Posted on 01/01/2006 4:48:03 PM PST by HarleyD
But we cannot be sure, as we cannot be sure if the purification is instantaneous or not -- since God has the power to forgive our sins, but our naural state of body and soul will not change, and therefore will continue in the unnatural state until the Final Judgemnt.
And as Kosta mentions, there is an ancient practice of praying TO saints to intercede - not just to beg mercy for their souls
But they can only ask for mercy too, Jo. We can only ask for mercy; nothing more.
That is basically what Russian Toll Houses represent -- a 40-day horror ride. But, as Kolo says, these are speculations, lest they be taken for dogma.
You are probably right; I certainly only meant it as a quick metaphor, relying on either you or Kosta to flesh it out.
I don't understand where the Communion of Saints fits into this.
I thought in the Catholic tradition the Community of Saints represents Church Militant praying for the dead.
I am not sure, but I think the Church settled this matter in the 8th century. The menaing of this Community involved the Siants who are in heaven (i.e. those who have achieved theolsis, or likeness of Christ; that is real saints, not the "holies" who share in faith and sacraments on earth; I think the Protestants refer to themselves as saints or the divines -- Calvinists and lutherans respectively). If you wonder if the souls can pray, the Church certainly says they can pray, but they can't repent. Our time for repentance is on earth. When we die, our souls are immediately subjected ot judgment.
"And as it is appointed unto men once to die, and after this the judgment" (Heb 9:27)
Once judged, what good is it for us to repent; the judgment is passed.
Thank you for the "purgatory primer". One thing I'm curious about is to what extent people go there. (I think our side would say that the blood of Christ covers our unholiness and that the saved are seen as righteous in God's eyes, thus no need for purgatory.) Since we all sin after salvation (or initial salvation) then does every ultimately saved person go to purgatory for a time? Or, does everyone who was "right" with God and had confessed all sins before death get to bypass purgatory? I'm just trying to figure out if purgatory is expected to be experienced by very many or very few.
This is how I understand the Communion of Saints, -- the Saints in heaven in union with God, but I do not understand how the model where the souls all without exception await the Final Judgement in a state of relative discomfort, that you described earlier, accomodate the Saints in heaven. Are they also "in an unnatural state"?
I agree that we must obey our King, but I am just less willing to obey fallible men. I still don't understand why, if only the Catholic tradition is true, this is not in the Bible. I do not declare that any tradition must be wrong because it is not in the Bible, but in order to believe in it I must put my trust in men I do not know. The authority of these (non-Biblical) men is a self-claimed authority.
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.
Forgive me if I've already asked this, but the Church has never taught error? Ever? What about the earlier discussion of indulgences? I thought I remembered many Catholics backing away from that one. Even in the Pope's recent pronouncement on homosexuality, he allows latent existing homosexual priests to remain in good standing. Would the apostles have approved of this?
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?
Well, in the interests of fairness I will concede to you that Jesus was at the Last Supper. See, we Protestants can be reasonable! :) However, after that it all goes back to interpretation. Following a practice and determining its meaning are two different things. Obviously we both believe Baptism is very important, but for totally different reasons.
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?
This goes back to "what is the Church"? You explained to me before that "THE CHURCH" does not equal "The Roman Catholic Church". Therefore, other than the RCC is also within "THE CHURCH". You can't admit that and then say that others are also part of the CHURCH, as long as they agree with RCC teaching. That would wipe out the whole point. Either you claim that the RCC is the only way to God, or you allow for differences. Our side does allow for some differences, just not on the core, defining beliefs of the faith. Eschatology is a perfect example. I take no offense at my Protestant brother who wrongly believes in post-trib. :) These things just aren't essential to the faith as a whole. You, OTOH, are bound to follow the Church teaching on this, are you not?
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.
It depends on how you define "Protestant". If you say that Protestant is anything not Catholic, then sure, there are plenty of conflicting views out there. The Branch Davidians were not Catholic, but they were certainly not part of my family of churches either. Among Bible believing churches, yes, there are some differences, but at the core there is basic unity.
You mentioned infant baptism as a possible example of disunity at a core level. I am unaware of any Protestant church that considers this a "core" issue in its statement of faith. (I could be wrong.) Core issues are things like the identity of Christ, the trinity, method of salvation, reality of sin, need for forgiveness, existence of heaven and hell, inerrancy of the Bible, etc. I just don't see there being a million different views on these types of issues among Bible believing churches.
We have more differences than you because we do not automatically submit to the direction of fallible men. You do submit because you believe these men have been specially blessed with power and wisdom, etc. That's fine. That is faith. I also believe the Spirit lives in me and leads me. I have not yet been led to follow men before God's word.
God bless.
I bet God was sweating that one out....
Humans are not spirits. They are bodies with spirits. That is how they were created and that is their natural state. Obviously, that is not the case with the souls of the departed. Something is missing.
Remember that God created Adam in Paradise; that is where huanity started and that is where humanity will end. We are just making a looooong detour to the beginning. We know the beginning and we know the end. We just don't know why. We believe it is because we chose evil; Protestants think God intentionally corrupted His perfect Creation because "its His party and He can do whatever He wants." Take your pick, but the end result is the same: at the Final Judgment, the souls and the bodies are reunited.
The only Saint we believe is not in that state is Theotokos.
LOL! Alright, well I certainly do not call your pope antiChrist. I actually happen to like your pope and believe he is a good man of God. I wish him well.
It [Protestantism] 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).
I don't know anything about any removal of books, but as to all of it, we are protesting! We have to disagree with you on some things. We put more faith in God's written word than in handed down traditions.
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.
Protestantism disobeys the RCC, not the "Church that Christ established". We don't lead anyone away from taking the Lord's Supper and confessing one's sins. We encourage it. We just don't agree with you on their meaning. Who are these children who are being deprived of baptism in Protestant churches? I'm a Southern Baptist, I love baptism!
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), ...
We deny the necessity of man-driven works. We say Jesus did the real work when He died on the cross. Of course we should obey God and do good in His sight. He promises us that we will, but not because of us, but because of His presence in us.
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?
What are you talking about??? Who is crumbling on any of these things (except one)? Evangelical Protestants are on the front lines in political debate on many of these issues. Who was it that got rid of Harriet Meiers? It was us! Now, with God's grace we will have another vote against Roe. We are out there and we are working hard. You can't deny that. Catholics are working hard too, but you have no monopoly. The only exception I allowed was for contraception. I'll bet that if you gave me a month to prepare and $50,000 for expenses, I could go out into the country and find a practicing Catholic who has ever used birth control. Will you take me up on it? :)
Further, I'll bet you anything that a much greater percentage of Catholics vote for candidates who give Christianity lip service, but don't live their professed faith. How many of the most liberal people in Congress call themselves Catholics? I don't say it is the fault of "Catholicism" that these people vote with satan, but I sure don't see them being called to account by the Catholic community. In fact, to a much greater degree I believe evangelical Protestants will drop the hammer. That is what killed McVain in 2000, and could be his downfall again in '08. For goodness sakes, there are sixty-something million of you guys in this country alone. If you organized and supported only Godly candidates, there wouldn't be any liberals. Where is your opposition?
You obviously do not feel that love is true love only if it is free. You would rather believe that God somehow put a "spell" on HVM to make sure she would consent.
I am beginning to believe that there is a "Protestant" personality type.
And you obviously do not believe that even our love is a gift from God.
It is my understanding that the Particular judgment is meant only for us - where we are judged to eternal heaven (probably via Purgatory) or eternal hell. The Final Judgment is meant for EVERYONE to see, the saved and damned, so that all can see that God is just and merciful, giving everyone the opportunity during life to respond to God's call. Also, we will all receive glorified bodies that will unite with our souls.
Regards
True, but God is pleased to answer the prayers of a righteous man. Being in heaven, we'd presume they are righteous and God will be more pleased to work His graces through the intercessions of that saint in heaven.
Regards
As always, thanks for your questions.
Purgatory exists only as a result of the Blood of Christ. The Scriptures tell us that we must be holy as God is (not in degrees, but in likeness!). We are told that unless OUR righteousness (not Christ's thrown over us like a coat) exceeds that of the Pharisees, we shall not see heaven (Mat 5:20). Considering the context of Matthew 5-7, Jesus is clear that He instructs US to Love from the heart. He is telling us to give alms, to pray, to fast - NOT just to do it externally for human pride, but to do it for the Love of God and neighbor. This is the righteousness that God desires from us (understand, WE don't do this alone - but with God's Spirit working within us the will to follow Him). Nowhere in Matthew 5-7 does Jesus talk about imputed justification or anything like it. It is clear that Jesus expects US to be holy, to be clean of heart, to be meek and humble, to be poor in spirit...
Most of us will not achieve that level of righteousness here on earth. We will likely have attachments to things of the world. Our pride. We will not place God first in everything. This must change before eternal union with God. Could you imagine God and Luther's idea of man co-existing forever? It is incomprehensible. God is not some foolish old dolt who doesn't recognize the smell of our stinking selves (spiritually) underneath the "cloak" of Christ... I never did understand that mental picture.
Since we all sin after salvation (or initial salvation) then does every ultimately saved person go to purgatory for a time? Or, does everyone who was "right" with God and had confessed all sins before death get to bypass purgatory?
Sins are not forgiven in Purgatory, but here on earth. We are punished for the temporal results of our sins in purgatory, first of all. An example might help. Let's say your son breaks a window. He apologizes. He is forgiven. But what about the window? Do we ignore the fact that the window is broken? As a parent, we have a right and a DUTY to serve some sort of corrective to our child. Some will make the child work or do extra chores. Spankings. Groundings. Take away the toy. In any case, the child must suffer some consequences for their action. Not only that, the child is punished for the sake of discipline and for developing virtue. God does that with us, as the Scripture tells us. He continues this in Purgatory.
Secondly, Purgatory is for purging away attachments and our vices that remain within our will and intellect after our death. Few of us will die with God as the treasure of our hearts, without pride, ego, or envy, for example. I imagine that our particular judgment, our opening of our eyes at the reality of God, we will PINE for God - it will be a suffering, one where we will let go of our wills that differ from God's.
Purgatory will be experienced by the majority of the saved.
Regards
Yes, we believe the Biblical meaning of "saint" is any saved person. Such as in this passage:
Rom. 8:26-27 : "26 In the same way, the Spirit helps us in our weakness. We do not know what we ought to pray for, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with groans that words cannot express. 27 And he who searches our hearts knows the mind of the Spirit, because the Spirit intercedes for the saints in accordance with God's will.
From the Catholic or Orthodox view, why would the Spirit need to intercede for a saint? Aren't all saints already purified, and thus avoid purgatory? Also, this passage clearly refers to physically living people. For Catholics, I thought that for anyone to become a recognized saint, he or she had to first be physically dead, and then canonized by the Church.
No one intercedes for those in heaven. Those in heaven can intercede for others, though. In Romans, the Spirit is interceding for those who are not in heaven yet. Jesus desires that the Kingdom of God is made present to all men of all time. Thus, He continues to intercede for them, not those who already have the Kingdom fully within them. A person doesn't have to be a cannonized saint to be in heaven. Cannonized saints are "officially" recognized for the purposes of the Liturgy, but we are encouraged to ask the prayers of any saint whom we believe has been saved (and is in Purgatory or Heaven).
Regards
Harley: "I bet God was sweating that one out...."
Exactly right, Harley! Our God does seem to be the luckiest God that ever was, doesn't He? In this example, what were the chances that God would luck out and Mary (God's first pick) would agree from her free will to bear the Son of God? I suppose that had Mary used her free will to refuse God He would have simply moved on to another candidate. But wait a minute. Didn't the family of Mary and Joseph have to meet specific lineage requirements in order to fulfill prophecy? Maybe it wouldn't have been so easy to find another candidate. Our God is truly a lucky God indeed.
One more example: What a break God caught that Judas did not repent before his betrayal of Jesus. Judas could have ruined everything, but God got lucky. God wanted Judas to be saved and Judas had free will, right? But, lucky for God, and of course all of us, Judas did not repent. Of course, perhaps if Judas had repented, then God would have chosen another? This is problematic because Jesus already limited his possible betrayer to among the disciples before it happened. Any new betrayer would have also had to agree to the betrayal for exactly 30 pieces of silver, not 29 or 31. But, thank luck, this was not needed as Judas seemed to freely choose to cooperate.
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.