Understanding Catholicism/ Dialogue with other (purification, beliefs, hell, doctrine)

[*Paul*]

Originally Posted by writer

19 The fact that they are deceased has no bearing on this; it is to their soul that a Catholic prays.
The fact that livin souls shouldn't contact deceased and vice versa bears on this 2 me. Since Scrip condemns.
Thanks

Also surely it is entirely unneccessary since:

Eph 2v16-18: And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby:
And came and preached peace to you which were afar off, and to them that were nigh.
For through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father.

[Katzpur]

Originally Posted by michel

I think the point here is that saints can use their 'praying power' (which, because they are in communion is greater than if they were individual) to help influence change. The fact that they are deceased has no bearing on this; it is to their soul that a Catholic prays.

What on earth do you mean when you say, "The fact that they are deceased has no bearing on this"? How could it not have bearing on it? We can ask the living to pray for us because they are alive and can hear us. There is absolutely nothing scriptural to indicate that we can commune with the dead by our thoughts or even verbally. I know the Catholic response to this will be that it's "tradition." I know it's "tradition." What I would like to know is how and when it started. Who was the first "Saint" named by the Church? When was he or she designated as a "Saint"? And, if new revelation to the Church had long since ceased, what was the rationale for deciding that a deceased person could respond to petitions made by the living to pray for them?

[porkchop]

Originally Posted by Katzpur

What on earth do you mean when you say, "The fact that they are deceased has no bearing on this"? How could it not have bearing on it? We can ask the living to pray for us because they are alive and can hear us. There is absolutely nothing scriptural to indicate that we can commune with the dead by our thoughts or even verbally. I know the Catholic response to this will be that it's "tradition." I know it's "tradition." What I would like to know is how and when it started. Who was the first "Saint" named by the Church? When was he or she designated as a "Saint"? And, if new revelation to the Church had long since ceased, what was the rationale for deciding that a deceased person could respond to petitions made by the living to pray for them?

Im very surprised by your response, katzpur, as i know it is a big part of the mormon faith to be baptised for the dead. If you think its not relevant to pray for the dead, as the catholics do, then what do you think of your own religions practise of baptism for the dead?

[Katzpur]

Originally Posted by stimpy

Im very surprised by your response, katzpur, as i know it is a big part of the mormon faith to be baptised for the dead. If you think its not relevant to pray for the dead, as the catholics do, then what do you think of your own religions practise of baptism for the dead?

I think you may have misunderstood. I do not take issue with the Catholic practice of praying for the dead. As a matter of fact, I have always found it kind of interesting to note that the Catholics and the Latter-day Saints are different from the Protestants in that we both believe there is something the living can do to benefit the dead in some way.

What I don't understand is the belief that the dead (specifically those designated by the Church as "Saints") have the ability to hear our unspoken prayers and to intercede on our behalf with God. God would have to have made it possible for this to be the case. He can hear our prayers, whether verbally expressed or not, but He is God! I don't believe that the first- or probably even the second-century Christians prayed to anyone but God or believed that God had granted certain deceased individuals with the power to act as mediators with God. I would even go so far as to admit to the possibility that the dead can petition God on behalf of their loved ones, but I just don't understand how we can supposedly communicate with them through prayer or meditation, or by what authority the Church designates which of them has the ability to hear us. That's why I asked when this practice began.

It's not my intention to be disrespectful, but this thread is on a debate forum, and this is an issue that lends itself to debate.

[porkchop]

Originally Posted by Katzpur

I think you may have misunderstood. I do not take issue with the Catholic practice of praying for the dead. As a matter of fact, I have always found it kind of interesting to note that the Catholics and the Latter-day Saints are different from the Protestants in that we both believe there is something the living can do to benefit the dead in some way.

What I don't understand is the belief that the dead (specifically those designated by the Church as "Saints") have the ability to hear our unspoken prayers and to intercede on our behalf with God. God would have to have made it possible for this to be the case. He can hear our prayers, whether verbally expressed or not, but He is God! I don't believe that the first- or probably even the second-century Christians prayed to anyone but God or believed that God had granted certain deceased individuals with the power to act as mediators with God. I would even go so far as to admit to the possibility that the dead can petition God on behalf of their loved ones, but I just don't understand how we can supposedly communicate with them through prayer or meditation, or by what authority the Church designates which of them has the ability to hear us. That's why I asked when this practice began.

It's not my intention to be disrespectful, but this thread is on a debate forum, and this is an issue that lends itself to debate.

So if you dont believe that catholics can pray to the deceased, and seem to think it such a far fetched idea ( im with you on that one), does it not feel odd that you could be(or have been) baptised for someone who is dead, who no longer exists,and it will work. Im sorry katzpur, but it sounds really odd, i mean, logically, it does not make sense, it is not sciptural, and i mean the Bible, not that joseph smith stuff, which i know probably wont make an ounce of diference as mormons take his word over Gods, but if you can not understand how a catholic prays to the dead, how do you understand your practise of baptising for the dead?

[writer]

16 http://www.catholic.com/library/purgatory.asp
The Catechism of the Catholic Church defines purgatory as a "purification, so as to achieve the holiness necessary to enter the joy of heaven," which is experienced by those "who die in God’s grace and friendship, but still imperfectly purified" (CCC 1030).
To the contrary: I saw the holy city, New Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God... (John-Rv 21:2)

It notes that "this final purification of the elect . . . is entirely different from the punishment of the damned" (CCC 1031).
Correct. Biblically. Once regenerated, always regenerated (OSAS), Jesus-Jn 6:37; Heb 6:1, 11-20; etc

The purification is necessary because, as Scripture teaches, nothing unclean will enter the presence of God in heaven (Rev. 21:27)
Hence it's fair to call one's Christian life today "purgatory" likewise.
"Blessed are the pure in heart for they shall see God" (Mt 5:8; 1 Jn 3:3; 2 Cor 3:18).
As mentioned above, tho, Rv 21:27 (New Jerusalem) is neither heaven, nor in heaven in 27. Rather she's on earth. As John in verses 2, 24, 26 make clear

and, while we may die with our mortal sins forgiven, there can still be many impurities in us, specifically venial sins and the temporal punishment due to sins already forgiven.
1stly, Biblically (apostolically), all sins are, by definition, "mortal" (Paul-Rm 6:23 "For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus...").
2ndly, NT terms for temporary punishment of believers (whether for sin or immaturity) in the next age include "outer darkness" (Mt 25:30), "hurt of the second death" (Rv 2:11), "saved so as through fire" (1 Cor 3:15), "stripes, lashes" (Lk 12:48), "cast out, dried up, burned" (Jn 15:6), "weeping and gnashing of teeth, portion with the hypocrites" (Mt 24:51), "lose soul-life" (Mt 16:25).
Lastly, such purification, temporary discipline, of believers is in life. In natural resurrection (eg Mt 25:7; 1 Jn 2:28; 2 Cor 5:10). Not in the least in death or while in decease. Nor begun yet. And, at most, 1000 years (cf Rv 20)

When we die, we undergo what is called the particular, or individual, judgment. Scripture says that "it is appointed for men to die once, and after that comes judgment" (Heb. 9:27). We are judged instantly and receive our reward, for good or ill. We know at once what our final destiny will be.
This izn't completely accurate, altho it seems kinda sufficient.
The Lord Jesus in John 3 said that unbelievers (into Christ) r condemned "already." Altho, given Heb 9:27, of course folks can and should ask Christ for forgiveness and Himself anytime before they pass away (Jn 3:14-16; 4:10, 15-18, 26), and thus be born, eternally, with His life and nature, and thus changed ontologically.
Regarding unbelievers, the judgment in Heb 9:27 IZ their judgment in Rv 20:11-15. Thus not "instant." Tho experientially there duzn't appear to be much diff (cf Jesus-Lk 16:19-31).
Regarding regenerated: we Christians must all "appear before the judgment seat of Christ [2 Cor 5:10; Rm 14:10; 1 Jn 2:28; etc] to receive the things done through the body according to what we've practiced, whether good or bad." This also is not "instant." But rather near the end of Christ's parousia, His physical return, on His way to earth, in the air. And this also has to do with either sharing His 1000 year reign here. Or experiencing outer darkness. It has nothing to do with eternal perdition (cf Jn 6:37; 10:27-30; Heb 6; etc)

At the end of time, when Jesus returns, there will come the general judgment to which the Bible refers, for example, in Matthew 25:31-32: "When the Son of man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit on his glorious throne. Before him will be gathered all the nations, and he will separate them one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats." In this general judgment all our sins will be publicly revealed (Luke 12:2–5).
To the contrary: Mt 25:31-32, however large, at the end of this age, after Armageddon, is a specific judgment. Christ will judge the living nations there. Based on how they treated His children on earth during the great tribulation. Luke 12:2-5 applies then. Equally as it applies to the judgment of the deceased unbornagain (to coin a term) in Revelation 20. Or of believers in 2 Cor 5; Rm 14. Neither Mt 25:31-46 nor Rv 20:11-15 include or involve any born anew. Our particular judgment's referenced in Mt 24:45-51; 25:1-13, 14-30; and obliquely in Rv 20:4, 6 and 22:12.
As 20:5 reveals: these two "general" resurrections and judgments are separated by 1000 years (cf also Jn 5:21-30)

Augustine said...
Mebbe nex.
Thanx

[Katzpur]

Originally Posted by stimpy

So if you dont believe that catholics can pray to the deceased, and seem to think it such a far fetched idea ( im with you on that one), does it not feel odd that you could be(or have been) baptised for someone who is dead, who no longer exists,and it will work. Im sorry katzpur, but it sounds really odd, i mean, logically, it does not make sense, it is not sciptural, and i mean the Bible, not that joseph smith stuff, which i know probably wont make an ounce of diference as mormons take his word over Gods, but if you can not understand how a catholic prays to the dead, how do you understand your practise of baptising for the dead?

Stimpy,

This thread is about Catholicism and not Mormonism. It would be unfair of me to derail it by getting into a discussion with you about baptism for the dead, a doctrine which, contrary to what you may believe, is entirely scriptural ("and I mean the Bible, not that Josesph Smith stuff"). However, if you'd like to check out the following thread, I would be happy to respond to any questions you may have on this practice:

Baptising the Dead?

Incidentally, we do not take Joseph Smith's word over God's. But again, if you'd like to debate that issue, feel free to start a new thread on the subject.

[athanasius]

I will not ever debate Mr Writer again as he has proven himself to be quite uncharitable and judgmental in our debate on the Eucharist and the Blessed Virgin Mary. So this is Not written to Mr writer. But to any one else who would like to read why Catholics believe in the concept Purgatory Here are 2 documents illistrating why we do.

The first is this from the "Nazareth resource library" it is http://www.cin.org/users/james/files/how2purg.htm

The second is the historical evidence for the roots of this doctrine in early Christian history: It show the fathers like Augustine showing proof for this concept. It is
http://www.catholic.com/library/Roots_of_Purgatory.asp


God bless you all In Jesus through Mary.
athanasius