Purgatory - in the fires of hell - for the saints??

Thursday said:

Catholic teaching has never approved the selling of indulgences. Corrupt Bishops have done this, but it was not in line with Catholic teaching.

Sorry for your confusion.

Click to expand...

My confusion?

Your own Catholic Encyclopedia admits to this - and Luther's condemnation by the RCC was over his own condemnation of selling indulgences. hint the 95 thesis were all about that.

From - http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12700b.htm

"The first impulse to secession was supplied by the opposition of Luther in Germany and of Zwingli in German Switzerland to the promulgation by Leo X of an indulgence for contributions towards the building of the new St. Peter's at Rome. For a long time it had been customary for the popes to grant indulgences for buildings of public utility (e.g. bridges)."


A less Catholic site describes it this way -

"Warlike Pope Julius II died in 1513, and his successor, Giovanni de' Medici, took the name Pope Leo X. If Julius loved to fight, Leo preferred amusement. His self-indulgence destroyed the unity of the western church when he bartered sin for money in the most infamous indulgence of church history."
http://www.christianity.com/church/...s-indulgence-led-to-reformation-11629920.html

St. Peter's basilica was being rebuilt, but there was no money. Leo decided to solve the problem in time-honored fashion. On this day March 15, 1517 he declared that anyone who contributed to the cathedral would be granted an indulgence. Although in theory an indulgence was only a remission of penalties meted out in this world by the church, in practice it was hawked as if it covered the actual guilt of sins and could release souls from Purgatory. The gist of the indulgence was as follows:

"... absolve you ...from all thy sins, transgressions, and excesses, how enormous soever they be...and remit to you all punishment which you deserve in purgatory on their account and I restore you...to the innocence and purity which you possessed at baptism; so that when you die the gates of punishment shall be shut... and if you shall not die at present, this grace shall remain in full force when you are at the point of death."

Sent to preach the indulgence in Germany was a Dominican named Tetzel

http://www.christianity.com/church/...s-indulgence-led-to-reformation-11629920.html

Click to expand...

"blame it all on some local Bishop" is a form of revisionist-history that even the Catholic Encyclopedia does not permit.

BobRyan said:

Even Catholic historians point to its use with indulgences to raise money for the RCC.
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12700b.htm
.

Click to expand...

here we are talking about actual history - so preference and 'wishing' and even name calling against your own Catholic Encyclopedia -- is not going to "change history".

And I quote
"
Original ideas and purposes of the reformers
The first impulse to secession was supplied by the opposition of Luther in Germany and of Zwingli in German Switzerland to the promulgation by Leo X of an indulgence for contributions towards the building of the new St. Peter's at Rome.

For a long time it had been customary for the popes to grant indulgences for buildings of public utility (e.g. bridges). In such cases the true doctrine of indulgences as a remission of the punishment due to sin (not of guilt of sin) had been always upheld, and the necessary conditions (especially the obligation of a contrite confession to obtain absolution from sin) always inculcated. But the almsgiving for a good object, prescribed only as a good work supplementary to the chief conditions for the gaining of the indulgence, was often prominently emphasized. The indulgence commissaries sought to collect as much money as possible in connexion with the indulgence. Indeed, frequently since the Western Schism the spiritual needs of the people did not receive as much consideration as a motive for promulgating an indulgence, as the need of the good object by promoting which the indulgence was to be gained, and the consequent need of obtaining alms for this purpose.

The war against the Turks and other crises, the erection of churches and monasteries, and numerous other causes led to the granting of indulgences in the fifteenth century. The consequent abuses were heightened by the fact that secular rulers frequently forbade the promulgation of indulgences within their territories, consenting only on condition that a portion of the receipts should be given to them. In practice, therefore, and in the public mind the promulgation of indulgences took on an economic aspect, and, as they were frequent, many came to regard them as an oppressive tax.

Vainly did earnest men raise their voices against this abuse, which aroused no little bitterness against the ecclesiastical order and particularly the Papal Curia. The promulgation of indulgences for the new St. Peter's furnished Luther with an opportunity to attack indulgences in general, and this attack was the immediate occasion of the Reformation in Germany. A little later the same motive led Zwingli to put forth his erroneous teachings, thereby inaugurating the Reformation in German Switzerland. Both declared that they were attacking only the abuses of indulgences; however, they soon taught doctrine in many ways contrary to the teaching of the Church.

The great applause which Luther received on his first appearance, both in humanistic circles and among some theologians and some of the earnest-minded laity, was due to the dissatisfaction with the existing abuses."

Cis.jd said:

That is a bunch of lies.

Click to expand...

from your own encyclopedia "The great applause which Luther received on his first appearance, both in humanistic circles and among some theologians and some of the earnest-minded laity, was due to the dissatisfaction with the existing abuses."

I don't think you proved your point just then.

Cis.jd said:

But the link has no substance at all, it is just as credible as a Muslim site

Click to expand...

Again - name calling does not change history -- and I would have no credibility were I to "quote you" as my source for denying all of history on the point that they raise. You offer no substance against this proven history except that you don't like it - or wish it was not the case.

Cis.jd said:

You should take it as concern. First of all, it was pointed out to you numerous times that the belief in Purgatory isn't just by catholics. All the faiths prior to the 1600's believed it, including the first protestant branches.

Click to expand...

All the protestants abandoned it -

Calvin rejected purgatory in the 1500's

With all the differences they claimed against the Catholics, why wasn't Purgatory one of them?

Click to expand...

Luther rejected purgatory

Luther's beliefs on purgatory evolved over time. ...

Continued belief, but not as a matter of doctrine
In Defense and Explanation on All the Articles (1521), Luther wrote:

The existence of a purgatory I have never denied. I still hold that it exists, as I have written and admitted many times, though I have found no way of proving it incontrovertibly from Scripture or reason. I find in Scripture that Christ, Abraham, Jacob, Moses, Job, David, Hezekiah, and some others tasted hell in this life. This I think was purgatory... in short, I myself have come to the conclusion that there is a purgatory, but I cannot force anybody else to come to the same result.

Here, Luther is saying it is a matter of personal judgment. He, himself, believes in purgatory, but won't hold it against anyone who comes to a different conclusion. Likewise in Against Latomus (1521), he argues for purgatory while admitting that it cannot be proven by scripture.

In a 1522 sermon for the Festival of Epiphany, Luther said the spirits of the dead do not seek help from the living and said one is not a heretic for denying purgatory since "The Scriptures know nothing of it."

Expressed doubts
In a letter to his friend Nicholas von Amsdorf later that year, Luther wrote that he was unsure what happened after death but felt that "with few exceptions all sleep without possessing any capacity of feeling," waiting to the resurrected at a later date. He further said that the existence of purgatory was uncertain and that he wasn't convinced that all those not in heaven or hell were in purgatory.

The 1522 version of Luther's Personal Prayer Book contain the petition "Have mercy upon all poor souls in purgatory," but the petition was removed in the 1524 edition.

Rejects the idea
In Confession Concerning Christ's Supper (1528), explicitly stated for the first time that purgatory was a false teaching. However, he did say there was no real harm in praying for the dead since scripture didn't speak against it. He said those who wished to do so could say "Dear God, if this soul is in a condition possible for mercy, be thou gracious to it."

Two years later, in "Exhortation to All Clergy Assembled at Augsburg" Luther condemned the doctrine of purgatory and wrote that falsely claiming the ability to free souls from purgatory had brought great shame but "lots of money" for the church. Also in 1530, he wrote Revocation of Purgatory, a tract denouncing the doctrine of purgatory.

From 1535-1545, Luther wrote and lectured extensively on Genesis. These lectures were compiled and published shortly after his death in 1546. In this work, he found several occasions to comment on the idea of purgatory. For example, on chapter 4 he writes:

had we held Baptism and the holy Supper of our Lord in that esteem in which we ought to have held them, we should never have become monks. Nothing concerning purgatory, nothing concerning the sacrifice of the mass, nothing about those other like iniquities, would ever have been taught and handed down to us in the Church. But after the light of the Word had been put out by the wicked Popes, it was easy enough to thrust upon men all these abominations.

Thus calling the teaching of purgatory an "iniquity" taught by "wicked Popes".

http://christianity.stackexchange.c...r-accept-or-reject-the-existence-of-purgatory

Click to expand...

With all the differences they claimed against the Catholics, why wasn't Purgatory one of them? Because it is actually scriptural.

Click to expand...

That is false in that we can show that the very early reformers themselves came to the point of rejecting the false doctrine of purgatory -- including Luther and Calvin.

But it is also false in that you do not show that case from scripture but claim that Luther's early behavior while leaving Catholicism is proof that it is in scripture. This is very odd indeed.

This whole "after 1600" is something you need to take in high regards because that shows your credibility. These Protestants are starting the reformation in the 1500's AND rejecting purgatory in the 1500's. What more do you want??

Cis.jd said:

Luther rejected/disagreed with some points about Purgatory but never rejected it completely, with addition to not blaming anybody who rejects it. The existence of a purgatory I have never denied. I still hold that it exists, as I have written and admitted many times, though I have found no way of proving it incontrovertibly from Scripture or reason.

Click to expand...

After that -- he totally rejected it as an abomination. (BTW so do Anglican/Episcopalians reject purgatory. )

"In Confession Concerning Christ's Supper (1528), explicitly stated for the first time that purgatory was a false teaching. However, he did say there was no real harm in praying for the dead since scripture didn't speak against it. He said those who wished to do so could say "Dear God, if this soul is in a condition possible for mercy, be thou gracious to it."

"Two years later, in "Exhortation to All Clergy Assembled at Augsburg" Luther condemned the doctrine of purgatory and wrote that falsely claiming the ability to free souls from purgatory had brought great shame but "lots of money" for the church. Also in 1530, he wrote Revocation of Purgatory, a tract denouncing the doctrine of purgatory.

"From 1535-1545, Luther wrote and lectured extensively on Genesis. These lectures were compiled and published shortly after his death in 1546. In this work, he found several occasions to comment on the idea of purgatory. For example, on chapter 4 he writes:

"had we held Baptism and the holy Supper of our Lord in that esteem in which we ought to have held them, we should never have become monks. Nothing concerning purgatory, nothing concerning the sacrifice of the mass, nothing about those other like iniquities, would ever have been taught and handed down to us in the Church. But after the light of the Word had been put out by the wicked Popes, it was easy enough to thrust upon men all these abominations."

Thus calling the teaching of purgatory an "iniquity" taught by "wicked Popes".

http://christianity.stackexchange.c...r-accept-or-reject-the-existence-of-purgatory

I've showed you verses from Scripture, don't pretend i didn't.

Click to expand...

You did - but like John 3:16 they said nothing at all about being tormented after one dies - on the way to heaven.

The point remains. no Purgatory in OT, none in NT none in the Christian church at all for 100's of years before the RCC came into existence.

1500 is still very late. The Bible was Canonized (by us) at 300 ad

Click to expand...

Not true - Luke 24:27 "Beginning with Moses and all the prophets He explained to them from ALL of scripture the things concerning Himself" -- No Catholics there. No 300 A.D. there. Nothing about Purgatory there.

. It took the Holy Spirit that long to help man interpret scripture, from the time of Acts to the "1500+"?

Click to expand...

Nothing about Purgatory in OT or NT.


From http://www.christianitytoday.com/history/issues/issue-70/what-about-purgatory.html



In the fourth century (300's), Acrius taught that prayers for the dead were fruitless—an assertion Epiphanius, bishop of Salamis, rebutted in his "Refutation of All the Heresies." Some early Greek (Eastern) theologians also dissented from the emerging consensus on purgatory, while others supported it.

Later in the Middle Ages, the Albigensians, Waldensians, and Hussites all rejected purgatory, though for different reasons. So did John Calvin

Purgatory was defined at the Council of Trent in 1545-1563:

Luther's full rejection of it came in 1528. What more did you want?

Here are more verses for your research to see the doctrine and reason behind it. Psalm 141:8, Ruth 2:20, Isaiah 4:4, Isaiah 6:5, Ezechiel 36:33, Daniel 12:10, Micah 7:9, Zechariah 9:11, Zechariah 13:9, Matthew 12:32, Luke 12:47, Romans 5:3, 1 Corinthians 3:13, Philippians 2:10, Hebrews 12:5, Hebrews 12:23, 1 Peter 1:7, 1 Peter 3:18, 1 Peter 4:18, 1 John 5:16, Revelations 5:3, Revelations 21:27.

Click to expand...

Here is a great example from your list -- Phil 2:10 that makes no mention at all of being tormented on the way to heaven after someone dies so they can pay for - give satisfaction for sins not forgiven in this life. "10 so that at the name of Jesus every knee will bow, of those who are in heaven and on earth and under the earth,"

A great example of NOT finding Purgatory in that text.

Here is another great example of NOT finding a text for Purgatory - though it is in your list
Rom 5: 3 And not only this, but we also exult in our tribulations, knowing that tribulation brings about perseverance

That text says nothing about "after you die - on your way to heaven God will subject you to torture/tribulation to create perseverance in you after you die".

The very salient points of the doctrine of Purgatory "torment after you die and before you get to heaven" is NOT There!
Neither is "you make your own payment for sins after die that were not forgiven before you died"

You are simply posting texts that say nothing about Purgatory "as if they did".

Who goes for that??

in Christ,

Bob

Thursday said:

Catholic teaching has never approved the selling of indulgences. Corrupt Bishops have done this, but it was not in line with Catholic teaching.

Sorry for your confusion.

Click to expand...

My confusion?

Your own Catholic Encyclopedia admits to this - and Luther's condemnation by the RCC was over his own condemnation of selling indulgences. hint the 95 thesis were all about that.

From - http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12700b.htm

"The first impulse to secession was supplied by the opposition of Luther in Germany and of Zwingli in German Switzerland to the promulgation by Leo X of an indulgence for contributions towards the building of the new St. Peter's at Rome. For a long time it had been customary for the popes to grant indulgences for buildings of public utility (e.g. bridges)."


A less Catholic site describes it this way -

"Warlike Pope Julius II died in 1513, and his successor, Giovanni de' Medici, took the name Pope Leo X. If Julius loved to fight, Leo preferred amusement. His self-indulgence destroyed the unity of the western church when he bartered sin for money in the most infamous indulgence of church history."
http://www.christianity.com/church/...s-indulgence-led-to-reformation-11629920.html

St. Peter's basilica was being rebuilt, but there was no money. Leo decided to solve the problem in time-honored fashion. On this day March 15, 1517 he declared that anyone who contributed to the cathedral would be granted an indulgence. Although in theory an indulgence was only a remission of penalties meted out in this world by the church, in practice it was hawked as if it covered the actual guilt of sins and could release souls from Purgatory. The gist of the indulgence was as follows:

"... absolve you ...from all thy sins, transgressions, and excesses, how enormous soever they be...and remit to you all punishment which you deserve in purgatory on their account and I restore you...to the innocence and purity which you possessed at baptism; so that when you die the gates of punishment shall be shut... and if you shall not die at present, this grace shall remain in full force when you are at the point of death."

Sent to preach the indulgence in Germany was a Dominican named Tetzel

http://www.christianity.com/church/...s-indulgence-led-to-reformation-11629920.html

Click to expand...

"blame it all on some local Bishop" is a form of revisionist-history that even the Catholic Encyclopedia does not permit.

Thursday said:

That is not selling indulgences.

Your protestant source is biased.

Click to expand...

The idea that Protestants wrote the Catholic Encyclopedia at NewAdvent is the kind of nonsense needed to defend a teaching like Purgatory with the sort of "fluff" that does not stand up to even casual review of the actual facts.

The idea that you will not read any history by anyone but your own church is extreme throw back to the dark ages. Almost no denomination defends that sort of nonsense today. But in this case - you have name-call against your own Catholic historians when even that - is too objective and open minded for your preference. Worked great in the dark ages - but those tactics don't sell well in the light of the 21st century.

Why do it?

It makes the case for Purgatory look worse than it already is.

in Christ,

Bob

Thursday said:

Purgatory is simply the final sanctification of the saved before they enter heaven.

It has nothing to do with money.

Click to expand...

Then -- no Pope Leo X?
No plenary indulgences?

Is it your argument that the RCC was in error when it offered indulgences?

Thursday said:

You are mistaken. That is not the selling of indulgences. That is the correct biblical analysis of almsgiving.

In case you missed it:

Matt 6
2So when you give to the needy, do not sound a trumpet before you, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and on the streets, to be praised by men. Truly I tell you, they already have their reward. 3But when you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, 4so that your giving may be in secret. And your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you.

The popes emphasis here is in total keeping with the promise of Jesus that whatever he looses on earth will be loosed in heaven.

Click to expand...

You are equivocating between purgatory-indulgences and giving offerings in church. Matt 6 says nothing about indulgences or purgatory.