Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Purgatory, Indulgences, and the Work of Jesus Christ (Discussion)
New Advent ^ | Various | Various

Posted on 03/26/2005 2:00:31 PM PST by gbcdoj

The only begotten Son of God . . . "made unto us from God, wisdom, justice, sanctification and redemption" [I Cor. 3], "neither by the blood of goats or of calves, but by His own blood entered once into the holies having obtained eternal redemption" [Heb. 9:12]. "For not with corruptible things as gold or silver, but with the precious blood of His very (Son) as of a lamb unspotted and unstained He has redeemed us" [cf. I Pet. 1:18-19], who innocent, immolated on the altar of the Cross is known to have poured out not a little drop of blood, which however on account of union with the Word would have been sufficient for the redemption of the whole human race, but copiously as a kind of flowing stream, so that "from the soles of His feet even to the top of His Head no soundness was found in Him" [Isa. 1:6]. Therefore, how great a treasure did the good Father acquire from this for the Church militant, so that the mercy of so great an effusion was not rendered useless, vain or superfluous, wishing to lay up treasures for His sons, so that thus the Church is an infinite treasure to men, so that they who use it, become the friends of God [Wisd. 7:14].

Indeed this treasure . . . through blessed Peter, the keeper of the keys of heaven and his successors, his vicars on earth, He has committed to be dispensed for the good of the faithful, both from proper and reasonable causes, now for the whole, now for the partial remission of temporal punishment due to sins, in general as in particular (according as they know to be expedient with God), to be applied mercifully to those who truly repentant have confessed.

Indeed, to the mass of this treasure the merits of the Blessed Mother of God and of all the elect from the first just even to the last, are known to give their help; concerning the consumption or the diminution of this there should be no fear at any time, because of the infinite merits of Christ (as was mentioned before) as well as for the reason that the more are brought to justification by its application, the greater is the increase of the merits themselves. (Pope Clement VI, Bull "Unigenitus Dei Filius", Jan. 25, 1343, in Denzinger-Rahner, trans. Deferrari, The Sources of Catholic Dogma, no. 550-552)


In an indulgence in fact, the Church, making use of its power as minister of the Redemption of Christ, not only prays but by an authoritative intervention dispenses to the faithful suitably disposed the treasury of satisfaction which Christ and the saints won for the remission of temporal punishment.

The aim pursued by ecclesiastical authority in granting indulgences is not only that of helping the faithful to expiate the punishment due sin but also that of urging them to perform works of piety, penitence and charity--particularly those which lead to growth in faith and which favor the common good. (Pope Paul VI, Constitution "Indulgentarium Doctrina", Jan. 1, 1967)


Now one man can satisfy for another, as we have explained above (13, 2). And the saints in whom this super-abundance of satisfactions is found, did not perform their good works for this or that particular person, who needs the remission of his punishment (else he would have received this remission without any indulgence at all), but they performed them for the whole Church in general, even as the Apostle declares that he fills up "those things that are wanting of the sufferings of Christ . . . for His body, which is the Church" to whom he wrote (Col. 1:24). These merits, then, are the common property of the whole Church. Now those things which are the common property of a number are distributed to the various individuals according to the judgment of him who rules them all. Hence, just as one man would obtain the remission of his punishment if another were to satisfy for him, so would he too if another's satisfactions be applied to him by one who has the power to do so. (St. Thomas, Sup. q. 25 a. 1)


TOPICS: Apologetics; Catholic; General Discusssion; Theology
KEYWORDS: indulgences
In another thread, PetroniusMaximus has argued that Purgatory and Indulgences are disproved, on the basis of quoting Rom. 5:6-11 and Heb. 10:10-12,14:
Heb 10:10 In the which will, we are sanctified by the oblation of the body of Jesus Christ once. 11 And every priest indeed standeth daily ministering and often offering the same sacrifices which can never take away sins. 12 But this man, offering one sacrifice for sins, for ever sitteth on the right hand of God, 13 From henceforth expecting until his enemies be made his footstool. 14 For by one oblation he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.

Rom 5:6 For why did Christ, when as yet we were weak, according to the time, die for the ungodly? 7 For scarce for a just man will one die: yet perhaps for a good man some one would dare to die. 8 But God commendeth his charity towards us: because when as yet we were sinners according to the time. 9 Christ died for us. Much more therefore, being now justified by his blood, shall we be saved from wrath through him. 10 For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son: much more, being reconciled, shall we be saved by his life. 11 And not only so: but also we glory in God, through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now received reconciliation.

He has graciously agreed to move that discussion from the prayer thread to here.

If you would, PM, please explain the contradiction you see between your two scripture quotes and Indulgences.

1 posted on 03/26/2005 2:00:32 PM PST by gbcdoj
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: PetroniusMaximus

ping.


2 posted on 03/26/2005 2:20:54 PM PST by gbcdoj
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gbcdoj
As a Catholic, who is lost thinking about all this, I wish somebody can explain the mysteries to me.

First God created us, he "loves us"? He asked us not to eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Here the question what is wrong with eating from the tree, and if we made a mistake, ah our father who loves us, why can he just FORGIVE us? How many times did you or I forgive our children for doing something that we asked them not to?

Then he is not happy with being upset with us, and punishing us, he wants be unhappy and upset with our children, and grand children. Show me grandfather who is upset with his grandchildren because their father once ate from the forbidden cookies one time? Now he continues to be upset thousands of years after the fact, and cannot let go of that ONE mistake until he lets "his only begotten son" get killed.

Please help explain this messy story.

3 posted on 03/26/2005 2:26:17 PM PST by conservlib
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #4 Removed by Moderator

To: conservlib
***why can he just FORGIVE us?***


Excellent question.

Because He is, ultimately, completely different from us in that He is perfectly Holy. We are not - not even close - and therefore we have a hard time understanding what holiness is.

Holy means, basically, that He is completely separate from sin and evil.

His holiness is perfect in that He makes no compromise with sin. If He were to make the slightest compromise then He would cease to be a God worth worshiping and heaven would cease to be a place to which one would wan to go.

If God were to compromise with you over your sin then what would stop Him from, by degrees, coming to a compromise with Kim Jong Il or Pol Pot or Stalin or Hitler?


The biggest argument against the statement "why can't God just forgive" is this: If He could have done that then WHY did Jesus have to die such a horrible death?


Go do an extended Bible study on holiness. You see pretty quickly why He doesn't just forgive.



****Now he continues to be upset thousands of years after the fact, and cannot let go of that ONE mistake until he lets "his only begotten son" get killed.***

That one mistake injected a poison into the human race that every one of us is now infected with - the poison of rebellion. Jesus didn't just die for that one sin. He did for all the sins that humanity has ever committed. He died for those murderous thoughts you've had towards people and for the adulteries you've toyed with in your heart. He took the lash for every lie you've ever told. He was beaten for your sins (and mine).
5 posted on 03/26/2005 2:43:54 PM PST by PetroniusMaximus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: tnGOPgirl

Ping.

You may or may not be interested in this discussion. I just thought I'd bring it to your attention.


6 posted on 03/26/2005 2:55:55 PM PST by PetroniusMaximus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gbcdoj

***If you would, PM, please explain the contradiction you see between your two scripture quotes and Indulgences.***

As I see it, Indulgences and Purgatory pretty much go hand in hand. Neither are present in then New Testament.


"WHAT AN INDULGENCE IS

An indulgence is the extra-sacramental remission of the temporal punishment due, in God's justice, to sin that has been forgiven, which remission is granted by the Church in the exercise of the power of the keys, through the application of the superabundant merits of Christ and of the saints, and for some just and reasonable motive."
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07783a.htm

That "temporal punishment" is (I believe) most commonly a reference to Purgatory. Pugatory is not in the New Testament . When believers die they go to be with the Lord.



(I will do my best to keep this discussion polite, respectful and, hopefully, edifying. Given the darkness of the last few days and all that has befallen poor Terri, I feel a great aversion to needless argument, as I am sure you do.)


7 posted on 03/26/2005 3:13:38 PM PST by PetroniusMaximus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PetroniusMaximus
That "temporal punishment" is (I believe) most commonly a reference to Purgatory.

Well, only for the case of people who are in purgatory. To give a scriptural example, Nathan told David that he had been forgiven by God, but that he would be punished by the death of his son. So clearly here we have two different types of punishments: eternal punishment (forgiven), and temporal punishment (to be exacted by his son's death). Do you agree that this also applies to NT believers, that they have to expiate their temporal debt for sin? In favor of this, I cite "Bring forth therefore fruits worthy of penance" (Luke 3:8).

http://www.newadvent.org/summa/408604.htm

On the contrary, It is related (2 Kgs. 12:13) that when David penitent had said to Nathan: "I have sinned against the Lord," Nathan said to him: "The Lord also hath taken away thy sin, thou shalt not die. Nevertheless . . . the child that is born to thee shall surely die," which was to punish him for the sin he had committed, as stated in the same place. Therefore a debt of some punishment remains after the guilt has been forgiven.

I answer that, As stated in I-II, 87, 4, in mortal sin there are two things, namely, a turning from the immutable Good, and an inordinate turning to mutable good. Accordingly, in so far as mortal sin turns away from the immutable Good, it induces a debt of eternal punishment, so that whosoever sins against the eternal Good should be punished eternally. Again, in so far as mortal sin turns inordinately to a mutable good, it gives rise to a debt of some punishment, because the disorder of guilt is not brought back to the order of justice, except by punishment: since it is just that he who has been too indulgent to his will, should suffer something against his will, for thus will equality be restored. Hence it is written (Apoc. 18:7): "As much as she hath glorified herself, and lived in delicacies, so much torment and sorrow give ye to her."

Since, however, the turning to mutable good is finite, sin does not, in this respect, induce a debt of eternal punishment. Wherefore, if man turns inordinately to a mutable good, without turning from God, as happens in venial sins, he incurs a debt, not of eternal but of temporal punishment. Consequently when guilt is pardoned through grace, the soul ceases to be turned away from God, through being united to God by grace: so that at the same time, the debt of punishment is taken away, albeit a debt of some temporal punishment may yet remain.

Pugatory is not in the New Testament . When believers die they go to be with the Lord.

Can we get some Scripture for that? Besides the thief, I mean: for expiated his sins anyway: "we receive the due reward of our deeds" (Lk 23:41).

I will do my best to keep this discussion polite, respectful and, hopefully, edifying. Given the darkness of the last few days and all that has befallen poor Terri, I feel a great aversion to needless argument, as I am sure you do.

Certainly.

8 posted on 03/26/2005 3:49:03 PM PST by gbcdoj
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: PetroniusMaximus
D. 1 Corinthians 3:11-15 "For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ. (12) Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble; (13) Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is. (14) If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. (15) If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire."

1 Corinthians 3:11-15 "For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ. (12) Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble; (13) Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is. (14) If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. (15) If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire."

2 Maccabees 12:42-46 42 7 Turning to supplication, they prayed that the sinful deed might be fully blotted out. The noble Judas warned the soldiers to keep themselves free from sin, for they had seen with their own eyes what had happened because of the sin of those who had fallen. 43 He then took up a collection among all his soldiers, amounting to two thousand silver drachmas, which he sent to Jerusalem to provide for an expiatory sacrifice. In doing this he acted in a very excellent and noble way, inasmuch as he had the resurrection of the dead in view; 44 for if he were not expecting the fallen to rise again, it would have been useless and foolish to pray for them in death. 45 But if he did this with a view to the splendid reward that awaits those who had gone to rest in godliness, it was a holy and pious thought. 46 Thus he made atonement for the dead that they might be freed from this sin.
9 posted on 03/26/2005 4:49:58 PM PST by Conservative til I die
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: gbcdoj
***On the contrary, It is related (2 Kgs. 12:13) that when David penitent had said to Nathan: "I have sinned against the Lord," Nathan said to him: "The Lord also hath taken away thy sin, thou shalt not die. Nevertheless . .***

Compelling argument. Except that it comes from the Old Covenant and sin was handled VERY differently then. I could as easily say that this proves the necessity of worshiping at the temple (2 Sam 12:20). (As an interesting side note, all David's "penance" did no good in turning away God's punishment in this situation.)

There is such a thing as chastening, discipline, punishment, reaping what one has sown.

Revelation 3:19
"As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten: be zealous therefore, and repent."


Hebrews 12:6-9

"My son, do not regard lightly the discipline of the Lord,
nor be weary when reproved by him.
For the Lord disciplines the one he loves,
and chastises every son whom he receives."


It is for discipline that you have to endure. God is treating you as sons. For what son is there whom his father does not discipline?

If you are left without discipline, in which all have participated, then you are illegitimate children and not sons. Besides this, we have had earthly fathers who disciplined us and we respected them. Shall we not much more be subject to the Father of spirits and live?

For they disciplined us for a short time as it seemed best to them, but he disciplines us for our good, that we may share his holiness. For the moment all discipline seems painful rather than pleasant, but later it yields the peaceful fruit of righteousness to those who have been trained by it."


But in the NT all this is seen within the scope of this life and it is to prepare us for the next life. There is no mention of eons of suffering.






***Can we get some Scripture for that? Besides the thief, I mean: for expiated his sins anyway: "we receive the due reward of our deeds" (Lk 23:41).***



Here's one. Paul lays out two possibilities, at home or away...

"We know that while we are at home in the body we are away from the Lord, for we walk by faith, not by sight.

Yes, we are of good courage, and we would rather be away from the body and at home with the Lord. So whether we are at home or away, we make it our aim to please him. For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one may receive what is due for what he has done in the body, whether good or evil."

(All mankind must appear, therefore the reference to "good or evil".)


Another striking scripture...

"Do not let your heart be troubled; believe in God, believe also in Me.

In My Father's house are many dwelling places; if it were not so, I would have told you; for I go to prepare a place for you.

If I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to Myself, that where I am, there you may be also.

"And you know the way where I am going."

Thomas said to Him, "Lord, we do not know where You are going, how do we know the way?"

Jesus said to him, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me."


Two thoughts:

Jesus said "if it were not so, I would have told you." He's talking about heaven. He says he's going to prepare a place and that he's coming back so that they could be with him. He then says IF IT WERE NOT SO (if there was interim millenia of flaming punishment) I WOULD HAVE TOLD YOU.

Secondly, Jesus says, "no one comes to the Father but through Me". Catholic theology says "No one (except the very best) comes to the Father but through fiery purgatory."
10 posted on 03/26/2005 4:58:40 PM PST by PetroniusMaximus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Conservative til I die

***(13) Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is. (14) If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. (15) If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire."****


Yes, the judgement seat. There will be many tears as people see that their livesa were wasted. Everything they built for God (but not at His command or by His direction) will vanish like straw in a flame. BUT THEY WILL BE SAVED - yet like someone saved from a burning building.

This is no description of "Purgatory" but of Judgement Day.



***2 Maccabees 12:42-46 42***

This is really the passage upon which the whole edifice rests. It is a shakey and slim foundation for such a potentially cosmologically important doctrine - that of the supposed existence of a sort of interium "hell" where one may go to finish unfinished business with God.

Thoughts:

1. These men were guilty of idolatry - to Catholics a mortal sin that puts one in HELL not Purgatory. You can't pay someone's way out of hell.

2. This passage is not even clear that his idea worked! It simply says that "Thus he made atonement for the dead that they MIGHT be freed from this sin." Were they or not? The (admittedly imperfect [see: 2 Maccabees 15:38,39]) book doesn't state.


11 posted on 03/26/2005 5:16:18 PM PST by PetroniusMaximus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: PetroniusMaximus
Except that it comes from the Old Covenant and sin was handled VERY differently then.

Was it? The old law could not justify, so David must have been justified, after his sin, under the New Law by the grace of Jesus Christ: so where's the difference?

12 posted on 03/26/2005 9:55:22 PM PST by gbcdoj
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: PetroniusMaximus
Yes, we are of good courage, and we would rather be away from the body and at home with the Lord. So whether we are at home or away, we make it our aim to please him. For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one may receive what is due for what he has done in the body, whether good or evil.

Not quite. To "be away from the body" is clearly necessary for being "at home with the Lord", yet the text doesn't say that it's the only thing necessary: I Cor. 3:10-15 would seem to indicate the opposite.

IF IT WERE NOT SO (if there was interim millenia of flaming punishment) I WOULD HAVE TOLD YOU.

"If it were not so" refers to the existence of the "many mansions". And I will come again and receive you to Myself, that where I am, there you may be also does not indicate that there is no intervening state: the purpose of the reception is to that they may be in Heaven, yet they are not immediately placed in heaven after being received, so there seems no objection to supposing that they would go to heaven after making satisfaction for their sins.

Secondly, Jesus says, "no one comes to the Father but through Me". Catholic theology says "No one (except the very best) comes to the Father but through fiery purgatory."

The removal of sins in Purgatory is in virtue of the grace of Christ.

13 posted on 03/26/2005 10:11:34 PM PST by gbcdoj
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: PetroniusMaximus
This passage is not even clear that his idea worked!

Whether it worked in that specific case? Perhaps. But it is clear that It is therefore a holy and wholesome thought to pray for the dead, that they may be loosed from sins.

As for the soldiers and their idolatry, they may have repented during the battle and before their deaths and so, while forgiven, still had an unexpiated debt of temporal punishment just like David before his son died.

14 posted on 03/26/2005 10:13:47 PM PST by gbcdoj
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: gbcdoj

***Was it? The old law could not justify, so David must have been justified, after his sin, under the New Law by the grace of Jesus Christ: so where's the difference?***

I'm not sure I understand what you're saying.

David was under the sacrifical system, eye for eye, that kind of stuff. He wasn't truly justified until Christ died and rose again. That old system was fully in effect fro David all his life. He was "under the Law".




By this the Holy Spirit indicates that the way into the holy places is not yet opened as long as the first section is still standing (which is symbolic for the present age). According to this arrangement, gifts and sacrifices are offered that cannot perfect the conscience of the worshiper, but deal only with food and drink and various washings, regulations for the body imposed until the time of reformation.


But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things that have come, then through the greater and more perfect tent (not made with hands, that is, not of this creation)
he entered once for all into the holy places, not by means of the blood of goats and calves but by means of his own blood, thus securing an eternal redemption. For if the sprinkling of defiled persons with the blood of goats and bulls and with the ashes of a heifer sanctifies for the purification of the flesh, how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish to God, purify our[ conscience from dead works to serve the living God.


Therefore he is the mediator of a new covenant, so that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance, since a death has occurred that redeems them from the transgressions committed under the first covenant.

Heb 9


15 posted on 03/26/2005 10:24:12 PM PST by PetroniusMaximus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: gbcdoj

***yet the text doesn't say that it's the only thing necessary: I Cor. 3:10-15 would seem to indicate the opposite.***

I Cor. 3:10-15 has nothing to say to the issue you are addressing. It is a description of Judgement day.


***does not indicate that there is no intervening state:***

No "intervening state" is mentioned - in the entire NT. Nowhere does the NT state that there weren't cats and dogs numbered among Jesus' disciples. Are we free to infer that there were?


*** yet they are not immediately placed in heaven after being received,***

Where do you get this from?



***The removal of sins in Purgatory is in virtue of the grace of Christ.****

Where is Purgatory named in the NT?

Heaven is named 237 times. Hell/Death/Destruction is named nearly as many.


16 posted on 03/26/2005 10:36:54 PM PST by PetroniusMaximus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: gbcdoj

***It is therefore a holy and wholesome thought to pray for the dead, that they may be loosed from sins.***

Perhaps this is one of the author's "imperfect" statements. [see: 2 Maccabees 15:38,39]



***As for the soldiers and their idolatry, they may have repented during the battle and before their deaths ***

Is this the best argument for Purgatory? That something "may have" happened? You would gamble your eternal destiny on "may have".

What if you are wrong my friend?

What if there is no "second chance" to clean up you life?


17 posted on 03/26/2005 10:41:56 PM PST by PetroniusMaximus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: PetroniusMaximus
"What if there is no "second chance" to clean up you life?"

That's not what Purgatory is for, though.

18 posted on 03/26/2005 11:14:26 PM PST by pascendi (Quicumque vult salvus esse, ante omnia opus est, ut teneat catholicam fidem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: pascendi

*** That's not what Purgatory is for, though.***

According to the New Advent Encyclopedia it is.

"Purgatory (Lat., "purgare", to make clean, to purify) in accordance with Catholic teaching is a place or condition of temporal punishment for those who, departing this life in God's grace, are, not entirely free from venial faults, or have not fully paid the satisfaction due to their transgressions."

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12575a.htm


What do you believe "Purgatory" is for?


19 posted on 03/26/2005 11:47:23 PM PST by PetroniusMaximus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: PetroniusMaximus

Nope. That's not the same as what you said.


20 posted on 03/26/2005 11:48:16 PM PST by pascendi (Quicumque vult salvus esse, ante omnia opus est, ut teneat catholicam fidem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: pascendi

What, except for brevity, is the difference?


21 posted on 03/26/2005 11:51:57 PM PST by PetroniusMaximus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: pascendi

PS - I'm signing off for the night. Rest well and have a joyful Easter.


22 posted on 03/26/2005 11:53:04 PM PST by PetroniusMaximus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: PetroniusMaximus
Yeah, I was going to say the same thing. Sure, I can explain, but thanks: tomorrow. Tired.

Blessed Easter to you as well.

23 posted on 03/26/2005 11:56:01 PM PST by pascendi (Quicumque vult salvus esse, ante omnia opus est, ut teneat catholicam fidem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: PetroniusMaximus
He wasn't truly justified until Christ died and rose again.

Paul in Rom. 4 proves that justification by faith always existed, even before the institution of the Law (and if before the law, then after the law too).

3 For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God: and it was reputed to him unto justice. 4 Now to him that worketh, the reward is not reckoned according to grace but according to debt. 5 But to him that worketh not, yet believeth in him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is reputed to justice, according to the purpose of the grace of God. 6 As David also termeth the blessedness of a man to whom God reputeth justice without works: 7 Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven: and whose sins are covered. 8 Blessed is the man to whom the Lord hath not imputed sin. 9 This blessedness then, doth it remain in the circumcision only or in the uncircumcision also? For we say that unto Abraham faith was reputed to justice.

v. 9 shows that Abraham had the blessedness of v. 6-8: as does v. 3 "it was reputed to him unto justice".

Looking at the passage again:

13 And David said to Nathan: I have sinned against the Lord. And Nathan said to David: The Lord also hath taken away thy sin: thou shalt not die. 14 Nevertheless, because thou hast given occasion to the enemies of the Lord to blaspheme, for this thing, the child that is born to thee, shall surely die.

The sin was "taken away" - it was gone. Only justification by faith forgives sins, therefore David was justified, and by Christ, for "it is impossible that with the blood of oxen and goats sin should be taken away" (Heb. 10:4).

Proof: (a) David's sin was taken away, (b) The old sacrifices could never take away sin, therefore: David's sin was forgiven not by the sacrifices, but by Christ: "this man, offering one sacrifice for sins, for ever sitteth on the right hand of God" (Heb. 10:12)

I Cor. 3:10-15 has nothing to say to the issue you are addressing. It is a description of Judgement day.

On the contrary. The text (KJV):

12 Now if any man build upon his foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble,

The foundation is Christ: so this is dealing with a man who is building on the right foundation, one who will be saved.

13 every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is.

His works are the gold, wood, stubble, etc. At the day of judgment, the works will be tried by fire to see of what type they are, that is, gold, wood, etc.

14 If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward.

The fire does not burn the works of gold, silver, or precious stones. For those that are not burned, a reward will be given.

15 If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss : but he himself shall be saved, yet so as by fire.

15 ei tinos to ergon katakaêsetai, zêmiôthêsetai, autos de sôthêsetai, houtôs de hôs dia puros.

But the fire does burn away the works that are flammable. Such men "suffer loss", that is, they are punished. For zemioo, Liddell and Scott give:

I. to cause loss or do damage to any one, tina Plat., etc.:--Pass., megala zêmiôsetai will suffer great losses, Thuc.

II. to fine, amerce, mulct in a sum of money, c. dat. rei, z. tina chiliêisi drachmêisi Hdt.; chrêmasin Thuc.:-- Pass. to be fined or amerced in a thing, c. dat., Plat.; c. acc., tên psuchên zêmiôseai wilt lose thy life, Hdt.

2. generally to punish, id=Hdt., Thuc.

How is he punished? We are given the answer: he is saved, by fire: that is, the fire punishes him and so he is saved after that. In a word, purgatory.

No "intervening state" is mentioned - in the entire NT. Nowhere does the NT state that there weren't cats and dogs numbered among Jesus' disciples. Are we free to infer that there were?

Biblical principles lead us to the conclusion of purgatory; nothing would lead us to infer feline disciples of Jesus.

It says I will come again and receive you to Myself, [in order] that where I am, there you may be also: not "I will come again and receive you to Myself, and where I am, there you will be also", or something similiar. In other words, you are reading into the text that immediately after the reception they go to heaven: it is simply stating the purpose of the reception.

Heaven is named 237 times. Hell/Death/Destruction is named nearly as many.

Only one instance of teaching in the Scriptures is necessary to prove a doctrine, and we have that in 2 Macc 12:42-46. To quote Cardinal Manning:

Nay, more, the Church so honours the written word of God, that it acts upon its lightest word. It is a strange thing to hear men say that such and such doctrines are incredible because so little is said of them in Holy Scripture. Is truth measured by quantity? How many divine words are needed to overcome the unbelief of men? How often must God speak before we obey Him? How many times must He repeat His revelations before we will submit to His divine voice? Does not every spark contain the whole nature of fire? Does not every divine word contain the veracity of God? The Church of God recognizes His voice in every utterance, and honours the divine will revealed in the fewest syllables. (The Temporal Mission of the Holy Ghost)

Perhaps this is one of the author's "imperfect" statements. [see: 2 Maccabees 15:38,39]

38 So these things being done with relation to Nicanor, and from that time the city being possessed by the Hebrews, I also will here make an end of my narration. 39 Which if I have done well, and as it becometh the history, it is what I desired: but if not so perfectly, it must be pardoned me. 40 For as it is hurtful to drink always wine, or always water, but pleasant to use sometimes the one, and sometimes the other: so if the speech be always nicely framed, it will not be grateful to the readers. But here it shall be ended.

Isn't it clear that it's talking about literary ability, and not about doctrinal mistakes?

Is this the best argument for Purgatory? That something "may have" happened?

No, we are discussing the slain soldiers. As you pointed out, the text says "might" - it says that Judas did the right thing, but it doesn't say that it was successful. How could Judas know whether the soldiers had repented or not? He couldn't, so "might".

You would gamble your eternal destiny on "may have". ... What if there is no "second chance" to clean up you life?

There's no 'second chance'. Nor is there a gamble: anyone who gets to purgatory is already saved. Only the justified can go to purgatory. The dispute between us is simply whether justification in the NT, as opposed to the OT, always removes the debt of temporal punishment.

CCC 1022 Each man receives his eternal retribution in his immortal soul at the very moment of his death, in a particular judgment that refers his life to Christ: either entrance into the blessedness of heaven-through a purification or immediately,--or immediate and everlasting damnation.

Note that there are only two options: heaven or hell, depending on whether one's life was referred to Christ or not.

24 posted on 03/28/2005 3:18:14 PM PST by gbcdoj
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: conservlib
I wish somebody can explain the mysteries to me.

Here you go. This is an excellent catechism that can be taught on many levels, not all of it is on line though, the section you are interested in is.

My Catholic Faith 18. Adam and Eve Our First Parents

And here is the same section from the Baltimore Catechism:

Adam and Eve

25 posted on 03/28/2005 3:48:19 PM PST by murphE (Never miss an opportunity to kiss the hand of a holy priest.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: gbcdoj

I don't know about you, but I have a hard time keeping my thought's straight in posts dealing with multiple arguments. I always feel like none of them truly get the attention they deserve.

With your permission, may I suggest that we deal with one issue at a time.



As to Abraham, Romans 4 does indeed say that Abraham was justified by faith. I have been imprecise in my terminology. What I was referring to was the fact that Abraham was not perfected and did not receive the promise until Christ was raised. As my proof of this I offer the following:

Heb 11

"By faith Abraham obeyed when he was called to go out to a place that he was to receive as an inheritance. And he went out, not knowing where he was going. By faith he went to live in the land of promise, as in a foreign land, living in tents with Isaac and Jacob, heirs with him of the same promise. For he was looking forward to the city that has foundations, whose designer and builder is God...

...And all these, though commended through their faith, did not receive what was promised, since God had provided something better for us, that apart from us they should not be made perfect."


We see from the above that Abraham was looking forward to the promise of perfection but he did not (and could not) receive it with out the fulfillment of the blessings promised to the Church age.

As a follow up proof, Jesus in the NT describes Lazarus as being in Abraham's Bosom. I believe we both know this was a paradisaical place of rest - but it was not the Heaven in which God dwells. Abraham, righteous as he was, was not allowed into God's presence before he partook of the cleansing accomplished by Jesus death on the cross.

I believe my point in this illustration was that the NT saints (i.e. believers) have a salvation that is different in quality than that which was available to those under the old covenant. The Old Testament can not always be an accurate guide as to how God handles matters under the New Covenant.


26 posted on 03/28/2005 8:11:50 PM PST by PetroniusMaximus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: PetroniusMaximus
"Here's one. Paul lays out two possibilities, at home or away..."

Yes, but in 2 Timothy Paul lays out a third possiblity. Consider:

"1:16 May the Lord grant mercy to the household of Onesiph'orus, for he often refreshed me; he was not ashamed of my chains, 1:17 but when he arrived in Rome he searched for me eagerly and found me-- 1:18 may the Lord grant him to find mercy from the Lord on that Day--and you well know all the service he rendered at Ephesus."

Now, clearly Onesiph'orus has died. And, just as clearly, Paul is praying the Lord show him mercy.

Now, if we are either, 'home or away,' as classical Protestant theology holds, then why is Paul praying for a dead man? Certainly, under Protestant theology, such prayers can have no effect? Either Onesiph'orus is with the Lord -or he isn't! Paul's prayer for him, however, illustrates a third possiblity -the possiblity Onesiph'orus is somewhere where he could still need and, more importantly, use God's mercy, i.e. Purgatory.

Under Protestant theology, one must conclude St. Paul, here, is violating what we Catholics hold is the Second Commandment, taking the Lord's name in vain. Essentially, if Protestants are right, then St. Paul, here, is making a HUGE theological error calling on God to show mercy to a dead man. Moreover, we must conclude the Holy Spirit somehow slipped up and did not immediately provide us with a correction to this error on Paul's part.

With the Catholic conception of Purgatory, however, Paul's words here make total sense.

27 posted on 03/28/2005 9:02:33 PM PST by AlguyA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: PetroniusMaximus

Sure.

In the OT we see all men described as going to Sheol - the saints had to go to Heaven at some point, so I think that must be what the "promise" refers to. This fits with Heb. 10:36: "For patience is necessary for you: that, doing the will of God, you may receive the promise", which seems to refer the promise to the afterlife, as it also does with Heb. 9:15: "the promise of eternal inheritance".

With this interpretation in mind, I don't think the argument, based on this passage, that OT justification (of David) is different from NT justification with regards to the question of temporal punishment can stand, since what's at issue in Heb. 11:39 is just that the OT saints didn't go to Heaven until after Christ's death.

As the Catholic Encyclopedia says:

As a result of the Fall, Heaven was closed against men. Actual possession of the beatific vision was postponed, even for those already purified from sin, until the Redemption should have been historically completed by Christ's visible ascendancy into Heaven. Consequently, the just who had lived under the Old Dispensation, and who, either at death or after a course of purgatorial discipline, had attained the perfect holiness required for entrance into glory, were obliged to await the coming of the Incarnate Son of God and the full accomplishment of His visible earthly mission.


28 posted on 03/29/2005 6:53:14 PM PST by gbcdoj
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson