Posted on 01/01/2006 4:48:03 PM PST by HarleyD
You are correct. The "sense of the faithful" is active in your Catholic relative! Certainly, we must both agree that our love will be even greater in heaven - and nothing can separate us from the love of Christ. Thus, her father remains part of the Body and even more deeply desires her daughter's salvation and God's graces to rain upon her. I believe this is a comforting doctrine for those who have lost a loved one. A connection still remains between the two as a result of their love. (which is from Christ)
Please forgive my ignorance, but I don't know anything of the exact Church teaching of purgatory. Who goes there? Why? What's it like, and for how long? What is the strongest scriptural support for this, or is this considered tradition?
What Purgatory is I can tell you from the top of my head, but more Scriptural/Tradition quotes will have to await written sources that I don't have with me. Even several hundred years before Christ, Jews believed (at least Pharisees) that the souls of faithful men who had deviated somewhat from God's ways were subject to a third state of existence. Maccabees 12 talks about some men who died in battle with some amulets with them. Judas, the leader, took up a collection of money and sent it to the Temple and the men prayed for the souls of these men who died with the taint of idolatry on their hearts. The Scripture itself explains that there would be no point in praying for these men if they were in hell or heaven. Jesus also implies the existence of a third state between heaven and hell, as does Paul. Being that the first Christians were Jews of the Pharisaical branch, it would follow that they had similar beliefs as laid out in Maccabees. Practices noted in later writings show the validity of the teaching.
The idea is that nothing impure shall enter heaven. We must attain holiness - how can we come into union with God and not be holy ourselves? Before I continue, be advised that this is not holiness we attained ourselves, but through God's graces throughout our lives. When we are judged, God will note whether we have purified ourselves in this life. Is it possible we can attain union with God but have pride? Have sloth or vanity? Hardly! We must become like Christ to rise with Christ. Purgatory is a great mercy, because it gives us, the saved, a final opportunity to prepare ourselves for eternal life. We do NOT merit in Purgatory. It is a purging - which entails suffering (just like any purging or sacrifice does). But we know that we are destined for heaven. We will deeply desire to be purged of anything that keeps us from Christ. It is the result of Christ's work of redemption on the cross.
The Church doesn't officially teach much about Purgatory's means of punishment, or "length of time" spent there, and so forth. Private revelations given to others give us an indication that it would be better to be purged here on earth! But these are not part of the Deposit of Faith. The Scriptures and Apostolic Tradition don't teach us such things. So all we can do is speculate on the particulars.
Let me know if you want more specific Scripture/Tradition quotes.
Regards
Now THAT is a great line! I've never heard it before so I'll give you the credit when I repeat it. :)
I find nothing in scripture that shows anyone agreeing to anything. God tells people what is going to happen and people accept (or deny) what will happen. It always happens just the way God said whatever we say.
Jonah wasn't given much of a choice which many are refusing to admit-("Fish belly, Nineveh, fish belly, Nineveh, fish belly, Nineveh. Hmmmm which to choose?"). Cain wasn't given a choice at all. God just make a blanket statement to Cain that sin was "crouching at his door". Cain still killed Able his brother. Since God appoints the time for us to die, one has to conclude this was the time appointed for Able to die. God not only knew when Able would die, He also knew how he would die and allowed Able to die in such a fashion. Cain was ordained to bring about Able's death although that doesn't make what Cain did right or excuse him. God controlled the events-not man.
Since there were only these two individuals it is clear to see the workings of God. The more people and interaction the greater the permutations become similar chaos theory where a butterfly beats its wings in South America causing a tornado in Texas. Instead I would call it Intelligent Design. It is God who directs the entire universe according to His will.
Cain never said he was sorry, never asked forgiveness, and never went to his parents to have them intercede for him with the Lord. Cain simply focused on his own selfish concerns and left. That is the true nature of man; vile and contemptible. There is no "spark" of goodness.
I don’t know of any “decision” by Eve. Scripture states that Eve was deceived (2 Cor 11:3, 1 Tim 2:14); not that she made a “decision”. Adam was the one who “freely” took of the fruit as ordained by God and it is because of Adam that the race died; not Eve who actually sinned first. Less we think too harshly of Eve, Paul warns Christians in a number of places not to be deceived. Although one can be deceived into sinning it doesn’t excuse us. But deception is far different than making a choice.
Mary is similar to everyone else who has an angel popped in on them. The angel says, “You will….(fill in the blank)” and people says, “Sounds great to me.”. I don’t consider that an exercise of choice.
I believe, in the end, it comes down to authority. That is the final question. It is not a matter of "liking" the Catholic Church's teachings. It is that I believe that they ALONE had a legitimate claim to authoritatively teach the Gospel. Christ sent out particular men to preach and teach - those who were His witnesses. I saw this Apostolic Succession as the source of authority within the Church, protected by God. Thus, I submit my obedience to their interpretations on Scripture and so forth.
I don't think it is a matter of finding a church who YOU agree with. I think it is a matter of finding a church that has been given authority from God. If we find such a church, if we say that Christ is our King, must we not obey our King and follow where He leads us and follow those whom He had left in His charge? Consider the parables of the ruler/master who go away - and a slave is left in charge. This is representative of the Church's leadership role.
Just to be sure, are you saying that whenever we talk about "papal infallibility" we are only talking about the truth of the message, and it has nothing to do with the man himself?
Exactly. Benedict, the Pope, is certainly a holy man. But his decisions on faith and morals are binding on us NOT because of his superior wisdom or sinlessness, but because the Holy Spirit is specifically protecting Him. Christ promised that the Church cannot teach error on matters of doctrine. Over and over, the Church itself notes that it is not to teach anything "new", but only what has been handed down from the Apostles. Everything of consequence taught by the Church is found at least implicitly in the Scriptures as interpreted by Tradition. I have already given "intercessionary prayers of the physically dead saints" as an example of a teaching found in Scripture implicitly. The current Pope is God's instrument of visible unity for the Church. It is through him, if God finds it necessary, that God speaks to the rest of the Church, for example, on his just released encyclical on Love.
I do make interpretations, and they are in part based on what other men I trust have thought before me
We do as well, as long as we don't make interpretations against what the infallible Church teaches. This is a sign of our humility and obedience to God - that we submit to His Church.
My ultimate test is always whether the teaching is Biblical and in context.
The Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist is Biblical, is it not? Do you think that the Christians writings in 100 AD are following a practice that is not found in Scriptures? It comes back to authority, doesn't it? Catholics follow the teachings passed down from the Apostles. That is what faith is.
Well, IN THE ONLY SENSE THAT LONG-TERM ERROR IS POSSIBLE, how long have the Muslims been wrong?
Does not the Scriptures say that the Church is the pillar and foundation of the truth? Does the Scriptures say that Christ would guide and protect His Church with the Spirit of Truth? If we believe that the Church is NOT from God, then why do we believe that the Scriptures that we call the New Testament are even from God? Why not the Koran, then? As to long-term error... Satan still exists as well... It seems amazing to me that Christ would allow such a fundamental error into His Church - we call the Eucharist the source of Christian life! If the Spirit is not guiding the Church, our faith is in vain.
Jo, that is a flat out distortion and you know it. Protestants are not splintered into thousands of different directions. Do you really think this? The core principles are fairly simple and substantially universal.
There are dozens of Baptist groups, are there not? They all hold to different teachings on issues. There is no unity in Protestantism. Even on core issues, what authority beyond oneself holds a person to follow that supposed "core" issue? People cannot even agree on WHAT IS a core issue! While some may say "infant baptism" is a core issue, others will say "no, it isn't". It is clear that there is a broad spectrum of beliefs on such important issues on how one is saved, the sacraments, authority, sanctification, and so forth. I do not know a lot about Protestantism's various beliefs. I do know, from my experience here, that it is quite broad - officially. While some Catholics appear to hold some interesting points of view, this is because they don't know their faith. There is only one Catholic belief on a subject. Protestantism doesn't have that unity, except on a few areas. Can the Spirit of Truth REALLY be leading ALL of these people - sometimes in diametrically opposed directions? Are works of love necessary for salvation? Etc.
Does the Church really only teach what was handed down to them from predecessors, or does it install new teachings?
The Church doesn't teach anything "new". It DEFINES something for everyone to believe. But this is only in an official capacity. Everything that the Church defines is implicitly found in the Scriptures as interpreted by Apostolic Tradition. For example...Jesus is of the same essence as God the Father. This was believed by the "whole" Church "all" the time "everywhere" BEFORE it was officially defined at Nicea in 325 AD. The Church, as a result of heretics, is forced to plumb the depths of the Deposit of Faith and find out "what DO we believe on this matter?" After deliberation and the Holy Spirit, they Define something - "this is our official belief, not that". Thus, there is nothing "new", just items of faith that are "officially defined". The belief was already there.
Whatever the Pope says is what the Church adopts and teaches. There's no vote as far as I know. Do you hold that Christ's doctrine has never been corrupted under any Pope, as you said?
Only in his official capacity, not as a private theologian, or discussing politics. Normally, the Pope makes such declarations in union with the rest of the Bishops, although he does have the power to do so separately. I hold that the pope has not corrupted official Church teachings. Of course there were sinful popes and popes who made poor political decisions, even religious decisions.
Brother in Christ
There is no greater example of this in scripture than the nation of Israel versus Egypt. It is a type of the way God works. Israel was sojourners in Egypt. God called Israel out of Egypt. He didn’t make a blanket call to everyone in Egypt so that individuals could pick and choose. He specifically called Israel out and He used the Egyptians to affect His calling.
Likewise, God’s elect are sojourners in this corrupted world. God calls the true Israel out of the world. He uses those of this world, both the elect and reprobate, to affect His calling.
VI. As God has appointed the elect unto glory, so has He, by the eternal and most free purpose of His will, foreordained all the means thereunto.[12] Wherefore, they who are elected, being fallen in Adam, are redeemed by Christ,[13] are effectually called unto faith in Christ by His Spirit working in due season, are justified, adopted, sanctified,[14] and kept by His power, through faith, unto salvation.[15] Neither are any other redeemed by Christ, effectually called, justified, adopted, sanctified, and saved, but the elect only.[16]
VII. The rest of mankind God was pleased, according to the unsearchable counsel of His own will, whereby He extends or withholds mercy, as He pleases, for the glory of His sovereign power over His creatures, to pass by; and to ordain them to dishonor and wrath for their sin, to the praised of His glorious justice.[17]
VIII. The doctrine of this high mystery of predestination is to be handled with special prudence and care,[18] that men, attending the will of God revealed in His Word, and yielding obedience thereunto, may, from the certainty of their effectual vocation, be assured of their eternal election.[19] So shall this doctrine afford matter of praise, reverence, and admiration of God;[20] and of humility, diligence, and abundant consolation to all that sincerely obey the Gospel.[21]
Scriptural footnotes
Whew! And I am sure you are glad to hear that :-)
I would say that God doesn’t do anything with the reprobates. He simply passes over them. God uses them to affect His will but He doesn’t actively call them out as He does the elect.
Well that is pretty much what Catholics believe on the subject, at least St. Augustine and St. Thomas, who have formed so much of Catholic theology. I believe it is "allowed" for a Catholic to follow Molina, who is closer to understanding that God's foreknowledge sees man's reaction, which places more responsibility on man.
He didn’t make a blanket call to everyone in Egypt so that individuals could pick and choose. He specifically called Israel out and He used the Egyptians to affect His calling.
I wonder if EVERY Israelite placed the blood on the lintels of their doors... I suppose we could limit those who did as the "spiritual" Jews, such as Paul notes in Romans. Like I said before, I don't know if we will ever understand how God and us interact, since Scripture details BOTH God's ordinance and man's free will to choose good and evil. Perhaps we can say that ONLY a man touched by the Spirit can even choose (in other words, Moses' words in Deuteronomy to the Jews were not addressed to heathens, even indirectly) one or the other. But it is clear that we cannot come to God alone, nor do anything of eternal merit without Him. To balance this, we will be judged on what we do... I think St. Augustine says that God wills to judge His creatures based on His own gifts. Who can know God's ways...
The doctrine of this high mystery of predestination is to be handled with special prudence and care,[18] that men, attending the will of God revealed in His Word, and yielding obedience thereunto, may, from the certainty of their effectual vocation, be assured of their eternal election.
The certainty of eternal election? Beware, he who thinks he stands firm, lest he fall... The Church teaches that an individual cannot know he is of the elect - although we can have signs of the possibility through our lives. The fact of the matter is that God will do what He does. The certainty of election takes away God's free will.
Regards
You can choose between 2 things, but everything an unsaved man does is sin to God, so all the unsaved do is chose which sin they will be guilty of, all he can do is sin ( I am not talking about our standing before men)
Rom 3:10 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:
Rom 3:11 There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.
Rom 3:12 They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.
Gen 6:5 And GOD saw that the wickedness of man [was] great in the earth, and [that] every imagination of the thoughts of his heart [was] only evil continually.
Isa 64:6 But we are all as an unclean [thing], and all our righteousnesses [are] as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away.
Rom 14:23 And he that doubteth is damned if he eat, because [he eateth] not of faith: for whatsoever [is] not of faith is sin.
Tts 1:15 Unto the pure all things [are] pure: but unto them that are defiled and unbelieving [is] nothing pure; but even their mind and conscience is defiled.
To the Protestantism as a whole, it is harsh, but well deserved. At least I do not call Luther antiChrist, and he called my pope just that. It should not be taken as a judgement on individual Protestants of whom I know and love great many. They believe what they were brought up to believe, love Christ and very often lead exemplary lives for the rest of us to follow.
Protestantism doesn't ask any more of a person than the Bible does.
It asks less. It removed several inspired books from circulation; it disregards and ridicules the Holy Tradition apart from its written component (only Augustine among the Fathers is treated as authority, but frequently misunderstood). It disobeys the Church that Christ established and leads its adherents away from the sacraments of Eucharist and confession, and children are frequently deprived of baptism, all these being necessary for their salvation. It denies the necessity of works, despite they expressly asked for by Christ (open the Gospel at random and within 5 min of reading you will find something that Christ asks you to do), and are the basis of the judgement we shall receive (Apocalypse, multiple, especially 20:12). It destroyed the monastic tradition, which deprived the Protestant flock from a powerful instrument of witness and spiritual growth. The great martyrs and builders of the Church are denied honor, and the flock denied their example, under the blasphemous and self-serving notion of sainthood as church membership.
Christ said, -- give what you have to the poor and come, follow me. That is the Church he bequeathed us, -- the Church of heroes. Instead, Luther offered a comfortable bourgeois institution wholly compatible with middle class shallow individualism, incapable of challenging the oppressor state. The fundamentals of Christian ethics condemn contraception, extramarital sex, adultery, divorce followed by remarriage, usury, voting on moral issues, abortion cloning and euthanasia, scientism, irreligious education, and I could probably go on. On these issues Protestant opposition has either crumbled or is crumbling, -- why?
Both Orthodox and Catholic believe that upon death few souls are ready to enjoy the vision of God, so called beatific vision and the highest state of happiness, to which we refer as Heaven or Paradise. We both believe that there is an intermediate state after death and then two possible final states, Heaven or Hell. We both believe that prayers should be offered for the repose of the souls of the dead, and that for those in an intermediate state these prayers have a salutary effect.
The Catholics believe that Christ judges everyone in so-called particular judgement immediately after death and if the soul is condemned to Hell, that is where it goes right away. If the soul is judged saved for eternal life, its final destination is heaven. However, most souls are burdened by the aftereffects of sin, even though that sin is forgiven them. The analogy is that even though a tumor has been removed from a sick man (=sin pardoned), the scar where the surgery took place needs to heal before the man can walk again (=be in the presence of God). That convalescence or purification happens in Purgatory. One mark of a saint is that he or she has completed the purification on earth in his lifetime and can go directly to heaven. The prayer is only efficacious for souls in purgatory, but not knowing who ends up where and at what time, we pray for all dead (a public mass for the dead is not allowed in cases of hardened public sinners, but private prayers are always a good thing).
The Orthodox beliefs are somewhat different. Both the condemned and the saved go through a process of trial, when Satan and Christ bargain for the soul. This is when we pray for them. The Orthodox do not use the word purgatory and consider the Catholic doctrine an innovation. I don't think they would say that our belief is definitely wrong, but it is not officially taught by the Orthodox Church.
You may be interested in some in-depth discussion I recently had with the Orthodox so that we understand each other better: Indulgences: Spreading the Wealth. I did not intend it as a vehicle for polemics witht he Protestants and you will see that I avoid arguing the scriptural basics there.
It is true that the doctrine of Purgatory, even its Orthodox less detailed counterpart is in some part speculative theology, in some part tradition that was written down by the Church fathers but never made it into the New Testament proper, and in some part scripture. I showed you why the Catholic theology of the afterlife is compatible with the scripture, but I agree that different interpretation of the same scripture is possible. Certianly the Orthodox interpretation is possible even though it differs from ours. I don't think that any interpretation of the scripture that denies the existence of an intermediate stage following death is possible though; at least I have not seen a satisfying exegesis of the parable of Unmerciful Debtor that would deny that a temporal punishment after death exists for some people.
Here's a quick synopsis of the belief of the Orthodox Church on the state of souls after death from the GOA website. I believe it was written by Archbishop Michael:
"At death man's body goes to the earth from which it was taken, and the soul, being immortal, goes to God, who gave it. The souls of men, being conscious and exercising all their faculties immediately after death, are judged by God. This judgment following man's death we call the Particular Judgment. The final reward of men, however, we believe will take place at the time of the General Judgment. During the time between the Particular and the General Judgment, which is called the Intermediate State, the souls of men have foretaste of their blessing or punishment."
Everything in your post is the same as Orthodox belief.
Right on target, Coronos! The Scripture is full of instances where He does.
This, however, does not explain our prayers for the dead, Kolo. The Orthodox, in addition to what is the GOARCH summary, also believe that the souls, separated from their bodies, are in an unnatural state. We were created body and soul (in that order) and our state in the spirit deprived of a body is not natural.
Such state is, therefore, uneasy and even possibly torturous, because the souls really cannot "do" anything. They can't repent after physical death, and our supplications are aimed at easing their "torment" or "longing" which they would experience even if they are destined for eternal blessing after the Final or Dread Judgment.
This is really a round-about-way of saing pretty much what the Latins are saying, IMHO. The "discomfort" also comes from the fact that all our sins which we have not repeneted of will be made visible as we stand before God and Saints in our sinful nakedness. Shame, perhaps, better describes this "discomfort" and prayers provide spiritual clothing, spiritual "warmth" and spiritual comfort.
The Otherodox, of course, are less legalistic in their terms, but the message is the same, as far as I can see.
"The Otherodox...." Would that be us Greeks? :)
Its all pretty much speculation, Kosta. In any event, as you never tire of reminding us, our prayers for the dead are for "mercy".
Well, let's test that theory.
1 Now the serpent was more subtle than any of the beasts of the earth which the Lord God had made. And he said to the woman: Why hath God commanded you, that you should not eat of every tree of paradise? 2 And the woman answered him, saying: Of the fruit of the trees that are in paradise we do eat: 3 But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of paradise, God hath commanded us that we should not eat; and that we should not touch it, lest perhaps we die. 4 And the serpent said to the woman: No, you shall not die the death. 5 For God doth know that in what day soever you shall eat thereof, your eyes shall be opened: and you shall be as Gods, knowing good and evil. 6 And the woman saw that the tree was good to eat, and fair to the eyes, and delightful to behold: and she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave to her husband who did eat.Eve knew the commandment of God, and evidently was disposed to agree with it at the beginning, since the serpent had to persuade her otherwise. She used her senses and listened to the serpent, changed her mind, and agreed with the serpent, and therefore disagreed with God. She is shown to be able to go either way, and she made a choice between the two, a decision. Neither God or the serpent were forcing her: God did not interfere and the serpent is said to be subtle and indeed uses nothing but persuasion. (I agree that the sin is properly Adam's, but the point is that Eve is shown exercising free choice, while regarding Adam we can only assume that, -- surely Eve did not force him to eat the fruit).(Genesis 3)
5 But to Cain and his offerings he had no respect: and Cain was exceedingly angry, and his countenance fell. 6 And the Lord said to him: Why art thou angry? and why is thy countenance fallen? 7 If thou do well, shalt thou not receive? but if ill, shall not sin forthwith be present at the door? but the lust thereof shall be under thee, and thou shalt have dominion over it. 8 And Cain said to Abel his brother: Let us go forth abroad. And when they were in the field, Cain rose up against his brother Abel, and slew him. 9 And the Lord said to Cain: Where is thy brother Abel? And he answered, I know not: am I my brother's keeper? 10 And he said to him: What hast thou done? the voice of thy brother's blood crieth to me from the earth.(Genesis 4)
Again, you speculate, and contradict the scripture. The scripture shows that God reasons with Cain, encourages him to do better next time, warns about sin, and urges him to have dominion over sin (verse 7). This is not just choice, but a positive encouragement to do well. The fact that Cain, not God is in control is underscored by verses 9 and 10 where God asks Cain what did he do, as if not knowing.
1 Now the word of the Lord came to Jonas the son of Amathi, saying: 2 Arise, and go to Ninive the great city, and preach in it: for the wickedness thereof is come up before me. 3 And Jonas rose up to flee into Tharsis from the face of the Lord, and he went down to Joppe, and found a ship going to Tharsis: and he paid the fare thereof, and went down into it, to go with them to Tharsis from the face of the Lord. 4 But the Lord sent a great wind into the sea: and a great tempest was raised in the sea, and the ship was in danger to be broken.Here is choice number one: Jonah flees from the face of God. Does God send a tornado to deposit him in Nineveh like Dorothy and Toto? No, God gives him another chance to exercise free will.(Jonas 1)
12 And he said to them: Take me up, and cast me into the sea, and the sea shall be calm to you: for I know that for my sake this great tempest is upon you.Choice number two: Jonas repents and chooses to die. His attempted martyrdom converts pagans. Lord used Jonas' disobedience for the greater good.(Jonas 1)
1 Now the Lord prepared a great fish to swallow up Jonas: and Jonas was in the belly of the fish three days and three nights. 2 And Jonas prayed to the Lord his God out of the belly of the fish. [...] 7 I went down to the lowest parts of the mountains: the bars of the earth have shut me up for ever: and thou wilt bring up my life from corruption, O Lord my God. [...] 10 But I with the voice of praise will sacrifice to thee: I will pay whatsoever I have vowed for my salvation to the Lord. 11 And the Lord spoke to the fish: and it vomited out Jonas upon the dry land.The fish here is a rescue boat. Contrary to what you say, the fish is not shown as an instrument of torture and coercion, for Jonah is shown happy to be in it. Having been rescued, Jonah freely offered a prayer of hope and thanksgiving and God responded by making the fish deliver Jonah safely.(Jonas 2)
1 And the word of the Lord came to Jonas the second time, saying: 2 Arise, and go to Ninive the great city: and preach in it the preaching that I bid thee. 3 And Jonas arose, and went to Ninive, according to the word of the Lord:The connection between the episode at sea and the commission to preach at Nineveh is broken here, as God asks a second time. We understand that Jonah's penance at sea reformed him, but we do not see anyone but Jonah in control over the decision to obey God the second time around. Note, as I said earlier, that the fish did not deliver Jonah to Nineveh, and a second chance to refuse to go was given him.(Jonas 3)
28 And the angel being come in, said unto her: Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women. 29 Who having heard, was troubled at his saying, and thought with herself what manner of salutation this should be. 30 And the angel said to her: Fear not, Mary, for thou hast found grace with God. 31 Behold thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and shalt bring forth a son; and thou shalt call his name Jesus. 32 He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the most High; and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of David his father; and he shall reign in the house of Jacob for ever. 33 And of his kingdom there shall be no end. 34 And Mary said to the angel: How shall this be done, because I know not man? 35 And the angel answering, said to her: The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the most High shall overshadow thee. And therefore also the Holy which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God. 36 And behold thy cousin Elizabeth, she also hath conceived a son in her old age; and this is the sixth month with her that is called barren: 37 Because no word shall be impossible with God. 38 And Mary said: Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it done to me according to thy word. And the angel departed from her.First, Mary is troubled because she is saluted as royalty, by an angel, no less. By your logic this is the time when we say "Sounds great to me" and shut up. You are perhaps right, but then this is why we are sinners and she is not. God is telling her that she will carry his Son, and her response is -- are you ready for this? -- "Prove it". Note that this exactly echoes, in reverse, Eve's behavior, who also needed proof before consenting to the serpent. Mary here is righteously prudent not willing to repeat Eve's mistake.(Luke 1)
Next, the proof is given, and Mary consents: "be it done to me according to thy word". Hers is to be a valid marriage to the Holy Ghost, and free consent is essential for marriage. No free will, no savior.
Mom, we believe that also. We believe that man dug himself into hole out of pride and arrogance and got stuck there fore good. He can't really go anywhere, or do anything, but sit eternally in his darkness. Without God's help, without His rope or Divine Hand, man cannot pull himself out. It doesn't mean that man has lost his ability to judge, or to know that a helping Hand can pull him out.
Where we differ is in who does the what. You believe that it's up to God whether He pulls you out or not. We believe that God offers His hand to everyone sitting in the hell hole and it is up to us to accept or reject that Hand. Why do some accept and others reject is not the question to pose. The question to pose is why did Adam choose evil? Pride and arorgance or because God gave him no choice but to choose evil?
Why? God obviously intended man to be in Paradise. Man was the crown-jewel of God's Creation: a being not only born in the goodness of God, in His likeness, but also in God's image -- a being with dominion over the world he was created on.
God had man exactly where He wnated him -- and where He wants him, and where he shall be. That will not change. But one can't help but wonder why then did God repent for having created man (Gen 6:6), such a high maintenance creatire, that God had to suffer out of His love for us underserving sinners, in order to give us a chance to be saved!?
Is it possible that God decided to corrupt His own perfect Creation just so that He might have something to do in the foreseeable future, by micormanaging his people and paying for our redemption with His own Blood?
Your belief would be okay if it did not at the same time imply that God created Adam with the intention of throwing him into that hole along with Eve. The Reformed theology confuses God's omnioptence with being all controlling of what we do. What we do does not interfere or threaten His plan. What we do applies only to our space-time framework which does not limit God in any way. It only limits us.
We believe that, by his own pride and arrogance, Adam sealed his fate and the fate of his progeny by disobeying God and then blaming Him for his disobedience.
He became separated from the Light and faced darkness of his soul, for the absence of light is darkness. In darkness he is lost. In darkness he cannot find a way. In darkness he cannot know the truth. God is the Light, the Way and the Truth by which we can return to Him. As long as we think that we can be like gods, we shall remain in darkness.
LOL!!! It's been a long day, Kolo. But that was quick and funny! :-)
our prayers for the dead are for "mercy"
That's all we can ask.
If we view Purgatory as that opportunity to purge our attachments to things other than God, I think we would all agree on this in principle. Who would posit that man will enter union with the Father for eternity with our wounded will when we die? Very few of us will have purged away our pride, our vanity, our sloth, or whatever sinful tendency that we have, our concupiscence of the will. Thus, I believe a third place is necessary. What remains, from what I understand, is "do the purged souls go into union with God in heaven BEFORE the Final Judgment"? I would say yes, if we look to the Book of Revelation and see that John sees a great number of people in heaven offering eternal worship to the Father BEFORE this Final Judgment at the end of the Book. I think careful study by the Eastern Orthodox on this subject will likely find that we agree on much of what has been called Dogma by the Western Catholic Church.
And as Kosta mentions, there is an ancient practice of praying TO saints to intercede - not just to beg mercy for their souls. This is especially true of the cult of the martyrs - it is pretty much unanimous that they rest in peace with God.
I am not aware of what Annalex discusses regarding the "arguing" between Satan and God for the souls. Is this one school of speculative thought among many, or is this rather limited in belief through the Church? I don't sense that as part of the faith, as what would be the point of being judged upon our death if then Satan and God would "argue" over the soul?
Brother in Christ
Frankly, aside from SBs, I don't know enough about those other faiths to comment on them intelligently. From what I do know, I think I would feel general unity with any Bible-believing church. I do not think it is fair to define protestants as any "Christian" church that isn't Catholic. So, while SBs and JWs are both not Catholic, I have no association or agreement with them at all. However, in my own Southern Baptist church, I am sure there are plenty of people whom I respect who do not share my reformed views. That's OK, and I have no plans to leave my church. We are nevertheless in unity because of our reliance on the Bible, and many other beliefs.
" I am not aware of what Annalex discusses regarding the "arguing" between Satan and God for the souls."
I vaguely remember hearing something like this but I seem to remember that it is demons arguing with angels over the state of the deceased before Christ at the Particular Judgment, not the Evil One and Christ arguing.
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.