Posted on 10/22/2011 1:21:35 PM PDT by NYer
Catholics get a bad rap for thinking we somehow “merit” or “earn” our own sanctification (and salvation) through “works” that we do. But that’s a misunderstanding of what the Catholic Church actually teaches. Our sanctification (our being made holy) happens only by the Grace of God. But it does require a response on our part. We must cooperate with it. This submission to and cooperation with God’s Grace, Catholics call a “work” and it takes various forms.
Some identify this response to God’s grace as a kind of “saving” or “justifying” faith (a faith that produces or is accompanied by works of conversion, hope and charity) as opposed to a “work” – something we do. Such a position is reconcilable with Catholic teaching once we understand each side’s terminology. On the other hand, I think it’s confusing to refer to this cooperation with and submission to God’s Grace as simply “faith alone” – which is one reason Catholics don’t refer to it that way (and probably one reason the Bible says we are “not” saved by “faith alone” – James 2:24).
Anyway, here Fr. Barron speaks a little bit about some of these sanctifying practices of the Church and what we mean by “Purgatory” (an extension of that sanctification) in the super-natural sense.
What the Church means by purgatory? - Watch You Tube Video
This exclusive preview clip was from CATHOLICISM, Episode X: “WORLD WITHOUT END: THE LAST THINGS”.
Explore the Church’s conviction that life here and now is preparation for an extraordinary world that is yet to come – a supernatural destiny. Father Barron presents the Catholic vision of death, judgment, heaven, hell and purgatory as he journeys to Florence, Ireland and Rome.
The vision of the Church sees beyond this world and invites us to consider a world without end. Father Barron shows how this vision is supported by the mystery and truth of the Resurrection of Jesus.
View exclusive preview clips from all episodes of the CATHOLICISM series coming out in Fall 2011.
I wonder who NL is referring to?
Because we preach freedom in Christ. We’re not the ones with all the restrictions and bondage.
The example used several times in this thread about breaking someone's window and having to endure some kind of "temporal" punishment to make "reparations" for that wrong. Has anyone thought that perhaps the reparations God wants us to do when we have wronged someone is for us to make amends TO the person we have wronged? If I sin against another person, God first expects me to confess my sin to him THEN confess and ask forgiveness of the human involved, too. I should - while here on earth alive - try my best to make amends for the wrongs I have committed. But these actions are NOT related to my eternal salvation simply because Jesus paid the penalty of all my sins by his blood.
The whole purpose of reparations, anyway, is to the benefit of both the offender and the offended. The offender knows forgiveness for his wrong acts from the one he wronged and he knows God has forgiven him and fellowship with both is restored. The offended knows that the one who offended admits they're wrong and asks for forgiveness, which he should then grant. All this is and MUST be done at the physical, earthly stage because, once one or the other dies, the purpose of that is over. Many people feel guilt because someone they hurt died and they never went to them to ask for forgiveness. Many people feel bitterness because someone who did them wrong died and never came to them and said they were sorry. The "reparations" whole purpose MUST be on this side of Heaven. It is for both of our benefits but to carry it over into the eternal realm and insist that God expects us to make reparations for some wrong we did without making "good" on it while still alive is both unscriptural and unreasonable. Why even "bother" asking for forgiveness for our wrongs or make it up to someone we hurt, if we can just "take care of it" in Purgatory? Makes no sense. THAT would be "copping out" on my responsibilities. Damage to the "eternal order" of things having to be made right smacks of "karma" and that is NOT what Christ taught.
We only can go to Heaven if our sins have been paid for, and ONLY the blood of Christ pays for sin. No amount of suffering on earth OR in between Heaven and earth could ever be enough. When we die we either go to Heaven or to Hades/Hell. If we are "in Christ" by faith, then we have eternal life with him. No amount of good works or suffering can save us.
Briefly, the argument that SOME do not go to purgatory is compatible with our belief. We do not hold that ALL need purgation after death.
We only can go to Heaven if our sins have been paid for, and ONLY the blood of Christ pays for sin. No amount of suffering on earth OR in between Heaven and earth could ever be enough.
No argument there. We would say the sacrifice of Christ makes the gift of purgatory available because the sin has been paid for.
Why I loathe the NAB, by Mad Dawg
The first version was a joke. That was readily seen. So they decided on another version. A friend of mine knows one of the translators. So he went off on him about the description of the repentance of the Prodigal Son.
The text says clearly, “He came to himself.” (And these are given to us as ipsissima verbi, don’t forget.) But the translators in their vain adulation of “Dynamic equivalence” decided to translate is “he came to his SENSES”!!!!!
That’s not translation, that’s mutilation!
Also, Isaiah 55, one of the most generally important and startlingly beautiful passages in all literature, much less in all the Bible. these bozoi have that the Word of God “will not return to me void.” VOID? What in the name of all that’s beautiful is wrong with “empty”?
Don’t get me started....
But all have sinned and yes all still have committed sin after their moment of salvation. Who are the SOME then? That's not the way it works. You break one commandment the guilt is the same as breaking them all. We can't save ourselves. ANY punishments in this life or the next life can not pay the debt of sin nor remove one blot of it nor undo it's damage.
For that reason was John 3:16-18. By HIS Stripes we are healed by HIS sacrifice for our sins we are purchased and set free from all our sins for The Bible plainly says those whom the Son sets free are free indeed. Our sinful portion of our soul is no more as it is sealed by the Lambs Blood. The curse of this world is no more once we die if we die in Christ. We are new beings Born Again with a cleansed spirit and new bodies GOD intended us too have. We are healed from our sins in the same way as the ones with leprosy Christ healed or as the blind or lame he healed from their physical ailments. We are even as the one whom He cast the demons out of and the demons left the person and were cast in the sea.
Our sins are gone as is all the pains, hurts, and disappointments of this life at the second of our physical death IF we believe Christ died for our sins and accept His free gift of salvation. We are set free.
Not even Christ chosen disciples could live a perfect sin free life even after Christ ascended into heaven. These were ones whom had seen all the miracles yet there was still bickering and strong disagreements on some issues for some time too come. Yes even Simon Peter made some major mistakes in his judgment which Paul brought to his attention. Surely a man who denied Christ three times would have residual sins and damage? No he would not because Peter was under Grace.
The thing about sin is even though we receive our salvation over time with The Holy Spirit working within us our sin becomes more displeasing too us because The Holy Spirit at work in us is ministering to our souls. For some getting to that point takes longer then others. Others try to do The Holy Spirits work by self inflicting torments or punishmnets or worse allow other too do so on themselves as if that somehow will make it go away. The answer is a prayer away and can be prayed anywhere at anytime.
There is but one sin man can not be forgiven. It is the total deliberate and conscious rejection of Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior unto ones death. The Holy Spirit talks too the heart of all sinners to come too Christ. When is it too late? Only GOD knows for sure. It wasn't too late for the thief on the cross. But then again we know not the moment GOD gives us our last heart beat and breath.
The thing about sin is even though we receive our salvation over time with The Holy Spirit working within us our sin becomes more displeasing too us because The Holy Spirit at work in us is ministering to our souls.
This certainly resonates with our thought.
But yet you take it upon yourselves to determine who went straight to heaven, obviously based on the outward appearance of the man/woman
1Sa 16:7 But the LORD said unto Samuel, Look not on his countenance, or on the height of his stature; because I have refused him: for the LORD seeth not as man seeth; for man looketh on the outward appearance, but the LORD looketh on the heart...
Good luck repeating Protestant mantras. Souls in purgatory work?
Thank you.
The Catholic authority is the Catechism, not commentaries to bad translations by Catholic quislings, whose name is legion. The Catechism of the Catholic Church cites 1 Cor. 3 as biblical support for the purgatory.
III. The Final Purification, or Purgatory
1030 All who die in God's grace and friendship, but still imperfectly purified, are indeed assured of their eternal salvation; but after death they undergo purification, so as to achieve the holiness necessary to enter the joy of heaven.
1031 The Church gives the name Purgatory to this final purification of the elect, which is entirely different from the punishment of the damned.604 The Church formulated her doctrine of faith on Purgatory especially at the Councils of Florence and Trent. the tradition of the Church, by reference to certain texts of Scripture, speaks of a cleansing fire:605
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.606
1032 This teaching is also based on the practice of prayer for the dead, already mentioned in Sacred Scripture: "Therefore Judas Maccabeus] made atonement for the dead, that they might be delivered from their sin."607 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.608 The Church also commends almsgiving, indulgences, and works of penance undertaken on behalf of the dead:
Let us help and commemorate them. If Job's sons were purified by their father's sacrifice, why would we doubt that our offerings for the dead bring them some consolation? Let us not hesitate to help those who have died and to offer our prayers for them.609
604 Cf. Council of Florence (1439): DS 1304; Council of Trent (1563): DS 1820; (1547): 1580; see also Benedict XII, Benedictus Deus (1336): DS 1000.
605 Cf. ⇒ 1 Cor 3:15; ⇒ 1 Pet 1:7.
606 St. Gregory the Great, Dial. 4, 39: PL 77, 396; cf. ⇒ Mt 12:31.
607 ⇒ 2 Macc 12:46.
608 Cf. Council of Lyons II (1274): DS 856.
609 St. John Chrysostom, Hom. in 1 Cor. 41, 5: PG 61, 361; cf. ⇒ Job 1:5.
your interpretation [does not] have the required “unanimous consent of the fathers.”
As I pointed out, it consents with the Catechism; it is an interpretation on which the consensus exists at least in the Western Church. Again, 1 Cor 3 is the answer to the question "where is purgatory taught"? On the consensus with the Orthodox we can work and do work. When I see you converting to authentic Christianity, Eastern or Western we can discuss the patristics on the purgatory as brothers; not at the state you are in.
The Lord knows those who are His, (2Tim. 2:19) and there is no waiting for getting into Heaven now,[etc.]
I don't duisagree with that paragraph. If it ws written to refute something the Church teaches, kindly try again.
the suffering is that of loss of rewards due to “any man's works” not enduring the fire test
Yeah, OK. Since the Church does not style all church goers as saints, but rather sees in sanctification a life long process, the presence of imperfections after death is to the Church a delay in sanctification also. You see a difference because you don't understand Catohlic anthropology.
You must exalt Rome like this
And so must you. The Church is the mother of all Christians.
n context, it is manifest that this was ones workmanship in building the church [...] believers are building the church directly or indirectly, and which Col. 1:24 supports
No becase "every man" is called to be a building himself, which building is tested. It is true that every good work build the Church, and every Protestant effort at exegesis aims to destroy it. This is why one should not collaborate with the Protestants in matters of faith.
If this was the issue and purgatorial cleansing was defined as i expressed, and awaited the return of the Lord, then there would be no debate, but some basic commonalities do not negate differences, which was what my points addressed
Maybe you should list the differences then rather than making verbose posts that mostly speak of things we all agree upon.
(“ye” is plural)
St. Paul writes to more than one person, but he says that "if any man build upon this foundation" and then "every man's work", so the building might be a common one, but it is the person of the builder that is tested.
We also believe in the need for purification as a mark of true faith, but we see in Scripture this being dealt with in this life.
Of course. The purgatorial suffering is for those who for various reasons died while their purification in this life was not complete.
Let me be clear: This is not a contest. It is not a pick-up basketball game in the hood where trash-talking is de rigeur. It is not a rock-fiught where any rock that comes to hand may be thrown.
I see no use and great temptation in conversing with those who think they are fighting a fight and that that justifies resorting to insult when reason fails.
If they turn again and show themselves to be concerned about more about the victory of the truth than of themselves — if they show that they can tell the two apart, then conversation can be useful to both.
Otherwise it is just one of the enemy’s snares and an occasion of sin.
Corollary: IF one were truly interested in bringing souls to the truth, Then he would not taunt and insult and,in general, raise the bar, so that admitting a mistake would be more painful then necessary. He would tend more to smoothing the path than to erecting barriers.
So we can reasonably conclude that when one makes it personal and is abusive he is not concerned as much with the truth as he is with his own personal power. All the more reason to stay away.
That’s exactly what it means along with whether the things we did added to the Kingdom of God or were earthly and of little worth. All the sins we have committed or errors we committed, whether by omission of commission, have been forgiven as far as eternity is concerned.
God says He forgives and forgets. How then can He bring them up again later?
LOL When Christ rose from the grave he earned us a one way, direct flight ticket. No delays, stopovers or changing planes. Being perfect He made sure we go first class with no cheap seat restrictions. When He rose from the grave it was all taken care of with no possibility of add ons or extra charges at check in. When it’s time for our flight we carry no baggage because we are provided with everything we will need when we get there.
1 Corinthians 3 is talking about the work of building the body of believers. Whether they are building and adding strong Christians based in the word of God understanding and standing strong in the faith or if they are simply adding those who only get fed the milk of the faith. Those who are fed the “meat” of the faith become strong in the faith and last but those who are weak in the faith can fall away when tempted. It’s not talking about personal works.
(How shall I represent the loud buzzer noise?)
;-)
Alternatively: What have you been SMOKING!
Protestants deprive themselves of one of the joys of being Catholic, namely: grumbling about our bishops. The whole humorous irony of our "faith" which seems ever to escape our opponents, is that we fervently maintain that God has preserved the Church as the "pillar of truth" in SPITE of, not because of, the bishops and others in authority. We almost enjoy outrages like the NAB, because they remind us that our help is in the Name of the Lord -- as opposed to the USCCB
(IMHO) Because of the Magisterium, the issues raised by the notes and by the execrable translation are due our consideration. We use the blessed thing in our Masses. Why are appropriately subservient to that point.
But just as (and it pains me as a Thomist to say this - kidding) John Paul II of blessed memory said there is no official philosophy of the Church (in Fides et Ratio), so I think we can say there is no official exegesis or technique of "higher criticism" or any such thing of the Church.
IF asked, I have no problem 'sharing' in RCIA some of the methods and conjectures of the "higher criticism," and I have found some things, esp. formgeschichte, to be useful.
But I ALWAYS say firmly, that the Scriptures were discerned by the Church and handed on to us as the crown and jewel and, indeed, canon of all things handed on -- traditions. And however else we read it, we should read it as it is given.
And I think even "dynamically equivalent" scribes and the US Conference of Catholic Bishops cannot dim its light. I do not worry (well, not TOO much) because the Lord fights for me.
That same comment has been made about Phil 2:12-13. Maybe so, but my gut says, "It's ALL personal."
Even Christ's suffering wasn't enough to pay for the atonement. It required His LIFE; the shedding of blood.
If anyone's suffering alone were enough to atone for sins, Jesus wouldn't have needed to die.
Another thing that making reparations can do in a situation where harm is done is show the sincerity of the person who was the offender, mainly if they come forward and offer to do it. If it's enforced from the outside, it shows no sincerity of heart. It's still right because it's justice, but does not mean as much to the offended.
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.