The Biblical Basis of 10 Catholic Distinctives

[The Liturgist]

True, there are exceptions to my generalizations. But I have served as a UMC pastor for several years and have served Bible studies and prayer groups. My remarks are based on those experiences. Though Pentecostal in spirituality, I have served as a Theology professor at a Franciscan university for several years. So I have been exposed to Catholic spirituality at its best.

If Christians obey the NT command to air their dirty linen to each other, then confidentiality of the listener is essential.
The Catholic requirement of confession to a priest is therefore a good safeguard against gossip, but I agree, not a divine requirement.

I like the Anglican approach of combining optional auricular confession with a public confession, but I also like the approach of Eastern Orthodox Christians from Russia, Ukraine, Poland, Belarus, Georgia, Serbia, Romania and Bulgaria of mandatory auricular confession at least once a month, and preferably weekly, particularly since their priests seldom impose penances. In contrast the Greek Orthodox, Antiochian Orthodox, Cypriot Orthodox, Finnish Orthodox, Albanian Orthodox (I think) and also the North Macedonian Orthodox and Carpatho-Rusyn and the Czech and Slovak Orthodox Church practice confession at your discretion or annual confession. In some of these churches however, I have noticed laity are more likely to sit out the Eucharist.

St. John of Kronstadt had too many visitors to his parishes to hear their confessions in the normal way, so he implemented an unusual solution, which was to have everyone scream their transgressions as loudly as possible, so that no one could hear what anyone else had done over the din, and then he absolved all of them (individually i expect, by having them form a queue to venerate the Holy Cross and receive the prayer of absolution). However this is not done at present.

A ROCOR priest who didn’t speak English had myself and other parishioners who did not speak Russian just read a list of sins that covered everything. I like that, because if we look into Patristic hamartiology, a lot of us are guilty of sins we don’t realize we are guilty of. For example, many Early Church Fathers considered slander to be a form of murder. It is also possible to commit sexual immorality with one’s lawfully wedded spouse, by lusting after strange flesh. Thus the ancient Orthodox canon by which a confessor can deny the chalice to sodomites for up to twice the length of time as the adulterers can also be applied to married heterosexual couples.

 

[Berserk]

(8) THE BIBLICAL BASIS OF PURGATORY

The word "Purgatory" (Latin: "purgatorium") initially appears around 1160 AD), but this concept of postmortem purification has roots in ancient Judaism and the NT. The following 4 texts form a major part of the background for the doctrine of Purgatory:

(1) Catholics refer to 2 Maccabees in their OT for the initial principle that justifies the concept of Purgatory. It was discovered that Jewish freedom fighters had committed idolatry and it was thought that their deaths in battle were a punishment for this sin. The righteous Jewish soldiers believed in praying for the dead. So they sent a sin offering to the Jerusalem Temple and prayed for these dead soldiers "that the sin that had been committed would be wholly blotted out. 12:42, 44)." In this way, they attest the belief that prayer and godly ritual can change the status of dead sinners in the eyes of God.
Now modern Christians don't embrace the Apocrypha as Scripture. But Paul applies this Maccabean principle to the Corinthian practice of proxy baptism for the unrighteous dead. Paul believes that soul retrievals from an interim state (akin to Purgatory) through proxy baptism can be part of the process by which God will ultimately "be all in all:"

"...so that God may be all in all. Otherwise, what will they do who receive baptism in behalf of the dead? If the dead are not raised all all, why are they baptized on their behalf (1 Cor 15:28-29)?"


(2) Paul accepts the traditional Jewish view that locates Paradise in the 3rd Heaven (2 Cor 12:2-3). This view raises the question of the nature of the first 2 Heavens. Paradise is the desirable place for the deceased righteous to reside (see e. g. Luke 23:42-43). But in the relevant intertestamental Jewish texts that are the background of this model of the Heavens, the 2nd Heaven is described as a place of suffering akin to Purgatory.

(3) Perhaps the best biblical precedent for the Catholic doctrine of Purgatory emerges from Paul's discussion of the fate of weak Christians who build their lives improperly on the foundation that is Christ. Paul warns that their works will not withstand close divine scrutiny: "If the work is burned up, the builder will suffer loss; the builder will be saved, but only as through fire (1 Cor 3:15)." In early rabbinic literature, the expression "saved so as by fire" is applied to Jews of mediocre spirituality who must spend a year in Gehenna before being promoted to Paradise. Gehenna here seems to be a model for Purgatory.

(4) In a parable Jesus uses the image of a debtor's prison as an allusion to Gehenna: "In anger his Lord handed him over to be tortured until he would pay all his debt (Matthew 18:34)." The implication is that the debt can theoretically be paid to secure release.

 

[The Liturgist]

Relics have had no basis in spirituality for a very long time now.

That might be true in those iconoclastic churches which destroyed all their relics, but for those of us who still have them, they are a very important part of our spirituality. Many, such as the relics of St. Nicholas of Myra, which were expropriated by the Latins and relocated to Bari, along with several other relics such as those of St. Mark which had been in the possession of the Orthodox, but which are now being returned (the Three Holy Hierarchs, for example, are once more in Constantinople), continue to stream myrhh, which the Orthodox have authenticated is the same myrhh that was streamed by these relics before the Roman Catholics of Bari removed them from the Orthodox church in Myra.

I myself venerate relics and receive myrhh streamed from them and from the Holy Icons known to gush myrhh (mostly icons of Our Glorious Lady Theotokos and Ever Virgin Mary) on every possible occasion.

 

[BobRyan]

(8) THE BIBLICAL BASIS OF PURGATORY

The word "Purgatory" (Latin: "purgatorium") initially appears around 1160 AD), but this concept of postmortem purification has roots in ancient Judaism and the NT.

roots?

There is nothing about Purgatory in either OT or NT.

And if we go outside the Bible --- Even 2 Macc does not mention it

(1) Catholics refer to 2 Maccabees in their OT for the initial principle that justifies the concept of Purgatory. It was discovered that Jewish freedom fighters had committed idolatry and it was thought that their deaths in battle were a punishment for this sin. The righteous Jewish soldiers believed in praying for the dead. So they sent a sin offering to the Jerusalem Temple and prayed for these dead soldiers "that the sin that had been committed would be wholly blotted out. 12:42, 44)." In this way, they attest the belief that prayer and godly ritual can change the status of dead sinners in the eyes of God.

Not in 2 Macc. Not in 2 Macc 12, Not in 2 Macc 12:42-44

First of all, paganism -- Idol worship of pagan gods is a mortal sin and even the Catholic Church confesses that Purgatory does not apply to the case of mortal sin.

2 Macc 12.
40 However, under the tunic of each of the dead, they found amulets that were sacred to the idols of Jamnia, which the law forbids the Jews to wear. Thus it was clear to everyone that this was the reason that these men had been slain. 41 And so they all praised the acts of the Lord, the just judge who reveals things that are hidden, 42 and they turned to supplication, praying that the sin that had been committed might be completely blotted out. The noble Judas exhorted the people to keep themselves free from sin, since they had seen with their own eyes what had happened as a result of the sin of those who had fallen.

43 Then he took up a collection from all of his soldiers, amounting to two thousand silver drachmas, and sent it to Jerusalem to provide for an expiatory sacrifice. In doing this, he acted in a suitable and honorable way, guided by his belief in the resurrection. 44 For if he had not expected those who had fallen to rise again, it would have been superfluous and foolish to pray for the dead

2 Macc admits that praying for the dead has no benefit apart from the future bodily resurrection.

That is the opposite teaching as compared to Purgatory where it is claimed that WHILE dead and BEFORE being bodily resurrected real BENEFIT is experienced by the dead in getting free from Purgatory.

So other than being a great example of "not purgatory" it simply reveals that someone took actions that were clearly not addressing the problem for as scripture says "it is appointed unto man once to die and then comes judgment" rather than "And then comes purgatory followed by heaven"

Now modern Christians don't embrace the Apocrypha as Scripture

agreed

. But Paul applies this Maccabean principle to the Corinthian practice of proxy baptism for the unrighteous dead.

Mormons do try to use the 1 Cor 15 text regarding baptism as if it were speaking of the living being baptized on behalf of an unsaved dead person.

"...so that God may be all in all. Otherwise, what will they do who receive baptism in behalf of the dead? If the dead are not raised all all, why are they baptized on their behalf (1 Cor 15:28-29)?"

More reliable to actually quote the entire sentence rather than the snip. Then we see that is not at all about getting an unsaved dead person to be saved.

Rather it is the more general point of the necessity of Christ being raised from the dead.

1 Cor 15

12 Now if Christ is preached, that He has been raised from the dead, how do some among you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? 13 But if there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised; 14 and if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain, your faith also is in vain. 15 Moreover, we are even found to be false witnesses of God, because we testified against God that He raised Christ, whom He did not raise, if in fact the dead are not raised. 16 For if the dead are not raised, then not even Christ has been raised; 17 and if Christ has not been raised, your faith is worthless; you are still in your sins. 18 Then also those who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished. 19 If we have hoped in Christ only in this life, we are of all people most to be pitied.

20 But the fact is, Christ has been raised from the dead, the first fruits of those who are asleep. 21 For since by a man death came, by a Man also came the resurrection of the dead. 22 For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive. 23 But each in his own order: Christ the first fruits, after that those who are Christ’s at His coming, 24 then comes the end, when He hands over the kingdom to our God and Father, when He has abolished all rule and all authority and power. 25 For He must reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet. 26 The last enemy that will be abolished is death. 27 For He has put all things in subjection under His feet. But when He says, “All things are put in subjection,” it is clear that this excludes the Father who put all things in subjection to Him. 28 When all things are subjected to Him, then the Son Himself will also be subjected to the One who subjected all things to Him, so that God may be all in all.


29 For otherwise, what will those do who are baptized for the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why then are they baptized for them? 30 Why are we also in danger every hour?


His comment is not about baptizing dead people, or having living people get baptized as a method of saving/converting dead people, rather it is of the form "what will those do who are baptized --- given the proposed idea that dead are not raised"? Which is a proposed scenario that he had been reviewing and debunking since vs 12

(2) Paul accepts the traditional Jewish view that locates Paradise in the 3rd Heaven (2 Cor 12:2-3).

true. Paradise is in the 3rd heaven according to 2 Cor 12 . Rev 2 says the Tree of life is presently in paradise and it is where the throne of God is in Rev 22.

Still true to this day.

. Paradise is the desirable place for the deceased righteous to reside (see e. g. Luke 23:42-43).

not true. In Luke 23 "remember me WHEN you come into your kingdom. And Christ answered "truly I say to you today you SHALL be with Me in Paradise" ... which is a reference in kind to that future day when Christ comes into His Kingdom.

So then in John 20 on resurrection Sunday Christ states "I have not yet ascended to My Father"

 

[The Liturgist]

agreed

You and @Berserk were both wrong, in that the three largest communities of Christians, and the sixth or seventh, to wit, Roman Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, Anglicans, and Oriental Orthodox, and also some Lutherans (Lutheran churches usually have an open canon), the fourth largest group, and some Reformed Catholics, accept the deuterocanonical books. Some accept even more. Unless you want to deny that we are “modern Christians” but that might cause our friends @Shane R @prodromos @Jipsah @jas3 @chevyontheriver @Michie and @Xeno.of.athens might disagree with that - we are traditional, not modernist (although many modernists also use the deuterocanon), but we are modern in that we are Christians alive today, in vibrant churches, which in the case of the Orthodox are experiencing explosive growth - parishes expanding at 18% per year both from converts and the high birth rate of the members, to the point a serious strain exists on our resources.

TLM and other traditional parishes of the RCC, that either use the Tridentine Mass or celebrate the Novus Ordo with equivalent reverence, Continuing Anglican parishes, Confessional Lutheran parishes like the LCMS, LCA, AALC, ELC and others, and traditional Episcopalian parishes in the southern US and traditional Anglo Catholic parishes in the Church of England such as St. Magnus the Martyr are also experiencing growth at the expense of broad church / liberal catholic parishes that don’t stand for anything, and aliturgical non-denominational churches (and some moderate evangelical Anglican parishes that try to emulate moderate non-denominational churches which used to generate growth but which now are increasingly unpopular due to being lukewarm).

 

[Berserk]

Bob ducks the key relevant point, biblical texts that imply an intermediate postmortem status for souls not ready for heaven, but still with the remedial potential to ultimately be saved. Nor does he recognize Jesus' preference for the rabbinic term "gehenna" as His preferred designation for Hell, a terms the rabbis ca use for TEMPORARY postmortem punishment.

 

[BobRyan]

BobRyan said:
agreed

You and @Berserk were both wrong

hmm -- you provide zero context in what was said in that post about Purgatory, the post you are you quote from above... no details at all... zero.

This leads us to think that you are not going to address the details from scripture that were given

, in that the three largest communities of Christians, and the sixth or seventh, to wit, Roman Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, Anglicans, and Oriental Orthodox, and also some Lutherans (Lutheran churches usually have an open canon), the fourth largest group, and some Reformed Catholics, accept the deuterocanonical books.

so then you are either completely ignoring the subject of the post (purgatory) or you are claimijng that Angilcans, Lutherans, Eastern Orthodox etc all teach the doctrine of purgatory.

(It seems your choice was to ignore the entire topic of Purgatory in that post you quoted from and instead argue that the author of the Vulgate was wrong to notice that the Apocryphal books do not belong to either the Jewish OT canon or the NT canon)
[/QUOTE]

 

[BobRyan]

Bob ducks the key relevant point, biblical texts that imply an intermediate postmortem status for souls not ready for heaven

I addressed your first text where those engaged in the mortal sin of paganism, worship of idols are slain in battle because of that sin, where the text says that they would get no benefit at all from any sacrifices or prayers said from the while in that state of death. Which is flat out NOT the doctrine of Purgatory.

I address your appeal to the 1 Cor 15 as if it was teaching the Mormon doctrine of "baptism for the dead" -- a suggestion that almost all Christians recognize as not being taught at all in 1 Cor 15 , as I noted in my post.

and I address your appeal to "Paradise" as if it were not in the same location as the throne of God , even though Rev 2 and Rev 22 say that is exactly where it is , and Paul says it is in the 3rd heaven. (birds fly in the first heaven according to Gen 1, stars are in the second heaven, and the throne of God in the third heaven)

 

[bbbbbbb]

I addressed your first text where those engaged in the mortal sin of paganism, worship of idols are slain in battle because of that sin, where the text says that they would get no benefit at all from any sacrifices or prayers said from the while in that state of death. Which is flat out NOT the doctrine of Purgatory.

I address your appeal to the 1 Cor 15 as if it was teaching the Mormon doctrine of "baptism for the dead" -- a suggestion that almost all Christians recognize as not being taught at all in 1 Cor 15 , as I noted in my post.

and I address your appeal to "Paradise" as if it were not in the same location as the throne of God , even though Rev 2 and Rev 22 say that is exactly where it is , and Paul says it is in the 3rd heaven. (birds fly in the first heaven according to Gen 1, stars are in the second heaven, and the throne of God in the third heaven)

One of the other challenges with this particular doctrine is that it is exceedingly fluid. Lacking any base in the Bible, it is quite open to an enormous range of presentations and representations. Traditionally, it has been represented as being a place similar to hell where faithful Catholics go to be purged of their temporal sins. It is viewed as being of a temporary nature such that after God has determined that all of their temporal sins have been beaten out of them, then they can get into heaven which will, of course, be much more appreciated than if they merely passed directly into heaven after death. However, this view has been upended in recent decades with a new view that the purging of sins after death is actually a relatively pleasant experience, not unlike taking a shower prior to going out for dinner.

Both views have equal validity, even though they contradict each other. Their validity does not rest in the Bible but in the authority of the RCC to define it as it wishes.

 

[Jipsah]

I addressed your first text where those engaged in the mortal sin of paganism, worship of idols are slain in battle because of that sin, where the text says that they would get no benefit at all from any sacrifices or prayers said from the while in that state of death.

The damned don't go to purgatory. Catholicism 101.

 

[Jipsah]

Both views have equal validity, even though they contradict each other.

And both views offered are purely a matter of your own outsider's understanding of a dogma that you reject a propri, so I don't thi9nk we ought to consider it in any way authoritative.

Their validity does not rest in the Bible but in the authority of the RCC to define it as it wishes.

Just as you did. <Laugh>

 

[concretecamper]

temporal sins

What are temporal sins?

However, this view has been upended in recent decades with a new view that the purging of sins after death is actually a relatively pleasant experience, not unlike taking a shower prior to going out for dinner.

Can you quote Church teaching that backs up your statement?

This should be good

 

[Valletta]

One of the other challenges with this particular doctrine is that it is exceedingly fluid. Lacking any base in the Bible, it is quite open to an enormous range of presentations and representations. Traditionally, it has been represented as being a place similar to hell where faithful Catholics go to be purged of their temporal sins. It is viewed as being of a temporary nature such that after God has determined that all of their temporal sins have been beaten out of them, then they can get into heaven which will, of course, be much more appreciated than if they merely passed directly into heaven after death. However, this view has been upended in recent decades with a new view that the purging of sins after death is actually a relatively pleasant experience, not unlike taking a shower prior to going out for dinner.

Both views have equal validity, even though they contradict each other. Their validity does not rest in the Bible but in the authority of the RCC to define it as it wishes.

The Catholic teaching on purgatory is rock solid, hardly "upended" by any new "view," there is a relatively short description in the Catholic Catechism. The basis in the Bible is mentioned:

II. The Final Purification, or Purgatory​

1030 All who die in God's grace and friendship, but still imperfectly purified, are indeed assured of their eternal salvation; but after death they undergo purification, so as to achieve the holiness necessary to enter the joy of heaven.
1031 The Church gives the name Purgatory to this final purification of the elect, which is entirely different from the punishment of the damned.604 The Church formulated her doctrine of faith on Purgatory especially at the Councils of Florence and Trent. the tradition of the Church, by reference to certain texts of Scripture, speaks of a cleansing fire:605
As for certain lesser faults, we must believe that, before the Final Judgment, there is a purifying fire. He who is truth says that whoever utters blasphemy against the Holy Spirit will be pardoned neither in this age nor in the age to come. From this sentence we understand that certain offenses can be forgiven in this age, but certain others in the age to come.606
1032 This teaching is also based on the practice of prayer for the dead, already mentioned in Sacred Scripture: "Therefore Judas Maccabeus] made atonement for the dead, that they might be delivered from their sin."607 From the beginning the Church has honored the memory of the dead and offered prayers in suffrage for them, above all the Eucharistic sacrifice, so that, thus purified, they may attain the beatific vision of God.608 The Church also commends almsgiving, indulgences, and works of penance undertaken on behalf of the dead:
Let us help and commemorate them. If Job's sons were purified by their father's sacrifice, why would we doubt that our offerings for the dead bring them some consolation? Let us not hesitate to help those who have died and to offer our prayers for them.609

Catechism of the Catholic Church

 

[bbbbbbb]

And both views offered are purely a matter of your own outsider's understanding of a dogma that you reject a propri, so I don't thi9nk we ought to consider it in any way authoritative.

Just as you did. <Laugh>

Precisely. I agree entirely with you.

 

[bbbbbbb]

The Catholic teaching on purgatory is rock solid, hardly "upended" by any new "view," there is a relatively short description in the Catholic Catechism. The basis in the Bible is mentioned:

II. The Final Purification, or Purgatory​

1030 All who die in God's grace and friendship, but still imperfectly purified, are indeed assured of their eternal salvation; but after death they undergo purification, so as to achieve the holiness necessary to enter the joy of heaven.
1031 The Church gives the name Purgatory to this final purification of the elect, which is entirely different from the punishment of the damned.604 The Church formulated her doctrine of faith on Purgatory especially at the Councils of Florence and Trent. the tradition of the Church, by reference to certain texts of Scripture, speaks of a cleansing fire:605
As for certain lesser faults, we must believe that, before the Final Judgment, there is a purifying fire. He who is truth says that whoever utters blasphemy against the Holy Spirit will be pardoned neither in this age nor in the age to come. From this sentence we understand that certain offenses can be forgiven in this age, but certain others in the age to come.606
1032 This teaching is also based on the practice of prayer for the dead, already mentioned in Sacred Scripture: "Therefore Judas Maccabeus] made atonement for the dead, that they might be delivered from their sin."607 From the beginning the Church has honored the memory of the dead and offered prayers in suffrage for them, above all the Eucharistic sacrifice, so that, thus purified, they may attain the beatific vision of God.608 The Church also commends almsgiving, indulgences, and works of penance undertaken on behalf of the dead:
Let us help and commemorate them. If Job's sons were purified by their father's sacrifice, why would we doubt that our offerings for the dead bring them some consolation? Let us not hesitate to help those who have died and to offer our prayers for them.609

Catechism of the Catholic Church

Out of curiosity, do you understand the "cleansing fire" of Purgatory to be a pleasant or an unpleasant experience? The reason I ask is that various Catholic friends of mine, who claim to be devout Catholics, have explained Puratory as being both, leaving me somewhat perplexed. As you have provided the relevant section of the CCC for us (for which I thank you) I suppose one should be able to reach an understanding in regard to the experience of Purgatory for the Catholic souls.

 

[Valletta]

Out of curiosity, do you understand the "cleansing fire" of Purgatory to be a pleasant or an unpleasant experience? The reason I ask is that various Catholic friends of mine, who claim to be devout Catholics, have explained Puratory as being both, leaving me somewhat perplexed. As you have provided the relevant section of the CCC for us (for which I thank you) I suppose one should be able to reach an understanding in regard to the experience of Purgatory for the Catholic souls.

Why would we understand an experience we know so little about? I could speculate like anyone else. Being purified through Purgatory means we are going to Heaven, a positive. If time has not been eliminated (God is above time) then we will spend time outside of Heaven, which is a negative.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Why would we understand an experience we know so little about? I could speculate like anyone else. Being purified through Purgatory means we are going to Heaven, a positive. If time has not been eliminated (God is above time) then we will spend time outside of Heaven, which is a negative.

Thank you.

 

[The Liturgist]

hmm -- you provide zero context in what was said in that post about Purgatory, the post you are you quote from above... no details at all... zero.

This leads us to think that you are not going to address the details from scripture that were given


so then you are either completely ignoring the subject of the post (purgatory) or you are claimijng that Angilcans, Lutherans, Eastern Orthodox etc all teach the doctrine of purgatory.

(It seems your choice was to ignore the entire topic of Purgatory in that post you quoted from and instead argue that the author of the Vulgate was wrong to notice that the Apocryphal books do not belong to either the Jewish OT canon or the NT canon)

[/QUOTE]

I wasn’t defending purgatory, I was objecting to the preposterous ideas that modern Christians neither venerate relics nor use the deuterocanonical books. Relics are an extremely important part of the faith of all Eastern Orthodox, Roman Catholic, Oriental Orthodox, Old Catholic and Anglo Catholic Christians, and we are modern.

Deuterocanonical books are also used by all of the above, and Anglicans, Lutherans, and some Reformed Catholics.

As for purgatory per se, I’m not interested in defending that doctrine as I see it as a Scholastic simplification of a more complex doctrine, although recent Roman Catholic statements by the likes of Pope Benedict XVI are much closer to the Orthodox views on the state of the soul after death than the views that were encountered before the Council of Trent, but obviously I’m interested chiefly in defending those doctrines of the RCC which are also correct from an ecumenical perspective.

I will say their eschatology is much more correct than that of many denominations, but non-standard eschatology, that is to say eschatology that Catholics, Anglicans, Calvinists, Congregationalists, confessional Lutherans, Evangelicals and most Baptists and Methodists would join the Orthodox in disagreeing with, can largely only be debated in controversial Christian theology.

 

[Valletta]

Thank you.

You're welcome!

 

[BobRyan]

#98 The Liturgist
I wasn’t defending purgatory, I was objecting to the preposterous ideas that modern Christians neither venerate relics nor use the deuterocanonical books.

If you have some quote of someone here saying that no Christian groups venerate relics or read the Apocrypha please point to it.

In the mean time we were discussing what is and is not in the Apocrypha and Bible relative to our subject == purgatory listed as one of 10 Catholic doctrines that the author of this thread wanted to discuss.