07/22/2009 12:26:15 PM PDT by Marysecretary (GOD IS STILL IN CONTROL!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 249 | View Replies]

To: Mr Rogers
No, what Jesus said was, "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished."

Heaven and earth are STILL here, so ALL has NOT been accomplished. The Law is STILL HERE.

279 posted on 07/22/2009 12:27:17 PM PDT by ET(end tyranny)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 267 | View Replies]

To: Mr Rogers
I see no sign Luther was trying to scrub Jewish traditions from Christianity, except for where they were already dealt with by Jesus and Paul.

What Jewish traditions do you think Jesus scrubbed?

280 posted on 07/22/2009 12:30:51 PM PDT by ET(end tyranny)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 266 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 241-260261-280281-300 ... 341-346 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson