What every Roman Catholic should know...

I am the LORD: that is my name: and my glory will I not give to another, neither my praise to graven images. - ISAIAH 42:8

Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me; - EXODUS 20:4-5

The gift of eternal life is given freely by God through Jesus Christ. It cannot be earned or worked for.

For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord. - ROMANS 6:23

Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt. But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness. - ROMANS 4:4-5

And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work. - ROMANS 11:6

There is no purgatory, Jesus purged our sins already.

when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high; - HEBREWS 1:3

The grace of God which imparts salvation is received by faith in Jesus Christ, not by works.

For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast. - EPHESIANS 2:8-9

Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified. - GALATIANS 2:16

Water baptism is not a requirement for salvation otherwise Paul would have been sent to baptize.

For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect. - 1 CORINTHIANS 1:17

Holy Communion is a remembrance and is not the actual body and blood of Christ. Partaking is not a requirement for salvation.

And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst. - JOHN 6:35

For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost. - ROMANS 14:17

But meat commendeth us not to God: for neither, if we eat, are we the better; neither, if we eat not, are we the worse. - 1 CORINTHIANS 8:8

Christ is the only Mediator through whom we can pray to God.

For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; - 1 TIMOTHY 2:5

Christ is the one to whom we are to confess our sins.

If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous: And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world. - 1 JOHN 1:9 & 2:2

Jesus Christ is the only way to God. No other name can save.

Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me. - JOHN 14:6

Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved. - ACTS 4:12

For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. - ROMANS 10:13

-- ROhan (jamro4@hotmail.com), April 27, 2003

Answers

I wish I had a dollar, everytime one of these guys posted to the forum! :)

We don't worship images.

We don't believe in working or earning our salvation.

Jesus redeemed our sins, but there is temporal punishment associated with sin, that require acts of penance, and if not done here on earth, is done in purgatory.

We don't just believe in baptism by water, as we believe in baptism by fire, blood, desire, etc.

Holy Communion is the actual physical body and blood of Christ, as the Bible says that very clearly.

We agree that Christ is the only mediator to the Father. Others who pray on our behalf are petitioning Jesus.

We do confess our sins to Christ, through a representive.

We believe Christ is the only saviour, and no other person.

I know, now you are going to say where all of this is in the Bible, and I say go here: www.google.com and search "catholic apologetics"

Have fun reading! :)

-- Gordon (gvink@yahoo.com), April 27, 2003.

what about purgatory.........there is on purgatory....but one woudlnt believe it unless he/she reads the Bible

-- Rohan (jamro4@hotmail.com), April 27, 2003.

When I was a Lutheran, I percieved the Catholic faith to be many things. When I choose to look into joining the church, I was prepared to walk away if they said anything . . . and I mean anything that I couldn't justify. I'm still here.

All the percieved criticisms that I'm reading into the above post are born out of misconception of what the Catholic church is. It is from someone on the outside, trying to peek through the stained glass. If you really want to know what we are, just come on in, the door is always open.

I view Catholicism as "real" church. Lutherans, my previous church as "Church Lite" If you want the real thing, the Catholic church is where you need to be. If you want a watered down version of what Catholicism is, you will be quite comfortable as a Lutheran. I'm not putting down Lutherans, that's just what I feel when I celebrate with the rest of my family in their church.

If anything in the above post were true, I wouldn't be Catholic today.

-- Leon (vol@weblink2000.net), April 27, 2003.

"Catholics should read from the Bible"

Protestants should enter the Catholic Church.

-- Emerald (emerald1@cox.net), April 27, 2003.

Both Catholics and Protestants read the bible. Catholics also understand the Bible. That's why Catholics don't have thousands of conflicting denominations. God gave the Bible to the Catholic Church. It was written and compiled by Catholics, for Catholics. And the Holy Spirit interprets it to the Church which received the Bible from God. If I were in a system where every group claims to be getting its beliefs directly from the bible, but no two groups believe the same thing, I'd get a bit suspicious about the method being used to find these conflicting beliefs. If you read the Bible, you know that Jesus intended His Church to be ONE in belief. That alone should cause you to run from Protestantism, into the original Christian Church which still has unity of belief after 2,000 years.

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), April 27, 2003.

One more thought . . .

About this purgetory thing. I have to confess, I'm not real clear on the need for it. It seems like a "human solution" to what should be mystery.

When Jesus turned to the thief on the cross who paid him homage and said, Today you will be with me in Paradise. He didn't say, today you shall begin the process of clensing your soul so that one day you will be able to be with me in Paradise.

Today, you will be with me in Paradise . . . is much more comforting.

It's just my rambling and it's something I am trying to work through. I'll work it out someday.

-- Leon (vol@weblink2000.net), April 27, 2003.

Well Paul....its more than obvious that you really need to do some intense research. The Bible was NOT written by catholics. It started by Jews in mesopatania (modern Iraq),...rember the story/song "By the rivers of babylon..." this is when the Bible started...you have to come prepared and correct when you make statements like this

-- Rohan (jamro4@hotmail.com), April 27, 2003.

Now if Rohan followed my advice:

> "I know, now you are going to say where all of this is in the Bible, and I say go here: www.google.com and search "catholic apologetics""

he certainly would never have made this statement:

> "but one woudlnt believe it unless he/she reads the Bible"

Rohan, if you think we don't follow the Bible, then please I am begging you, go to www.google.com, and type "catholic apologetics", and read all the sites that show you very clearly that we do follow the Bible.

So stop with this nonsense that Catholics don't follow the Bible, just because we don't follow you watered down SELF interpretation of it.

Rohan, note that we have dealt with Protestants like you many many times on this forum. Eventually they give up and go away. We even had some who argued with us for months!!!

But please stick around, you actually might learn something about the Catholic faith, and eventually realize half the things you believe about our faith is outright lies.

-- Gordon (gvink@yahoo.com), April 27, 2003.

> "When Jesus turned to the thief on the cross who paid him homage and said, Today you will be with me in Paradise. He didn't say, today you shall begin the process of clensing your soul so that one day you will be able to be with me in Paradise."

That's a good point Leon, but the thief's time in purgatory could still be done that day, and on the same day he still went to heaven. Also, some might say that his suffering and dying on the cross, was an act of penance, enough to pay for his sins, after he accepted Jesus, since he agreed and even claimed his punishment was deserved!

I have heard that time in purgatory in slowed down, that 5 minutes in our time, is a much greater time in purgatory, or at least the perception of time in slowed down, because of the intense suffering. There is a story about a saint, who was taken to purgatory to be shown the suffering there, and she was only gone a few minutes in our time, but she wondered what happened, as I believe she said she was gone for years.

-- Gordon (gvink@yahoo.com), April 27, 2003.

Rohan, do some praying about this. God is boundless and limitless and so deep {my thoughts are not your thoughts}, your interpretations of His word are very pale and shallow.

Yes our sins and our debt is cancelled in full at Calvary, the devil and his works nailed to the cross, despoiled,and the powers made a public spectacle, led away in triumph. But what you don't understand is the difference between our guilt {paid for} and our iniquity which is the effects of the guilt which still needs to be healed. This purification, this is our sanctification- which is an ongoing process throughout our lives, done by the Holy Spirit. By His stripes we are healed, and yet He so lovingly holds our hand and takes us through the process of understanding our weakness- and overcoming them by getting to know Him more and more, and as we fall deeper in love with Him- he heals us of our iniquity- restoring us gradually back to His original image in us.We learn about ourselves- and specifically apply the Blood of Jesus to the wounded areas. For as the scriptures say- when we see Him face to face we will be like Him- {made in Christ's image}. Do you know you are in this process now?

Now the scriptures say 'nothing unclean will enter Heaven'. If you were to die right now- are you perfectly CLEAN? Your soul may be- if you are in a total state of repentance of all your sins- this is good- but the Holy Spirit is still wooing you to fullness in Him.. He is always in process of healing us- do you still get angry? Do you still have fears? Do you trust Jesus COMPLETELY with all your money, kids, family, relationships, health? Do you still read the bible daily to know Him more? of course!! Even if there is one little trace of lack of all this... you are not ready for Heaven- but THANKFULLY- if your life is taken in a moment-- He STILL provides you with a moment of time- to get cleaned up- to get TOTALLY PURIFIED- which is the condition of anyone entering Heaven. Think about this- this time of purging- [purgatory]- is not a punishment- Jesus took this for us already at Calvary- it is a time of LOVING MERCY,SANCTIFICATION.

He graciously walks us through it- so as to share this sanctification process with us- thus WE LOVE HIM MORE- for His patience and lack of judgement. The problem is that so many people have prejudiced notions of purgatory. It's simply further mercy and healing of Jesus- without it -you would be condemned immediately to hell right now if you died. Yes we are saved, yes we are guaranteed Heaven-hallelujah! but our 'dresses are still a little wrinkled', using biblical symbolism.

Research church history, brother, yes the apostles KNEW JESUS, they lived and breathed and had their being in Him. They didn't have a bible the first 3 to 400 years. They lived the Word, they lived out the Word. The Church formed, communities of believers grew and formed, by the power of the freshly poured out Holy Spirit of God, read the book of Acts.

Then the Holy Spirit led them to record their lives with Christ, thus the new testament came to be. For the NEXT 1200 years these holy people lived in the Holy Spirit, and the Church still grew, universally {that's what the word Catholic means, brother}. So, you see, our fellow writer Paul is right on in his research. It wasn't till the 15'th century that some folks disagreed with the apostles and wrote their own bible, thus setting off the splinter of more then what, 30,000, THAT'S THIRTY THOUSAND, protestant denominations- interpretations {which one do you follow?}. You may as well tell the other 29,999 non-catholic sects that they should read their bibles too because they don't see it the way you do either.

The Catholic church is indeed the original Church founded by Christ, established by Him on The Rock, who was Peter, our first leader..spell it...P-O-P-E...

As to statues....do you have a picture of your family, your wife, kids.. in your wallet? It's because you LOVE them, right? you don't idolize them do you? Do you put up a Christmas scene to celebrate Jesus' birth? Brother, do you have a statue of Mary and Joseph in that scene,after all, Jesus was born of a human mother, the scriptures tell us. God even told Moses to make a statue of a serpent so that when the Israelites looked at it they would be healed- they didn't worship it.

The arc of the covenant, the temple of David, both had statues of cherubims.

Pray brother pray! Our prejudice, and the walls we build to shut each other out are not of God!Read John 17:21. Lets accentuate our love of Him, our mission to follow Jesus and spread the gospel. The Holy Spirit will RAISE UP THE TRUTH, let's let Him do it!

The Catholic Church brought me Jesus, and Jesus opened my mind to the scriptures, to the power of the Holy Spirit, to prophetic worship, to daily hunger for Him, and seeking Him and meeting and receiving Him in the Holy Eucharist. He is so good. All glory to Him. In Jesus, Theresa

-- Theresa Huether (Rodntee4Jesus@aol.com), April 27, 2003.

Theresa, Emerald, Gordon, Leon, Paul, and Rohan:

Greetings in the Risen Lord!

I haven't posted here in a little while...

I've missed you all, especially my lil' brother!

Rohan,

Please allow me to present a brief overview of Catholic belief, and Church and Bible history: Catholics believe that Christ founded a Church, to be headed by Peter, following Christ's ascension.

This seems to be affirmed through Scripture, as Peter is almost always listed first in any listing of the apostles, and Peter very often acts as spokesman for the other apostles.

Following Christ's Ascension into heaven, Peter takes on the role of the visible head of the early Christian Church. History and tradition support this understanding.

In the Scriptures, we see Jesus turning to Simon, and re-naming him "Peter" (in Hebrew, Kepha, which means "Rock.") and saying, "You are Peter, and upon this rock, [b]I will build my church.[/b] We also see Jesus praying that all would be "one" in Him, just as He and the Father are One. We see Jesus instructing Peter to feed Christ's sheep, entrusting Peter with the keys to the kingdom, etc.

Christ also promised to send His Holy Spirit to guide this assembly of believers, His Church, and promised that the gates of hell would not prevail against it.

The Old Testament which Jesus and the Apostles read in the Synagogues contained 53 books, some in Hebrew, and some in Greek. These books were completed by[b] 200 BC[/b].

By the [b]first century AD[/b], all of the New Testament writings had been written.

Someone had to decide to compile these books together, and which writings of the Apostles and Disciples of the Lord were Divinely Inspired Scriptures, and which were just letters and prayers composed by holy men of the Church.

The first Holy Bible was compiled in [b]390 AD[/b] by St. Jerome. It contained 80 books. (This is called the Latin Vulgate.)

In [b]1455 AD[/b], Gutenberg invented the printing press. The First Book Ever Printed is Gutenberg's Catholic Bible in Latin, containing all 80 books.

About [b]1517 AD[/b], Martin Luther initiated the Protest-ant "re- formation," protesting the Church's teachings, and re-forming a religion more to his liking. Since many of his ideas contradicted Scriptures, those Scriptures had to be done away with. Martin Luther now began re-forming the Holy Bible.

In [b]1611 AD[/b], the King James Bible was printed, originally with all 80 books.

The deuterocanonical books of the Old Testament were officially removed and declared "apocrapha" ”(or, by definition, "spurious writings") in [b]1885 AD[/b] by the protestant reformers, leaving only 66 books in the Bible.

The Church which Christ founded is the Holy Catholic Church, with a direct line of leaders (popes) traced all the way back to St. Peter.

It was the Church, guided by the Holy Spirit, which declared which canons of Scripture were authentic. The Holy Bible was revered Word- for-Word for over 1600 years, until the reformers got their hands on it. It saddens all Catholics to see that our separated brethren have lost portions of God's Holy Word, and the unity for which Jesus prayed.

The doctrine of purgatory is defined in 2 Maccabees 12, which, of course is not found in the edited protestant Bible of today, known as the KJV.

Since the reformation, Protestant denominations continue to break off and form new denominations. There are presently over 38,000 protestant denominations, all contradicting one another in various doctrines, all claiming that they base their doctrines on the very same KJV of the Bible!

If ever you decide to attend a Catholic Mass, and I warmly invite you to do so (just do not receive Holy Communion) you will find that the first portion of the Mass is called the Liturgy of the Word, where the Old Testament is read, Psalms are sung or prayed, New Testament Epistles are read, and the Gospel is preached. The second half of the Mass is called the Liturgy of the Eucharist, where the once-for- all sacrifice of Calvary, Our Lord's Body and Blood, are re-presented to the Father in an unbloody manner, as was instructed the apostles at the Last Supper.

Please continue to post here! You are most welcome; we love this Church which Christ founded. Despite the many destructive sins of man, this Church has survived and thrived, only by the grace of God!

Pax Christi. (May the Peace of Christ be upon you.)

-- Anna <>< (flower@youknow.com), April 27, 2003.

Oy duh I used the wrong brackets above. I apologize!

I might add, Rohan, that the Catholic Bible remains unchanged, and still contains all of the same OT books that Jesus and the apostles read and studied in the synagogue.

The deuterocanonical books are: Tobit, Judith, First Maccabees, Second Maccabees, Wisdom, Sirach, and Baruch plus the additional texts in Esther and Daniel that are found in the Catholic Old Testament, but not in the KJV.

Pax Christi. <><

-- Anna <>< (flower@youknow.com), April 27, 2003.

bold off?

Someone is watching your backside... =)

-- Emerald (emerald1@cox.net), April 27, 2003.

Thank you Emerald, whatever would I do without you?

And Thanks, too Theresa, as you know, it's a two-way street. I think Jake is pretty spiffy, too. ((((hugs)))))

Pax Christi. <><

-- Anna <>< (flower@youknow.com), April 27, 2003.

Anna

I appreciate your condensed history of our faith and I'd like to add a little more background from my perspective. I was raised and confirmed a Lutheran, but am now very much, A CATHOLIC!! As such I've had to look at matters from both viewpoints.

When Martin Luther posted the 95 Thesis on the door of the Cathedral, he was simply posting 95 reasons why he felt that it was wrong for the church to sell indulgences. The church at that time was in the practice of selling indulgences as a way of insuring that your loved one spent less time in Purgetory and had a smooth journey to the gates of Heaven. It is a practice that has long since been revised and is no longer an issue, however at that time, Martin Luther felt that serious abuses were taking place. He was excommunicated from the church for posting his beliefs and he and those who felt as he did, formed the Lutheran Church.

He did not, as you say, write his own bible, he and his followers simply used an earlier translation of the bible which they felt was a more authentic translation. I believe he used an early Hebrew translation, while the Catholic Bible was from a Greek translation. There isn't anything of doctrinal importance contained in the aprocrapha that is not in the Hebrew translation. The differences in the Bible adopted by Martin Luther has little bearing on any of the differences in the way Lutherans and Catholics celebrate their faith. The differences, have more to do with percieved abuses in the Church at that time than in a "new" bible. You point out a reference in Macabbees that supports our acceptance of Purgetory. In my limited view, Purgetory didn't spring forth from that short statement. Purgetory was the churches teaching long before common Catholics had any kind of access to a complete bible. When questions were eventually asked, that vague reference was all we had to support "Biblically," our acceptance of Purgetory.

We take for granted the access we all share to the Bible, however the Bible on every nightstand is a reletively new aspect of our faith tradition. Guttenburg did print the first Bible in the Fifteenth century, however the process was still extremely labor intensive and the complete Bible was still unavailable to most churches and localities. It wasn't until the invention of offset lithography in the 19th century, that the bible was made available to everyone. We take the access to the bible for granted, however for the first 18 centuries of our tradition, the word was passed on largly in the practices and customs of our faith.

The Bible will always be the cornerstone of our faith, but the traditions and customs in our church which are not necessarily bible based, share equal importance in the tradition of our church as well.

Fundamentalist Christians are aghast that we can celebrate customs which are not bible based, but our traditions reflect a "Spirit led" church. It is and always will be a "living church"

The bottom line is . . . the original teachings and example given to us, in the person of Christ Jesus, are entirely intact and made whole within the walls of our faith. It's all here for anyone who cares to look. If Rohan cares to follow up his criticism of what Catholics believe, I would suggest he watch for the next RCIA (Rite of Christian Initiation of Adults) session in his local catholic church. These sessions will explore in depth the issues which you bring to light here.

I gotta tell ya, I was in your shoes at one time, but I'm imminently glad, I'm here now.

-- Leon (vol@weblink2000.net), April 27, 2003.

Jmj
Hello, folks.

Anna -- long time, no talk!
I noticed that you wrote these words: "The [seven] deuterocanonical books are: Tobit, Judith, First Maccabees, Second Maccabees, Wisdom, Sirach, and Baruch ..."
And you wrote: "The deuterocanonical books of the Old Testament were officially removed and declared 'apocrypha' ... by the protestant reformers, leaving only 66 books in [their] Bible."

You are right. So, based on the above, we have 73 books in the full (Catholic) Bible. I think that you may have accidentally added in the seven O.T. books twice, resulting in your references to "80" books, earlier in your message.

Leon, welcome to the Catholic Church. I think that it's wonderful that you responded to the graces you received to help you enter into the fullness of the truth.

I am partially concerned and partially relieved about some things you wrote about one of our Catholic dogmas.

The item of concern is found in these words of yours: "About this purgetory thing. I have to confess, I'm not real clear on the need for it. It seems like a 'human solution' to what should be mystery."
The reason this concerns me is that you appear not to have been taught enough about Purgatory in RCIA (or in some different form of preparation to be received into the Church). It is not really proper to refer to "this purgetory thing," because the Church's teaching about the existence of Purgatory is an infallible dogma defined at an ecumenical Council in the 1400s (though, of course, it had always been believed before that, going right back to Jesus and the Apostles). It is part of divine revelation, not a "human solution," so it should have been presented to you (during your catechesis) as a required belief. You should have had a chance to study and discuss it under the guidance of your pastor, before you entered the Church.

But the reason I said that I am "partially relieved" is because of this expression of openness on your part: "... it's something I am trying to work through. I'll work it out someday." I'm glad that you are making yourself a "regular" at this forum, because we are very happy to try to help you "work through" this and any other difficulty that may arise.

Leon, I noticed that you wrote this:
"When Martin Luther posted the 95 Thesis on the door of the Cathedral, he was simply posting 95 reasons why he felt that it was wrong for the church to sell indulgences. The church at that time was in the practice of selling indulgences as a way of insuring that your loved one spent less time in Purgetory and had a smooth journey to the gates of Heaven. It is a practice that has long since been revised and is no longer an issue, however at that time, Martin Luther felt that serious abuses were taking place. He was excommunicated from the church for posting his beliefs."

There are two serious mistakes here:
(1) It is not true that "The [Catholic] Curch at [the] time [of Fr. Martin Luther] was in the practice of selling indulgences ...". Rather, certain sinful clergymen (especially some living near Luther) were accepting alms in a way that was contrary to Church teaching. It wasn't "the Church" that was teaching wrongly or was sinning, but rather human beings who were sinning.
(2) It is not true that Luther "was excommunicated from the Church for posting his beliefs." Aside from the fact that some historians now doubt that he posted anything (but instead may have published his theses in pamphlet form), it was not the posting/publishing that resulting in excommunication. Rather, it was his attempt to force the Church to accept certain heretical doctrines that he had developed. As time goes on, Leon, and you have an opportunity to read more about Luther (and what he wrote and believed), you'll see what I mean about this. It's a complex subject, and I don't think that it would be helpful to go into it here and now.

You wrote: "There isn't anything of doctrinal importance contained in the aprocrapha that is not in the Hebrew translation. The differences in the Bible adopted by Martin Luther has little bearing on any of the differences in the way Lutherans and Catholics celebrate their faith."

As Anna pointed out, we Catholics don't refer to the seven books that are missing from Protestant Bibles as "the apocrypha," but rather as the "deuterocanonical books." To us Catholics, the term "apocrypha" has always referred to other ancient books -- books that were not divinely inspired. The deuterocanonicals were divinely inspired.

Leon, it is a mistake to say that "There isn't anything of doctrinal importance ... in the [deuterocanonicals] that is not in the" other 39 books of the Old Testament. It is also incorrect to state that the partial Bible approved by Luther "has little bearing on any of the differences in the way Lutherans and Catholics celebrate their faith."

If there were nothing of significance in these areas, Luther would not have dropped the seven books. The Catholic Mass is usually celebrated for the repose of the souls of the dead who may be in Purgatory. But Luther rejected the dogma of Purgatory, which is clearly supported in at least two of the seven books (Wisdom 3 and 2 Maccabees 12) that he deleted. Countering the idea that the seven books were dropped merely because they were not in a Jewish canon of Hebrew books is the fact that Luther wanted to delete also a few of the New Testament books -- especially the Epistle of St. James, which he was unable to reconcile with his heretical belief in salvation "by faith alone."

Leon, to help you to grasp and believe what the Church teaches about Purgatory and indulgences, I recommend that you read and study some paragraphs in the new Catechism of the Catholic Church. If you don't have a copy of this wonderful book, you really need one. Until you get hold of a copy, you can read the CCC online. Please use this search engine to look at paragraphs 1030-1032 and paragraphs 1471-1479. (If you wish, you can read more of the surrounding paragraphs for broader context.)

God bless you.
John

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), April 28, 2003.

John,

I went back and read again the scripture you offered and I have to admit that I don't see anything in there that would lead me to an understanding of anything like Purgetory. Purgetory is something for me that just doesn't add up yet. If it's a comfort and a blessing and a way of understanding the mystery that Christ has set before us, for you, then I aplaud you. I'm saying that even after reading the Catechism of the church and a number of Catechism summaries and all the readings and pamphlets and listening to a number of viewpoints offered by Priests and Sisters, I still don't feel the necessity yet. To me, Purgetory is muddying up the waters that Christ made clear. If there are mechanics involved on the way to Heaven, I trust that God will see me through. Jesus didn't go out of his way to explain the mystery to the apostles and so I just have to have faith that he will see me through when that time comes.

There might be some in the church who would say that I can't be catholic unless I believe with all my heart in Purgetory, but all I can say is, I can't force myself to believe what I don't yet have the grace to believe. Where else can I go?

I also went back to "James" and again I don't see anything in there that would seperate a Catholic from a Lutheran. I think you are building fences that just don't need to be there. In fact, I sense some deep seated misconceptions about Lutherans, in much the same way that we are missunderstood.

I still gotta stand by my statement that the differences in the Bibles of the two churchs, have little to do with the source of any divisions which might be present today.

I also belive that, if you leave the books in or take them out, the essence of my faith is still alive and intact.

-- Leon (vol@weblink2000.net), April 29, 2003.

I haven't posted in a while. Good to see you all. John, good to hear from you! How have you been?

I just wanted to add a tidbit on Luther that most might not know (apperant from the fact that it hasn't been posted).

Luther didn't just "pick" another "translation" of the Bible. Luther actually PLANNED to rid the bible of SEVERAL books (even from the New Testament!). As I understand it Luther attempted to delete portions if not the entire book of Revelations (appropriate - as it describes our HOLY MASS), among other books. However, as many of Luthers henchmen had (maybe) better-formed consciences they would not permit it. Therefore, Luther sought out a "version" of the "bible" that was already conviniently missing seven of the books that Luther desired to be deleted. He couldn't get any of the New T. books removed, so he used ONLY the Hebrew portion of the Old T.

http://www.catholicherald.com/saunders/98ws/ws981126.htm

On him being excommunicated: Luther was summoned several times to appear before the Pope, at which time he might have had his chance to explain why he was so upset. However, after refusing to show up, and likewise refusing to take back some heretical statements, the Church excommunicated him as a LAST resort.

In Christ.

-- Jake Huether (jake_huether@yahoo.com), April 29, 2003.

I believe Jake Huether that if Luther, with whom I share birthdays, could have have been killed the way Huss was in 1415. For the Church then The best heretic was a dead heretic. The Church had power on civil matters too, then.

Napoleon Bonaparte ended the Church influence in civil affairs when he put one of the Popes in prison. That Pope died. The next one crowned Napoleon. Since then, the civil power of the Roman Catholic Church began to go down little by little.

-- Elpidio Gonzalez (egonzalez@srla.org), April 29, 2003.

I believe , Leon, that we are capable of sinning often. What if you die at the moment you committed a sin, no time to ask God for forgiveness? Will you go to Hell then? God did create Hell or Purgatory to punish people. He did it because we asked him to. Everytime someone does something wrong, we ask God to deal with that person. Vengeance is mine says Yahweh.

-- Elpidio Gonzalez (egonzalez@srla.org), April 29, 2003.

Here is what the pope said about it.

-- Elpidio Gonzalez (egonzalez@srla.org), April 29, 2003.

The previous post was for Jake. H. on John Huss.

-- Elpidio Gonzalez (egonzalez@srla.org), April 29, 2003.

Purgatory is not for the purpose of punishing people. It is for the purpose of saving people who would otherwise lack the necessary state of spiritual purity to enter heaven. Those who reject the christian doctrine of Purgatory must believe one of two things - (1) that persons who are spiritually "unclean" will enter heaven along with those who die in a state of spiritual purity (even though the Bible tells us nothing unclean can come into God's presence); or (2) anyone who dies in less than a state of perfect spiritual purity goes to Hell. Neither of these sounds like the Word of the God I know.

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), April 29, 2003.

To Jake H.

Have you read any of those "extra books" lately. There isn't anything hiding in them that isn't in the rest of the bible.

Don't create division where there is none.

-- Leon (vol@weblink2000.net), April 29, 2003.

Paul

I guess I understand the mechanics of it, but I would just rather leave the details to God. It seems to me that some things should be left in mystery. I am ready to trust in God's perfect love and know that we are in good hands, God's hands.

God's ways not our ways . . . God's thoughts not our thoughts! As high as the Heavens are above the earth are God's thoughts above our thoughts and God's ways above our ways.

-- Leon (vol@weblink2000.net), April 29, 2003.

2 Maccabees:

[43] And when he had made a gathering throughout the company to the sum of two thousand drachms of silver, he sent it to Jerusalem to offer a sin offering, doing therein very well and honestly, in that he was mindful of the resurrection: [44] For if he had not hoped that they that were slain should have risen again, it had been superfluous and vain to pray for the dead. [45] And also in that he perceived that there was great favour laid up for those that died godly, it was an holy and good thought. Whereupon he made a reconciliation for the dead, that they might be delivered from sin.

That can be found no where else in the Bible, except in this "extra book". This "extra book" happenes to be inspired by God Almighty. And the fact that the Holy Catholic Church, which Christ founded upon the Rock, Peter, included it when it compiled the Bible gives reason to believe that it should not have been taken out.

-- Jake Huether (jake_huether@yahoo.com), April 30, 2003.

Elpidio,

I'm sorry that you've been lied to. The Church hasn't killed anyone. It was a sinner within the Church. Yes many heretics have been killed by the command of the Pope - yet the Pope at the time was abusing his power. Now, if you remember, wasn't it Peter who would have liked to have killed the guard arresting Jesus the night he was betrayed? Lucky for him, he only got his ear! Yet, didn't Peter infallibly say, and write, a couple of things in the Bible?

Luther, as far as I know, didn't become heretical untill he didn't get his way with the abuse of indulgences. He wasn't deemed heretical until he went apes for not reversing the abuse of indulgenses at the drop of a hat. None of the Popes have ever wished anyone to be heretical so that they could kill them! Luther had a very good chance to present his claim. And even if the pope didn't listen to him, was that reason to up and leave Christs Body? Should he not have stayed and prayed? But Luther lacked patience. He wanted his way NOW!

Hey, St. Francis was a reformer. Did he leave the Church and have a temper tantrum? No! He endured. He prayed. He was patient. Now he is an icon for Catholics and non-Catholics alike.

But to get us back on track - all else put aside - was Luther justified in removing books from the Bible? No matter how many people the Pope had killed, or how grievouse the sinners were inside the Church, does Scripture not say that NOT one word should be added or DELETED. Why has Luther been granted the same status as the Church Fathers of the 3rd century to "infallibly" delete seven books (and mare a few others) that previously been "infallibly" included?

Could I, who am no more or less of a man than Luther, remove a book from the Bible and be justified? If I were able to find a collection of Hebrew scripture, and claim that this is what the Apostles used, should I not have the same chance that Luther had? Or is that just outlandish and foolish?

The Church had been using the SAME 73 book Bible for darn near 1200 years! Did we all have the wrong Bible? Were we all fooled into believing that the "extra books" were really inspired? Sheesh! for 1200 years we must have been pretty dumb. And along came Luther, the savior of the church, who was able after over a millenium, to "recall?" that another Old Testament was really used. (Despite the evidence that he might have also had part of the New Testament removed also!). Hmmmm.

Just some thoughts.

-- Jake Huether (jake_huether@yahoo.com), April 30, 2003.

I will just pray for those who don't understand our Catholic faith And I will quote this:

"Those who know accept,,,,those who dont, critize...."

-- Jacob (flake777@hotmail.com), April 30, 2003.

OK . . . so this is what all the fuss is over . . .

[43] And when he had made a gathering throughout the company to the sum of two thousand drachms of silver, he sent it to Jerusalem to offer a sin offering, doing therein very well and honestly, in that he was mindful of the resurrection: [44] For if he had not hoped that they that were slain should have risen again, it had been superfluous and vain to pray for the dead. [45] And also in that he perceived that there was great favour laid up for those that died godly, it was an holy and good thought. Whereupon he made a reconciliation for the dead, that they might be delivered from sin.

I'm sorry Jake, but if that's all there is in the whole bible, I'm not going to waste any sleep worrying over it. There is so much more to our faith that is so much more meaningful to me. That one sideways hint at something constitutes "mystery" more than truth. You want hard truth, I'll comtemplate the mystery of it. All I can tell you for certain is that we are all in God's hands, if he wanted us to worry about such things, he would have made more effort to inform us. As it stands he did hand us a mountain of truth that we can live and touch and take heart in . . . that's where I would rather live.

-- Leon (vol@weblink2000.net), April 30, 2003.

Leon,

That was just one example. Would you like me to grab excerpts from all 7 missing books!?

"There is so much more to our faith that is so much more meaningful to me."

Than what? Than that statement? Than the Bible? You're right. The Catholic Faith came before the Bible. And our faith isn't built ON the Bible, rather, the Bible was built ON our faith. But the Church Fathers, when compiling Sacred Scripture for the Bible, included those books. All I'm saying is that if they weren't that important, they wouldn't have been selected from thousands of documents and placed with the other 66 books.

"That one sideways hint at something constitutes "mystery" more than truth."

Ummm. That "one sideways hint" is the most staightforward statement about the need for prayer for the dead, and about Purgatory in the whole entire Bible. Granted, the Church believed in it before it placed this in the Bible. But to remove it?

Again, Leon, you've missed my point. For Catholics it's no big deal. We already believe in that sort of stuff (Purgatory, etc.). But for evangelical purposes, non-Catholics need to know that there is (or was) more to the Bible than what they have (only 66 books). On their terms, since they don't believe in the authority of the Church, they would be more inclined to read what we believe in the Bible. If they understand the HARD, TRUE, evidence that books were removed, and what those books reveal, then they (by the Power of the Holy Spirit) might be moved to return Home, to the Catholic Church.

Now, Leon, I'm not really sure what your point is to me. My original post was a couple of facts about Luther. Then you posted to me that we shouldn't make a big deal over 7 "extra" books.

The BIG deal, Leon, is that those 7 extra books are divinly inspired. If you had 73 diamonds, and someone took 7 of them away, would you be upset? Heck ya. It's a shame. Because many many Christians who claim to have read the entire Bible, have not. Catholics don't really need to read the Bible, in three years (if you attend weekly Mass) you will have had it read to you. But for non- Catholics who wish to know Jesus, they have a hard time as it is without the Sacraments! They may know Jesus, but they don't fully know what his plan was for us - to be one of mind, in ONE BODY, ONE BELIEF.

-- Jake Huether (jake_huether@yahoo.com), May 01, 2003.

If Leon would contemplate what he's saying:''You want hard truth, I'll comtemplate the mystery of it. All I can tell you for certain is that we are all in God's hands, if he wanted us to worry about such things, he would have made more effort to inform us.''

The Church is here in the world precisely to give us truth; and there's no mystery written of here; a purging state is very obviously believed in by Israelites in Machabees II

God revealed it to the Jews well before Jesus came to the world. What they believed, He believed, or He would've corrected the mistake-- as He did with the acceptability of divorce by the Jews. He very boldly & directly changed it. He did not change their belief in Purgatory; and it's plain in the 2nd Bk of Machabees.

LEON; very importantly: God is infinitely JUST. This truth says temporary punishment for all souls who deserve it is, --definitely ''something God wants us to worry about.'' If you hear a warning, you pay heed; what's about ''I won't worry'' ??? Why pay heed? Because by avoiding even the merest venial sin, your punishment in Purgatory will be eliminated or at least cut short. Just recall the words of Our Lord: ''As you sow, so shall you reap.'' Sin must be punished, no trace or shadow of it can be tolerated in the divine presence of the Holy Trinity. It is true not all sin is deserving of HELL; but of punishment? Absolutely; even cannonized saints of our holy Church have faced temporal punishment for sins. Except that by God's mercy & grace, most suffer it here in their earthly existence; and may not pay in Purgatory. Yet, some have even gone for a time to Purgatory. It's God's divine Justice.

As for God's ''effort to inform us,'' Leon; consider this: He HAS made it; He makes it every day-- to inform us through the teachings of Christ's Holy Church! What do you mean, ''He would've made ''more effort to inform us''--?

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), May 01, 2003.

Jake H.Only the Book of Jesus ben Sirach (Ecclesiasticus) and the 2 Maccabees I find worthy to be in the Bible. Bel and the Dragon, susanna, Tobit, Judit, not historical. They shouldn't be. From the received Masoretic text: Song of Songs shouldn't be there.

The catholic Church had even more books before. See the Muratorian Canon.http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/muratorian- latin.html See Muratorian Canon

text.

-- Elpidio Gonzalez (egonzalez@srla.org), May 01, 2003.

For me, Just because is in the Bible, doesn't mean it belongs in the Bible.

-- Elpidio Gonzalez (egonzalez@srla.org), May 01, 2003.

No, Elpidio, the Catholic Church doesn't depend on you for the decisions. She has the Holy Spirit.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), May 01, 2003.

Tell me Eugene, how long did it take the Holy Spirit to show the Church the truth?

List of New testament in Chronological order. The Canon

-- Elpidio Gonzalez (egonzalez@srla.org), May 01, 2003.

Tell me Eugene, how long did it take the Holy Spirit to show the Church the truth?

List of New testament in Chronological order. The Canon

-- Elpidio Gonzalez (egonzalez@srla.org), May 01, 2003.

Tell me Eugene, how long did it take the Holy Spirit to show the Church the truth?

List of New testament in Chronological order. the Canon

-- Elpidio Gonzalez (egonzalez@srla.org), May 01, 2003.

Eugene, the link I gave you must be followed on the settings . The look for origins on the side. It will give a timline. It took at least 350 years for the Canon to of the New testament to be established. Don't you think those early church fathers were asking the spirit to give them the truth quickly?

Here is another thread with a timeline.< a href="http://www.islamic- awareness.org/Bible/Text/Canon/canonlists.html#1"> Origins of the New testament

-- Elpidio Gonzalez (egonzalez@srla.org), May 01, 2003.

Eugene, the link I gave you must be followed on the settings . The look for origins on the side. It will give a timline. It took at least 350 years for the Canon to of the New testament to be established. Don't you think those early church fathers were asking the spirit to give them the truth quickly?

Here is another thread with a timeline.< a href="http://www.islamic- awareness.org/Bible/Text/Canon/canonlists.html#1"> Origins of the New testament

Tring hard.

-- Elpidio Gonzalez (egonzalez@srla.org), May 01, 2003.

What's our problem with the old keyboard, Els Gonsalez? Lol!

No-- Our Church is given all her wisdom and grace from their divine source in the following sequence.

Christ in person proclaims His Gospel, from the very beginning. Even as the child His holy influence on Mary and Joseph radiated; later to be revealed to Luke by the Blessed Virgin Mary. The whole Nativity narrative must necessarily be taken from what transpired firstly; her own heart pondered on & preserved from any corruption the first truths & eventually from her lips it was written. Every single truth was inspired and preserved for the Church by the Holy Spirit; anticipating the coming of the Gospel.

Christ himself taught and protected from all error each of his disciples daily, particularly the twelve. The learning went on for them incessantly; and He afforded them all the grace Himself to preserve it in their hearts. There it lay dormant three years until Pentecost; when the Paraclete, the Holy Ghost, descended on them in tongues of flame. -The Virgin herself receieved the Holy Spirit that day. She was instrumental in the writing of Luke's gospel, and the Spirit preserved her testimony from all failure, whether by error or memory. Every other event from Christ's words & miracles, to the ordination of His apostles as ministers (priestly office) to the Church just arriving, is related in precisely the same way; under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Johns gospel explains the actions of the Advocate for us very well in John 16-- :12, on to the end. Many other letters and acts are saved by the infant Church with love and care; with the same Spirit's inspiration.

All these events and all the first excursions into the nations by the many disciples; to carry the Gospel to them; was with the Holy Spirit for Paraclete and Advocate. Nothing was ever left to chance.

Yes, a timeline for the eventual writing and assembling of all the inspired books and epistles and their selective canonization developed through later dates, even centuries. But all was with the Holy Spirit, Elpidio. He was there. No problem; He never dies.

Oral preaching comprised almost the first 100 years of these excursions and missions to the Jews and the Gentiles. Many were martyred before any of it had even been committed to writing. Yet, the writing accumulated, along with the evangelization and the trials. The persecutions; and heresies always cropping up. Saint Paul was already denouncing some, in the epistles he wrote on his travels. At every turn, the Holy Spirit was with them.

Today a lot of the work is preserved for the Church partly as scripture and what was recorded later from oral tradition. Like the accounts of Peter's crucifixion in Rome. He declared himself unworthy to be crucified in the way Jesus his Master had been and requested that his feet be pointing upwards at the sky during his ordeal. (You can't make these things up, Camarada!) Orally, and later on written, the diversity of apostolic teaching was passed on with every generation.

If you're the oriental scholar you claim to be, you know well what skills these ancients trained in for the oral recital and/or rhetorical devices, mnemnotic (?) techniques for a word by word discourse by teachers??? You mentioned something a few days ago.

Well, to this add the gifts of the Holy Spirit. Later on, about 300 years, the books were assembled and canonized by the Catholic Church with the Spirit insuring the proper books were not lost. Only the genuine Word of God, nothing more.

God is the supreme organiser; (LOOK at the magnificence of our universe!) the Church has no other claim to infallibility, Elpidio. It's all HIM.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), May 02, 2003.

Jmj

Odds 'n' ends today ...

Hi, Jake Huether. Thanks for saying hello. I was away from January 13 to at least March 1, and I know that you have been spending time at another forum. You can do much good here if you choose to return, as the forum is under attack by a couple of bands of brigands.

Leon, I strongly urge you have a long conversation with an elderly, orthodox Catholic priest or deacon about Purgatory. The passages (in 2 Macc and Wisdom) that I gave to you are proof of Purgatory's existence -- and their are further scriptural proofs in the New Testament -- but some people have to sit down and talk things out with a priest or deacon before the "light bulb" turns on in their heads.

I would like to ask you to read again, and meditate on, the Catechism passages I gave you. They will explain Purgatory to you, pointing out at least some of the scriptural passages that provide evidence of it -- both in the Old and New Testaments. Maybe reading about Purgatory at www.catholic.com will help you. Maybe reading about it in the Catholic Encyclopedia will help. Even mere human logic helps a person to realize that there cannot be only two "states" into which a soul can pass after death.

Leon, you wrote: "I'll comtemplate the mystery of it. All I can tell you for certain is that we are all in God's hands, if he wanted us to worry about such things, he would have made more effort to inform us." Ouch!!! That is a Protestant way of approaching the matter, because you are insisting on lots of scriptural evidence -- i.e., "sola scriptura." As a Catholic, you need to remember that you believe also in Apostolic Tradition, the second font of divine revelation -- which helps us to understand the Bible and even provides additional truths of the faith taught by Jesus to the Apostles. In other words, God most certainly DID "make [a great] effort to inform us" about Purgatory.

You wrote: "To me, Purgetory is muddying up the waters that Christ made clear." Just the opposite is true. The truth about Purgatory was taught by Jesus, and it helps to clear up some otherwise murky waters. All that is left is for us to have faith. This is a dogma which we cannot reject, nor even doubt, if we wish to be Catholics.

Elpidio, will there be no end? Why do you bring up Jan Huss and say that Luther would also have been killed if not protected? That is totally irrelevant. Both Huss and Luther were wrong and did evil things. The fact that they didn't deserve to be killed can't make them right or virtuous. Let's keep our minds on the facts and stay away from the emotional irrelevancies, please.

God bless all
John

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), May 03, 2003.

For those seeking to understand more about the doctrine of Purgatory, try this link: http://www.cmri.org/00prog11.html

-- Mark Steele (rmsteele1@cox.net), November 18, 2003.