What is Purgatory?

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Catholic : One Thread

I was raised Catholic, but I don't agree with some of the teachings in the Catholic Church, maybe just because I don't fully understand them. Purgatory is one of them. Could someone please explain what it really means and why Catholics believe in it. Thank You, Melanie

-- Melanie Bodelon (design465@hotmail.com), October 28, 2003

Answers

Response to What is purgatory?

Melanie,

Don't listen to what Faith says. She is just another Catholic basher that has no idea what she is talking about.

Purgatory is scriptural. But you can't ask that of a protestant because they removed books from the Bible. I think that purgatory stems from Tobit but I might be mistaken. I am sure one of the other posters will clarify this for me.

Purgatory is also a great gift that God has given us. Because we are sinful creatures we tend to do these things called mortal sins. Even after we confess a mortal sin there is still pumishment do this sin. Just like if you were to rob a bank and then you put the money back, there is still punishment under the law. This punishment do our sins makes us unworthy to see God. So, God gave us purgatory to purify us. Because nothing unclean can enter heaven.

Also remember that once we go to purgatory, we are going to heaven.

-- Scott (papasquat10@hotmail.com), October 28, 2003.


Response to What is purgatory?

Hello Faith, I understand that you were "raised" Catholic, but you are not answering Melanie's question from a Catholic perspective. I think she came here looking for the Church's teaching about this. I'm sure you understand that your answer in no way represents the way a Catholic would explain purgatory. To be fair, I think your bias should be explained as part of your answer so Melanie understands where your coming from. Jim

-- Jim Furst (furst@flash.net), October 28, 2003.

Response to What is purgatory?

The Holy Catholic Church has always taught the efficiency and complete work of Christ's sacrifice at Calvary. If it had not done so, no-one would know these truths today. Obviously the 2,000 year old Christian doctrine of Purgatory does not deny that Christ completely and fully paid the price for our sin. However, obviously that is not the whole story, or else every human being would automatically be saved. The fact that some human beings are not saved in spite of the completeness of Christ's death on the cross is due to the fact that different people respond differently to the free gift of salvation which is offered to us - but not forced upon us - by His death and resurrection. Some people throw it back in His face. Others ignore Him completely. A few people fully accept and live the New Life of grace which He offers us, and as a result are completely ready to enter heaven at the moment of their death. But most of us are not St. Francis or Mother Teresa. Most of us fall somewhere between complete rejection of Christ and complete acceptance of Him and all that He teaches. It is only common sense then to recognize that most of us are not ready to be cast into the everlasting fires of hell, nor are we ready to meet God face to face, and to share the eternal fellowship of the holiest of the holy. Most of us make a basic effort to follow Christ, as long as it doesn't hurt too much, and as long as we don't have to relinquish our grasp on some of the worldly pleasures and comforts we desire. We reach out to God, yet dabble in ungodliness. We trust in Him, but only so far. Will a just God condemn such sincere but pitifully weak creatures to an eternity in hell? Not likely. Will a just God fling wide the gates of heaven and allow such incomplete and soiled Christians to freely walk in along with the holiest of saints? Not likely. Scripture says that nothing unclean can come into His presence. Fundamentalist theology says that he "covers over" our sins, and smuggles us into heaven - still filthy but appearing clean, like a dung heap covered with snow. Genuine Christian theology however tells us that He actually allows us to be MADE CLEAN before our entrance into everlasting joy. This cleansing place/state/process is called Purgatory. Purgation - cleansing - happens there.

Purgatory is one of the most beautiful of God's gifts. He revealed this reality even to the chosen people, the Jews, before the birth of Christ - and then to the Christian Church through the teaching and writing of the Apostles. Without Purgatory, the only people who could ever enter heaven would be those select few who die in a state of absolute spiritual purity. Purgatory is a place of purification, but also of joy and peace, for those in Purgatory, unlike those on earth, know without a doubt that they are saved and will spend eternity in the intimate company of God.

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), October 28, 2003.


Response to What is purgatory?

Melanie Yes there is a Purgatory. It is a place where a soul goes in order to be cleansed before seeing God. It say in the Bible that nothing sinful can enter the kingdom of Heaven. It also says that there are some sins that will be "forgiven in the next life". The earliest Christians prayed for their departed in order "that they might be released from their sins" (II Macabees) With all of this in mind it is only logical that there be a place of cleansing, or purging, before we see God. Don't let anyone fool you, there is a purgatory, however a feew of the Scriptural references were removed from the Bible (the Protestant version anyway) because Martin Luther was obsessed with the idea of sin (scruplous) and deciede that if there was no scriptural support for a doctrine then he didn't have to believe it, you know, "out of sight out of mind" †AMDG

-- Jeff (jmajoris@optonline.net), October 28, 2003.

Response to What is purgatory?

Melanie, the main motive to sin (disobey God) is some selfish profit or sensual pleasure, which automatically goes against love, and against what is good and right. When we repent and accept Jesus Christ as Lord, we pledge faithfulness to follow him selflessly and inspite of all sufferings. God then tests our faith little by little by sufferings, trials, and temptations, which reveals all our weakness in our faith, love, and all our promises are proved to be false (I Cor.3/12-15). We may be filled with the Spirit, but not ready to be lead by the Spirit (Rom.8:14). The unspiritual man is not fully dead. It through much sacrifice and sufferings joined with the cross of Christ that we are able enter heaven (remember the narrow road, Lk.13/24). A definate process before attain the fullness of Christ.

But, then what happens when if die saved without this complete transformation. Purgatory accomplishes the left over work. What does purgatory do? Purgatory brings you closer and closer to God bit by bit. It is intensely painful, because our unsanctified selves cannot endure the all consuming fire of God's presence, yet there is also a great internal joy as you come closer and closer to God's presence. This is what the souls undergo in purgatory. When we pray for them, our prayers assist them with more grace to advance quickly into heaven (II Macc. 12/43-45), thus may shortening their period of intense suffering, and also they (cloud of witnesses, Heb.12/1) are sure to intercede for us helping us to fight the good fight here on earth admidst suffering and trials. It an act of love and communion of saints, against such there is no law (Gal.5:23)

-- leslie john (lesliemon@hotmail.com), October 29, 2003.



Response to What is purgatory?

I just want to thank all of you for taking the time to reply. Your responses have helped me to better understand purgatory and what it does for us. Thanks

-- Melanie (design465@hotmail.com), October 29, 2003.

Response to What is purgatory?

Dear Leslie; Aside from my reluctance to identify a source as part of the Hebrew Bible that Jews do not accept (that's another conversation) for the sake of argument - lets treat the II Macc.12:43-45 as scriptural:

From a Catholic POV 1) Is there more O.T. scriptural support beyond this single verse? I am unaware of earlier passages in the Old Test. that act as a foundation of such an expansive doctrine;

2) While we concur on the effect of sin, which N.T. verses indicate that sanctification (or are you talking about justification?) of one saved needs to continue after death;

3) Why would this particular form of sacrificial sin offering be kept in effect after Christ has made the single sacrifice as the perfect high priest (Hebrews)?

Looking forward to your reply. Include any sources that help in this inquiry. Peace

-- Robert Fretz (pastorfretz@oldstonechurchonline.org), October 29, 2003.


Response to What is purgatory?

Faith: re-read what Paul wrote.

-- Catherine Ann (catfishbird@yahoo.ca), October 29, 2003.

Response to What is purgatory?

Well Faith,

Let's face it - few people receive and follow Christ absolutely, positively, 100%, 100% of the time. So, if there is no Purgatory, then you have to accept one of three alternatives:

(1) Anyone who does not accept Jesus Christ absolutely, 100%, all of the time goes to hell (this of course would mean virtually everyone).

or (2) Anyone who makes ANY act of acceptance at all goes to heaven - the once-a-year-on-Easter Christians right along with the greatest saints.

or (3) There is a definite cutoff between the degree of acceptance that merits heaven and the degree of acceptance that merits hell. Maybe anyone who accepts Christ at least 30% goes to heaven, while 29% and below goes to hell? Or 50%? 90%?.

Since you have personally chosen to reject the 2,000 year old Christian doctrine of Purgatory - something that every Christian on earth accepted until the advent of your manmade tradition a few hundred years ago - please tell us - which of the three possibilities mentioned above do you accept? Or am I missing a 4th possibility?

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


Response to What is purgatory?

Dear Robert: On your questions, I will only make some brief points for a honest self assessment, since I lack time for study or seeking sources right now.

If we are honest, your reluctance to identify II Macc.12:43-45 (or for the matter any of the deuterocanonical writings) is not just because that Jews do not accept it, because it has been a part of the Protestant tradition from the very beginning. By the way, we don't much depend on the Jews for the canonicity of the scriptures, but the Holy Spirit.

Now regarding your questions:

1. From the Catholic POV 1) Is there more O.T. scriptural support beyond this single verse? I am unaware of earlier passages in the Old Test. that act as a foundation of such an expansive doctrine

A. Not in my knowledge. So do more primary doctrines of hell, heaven, etc., are not clearly or extensively discussed in the O.T. O.T was meant to be a gradual development to the fullness of the mystery in N.T (See Heb 1.1-2). The enfoldment is quite evident as we go forward even within the O.T. (See Mat. 22:23-33). Even the N.T church initially had many problems, which were not solved automatically just because they were spirit-filled. The Holy Spirit was slowly guiding them (Act. 15:28-29), yet you see it was not very complete or perfect, but surely leading the church to the fullness of truth and perfection. All the doctrines of the church (including the doctrine of Purgatory) are a outcome of this action of the Holy Spirit, who wills what is to be enfolded when and how much (Jn.16:12- 13).

Regarding your last two questions:

2) While we concur on the effect of sin, which N.T. verses indicate that sanctification (or are you talking about justification?) of one saved needs to continue after death;

3) Why would this particular form of sacrificial sin offering be kept in effect after Christ has made the single sacrifice as the perfect high priest (Hebrews)?

A) I cannot answer questions #2 and #3 right now. But, I have a question: If I am saved and justified, why, according to you do I need to be sanctified (why should I care?) since I am only bothered about entering heaven? What can stop me?

Looking forward to your reply.

-- leslie john (lesliemon@hotmail.com), October 30, 2003.



Response to What is purgatory?

Shalom Melanie,

After we saw the number of good responses to your question we held off posting ours but in light of these recent attacks against this doctrine of our faith we changed our minds. What those attacking this doctrine may not understand is that Purgatory is Jewish called Gehenna in Yiddish. Further Yeshua (Jesus) described in following way:

“But I say to you that every one who is angry with his brother shall be liable to judgment; whoever insults his brother shall be liable to the council, and whoever says, “You fool!” shall be liable to Gehenna… Make friends with your accusers while you are going with him to court, lest your accuser hand you over to the judge, and the judge to the guard, and you be put in prison; truly, I say to you, you will never get out till you have paid the last penny.” Matt.5.22-26

Thus the Catholic belief in Purgatory is actually rooted in Judaism, and yet the Jewish rabbis taught this doctrine in error. They taught that all who went to Purgatory for purging went for exactly one year, regardless of the sin or error. Yet above Yeshua throws this nonsense away saying that your time is based on your sins. Yet if His blood cleansed us of all sins as those attacking are claiming, what sins could send the redeemed unto Purgatory? The answer we believe resides in the Beatitudes in two places:

“Judge not, that you not be judged. For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and the measure you give will be the measure you get.” Matt.7.1-2

“And forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us.” Matt.6.12

Put simply, our forgiveness from Above by the Blood of the Lamb is directly proportional to how much we forgive others here on earth from the heart. However, can anyone go through life without judging another? This is why we believe St. Paul warned us that we all must go through the fire:

“Now if any one builds on the foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, straw- each man’s work WILL BECOME MANIFEST; for the day will disclose it, because IT WILL BE REVEALED WITH FIRE, AND THE FIRE WILL TEST WHAT SORT OF WORK EACH HAS DONE.” 1Cor.3.12-13

Our Church teaches that when we suffer in this world, we are facing that earthly form of purging. But what about those who grow in a country like America with wealth and comfort; how do these suffer if they get excellent health care and never face sickness and die in peace or go though those trials in denial? The we answer we see is Purgatory, that time of purging when we get what we deserve for avoiding His chastening with mercy. Yet that mercy will not come until we fully understand why we got sent there, so we can repent from the heart.

This is at least how we interpret the doctrine of Purgatory as well as what Yeshua meant when He said we’d have to pay to the last penny if we do not hold our tongues.

Shalom, C & C

-- C.Foegen (cfoegen@angelfire.com), October 30, 2003.


Response to What is purgatory?

Except, Faith: that YOU don't believe. What you believe is not in the Holy Gospel. You're a free lance lost sheep without a fold or a shepherd. And don't presume Jesus is your shepherd; because you have lost your way completely. He follows you, you don't follow Him.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), October 30, 2003.

Response to What is purgatory?

I think the question that I have addressed to Robert, Faith has tried to answer by saying "If you don't see the fruit of the spirit in your life...then you need to draw closer to the Lord." and he his right.

Purgatory does that unfinished business bringing you closer and closer God, especially when you are reluctant to draw to closer God and allow him to prune you (Jn.15:4). Pruning is a painful procedure, but have go through to enter heaven.

The gospel of John shows if you don't bear fruit, you maybe cut off from the vine (separated from Christ) even after being grafted to christ and cast out to be destroyed in fire (See Jn.15:2 and verse 6).

-- leslie john (lesliemon@hotmail.com), October 31, 2003.


Response to What is purgatory?

Faith, Christ also said that there are sins that will be forgiven "in the next life." How is that possible if there is not a Purgatory? Christ never told us to give up logic, and He also gave us Sacred Tradition handed down by the Apostles, both tool with which the Roman Catholic Church has interpreted and taught the Scriptures for 2000 years. †AMDG

-- Jeff (jmajoris@optonline.net), October 31, 2003.

Response to What is purgatory?

Dear Leslie,

Sorry for the delay – I’m getting ready for Sunday and our annual harvest fair on Saturday.

The short answer to your question is the classic Reformation response (on Reformation Day- October 31) –Guilt, Grace, and Gratitude: God convicts (convinces) us of our Guilt, He saves us through Grace, and we respond with Gratitude. Our justification is our trust (faith) in God’s work through Jesus Christ. Our Sanctification is our response to God. If we truly trust God (our justification), then how else should we live (our sanctification)? It is why we read the Law or the Summary after our Confession and Assurance in the Liturgy.

By the way: Jesus did not speak Yiddish (Webster’s: 1. a language of central and Eastern European Jews based on Rhenish dialects of Middle High German with an admixture of vocabulary from Hebrew, Aramaic, and Slavic languages – using the Hebrew alphabet.)

Gehenna (the valley where garbage was burned) was always referred to as hell. It is later (after Jesus) Talmudic writings (Mishnah 200AD – Gemara, commentary on Mishnah) that indicate that hell may not be a permanent assignment for the soul.

Peace

-- Robert Fretz (pastorfretz@oldstonechurchonline.org), October 31, 2003.



Response to What is purgatory?

Faith:

I just want to let you know that I was not asking for someone's opinoin of what purgatory is. I just wanted to know about the Catholic teaching, not your opinion of the Catholic Religion or of purgatory.

Melanie

-- Melanie (design465@hotmail.com), October 31, 2003.


Response to What is purgatory?

Actually, Faith; you ''explained'' nothing. You merely expounded on a false doctrine spread by heretics (who were baptised Catholics). We understand that for you, this is gospel truth. --You were deceived.

The doctrine of a purgatory after this life is true and unassailable. We know that because Our Lord Jesus Christ believed it (knew it, because He is divine), and gave His apostles & disciples in the Church authority to teach it. Christ would never have permitted any ambiguous or faulty belief to enter the teachings of His Church. He assured His Church of freedom from all error forever, and secured this for her by sending the Holy Spirit, our Paraclete. If the Spirit is truly with Christ's church, then Purgatory is a revealed truth. Period.

You can't change it, Faith, Luther can't change it. No one can dispute the Holy Spirit. 2nd Maccabees gives evidence that ALL Jews believed in prayers for their dead, ''that they might be loosed from sins''. Jesus was a Jew, believed it, taught it, and authorized the Church to freely teach it in His Gospel.

You left that Holy Church. Of all sources to be passing judgments on doctrine, Faith, you can't offer ANY truth at all. Just false doctrines.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), October 31, 2003.


Response to What is purgatory?

"I explained", she says. :-) Faith has "explained" why she doesn't have the same beliefs as the Church Jesus Christ founded - the same beliefs that every Christian on earth held until the start of her modern manmade tradition - the same beliefs that every great saint of Christianity held and professed - the same beliefs which the great doctors and fathers who provided the foundations of Christian theology wrote about and lived by. Well, what can I say? Either Faith is wrong ... or the beliefs of the Christian Church from the time of the Apostles have been consistently wrong for 2,000 years, until Faith made the necessary corrections ... hmmm ... I'll have to think on this ...

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), October 31, 2003.

Response to What is purgatory?

Faith - then please! Tell us which one of the 30,000 conflicting manmade sects which have separated from Catholicism DOES qualify as His True Church! Obviously not all of them! It must be out there somewhere, since Christ said He would be with it until the end of time. (Hint - begin by making a list of all Christian churches with a verifiable 2,000 year history)

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), October 31, 2003.

"I see much evidence that your religion has strayed from the truth revealed in the Scriptures"

A: Once again you ignore the plain truth of history - the Catholic Church, and it alone, compiled the Bible, deciding what would go into it and what would not. Therefore it is IMPOSSIBLE that the Bible contains anything contrary to Catholic teaching. But as long as you cling to manmade religion, you will have to reject both historical fact and genuine biblical truth in order to continue believing what you want to believe. Jesus said the truth would set us free. It is tragic to be in a postion where you have to repeatedly reject real truth and real freedom, in order to hang onto an illusion.

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), November 01, 2003.


Faith is a pretending Christian, and is deeply offended because one faithful Catholic confronts her as unfaithful and accuses her of lies. No one has deleted her perverse messages in any thread (YET); despite her comments:

--purgatory stems from Catholic misunderstanding. They deny the efficiency and complete work of Christ's sacrifice at Calvary. / / / This is a lie. Catholics do not deny Calvary and our total dependence on Christ's sacrifice. Nor does any Catholic deny the efficacy of Our Saviour's passion, death & resurrection.

Faith bears false witness; breaks the commandment of God. But she claims having once accepted Jesus Christ no sin remained a possibility. --Plainly here is false doctrine she learned from heretics.

We see a self-willed woman so full of herself, nothing ever enters past her prejudiced opinions. These are strictly her opinions; not the truth. Mr. Foegen tried to explain. Her answer: ''Jesus says earlier in Matthew, that unless our righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees we are doomed to eternal damnation.
So how do we ever rise above that?''

Faith: Jesus first public word to His people in the Gospel is "Repent.'' That's precisely what He said in Matthew, '' that unless our righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees we are doomed to eternal damnation.'' Because they did not repent. He calls us to repentence for our sins. Is that too hard for you to grasp? You say sin can't be imputed anymore to you. But you speak lies without scruples. You don't come to repentence, have not cared about Christ's commandments. You reject His teachings! Yet you think saying a few magic words saved you forever? This is nothing but a false doctrine. When will your heart be softened, to let His Gospel come in?

Without your complete repentence, there is no hope for you. You can't ''call upon the name'' until you realise the sins you owe Him for. He won't ''cover'' them if you never confess. So far, the Gospel message has been a blank to you; since your pride has no limit. You'll defend your errors against the Holy Spirit Himself. This is truly sad, Faith. We will have to pray for your deliverance from the devil.

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


Ho! ''You simply can't grasp what I am trying to say. I never said that sin is not any longer a possibility for me. What I am saying is that I am judged innocent in Christ and there is no longer any condemnation for those who have received Him. This truth is deep and obviously--you have not understood.'' What's so hard to grasp about your pretensions? It's easy to grasp the meaning of your pocket-bible nonsense, Faith. - -You condemn yourself.

I have not been ''calling names.'' I take everything you're posting, read it, and MARVEL at your specious attacks on Catholic truths; based entirely on heretical teachings. Is HERETIC a mysterious word to you, Faith?

I at least am giving you the benefit of reading what you post; whereas, you read nothing we try to say. You blow it off like a speck on your protestant lapel. And, that's fine. No one here wants to force the faith on you. It has to come from God; we only correct your evil misconceptions.

There is definitely one imortant reason I've pursued the dialogue with you; and it's not your conversion. Nor do I get much fun out of repeated arguing. I think I can offer a counterweight to your influence on the forum. You have to be stopped from spreading lies and protestant bigotry among our faithful. The Catholic faith is deserving of our vindication. You won't uphold it, that's for sure. You work for the devil.

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


This is what I meant by specious: ''I have asked Jesus to save me and I follow Him every day of my life. I am faithful- - though I will make mistakes.''

You may not know it, but Jesus founded the Church for your sanctification in this life. If you truly ''followed'' Christ, that is where your life would be centered, because that is where He is.

You have NOT followed Him, nor are you faithful You have the heretical faith of Luther, Henry VIII, Calvin, Knox, and many other false prophets. They separated themselves from the faithful; and you're following them.

Your penitence is false, too. You absolve YOURSELF of sin; with no regard to Christ's commands. They're duly recorded for the faithful of His church: ''Recieve the Holy Spirit; whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them; and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained.'' (John 20 :22,:23)

That is the correct Catholic doctrine of reconciliation and forgiveness direct from Jesus Christ to His Holy Church. It is certainly no license for sinners to repent in the silence of their room; although that might sometimes suffice. Jesus made provisions for a Church; and you rejected those provisions. You merely forgive yourself, with no regard for His truth. You say again speciously; ''Though I will make mistakes.''

The worst mistake is to defy His Holy Church and follow after heretical teachers.

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


Faith,
You quote the book of Revelations as most heretics have; a denunciation of ''Rome'', or, the Holy See. How convenient for you; to label the Church as this entity seen in that book. It can't penetrate your narrow mind this was the Roman Empire, and the Caesars which the apostle called Babylon. Nothing you quote is true of Christ's people in the city of Rome. Here is that gospel revelation, Dear:

Romans chapt 1, :7, :8 and on; ''To all God's beloved who are in Rome, called to be saints; grace be to you and peace from God our Father and from the Lord Jesus Christ. First I give thanks to my God through Jesus Christ for all of you, because YOUR FAITH is proclaimed all over the world.''--(! ! !) and in verse :12-- ''. . . I may be comforted together with you by that faith which is common to us both, yours and mine.''

No mention of harlots or beasts. Just Christ's Church at Rome, which you, Faith detest.

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


Christ is the founder of ONE Church. Not many.

You protestants have many; and not one ever founded by Christ. The Vatican states, for your information are not situated on the seven hills of Rome, the City. Not even near them. You're bogged down in bigotted information, Faith.

Paul knew where the Church was; he was active in establishing her many mission churches. These today are called diocesan districts. But all share one faith, and that's where the Church is. Not in a misty nothingness of your imagination. You would have a hard time scripturally showing the church you believe in. Rome is standing today over the tombs of a myriad Catholic saints and martyrs. They did not ''. . . come out of her, my people.''

They died in Roman arenas; as witnesses to Jesus Christ. They are entombed in catacombs beneath the city, and a few were even bishops. Popes, in fact! Look it up, Faith. Pay a visit to the home of the apostles Peter and Paul. And His Holiness, John Paul II!

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


''John was addressing a religious institution and not secular Rome.'' (Can you PROVE this; or is it wishful thinking?) ''We know this by his requirements of just who is this *woman* on the beast. (Who ''knows'' this? Anti-Catholics? Oh, NO.)

She is religious? (Pagan, Dear.) ''She has a tie to Jesus Christ,'' (the tie Saint Paul was talking about; ''by that faith which is common to us both, yours and mine.''--??? Rom 1, :12) Then--? isn't she holy? The faith is HOLY. You must have the wrong woman.

''She is a city that sits on seven hills. She is guilty of the blood of many saints.. She boasts that she sits as queen of heaven.'' (All of which points to the Empire. The Roman Empire, on seven hills; not Christ's Church. The Empire, drunk on the blood of saints, and the Empire, ruler over all.

Not a Catholic Church persecuted and hiding in the catacombs, Faith. That was the Church of YOUR blessed ancestors! That's the Catholic Church before Constantine the Great. You dream, sleeping beauty!

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


''*you* yourselves are God's temple and that God's Spirit lives in *you*?'' It's wonderful! --That was Saint Paul, writing to his people. They were Catholics; so was Paul. What else have you conveniently overlooked?

''. . . Catholic religion is just one of many that have popped-up since the time of the apostles.--'' If this were so, then Christ was lying when He promised to send His Church the Spirit of truth. He failed to help His Holy Church, whom He founded saying, ''The gates of hell shall not prevail against it.''

But you said you had faith in Him. Yes; and your own brand of faith, it ''popped up'' with Jesus inside; like the Genie in a bottle? / / / Dream on, Sleeping Beauty.

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


''Jesus really hated religion though. He especially hated when religion or the tradition of man took precedence over the Holy Word of God.''

Is there someplace in the scriptures where Jesus says He hates religion? I've looked everywhere, Faith.

I guess He celebrated the Passover because He hated the religion of His people. He was in the Temple on account of the same hatred. Maybe if He could have, He would've had His foreskin re- attached. Or denounced Moses and the prophets. They were a religious sect, after all. Yeah; Faith makes it all so clear.



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


Dear Folks, Can we get back to the issue? I really would like to know…

From a Catholic POV 1) Is there more O.T. scriptural support beyond this single verse (II Macc. 12:43-45)? I am unaware of earlier passages in the Old Test. that act as a foundation of such an expansive doctrine;

2) While we concur on the effect of sin, which N.T. verses indicate that sanctification (or are you talking about justification?) of one saved needs to continue after death;

3) Why would this particular form of sacrificial sin offering be kept in effect after Christ has made the single sacrifice as the perfect high priest (Hebrews)? Looking forward to your reply. Include any sources that help in this inquiry.

Peace

-- Robert Fretz (pastorfretz@oldstonechurchonline.org), November 01, 2003.


Good problem. In order to set 2nd Maccabees in context, we ought to understand what was written. Even if the book (s) had NOT been inspired to begin with, they are historically revealing. In 2nd Mac. there is the precedent. Jews in God's service; making petitions for their dead (in God's service) for what were presumably venial sins.

No Jew could have supposed the prayers were just pointless, or a trivial observance.

This is the cultural truth; Jews did believe in the existence of a 3rd possibility, where God's mercy was to be invoked. Purgatory.

If only hell (eternal loss) and glory (everlasting life) were known about in Christ's cultural milieu, it would have been absurd to pray for the loosing of sins for dead men. A soul would either be damned or in heaven. --Once damned, there is no return. If a soul has been taken to heaven, why pray any more for him?

Why would a soul with sin remaining in him be anywhere else but hell? (Why would a Christian, a believer in Jesus Christ, be anywhere but in heaven? This is why:

The least impurity is offensive to All-Holy God. We are taught by Jesus Himself, God lives in unapproachable light; His holiness is as removed from sin as heaven is from hell. Jesus says, --Luke 16, :26 by words of Abraham; ''Between us and you (hell) there is fixed a great gulf,''

Meaning that a soul that hasn't been purified of every sinful word or thought, will never enter into the holy presence of God. The merest sin cannot be overlooked.

That's a tall order. Many very good Christians have some fault for which no penance was done in this life; they just felt no need to confess, or to repent of it!

But once in Purgatory, this is but a formality. We know from Jesus and the apostles we have been given eternal life in His grace. Nevertheless; before we can come into our Almighty Father's glory, we must do penance for sin; the temporal pain it has merited. Because Christ clearly teaches us; in the end, as we sow so shall we reap. Purgatory is the place of reaping in total; that last farthing.

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


"which N.T. verses indicate that sanctification (or are you talking about justification?) of one saved needs to continue after death"

A: 1 Pet 3:19 refers to a place where some of dead were awaiting the opening of the gates of heaven. The place referred to here is not Purgatory - but it is clear from this passage that the dead may indeed reside in an intermediate place which is not heaven or hell, and that the existence of such a place is not contrary to the message of the Gospel.

In Matt 12:32 Christ refers to a particular type of sin that cannot be forgiven. He specifically notes that this particular sin cannot be forgiven EITHER in this life OR in the life to come. There would be no reason for Jesus to mention both these possibilities unless they both exist for other types of sin. We know sins can be forgiven in this life; and from these words of Jesus we must infer that at least some sins can be expiated, somewhere, somehow, AFTER this life is over.

1 Cor 3:10-15 speaks of the judgement, where each individual will be judged no only on what he believed, but also on what he did or didn't do during his earthly life. Matt 25 says that those who are utterly lacking in good works will go to hell. But this passage in 1 Cor indicates that some whose works are not sufficient may still be saved, but only "as by passing through fire". Fire as a means of purification is a concept which appears several times in the New Testament. So, Jesus says here that after death a purification process can still occur which makes up for a lack of such purification during earthly life. The comparison to "fire" indicates that it will be an intense experience, involving suffering, but will result in final purification, like gold purified in fire.(1 Pet 1:7)

Rev 21:27 states that nothing unclean can enter into heaven. We know the completely "unclean" who are not in the state of grace will be sent to hell. But this verse does not specify "totally unclean". Apparently anyone with the slightest trace of uncleanliness cannot enter. We know however that a just God would not send His children to hell for minor transgressions. Therefore, some means must be necessary for final spiritual purification of such saved persons before they enter heaven.

The last verses of Luke 12 present an allegorical story about the need for repentance in this life, and the final judgement. It speaks of a period of temporary punishment which some will endure. "I tell you, you will not get out until you have paid the very last penny". It is obvious this is not a reference to heaven, since heaven is not a place of suffering, and no-one will want to "get out" of heaven. It is likewise obvious that hell is not the place mentioned, since no-one ever gets out of hell. What is presented here is a gradual process of atonement, symbolized in terms of paying back a sum which is owed. The passage says that such atonement can be taken care of before we meet the judge; yet if we fail to do so, the judge will impose this temporary process upon us.

Of course, the most certain confirmation of Purgatory in the entire New Testament is a passage Protestants simply don't want to deal with - Matt 16:19 - Christ's promise to the leaders of the Church He founded - "Whatsoever you bind on earth is bound in heaven". The doctrine of Purgatory has been binding Christian doctrine from the very beginning, by the divinely imparted authority of God's Church. As such the doctrine, like every binding doctrine of the Church, is bound in heaven, where only truth can exist. So says the Word of God.

"Why would this particular form of sacrificial sin offering be kept in effect after Christ has made the single sacrifice as the perfect high priest" (Hebrews)?

A: Well, why would some people still go to hell after Christ has made the single sacrifice as the perfect high priest? Does this fact detract from the perfection of His sacrifice? Was Christ's sacrifice insufficient to save these particular people? Obviously not! They forfeited salvation IN SPITE of Christ's perfect sacrifice, by their complete unwillingness to accept it for themselves. The answer to your question then is that many, in fact most, who do accept Christ into their lives do so imperfectly. They love the Lord but they also love their earthly lives, and sometimes they give their earthly desires priority over God's will. Sometimes they sin. Sometimes they are simply lazy or apathetic. Too tired to go to church this morning because of partying last night. Will God send me to hell for such human weakness? I don't think so. But I wouldn't expect to be strolling in through the gates of heaven with someone like Mother Teresa, who divested herself of all worldly possessions, and offered her entire life as a sacrifice to God in the service of the poorest of His poor. No, I have a lot of cleansing to undergo before I could reasonably expect to rub celestial elbows with the likes of her. Or Saint Francis. Or a great many other profoundly holy people. I don't judge them. They had their faults too, and perhaps some such people did require some purification after leaving this earth. But it is obvious I think that within the broad category of "saved" people, some have both feet solidly in the kingdom, while others are straddling the fence between the kingdom and the world. That's why there are sins which must be expiated in the next life, if they are not expiated in this life. We praise and thank Him for that undeserved opportunity!

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), November 01, 2003.


Great post, Chavez.

-- Elrod (.@@la.(-).`), November 01, 2003.

Thank you, rod; --And notice how well Paul M. puts the cap on it altogether!

May Our Holy Redeemer have mercy on me, forgive my sins and bring me to life evrlasting! May his infinite love extend also to you & all who have been regarding our weakness

--as we speak in the Holy Spirit. Thanks, Paul M; for a treasure of good counsel for the faithful!

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


Amen to that Eugene. Hi Rod.

-- Kiwi (csisherwood@hotmail.com), November 01, 2003.

Sorry Hi Melanie! Welcome to our little Catholic community! Please ask away regarding ANY of the other difficult teachings you may have, its a fascinating journey learning about your faith, (Ive just started looking into the Church myself a year or two ago) even if you just wish to explore it from a purely academic position. 2000 years of non contradictory teachings, something to behold in awe as it unfolds before you. Remebere there will all hold question markes over certain teachings its human nature! I see youve met our resident oxymoron "Faith," she means well, Bless her soul.

God Bless

-- Kiwi (csisherwood@hotmail.com), November 01, 2003.


Faith is hanging by a thread. Oh ye of little faith, Faith!

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

Well stated everyone, i too am Roman catholic and it makes me sad that faith cannot see what is right there in front of her,She seems determined to deny what is true.Purgatory is real and it is a place that will clense and prepare us for the Kingdom of The Lord,Amen.

-- Andrew m Tillcock (drewmeister7@earthlink.net), November 01, 2003.

It is by the work of Christ, and our partial acceptance of it, that we are able to reach Purgatory. Otherwise we would all be doomed to hell.

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), November 02, 2003.

Faith is presumptuous: ''Better to be apart from the body (death) because then we are *with Christ.*--''

Again, a misinterpretation. It is PAUL who would rather part with his body and be with Christ. Faith thinks she is equal to the apostle when it comes to leaving the body. I hope she can prove that at the gates of heaven.

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


There's an aspect of Purgatory that should be clarified. It means temporal punishment as opposed to punishment in hell for eternity.

Christ says we all must REAP as we sow in this life. He states our debt must be paid even to the last farthing, and that when He comes He will reward all according to their works; good for good, evil for evil. In Purgatory, temporal punishment is meted out to every soul; as much as his/her unpaid debt might be, and no more.

Christ made the expiation on Calvary which purchases our salvation; but not our temporal punishment. By indulgences, we can draw upon His infinite store of grace during our lives; but not many realise it. He grants real indulgences, through His Church; a fact many non-Catholics dispute to their own loss. Not so the faithful Catholic!

When He told the Good Thief on the cross beside Him, This day thou shalt be with me in Paradise, He gave the man's soul salvation. We can see how in those hours, the Good Thief was paying his debt of temporal punishment: hanging in agony on a cross! He would indeed enter Paradise immediately. His suffering on Calvary next to Our Saviour was his Purgatory.

Many souls endure constant suffering in this life; we know then purgatory will hardly be necessary; if they repent all their sins. Their temporal punishment will be a fulfillment of God's sentencing: As you have sown shall you reap. Many will never enter purgatory; their temporal punishment takes place here in this life; a valley of tears.

It was part of a meditation of many years ago; a similar insight into this question; and about Christ's Second Coming -- when the just shall rise up to meet Him, living and resurrected:

Of these, many will have no time to go to a place of temporal purification; the last day will suddenly come upon (us) them.

The poor souls who haven't yet been purged will undergo instantaneous punishment to equal in pain and sorrow whatever their deeds during life have merited. All in one day!

Because God is All-Just and All-Holy; and no unworthy soul may enter into His Divine Presence.



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


Unhappily for you, Faith; Christ didn't place His authority on you. He gave it to His Church. What little truth you manage to take seriously is a fragment of the entire deposit of faith, the faith of the apostles; That is the Catholic faith.

Most of your alternatives to the Catholic faith are mere pleasure trips of your own design or outright heresies. Heresies that you have to finally reject.

That's IF you sincerely want to follow Our Lord.

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


You ought to be ashamed. The Holy Gospel has always been proclaimed in the Catholic Church. I hardly recall any words of Jesus in the Bible that give you the right to deny another man's salvation.

Nor did He say, ''Blessed are the Bible-thumpers, they shall inherit my Church'' /

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


Suuurrrrrrrrrre Faith,

The consistent, unchanging, 2,000 year old teaching of the Church Christ founded is a false gospel, and no-one was saved until Luther rebelled against God's Church and founded your manmade tradition. (That, I assume would make Luthor your savior?) And that new manmade tradition - no, YOUR personal little chunk of the pervasive chaos of that manmade tradition - is the true gospel, which now saves the few people who happen to agree with your personal interpretation of Christian truth. Does that about sum it up?

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), November 02, 2003.


Moderator, I think that "Faith" has had plenty of opportunity to "share," and now needs to be released from the forum. We don't need this guy's around-the-clock proselytizing here.

Yes, that's right. I said "guy." With a very sly ruse, this Fundy flop has returned to harass the forum for about the sixth time -- always under a different "handle" -- this time fooling many for a couple of weeks by adopting a very feminine name and slightly better behavior than in the past. He can't fool people who have seen him in action in the past, though (especially one wise "little birdie").

Cute name he picked, you see. He claimed to be a fallen-away Catholic, but it is quite rare for a Catholic family to give a daughter the name "Faith." I soon realized that it was just a pseudonym chosen to reflect this cradle Protestant's belief in the heresy known as "sola fide" (Faith Alone). Later, from the suggestion of a wise man, corroborated by my observation of certain behavioral traits, I realized that "Faith" is our frequently appearing, obnoxious "church-of-Christ" nemesis.

God bless you.
John

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), November 02, 2003.


Hello, Robert Fretz.

Like "Faith," you gave your uneducated opinion to Melanie without identifying yourself as a Protestant -- a minister, to boot -- when you wrote the following:

"Aside from my reluctance to identify a source as part of the Hebrew Bible that Jews do not accept (that's another conversation) for the sake of argument -- lets treat ... II Macc. 12:43-45 as scriptural:"

Your darned tootin' we're going to treat it as "scriptural" -- because it IS, not because we need you to grant some kind of concession to us, sir! And if what the "Jews ... accept" is for "another conversation," why even mention that little "dig" here? Just say what you want to say, without the irrelevant "foreplay," please. You are at a "Catholic" forum, not a "Religion" forum. And I am pleased to be writing to you on the Feast of All Souls, a day on which we pray for all those saved souls who are undergoing their final spiritual cleansing in Purgatory (a sort of vestibule of heaven).

Robert F, you continued: "From a Catholic POV 1) Is there more O.T. scriptural support beyond this single verse? I am unaware of earlier passages in the Old Test. that act as a foundation of such an expansive doctrine".

First, it is not an "expansive doctrine," but one that is very clear, concise, and logical.
Second, for Purgatory to be the truth, it is not necessary for there to be even a single scriptural passage about it, neither in the Old or the New Testament. You need to remember that the Church that Jesus founded believs in "twin fonts" of Divine Revelation, not just the single font that your recently founded denomination accepts. As others have helped you to see, though, there are II Maccabees and various New Testament passages that make clear to an honest reader that Purgatory exists.
Third, there is another helpful Old Testament passage -- namely, the follwoing purgatory-related words from the third chapter of the Book of Wisdom:
"But the souls of the righteous are in the hand of God, and no torment will ever touch them. In the eyes of the foolish they seemed to have died, and their departure was thought to be an affliction, and their going from us to be their destruction; but they are at peace. For though in the sight of men they were punished, their hope is full of immortality. Having been disciplined a little, they will receive great good, because God tested them and found them worthy of himself; like gold in the furnace he tried them, and like a sacrificial burnt offering he accepted them. In the time of their visitation they will shine forth, and will run like sparks through the stubble."

Robert F, you asked: "... which N.T. verses indicate that sanctification (or are you talking about justification?) of one saved needs to continue after death;"

I think that others have answered you, but in case you are still partly unclear ... We don't normally speak of it as "sanctification" after death, but rather "purification." Justification occurs in the Sacrament of Baptism -- and is then renewed whenever the Sacrament of Penance is needed for the forgiveness of mortal sins committed.

Robert F, you asked: "Why would this particular form of sacrificial sin offering be kept in effect after Christ has made the single sacrifice as the perfect high priest (Hebrews)?"

Why do you impose a term that we never used -- "form of sacrificial sin offering"? It appears that you are falsely attempting to make us appear to be Jews who are attempting to earn our way to heaven through ritual sacrifices. If so, how naughty on your part! Another mischief-maker in our midst? So many of you have passed through here! With time, you will learn that you can't sneak your minor-league fastballs past us! I suggest that you read about Catholic teaching on the subject of punishment -- eternal punishment (removed by the salvific action of Jesus) and temporal punishment (that we must endure in this life or the next, to make "reparation" for the wrong we have done). We need not be concerned about the former, but purgatory is partly for the latter -- temporal punishment.

God bless you.
John

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), November 02, 2003.


"Did you ever read Augustine's conversion testimony? He was changed in a moment by the power of the Word--the Holy Word of God." [comment by the shameless "Faith"]

This Fundy is going to try to teach US about one of the greatest Catholic saints of all time -- a bishop, Father, and Doctor of the Church from the 4th and 5th centuries? What chutzpah!

If Fundy Faith would read SAINT Augustine's five million extant words, he would find the great philosopher/theologian to be so thoroughly Catholic that he would never mention the name "Augustine" again.

Fundy Faith is wrong about the saint too. In his "conversion," he was not merely "changed in a moment by the power of the Word." Although his reading of a scriptural passage did play a role, he had already read the whole Bible earlier in life -- without its converting him. Fundy Faith conveniently ignores the key roles played by (1) Augustine's mother St. Monica praying many years for him to become a Catholic and (2) the convincing preaching of Milan's Catholic archbishop, St. Ambrose, which helped Augustine shed his heretical leanings and open his heart to the truth.

Please take a hike, Faith, until you are ready to convert to Catholicism. You cannot put any points up on the scoreboard with your "air-balls" at this forum. You have nothing to offer us, and (as always in the past) you ignore that vast wealth that we offer to you.

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), November 02, 2003.


Hi John. You wrote:" I realized that "Faith" is our frequently appearing, obnoxious "church-of-Christ" nemesis."

I did mention the "church of Christ" affinity early on when "Faith" appeared on the scene. Me thinK evincible clues are obvious.

rod..

..



-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), November 02, 2003.


Terrific, John!
Just don't lose sight of this, please. When our forum is challenged by know-nothings like poor Faith, there are possibly hundreds of silent beneficiaries nearby. Having this anti-Catholic lob slow pitches at us is really an opportunity to give to THEM our spiritual works of mercy; good counsel and a new exposition of truth as the Church reveals it.

The truth will OUT, John. Faith is deceiving him/herself thinking her testimony carries weight. How could it? It collapses under the first Catholic broadside. Faith rolls over like a motorcycle falling off a cliff; it ain't pretty! lol!

The lurkers of uncertain faith in the Church see Faith upended. And it couldn't happen to a nicer guy, (or gal) IMHO /

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


October 19, 2003.

Hi Faith.

Your words are reflective of the Church of Christ sect. It is curious how you did not experience God in the Catholic Church and how I currently reflect back on my Catholic up-bringing, but I cannot experience His presence in any of the church "services", only in the mass. I need something more than an ongoing Bible study, prayer meeting, and musical. This has been my experience with Protestant services. The mass has an entirely different meaning and purpose. I cannot and will not partake in the Protestant Last Supper celebration. They keep telling me that it is "symbolic". Well, if it is "symbolic" and not sacred, then why bother partaking? Afterall, it is only a symbol and I got the meaning of that a long time ago; I won't forget that. There must be a real significance to the Holy Eucharist. You nor I can prove anything, so for me it will just have to be a matter of faith that Christ is there in body and blood. I'm struggling and fighting with Protestant lies and interpretations. Symbolism is fine, but reality is what seperates us.

rod

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), October 19, 2003.

ro

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), November 02, 2003.


Shalom Faith,

Jesus forgives our trespasses as we forgive THOSE WHO TRESPASS AGAINST US, as well as "for the measure you give will be the measure you get".

The Beatitudes must be read in context because there is a promise of mercy, but the promise comes at a cost, that is we are to deny ourselves take up our cross and follow Him even unto death.

>>>...is a description of our works being judged. This is for the determination of our rewards in heaven based on our good works here on earth. But it has nothing to do with our salvation. It is not us that is put through the fire for testing--but our deeds, good and bad. >>>

The reward aspect is indeed before that passage in verse 8 but the penalty aspect immediately follows for "if any one destroys G-d's Tempe, G-d will destroy him" 1Cor.3.17. And when we judge our brother "who are made in the likeness of G-d" (Jam.3.10) we become liable for His judgment, saved or not: "Therefore you have no excuse, O man, whoever you are, when you judge another; for in passing judgment upon him you condemn yourself…" Rom.2.1 all these words were written AFTER He rose from the dead; so why was Paul and James both warning believers they are judged if they judge another if your position is true?

>>>He would pay that last penny for us >>>

Indeed, His sacrifice paid every penny, but just like the parable of the unforgiving servant (Matt.18.23-35), that forgiveness of debt is contingent upon us extending that same mercy upon a fellow servant. If we do not, then expect the same result when the King said:

"You wicked servant! I forgave you all that debt because you besought Me; and should not you have had mercy on your fellow servant, as I have mercy upon you?" And in anger his L-rd delivered him to the jailers, till HE SHOULD PAY ALL HIS DEBT."

Note the similarities to those two passages:

"…you be put in prison; … you will never get out till you have paid the last penny."

"…his L-rd delivered him to the jailers, till HE SHOULD PAY ALL HIS DEBT."

Furthermore, Yeshua (Jesus) added:

"So too My heavenly Father will do to EVERY ONE OF YOU, if YOU do not FORGIVE your brother from your heart."

Shalom, C &C

-- C. Foegen (cfoegen@angelfire.com), November 03, 2003.


Faith is full of faith (I wish it was GRACE), yet all of you pour and pour so much to fill her, forgetting the vessel is already filled. She can never receive, no matter how persuasive. You give scriptures, history, science, reasoning, and so much logic, yet no effect. She is come as a teacher not as a student. Yet, I believe, many others like us are benefitted, as we learn much by reading the posts. The root cause of Faith's problem must be personal, e.g. negative experience with one's own father or some clergyman.

-- leslie john (leslie_jn@yahoo.com), November 03, 2003.

Actually, Faith, I've been down that road and have discovered all the symbolism surrounding John 6. I can accept the symbolism and the meaning it has on one's faith. If you've taken some careful considerations of my writings on "Transubstantiation", your remarks would have been very different. Also, you have me in line to accept the Holy Eucharist, gee! thanks! I'm not quite there, but your zealous invitation is nice.

Is there anyway that you can remove the primitive thinking of your interpretations about "Transubstantiation" and open your mind just a tad more? Have you ever truly made the effort to understand from different angles? Look at what Jesus actually said and try to isolate what He was doing. Put the symbolism aside for a moment. Make an attempt to understand the significance of the literal meaning.

rod..

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), November 03, 2003.


Well, Faith. How do you seperate your faith from the Gnostic theology? They used the word "eat" to mean "understanding", much like what you have interpreted. There is more to it than to understand the Word. We must accept the Word as our giver of eternal life, not just understand.

rod BTW, the Passover was a symbolism of the Passion. Then, the symbolism was replaced with the "real" Christ.



-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), November 03, 2003.


Faith? Will you make an attempt to understand "Transubstantiation"? The symbolism is well understood, but give it a try with the literal meaning. Please?

rod

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), November 03, 2003.


If Faith had faith even as one little mustard seed, her eyes would be opened.

In the passage where Christ says this, He claims that little grain of faith would enable one to tell the MOUNTAIN, ____ Remove and cast yourself into the sea, and it would obey ____ Jesus was not really advocating the moving of any mountain. He was demanding from each Christian a faith without the merest question about it: TOTAL faith! A faith so pure and transcendental it will balk at NOTHING! What other faith, I ask you, would carry a mountain into the sea? Only SUPERFAITH, as Catholics have faith!

We don't balk. We don't falter, or question the Word of Jesus; He is God! If He says ''Eat my body; drink my blood,'' as His sacramental species; we believe!

Now, Faith, who cannot muster the same faith, would ''box in'' Jesus Christ and second-guess Him, saying, ''This is a hard saying; who can believe?''

Her faith is weaker than the mustard seed itself! It might as well be denial. It IS denial!

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), November 03, 2003.


Faith-

Yes, there IS everlasting grace! But man can fall away from this grace, just as he can fall away from the Everlasting God. You cannot be saved "once and for all," as Christ warns us again and again in the Scriptures. Even in the parable of the sower, He speaks of those who "hear the word and receive it" but, surrounded by worldly cares, fall away from His teachings.

If one loses grace, it is not the fault of the grace -which is indeed everlasting!- but one's own fault.

The Catholic Church also teaches that one cannot save oneself, and that there is no way for man to receive grace except through the free gift of God, through His Son who died for us on Calvary.

-- Catherine Ann (catfishbird@yahoo.ca), November 03, 2003.


Faith,

So are you one of those people who thinks that once they have accepted Christ they can never go to Hell?

Like tomorrow, if you decided to go on a murder spree and not repent, you'd still be okey dokey with God? (and don't say "I wouldn't do that because of Jesus", the question is whether or not you COULD go to Hell after "accepting Jesus".

Frank

-- Someone (ChimingIn@twocents.cam), November 03, 2003.


"Nope..Eugene., the Catholic church has no faith in God at all. It doesn't trust in Him to save them...it thinks it can save itself!"

Faith believes she can speak authoritatively to Catholics and teach us what our own Church teaches. Faith, do you believe that you are an authority on Catholic teachings?

At least I ask you what you believe instead of telling you what you believe.

Maybe you should post on the "Catholics who were born yesterday" forum. You might convince them. Around here, your false accusations aren't working.

AMDG,

Mateo

-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), November 03, 2003.


Faith,

That's a problem for us though. A Catholic's opinion should be found in the Teachings of the Magesterium (although there are some people who claim to be Catholics but deny the church teachings-- go figure). Anyway, with someone who interprets the Bible for themselves, how do you know WHAT they believe, when everyone can interpret something different even reading the same Bible?

I have indeed heard "Bible-only" people say you can't lose salvation, once you've been "saved", and they are the ones who decide if they've been "saved". Do you agree they are wrong?

Frank

-- Someone (ChimingIn@twocents.cam), November 03, 2003.


Faith has quoted the standard fundamentalist copout. Once I'm saved, I can't lose my salvation. If I do something grossly immoral, it means I was never saved in the first place. Catch 22. In other words, if Pastor Bill preaches the Word of God (as he interprets it) for 30 years, and brings thousands of godless people to Christ (or his version of Christ), and lives an exemplary Christian life - but then abandons his wife and runs off with his secretary, that means that the whole 30 years of outstanding Christian service was fake? He never really accepted Christ? Baloney.

Faith's star-spangled version of what it means to accept Christ is simply way out of line with genuine Christian teaching, and therefore with Biblical truth. The fact is, all men sin - that includes people who have genuinely accepted Christ. Indeed, acceptance of Christ by a person guarantees that Satan will multiply his efforts to lead that person into sin. Satan doesn't role over and play dead just because we accept Christ. Satan knows what Fundamentalists sadly do not seem to recognize - that no human being is saved until they take their dying breath. That's what the Bible tells us - those who are faithful UNTIL the END will be saved. (Note the future tense here - WILL be saved, at that time, not "are saved" now.) Satan's principle targets are those who have most sincerely and genuinely accepted Christ into their lives - especially clergy! He knows that the spiritual demise of one priest (better yet a bishop), or even a minister, can have a ripple effect that may shake the faith of many.

Faith is right on one point - once you have your salvation, you cannot lose it. But you don't have your salvation until you enter the gates of heaven. Until then you are working out your salvation, day by day. The Bible says we must do this in "fear and trembling". Fear of what? Obviously, of forfeiting salvation. Paul was keenly aware of this possibility. He wrote "I discipline my body and make it my slave, so that, after I have preached to others, I myself will not be disqualified." (1 Corinthians 9:27) If paul knew that he wasn't yet saved, and could easily forfeit his salvation, it seems rather arrogant when members of a manmade tradition smugly insist that they are unconditionally guaranteed what the great Saint Paul himself realized he was in danger of losing.

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), November 03, 2003.


Nonsense! Salvation is the only prize Paul ever wrote about - and no wonder! Given salvation, what else could possibly matter? Crowns? What kind of crowns? Metal and jewels? That would be so utterly meaningless in the face of the Beatific Vision that it would be so much trash, not a reward. Paul compares earthly life to a race, and says that the prize will be awarded at the END of the race. Good analogy! When else would the prize be awarded? There is but one prize that Christians strive for, the final and eternal prize -salvation. NOTHING else matters in the long run; and 1 Cor 9:24-27 makes it abundantly clear, even for a self-interpreter, that what Paul fears losing is that single final prize at the END of race - NOT the ministry he is called to during the race!

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), November 03, 2003.

Very hard to dispute ! ! !

At last, Faith is in agreement with the Catholic truth of PURGATORY! --God has taken mercy on her!

''If it is burned up, he will suffer loss; he himself will be saved, but only as one escaping through flames. (1 Corinthians 3:5-15)''

Stay here and be our friend, Faith! More wonderful truths for you ahead! Trust the Holy Spirit /

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), November 03, 2003.


Very good indeed, Eugene! "Faith" should pray for the Poor Souls in this month of November, too.

Rod, you are a winner! I do indeed recall your very early suggestion that "Faith" was a c-of-C man! And i like your little hidden hint there: "Me thinK evincible clues are obvious." Wish I could remember all the other names used, but only "Gale" comes to mind right now. (That one too had people mixed up about his sex.)

God bless you.
John

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), November 04, 2003.


wait, gale was a male? i never knew... i always assumed a female, and the writing style never led me to believe otherwise (although i will say that i never really saw a writing style which would indicate female either) what a kicker.

-- paul h (dontSendMeMail@notAnAddress.com), November 04, 2003.

"less reward"?? The expression "still saved, but only as by PASSING THROUGH FIRE" sure sounds like something a lot more serious than "less reward". Besides, if he is saved then he has not received less reward. He has received exactly the same reward - the only reward God has offered to us - salvation - but only after undergoing additional purification. "Passing through fire" is a recurring biblical metephor which always symbolizes purification - like gold, which is "tested by fire" - meaning that it is heated to a temperature where the impurities are burned away, leaving the pure gold behind. A very precise and accurate analogy for Purgatory.

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), November 04, 2003.

''These verses are clearly talking about a judgement of our works-- not salvation.--'' Purgatory isn't about salvation. Souls in purgatory have definitely been saved. So, this verse is not contrary to our salvation; it is about becoming God's soul at last, purified of every worldly fault.

''To claim the doctrine of Purgatory over a misunderstood message''--
Oh? Haven't you called it misunderstood, and it is not speaking of salvation; only purification? Purification equals Purgatory, Madam! Or Boy-San; whichever. You are who didn't understand that verse!

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), November 04, 2003.


''It is a good thing that we aren't judged by our works.'' He/she stepped in it again.

''Behold, I come quickly! And my reward is with me, to render to each one according to his works.'' (Rev, Epilogue; 22, :12) --The truth will out.

Yes; we are saved, but our works will be either rewarded or punished: a temporal punishent even after our soul's salvation. In other words, Purgatory!

Great work; you're beginning to fall in line with Catholic truth, aren't you ''Faith''-- ? ? ?

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), November 04, 2003.


"...wish I could rember all the other names used.."

Sam/Lance/Kevin

-- nasdaq (Some@help....), November 04, 2003.


"If *it* is burded up--if what is burned up? His works... "

A: That's right! If his works are burned up (are insufficient, either quantitatively or qualitatively) - works which could have been channels of purifying grace if he had done them on earth - then he will be in need of additional purificatrion before entering heaven.

"He will suffer loss...loss of what? rewards!...it's about rewards and crowns--the previous verses say so"

A: There are no "crowns" in heaven. Crowns are made of metal and jewels, materials of earth. Crowns are symbols of earthly authority. The reference to crowns is entirely symbolic. What possible use would anyone have for a crown in heaven?

"He is saved only as one who has *escaped the flames* meaning, by the grace of God."

A: WHAT????? The passage says he will PASS THROUGH the flames, not escape them! Will you stop at nothing - even rewriting the Word of God - in your futile attempts to legitimize your private interpretations??

"Fortunately--his works had no relevance to his salvation. Otherwise this person would have not been saved because his works were burned up or unacceptable"

A; If works have no relevance to salvation, then Matthew must have been terribly confused to say that those who neglect works of charity will go to hell. Is there some way he could have said this more clearly? I suppose there is no passage of God's Word so clear that self-interpreters, hell bent on enforcing their personal guesses, can't pervert it to their own ends. But simply rewriting a passage using OPPOSITE terms from the original is still farther than most self-respecting Protestants will go.

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), November 04, 2003.


Is God ABLE to inflict temporal punishment? Have you any idea what temporal punishment is for? Why is the world suffering all around you? Are the ''works'' of sinners suffering, or are we suffering because of our sin?

I would be glad to see my ''works'' burnt; they live only in memory. They aren't returning later to be burnt. But my soul is not just a memory; it's going to Purgatory and so is yours. When you leave this life, you take your soul and the grace of God with you. If there's no grace, you aren't saved. If you have Christ's grace, your soul is purged (in Purgatory) of all defect and you go with Christ for eternity. This is Divine Justice, not one of your distortions of scripture. It's very clear, from the true Bible interpretation.

You don't have respect for the Holy Bible at all. It's there only for you to bowdlerise.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), November 04, 2003.


Uh oh, don't tell me... infant baptism?

-- Catherine Ann (catfishbird@yahoo.ca), November 04, 2003.

Yeah, Catherine; we all get one at baptism. In fact, Faith had it. Until she attained the age of reason. By sinning, she lost it. I'm not laughing, I sinned myself and lost my baptismal grace. But thanks to the Holy Church of the apostles, my repentence and the sacrament of Penance made me whole again. (Faith has no return priveleges.) She talks a good game, though! Lol!

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), November 04, 2003.

Dear John; Chill out. Sometimes a cigar is just a good smoke. In other words, a question asked is just that – a question?

Here are a few responses and some more questions:

1) In regard to the inter-testament writings – as I recall from one of my Early Church History classes during my seminary days - it was St. Jerome, among others, who held a similar position when he said the Apocrypha (his term) might be read for edification but not to confirm the authority of church dogmas – I believe this is from his Prologue to Books of Solomon.

2) Perhaps I should have said “significant doctrine” as evidenced by the conversation.

3) I appreciate the many thoughtful responses (including Gene and Paul) regarding the OT and NT passages. I respectfully suggest that without purgatory as a preset dogma, each passage can be identified within the confines of earth, hell, or heaven. To arrive at a 4th state, purgatory, there appears to be a process of dogmatic insertion rather than interpretive exegesis from the scripture. That’s not a problem for you as you acknowledge in your “two fonts” statement.

4) There are no Reformed traditions or doctrines that suggest the one need not repent from sin after baptism. On the contrary, it is the desire and ability to repent for every sin that is seen as a gift of the Spirit and an assurance of our salvation. As I have heard it explained on this thread and others, it appears the need for purgatory depends on the disconnection or a tentative relationship between a person’s justification and salvation.

5) This is a metaphysical observation. I would imagine that temporal punishment is, by its self-description, time dependant. Time is part of God’s physical creation (Genesis), it is not eternal. When you die, do you believe your soul is “inside” or “outside” of time? If one is to be purged by temporal punishment – it seems you would have to be “inside” of time, i.e., John Edwards. Does that mean that purgatory is part of the physical (thus observable) creation? If it is not, how do you get a temporal event/process to work in a timeless eternity? Or, if we follow Gene’s non-temporal description of purgatory, that reflects the event similar to a final judgment (Revelation) affirmed by many Protestant traditions. I would like to hear the Catholic POV contributions from the group regarding this.

6) Finally, I used the term “form of sacrificial sin offering,” because 2 Macc. 12:43 says, “He levied a contribution from each man, and sent the total of two thousand silver drachmas to Jerusalem for a sin-offering.” (NEB – Cambridge) Since the sacrificial system (including this particular form of offering) was no longer needed because it was fulfilled by the perfect sacrifice of Jesus – why would the place or “state” of purgatory still be needed? This question could also be asked of the event of Jesus liberating the souls of history as described by Peter. Why would this process need to be repeated after the resurrection?

-- Robert Fretz (pastorfretz@oldstonechurchonline.org), November 05, 2003.


Robert:
I'm sure John can give you insights, and presently will.

Your addressing the question of the ''sacrificial system'' leaves me wondering: How would we effect these things through the faith of the apostles? It's not an offering for the poor souls in purgatory, 2nd Macc is concerned with. It's prayers for the dead. We know that as a DOCUMENT this book (taken from letters) said souls could benefit after death by prayers which loosed them from the penalty of sins. They were acknowledging that kind of sin.

Now, plainly understood, a soul already in glory needs no prayer of intercession. A soul damned for eternity is simply gone. You might pray indefinitely and never ''loose'' it from the sins which damned it. The Jews, then, came to a conclusion; some sin is left for later forgiveness, or punishment.

Because; as we contemplate above; only a soul freed of even the slightest defect will be admitted into heaven. I didn't say soul with the slightest defect will come to salvation. That event is Christ's grace given the saints; His work of Atonement. Purgatory isn't about salvation.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), November 05, 2003.


Jmj
Good day, Robert F.

You wrote: "Here are a few responses and some more questions:"

Please, in future, make it just ONE question. Then, when that has been fully covered, the next question, and so on. Dealing with "more questions" is unfair to the answerer, who may have to do research and write several sentences just to respond to a one-sentence question.

You wrote: "In regard to the inter-testament writings ..."

Oops! Mistake #1. They are not "inter-testament writings." Being divinely inspired works, they are interspersed among the other books of my Old Testament. Feel free to refer to them as the "deuterocanonical books" or "the Septuagint books not listed in the Hebrew canon" or "Catholic Bible books that I don't recognize as inspired."

You wrote: "... it was St. Jerome, among others, who held a similar position when he said the Apocrypha (his term) might be read for edification but not to confirm the authority of church dogmas ..."

It is true that St. Jerome at first gave his opinion that the books were not divinely inspired. However, he was only a priest, so he lacked the charism and authority to make a decision about this. The pope and bishops HAD the required charism, and they decided that the books are inspired -- to which judgment St. Jerome then humbly bowed.

You wrote: "I respectfully suggest that without purgatory as a preset dogma, each passage can be identified within the confines of earth, hell, or heaven."

What you really mean is that, if one is in a religious body that lacks a magisterium, one is one's own pope and interpreter of scripture, so one can interpret each passage as referring to "earth, hell, or heaven."

You continued: "To arrive at a 4th state, purgatory, there appears to be a process of dogmatic insertion rather than interpretive exegesis from the scripture. That’s not a problem for you as you acknowledge in your 'two fonts' statement."

You are partly correct. It's not that we "arrive at a fourth state," but that you don't arrive at one. The teachings of Jesus, passed on by word of mouth by the Apostles -- including the oral teaching on the existence of purgatory -- PRECEDED the writing of the New Testament. That's why we don't have to "arrive at a fourth state" by interpretive exegesis. We didn't provide those Bible passages to you as some kind of "proof texts" to cause you to "arrive at a fourth state." No. We provided them to show that the ancient Jewish and Christian belief in purgatory is not contradicted by scripture and can plausibly be supported by it.

You wrote: "As I have heard it explained on this thread and others, it appears the need for purgatory depends on the disconnection or a tentative relationship between a person’s justification and salvation."

Please rephrase this, as I am probably not getting your meaning. Maybe it would help if I assured you that, if a soul is in purgatory, the person is justified and saved already. It is going nowhere other than to heaven -- and there as soon as it is purified. As Paul M stated on 10/28: "Scripture says that nothing unclean can come into His presence [Rev 21:27]. Fundamentalist theology says that he 'covers over' our sins, and smuggles us into heaven - still filthy but appearing clean, like a dung heap covered with snow. Genuine Christian theology however tells us that He actually allows us to be MADE CLEAN before our entrance into everlasting joy. This cleansing place/state/process is called Purgatory. Purgation - cleansing - happens there."

In response to your questions about "temporal punishment," I would suggest that you read this section of St. Thomas Aquinas's "Summa Theologica," especially link #6. He does not use the term "temporal punishment" on that page, but does on others. Sometimes he refers to "satisfaction." [I perhaps should not have confused you by using the word "temporal," because it makes one think of earthly time. Still, I believe that there is a sense in which there is "time" in Purgatory, because a soul's stay there "begins" and "ends" over a "duration," and Purgatory itself will have an end -- ceasing to exist at, or at some point after, the Second Coming of Jesus.]

Here is the old Catholic Encyclopedia's article on Purgatory, which has a section subtitled, "Temporal punishment." If you'd like to see what Aquinas says about Purgatory, here are two more "Summa"-link pages: first page and second page. The saint speaks about punishment and many other things. I hope that these sources will provide an answer to the rest of your questions, including those concerning 2 Maccabees.

God bless you.
John

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), November 06, 2003.


Dear John,

Thank you for your response. I will follow up with the suggested writings.

Allow me to return the favor of edification:

1) Inter-testament writing is a classification that reflects time of writing, not canon.

2) Reformed Theology and Fundamentalist sermonizing rhetoric is about as far apart as the Summa and religious legends, such as the story of a priest who was preaching favorably towards Luther’s position. When he was celebrating the Eucharist, at the consecration of the elements, lightning struck – killing him, and on the altar was the Christ child. (Told to me by a priest while I was in seminary) Or, that George Washington converted to Catholicism on his deathbed. Or, that the house of Mary was miraculously transported from Nazareth to Dalmaitia in 1291 and from Dalmatia to Loreto, Italy in 1294. (Both published in “The Communion of Saints” by the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary in 1967 – I am assuming this is a legitimate Catholic organization – but, maybe not.) Try not to mix apples and oranges.

3) When a person asks or answers a question – deal with it straight on, rather than assuming you know what the other person is thinking or interpreting why the question is being asked. You almost never get it right and it detracts from the conversation.

Other than that, it has been interesting.

PS Since you have referred to it so many times, – When does the “oral teaching” of Christ become known to the bishops? Is it general information for the priests in seminary? Is there an orientation for new bishops? Is there a delineation of the actual teachings and the following interpretations and updates within Catholic tradition? Has anyone thought to write the particular teachings (without commentary) down for others to see? If so, is there a timeline that notes codification from oral to written tradition?

Feel free to identify an appropriately notated history (as opposed to a devotional writing) on the subject.

Peace

-- Robert Fretz (pastorfretz@oldstonechurchonline.org), November 06, 2003.


Jmj

Now go back, Robert F, and choose the FIRST thing you want to ask me. (If you don't understand why I am saying this, go back to the first point I made in my last post.) I know that you are a minister and therefore have the gift of gab [putting it charitably], but here you need to control your tongue, please. I need to read tons of messages on dozens of threads, and I need to write lots of replies -- so I don't have hours to work on your messages.

Oh, heck. I'll give you a second chance today. (But you will "strike out" if you whiff a third time!)

All right. You wrote: "Inter-testament writing is a classification that reflects time of writing, not canon."

Clever, but you can't fool me! While the deuterocanonicals were mainly (if not all) written after the other O.T. books, calling them "inter-testament" is an insult that can't be tolerated at a Catholic forum. They are not "inter-" (between) testaments, which would make them NON-testamental. Rather, they are within the first Testament, whether that pleases you or not.

You wrote: "Reformed Theology and Fundamentalist sermonizing rhetoric is about as far apart as the Summa and religious legends ..."

Interesting phrase there -- "Reformed Theology."
By it, do you mean "reformulated theology" (i.e., same meaning as held by Catholics, but in different language)?
Or by it, do you mean "forming anew that which became deformed in Catholicism"?
If the first, fine. But if the second (as I have been told), then I would reject it as an insulting phrase and ask you not to use it here. Catholic theology definitely didn't need to be "reformed/corrected" by a fallen-away Catholic French layman (Jean Cauvin) in the 16th century. He was a rebel and deformer, not a reformer. Robert F, you have had the misfortune of adopting a theology that is very flawed. Maybe coming here will help you to shed it.

You wrote: "Or, that George Washington converted to Catholicism on his deathbed. Or, that the house of Mary was miraculously transported from Nazareth to Dalmaitia in 1291 and from Dalmatia to Loreto, Italy in 1294. (Both published in 'The Communion of Saints' by the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary in 1967 – I am assuming this is a legitimate Catholic organization – but, maybe not.) Try not to mix apples and oranges."

The "Slaves" are not a "legitimate Catholic organization." However, very many Catholics (perhaps including the pope) do believe in the transportation of the House of Loreto. It is not a doctrine, though. It is just a harmless, pious belief based on a private revelation (which no Catholic is required to accept). It is not even well-known outside of Europe.

You wrote: "When a person asks or answers a question – deal with it straight on, rather than assuming you know what the other person is thinking or interpreting why the question is being asked. You almost never get it right and it detracts from the conversation."

Not for a moment can you convince me of your last sentence. I believe that I do "get it right" a lot, and I believe that it only "detracts" from some people's schemes. People who say things like your comment are usually feeling embarrassed at having their hidden thoughts and ulterior motives exposed. Come on, Robert F. You haven't really been coming here because you have been feeling drawn to convert to Catholicism, have you? [If you have been, I will apologize most abjectly and will promise to get you linked up with a former minister of your denomination who has now converted to Catholicism and will help you get through the rest of your "journey home."]

You wrote: "Since you have referred to it so many times, – When does the 'oral teaching' of Christ become known to the bishops? [etc.]"

I don't think that I have really "referred to [this] so many times." And I think that I should pass on this one and suggest another way for you to obtain the answer. I seem to recall your saying that you have at least one friend who is a Catholic priest -- possibly a man (or men) serving in neighboring parish(es). For the life of me, I don't know how you have avoided discussing this subject -- the font of divine revelation known as Oral/Sacred/Apostolic Tradition -- with your priest friend(s)! I think that you should discuss it with him/them at your nearest convenience.

God bless you.
John
PS: Remember, now. One question, please.

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@Hotmail.com), November 06, 2003.


Dear John; Unfortunately, I moved from my last parish where my friends of 19 years were located. I haven’t had the time to establish those kinds of friendship yet. Anyway, the topic popped up and I thought there would be a good book written about the process and content.

As to your kind invitation… it’s not necessary.

Allow me a short parable.

I enjoy motorcycles. In the early years, motorcycles were more or less the same; Two wheels, handlebars, and a motor. They were used both on the limited paved roads around towns and on the dirt roads and paths in the country.

As time went on, there were more roads and the motorcycles were being made larger and heavier. More chrome was added, seats for passengers, and saddlebags with fringe. They had great advantages: speed, comfort and beauty.

Time continued on, and some riders realized they had fewer places to go, because these big bikes could only run on highways – like the ones you see in California surrounded with sound abatement walls – painted and decorated – but walls none the less.

Then – once upon a time – a rider decided he wanted to recapture the trails and paths earlier riders enjoyed. So, he took off the chrome, cowling, pipes, and saddlebags. Changed the pattern of treads on the tires and looked for a break in the walls. He found it and was excited with the joy of riding the trails. Being close to creation, the challenge of crossing the streams, and making the jumps. He never knew the bike could be so alive.

When returning to the road – there was disagreement as to the acceptability (street legal) nature of this ‘reformed’ motorcycle. They were right, it didn’t look anything like the street bikes they were used too or what the leader of the pack was riding. So, the fellow headed cross country… and there were those who went him – but not too closely, because they too discovered this joyous riding – letting the bike lead, so to speak, instead of the road leading the bike.

As time went on, the road and cross-country bikes improved for their own environments – The road bike (think of an Indian Chief Deluxe) was sleek, beautiful, and powerful with great sounding pipes. The Cross Country Bike ( think of a Bultaco) was tough, powerful and agile – nothing short of a cliff could stop it. But the Chief would get stuck in the sand as soon as it went off road and the Bultaco would shake you apart if you attempted to ride it on a paved road over 35 mph.

So, neither group of riders would talk to each other – seeing the limitations of the other’s bikes. Then on another day, a few came close enough to each other that they noticed that in spite of all the changes, there was still a handlebar, two wheels, and a motor on each other’s bike. And while neither was willing to give up their own ride; smooth, fast, and good looking for those on the road or tough, powerful, and agile for the cross country – those who took the time to talk with each other learned to appreciate the unique value of each other’s ride and the road/path each followed.

Oh, for those who talked and listened to each other, they discovered they were all making the trip to the city on the hill. They came to realize that as long as the road and path went up, they were headed in the right direction - and their bikes would carry them. But, then, I’m an optimist. Peace.

-- Robert Fretz (pastorfretz@oldstonechurchonline.org), November 07, 2003.


Robert,

What do you ride? I've got a Road King (which is an excess, but I do enjoy it), and an old 82 enduro that I don't use much now. Funny on your analogy, I've heard of CMA riders being invited into Hell's Angel's club houses, which is an odd thing, but perhaps motorcyclists are sometimes as good of examples of Christians as can be.

Frank

And on the bikes, they both do have their advantages and disadvantages. Some people will probably disagree passionately, but racing around off-road is really for the young guys. At some point your body just doesn't like it any more. I do like rolling around on the HD though, can't get much better than a sunny day, a light breeze, and open road!

-- Someone (ChimingIn@twocents.cam), November 07, 2003.


Dear Frank, Alas, my bike riding days are behind me and in front of me. Behind me, my Dad and I shared a Benelli in the 60's, I road my friend's 70 Bultaco - what a difference, and a 125 Kawasaki dirt bike.

In front of me, when my last son gets out of college. I'm hoping Indian will still be in business by then. Hopefully I will be able to afford a Scout, but I would love the Springfield Chief (in my dreams.)

Yes, age does slow us down - but I can still feel the excitement of a good jump.

Peace

-- Robert Fretz (pastorfretz@oldstonechurchonline.org), November 07, 2003.


Your analogy fails to move me. I like horses.

John Gecik won't stop the presses of his mind because he just got the picture. Bank on that.

They are still saints who sometimes say, ''A funny thing happened to me on my way to the pearly gates. I was suddenly biked through some iron gates, into Purgatory. The bike went on to heaven without me, since it wasn't in the least bit able to sin while we knocked around together during my lifetime. It'll be waiting for me in heaven, where God keeps it in His arms just for me.



-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), November 07, 2003.


Robert,

Have you ever considered picking up some old junk bike? You can usually find something in a metropolitan paper for a couple hundred bucks that runs, and a 350 can be just as much fun as anything.

Frank

-- Someone (ChimingIn@twocents.cam), November 07, 2003.


Dear Frank;

Actually, that’s the plan for the summer of 04. But, since its been 20 years since I’ve been riding, I have to get a new license. I plan to enroll in a riders program at a local university program.

Dear Gene;

It is always dangerous to stretch a parable out too far… but here’s a thought.

Road bikers get a great ride on a wonderful machine, but they always have to pay the toll. Its part of the road system. Cross Country bikers may have a bouncy ride, but the experience and their trust in the bike helps them make that last jump – no tolls.

I’m signing off for the weekend so have a great one.

PS Just a reminder, this week’s lectionary is Mark 12:38-44, “The Widow’s Mite.” Whether you are riding a Road King or Kawasaki Cross Country “Green Hornet,” remember it won’t keep running unless you pay for the maintenance. In other words, pledge to support your church for 2004!

I promise, this is the last of the motorcycle analogies.

Peace

-- Robert Fretz (pastorfretz@oldstonechurchonline.org), November 08, 2003.


Jmj
Hello, Gene.

You wrote (to Robert): "Your analogy fails to move me. I like horses. John Gecik won't stop the presses of his mind because he just got the picture. Bank on that."

I'm sorry, but I think I'm going to let you down, Gene. I don't think that I "just got the picture" that you have in mind, if it has to do with horses. (I'll let you explain that one.)

However, that doesn't mean that my mind is a blank after reading Robert's sad analogy -- which reveals that, while not a raving anti-Catholic, he is apparently suffering from the error known as "Christian Indifferentism." He appears to think that our Catholicism and his Calvinism are equally efficacious ways to please God and get to Heaven. Who knows? Maybe he even goes so far as to accept religious indifferentism, whereby he would think that even non-Christianity can be pleasing to God and can be just as much a path to Heaven as his version of Protestantism.

Well, both Christian Indifferentism and Religious Indifferentism are dead wrong. They are species of the heresy of Relativism, both doctrinal and moral relativism -- dead wrong because there is only one Truth, not multiple truths that vary from person to person.


Hello, Robert.
Sorry to have to tell you that you did a lot of work for nothing (except perhaps to amuse yourself) by writing that elaborate attempt at an analogy. I won't take a lot of time to go through it in detail. Instead, I'll just toss out some ideas that are passing through my mind.

(1) The original motorcycle is the Catholic one, built by the inventor, Jesus Christ, himself, and given life by the Holy Spirit. It was intended for all times and places. God didn't invent a new conveyance -- nor revise the old one -- in the 16th century or afterwards. He invented only the original one and intended for every human being of his time -- and until the end of the world -- to ride the original (as a Catholic).

(2) The Holy Spirit allowed there to be not just one model of the original Catholic motorcycle. There is a big Western model and several Eastern models.

(3) However, each of the Catholic models, East or West, has certain "standard" equipment without which the bike couldn't run in a "motorized" way.

(4) Each model also comes in various "colors" and can have certain "optional" equipment that the rider may choose to add or remove as he goes through life.

(5) Each Catholic 'cycle comes with a full set of 73 maps, an owner's manual, and a sidecar with a navigator who alone knows how to interpret the documents and fix mechanical problems.

But what about the new-fangled motorcycles that appeared in your little history of man?

(1) Your own personal "reformed motorcycle" is a manmade Protestant model that is not pleasing to God. Remember, he wants everyone to drive the original Catholic bike, the one He invented -- not an imitation.

(2) The evil spirit was instrumental in leading the guys at the "reformed motorcycle" factory to split up and start over 30,000 new factories around the world, each making a different kind of 'cycle.

(3) Each of the reformed 'cycles has certain "standard" equipment missing. Every one of them, for example, lacks place for oil and gasoline [most of the Sacraments]. Some don't even have a place for water [Baptism]. Because of this, the reformed bikes can't run in a "motorized" way, but can only be propelled by human-foot-on-the-pavement power. This lets the 'cyclists make very little progress. Many abandon their vehicles and never reach their destination.

(4) Reformed motorcycles come with a partial set of 67 maps, but without a sidecar and navigator. The rider tries to follow the maps, but they are in languages that he can't translate properly. This leads him down all kinds of blind alleys, even into major crashes (falling off cliffs, etc.) -- again sometimes leading to despair and abandonment of the vehicle.

(5) It could be -- only God knows -- that some reformed motorcycles reach their destination, but only thanks to the fact that they had some spare parts picked up at the Catholic 'cycle factory.

[I invite my Catholic brethren to elaborate on my feeble effort to share the analogy.]

God bless you.
John

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), November 08, 2003.


OK; I see how I was unclear.

Rbt had said to you, ''Dear John; Unfortunately, I moved from my last parish where my friends of 19 years were located. I haven’t had the time to establish those kinds of friendship yet. Anyway, the topic popped up and I thought there would be a good book written about the process and content.
As to your kind invitation… it’s not necessary.--''

And I entered at that interval. Before I posted, there were other entries; so I seemed to be referring to you-- RE: horses.

I was saying that to Biker Bob. Since I realised then-- he had been addressing you, not me; I told him to be expecting John any minute.

And, by God's permission, you rolled the presses right back; offering Rbt & us a Catholic edition with teeth; very good choppers.

You ate up the ''chopper'' analogy with them teeth in your extra edtion; and no putt-putt about it!

Your printer's devil Gene takes no sides; since I always said to them choppers: ''Get a horse !'' Lol!

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), November 08, 2003.


Dear John,

You still lack accuracy telling other people what they are thinking. Whether on a road bike or a cross-country bike, it seems to be the result of those who only hear the sound of their own pipes and only look to see what’s a few feet in front of them.

Explaining a parable is like explaining art or poetry rather than experiencing it… but here goes.

In my parable – The motorcycle is the Church and we are the riders.

The handlebars are the Word of God as revealed in scripture that leads us (Yes, street and x-country bars are slightly different to accommodate different terrain).

The wheels are the sacraments that give us traction in this life. (Yes, street and x-country wheels have different surfaces to give traction in their unique environments.) Wheels can be added for the sidecar, service car, and trailer… but it does raise the question as to when is the motorcycle no longer a motorcycle?

The motor is the Holy Spirit that powers the bike.

The frame is Christ who holds us all together.

And God the Father is the owner of the hill and its city.

The paved road (Tradition) and the walls (the Magisterium) are intended to protect the riders and the road from the elements of the rougher terrain. The murals and decoration are the depictions of the view blocked by the walls. (The obvious concern is that the countryside is living and the fauna and terrain change over time – the murals can become out of date, remembering only what was).

The paths less traveled by the x-country bikers, (sorry Mr. Frost) filled with ruts, sand, mud, and obstacles, are the complexities of human life. And we are called to seek out humanity. The shepherd didn’t wait for a road to be built before he went looking for his lost lamb.

Yet, tradition is not superfluous – but it is heavy. Heavy loads are not well suited for the backcountry but we cannot leave it behind – the road and heavier equipment is needed to transport it. All who ride ignore it at their own peril (our common and uncommon histories, liturgies, and beliefs).

That’s what it means… because it’s my parable.

John and Gene, I have no desire for you to change and I am not changing my “ride.” And while you look at the “completeness of the Church” in the stacks of creeds, beliefs, and pronouncements – those of us who ride the other side see that completeness in the fellowship we share proclaiming Christ as Lord and Savior. It is that mutual fellowship that encourages me to roll over to the barrier to say, “Hi. How’s your trip been?”

I don’t have anything more to add. Thanks for the information regarding purgatory. I have a heavy schedule until after the holidays, so have a wonderful Thanksgiving and a very happy Advent and Christmas season.

Peace.

-- Robert Fretz (Pastorfretz@oldstonechurchonline.org), November 11, 2003.


With LITERELY almost 40,000 denominations out there with everyone claiming to be guided by the Holy Spirit don't you think that is a little chaotic?

I mean is peices of God's truth in each one? Each protestant church that argues with one another on who's right and there ALL supposed to be guided by the Holy Spirit. It's ridicuolous!

How Satan must laugh at mankind. Especialy when God's truth is confused and in the bible God says He is not the author of confusion.

Where is the truth. Is our pride and anger blinding us?

For 2000 years the catholic church has been teaching the SAME truth about the bible. But protestants decide to remove books from it a couple of hundred years ago. And from what I learned some protestants like Luther even rejected the book of Job, Jude, etc, as unbiblical and not inspired by God.

But perhaps we ignore that and just read and see what our own minds come up with and then we'll start our own denomination. It's sad to me.

I have a question for Faith and even some catholics in this forum. When you guys and girls are arguing among each other are you all honestly angry with one another. Perhaps feeling hatred for one another. I admit I have before but that is not a Godly thing to do.

Our pride defenetly blinds us. We wanta be right no matter what. Sure every christain with different beliefs will quote ALL kinds of scripture appearing to know what their talking about. Then listen to another and they quote their's as well and seem to know what their talking about. But all believe different. Enough to give you a headache.

I believe the catholic church is God's truth. And this is coming from a Spiritualist afterlife believer, to an athiest, to a VERY STRICT protestant to now a Catholic. Praise God for his wonderful truth and church. The Catholic church has always taught the SAME truths Christ taught us for 2000 years. It changes not because He changes not and is the same yesterday, today, and tomorrow, forever. amen!

-- Jason Baccaro (Enchanted fire5@aol.com), November 11, 2003.


Jmj

Jason, you asked: "When you guys and girls are arguing among each other are you all honestly angry with one another? Perhaps feeling hatred for one another?"

Jason, when I get into these heated things, I don't hate my opponent, because I always keep in mind my desire to attend Mass with him/her some day. I long for these people to be kneeling beside me and have a chance to receive Jesus in Holy Communion -- which many of them (like Robert F) have probably never done in their lives. The only "hatred" I feel is hatred of their errors, which are so damaging to their souls and the souls of their disciples.


Robert F, I understood your parable as you originally meant it. It wasn't necessary for you to come up with a new explanation for it. I rejected it as not corresponding to reality. I hope that you fully understood my analogies, which most definitely correspond to reality.

God bless you.
John

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), November 12, 2003.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ