do Catholics focus more on suffering than non Catholics?

[Earnest_Bunbury]

You seem to be saying that Jesus did not bear and suffer for all of our sins, “…,when He had BY HIMSELF purged our sins, (and) sat down on the right hand of the Magesty on high.” (Hebrews 1:3)

I’m guessing you believe that Christ maybe only did a partial redemption of your sin, which then enabled you (by grace, of course) to perform a “Do It Yourself” suffering-purging of your own sins that were “not taken care of by Christ” at the one Sacrifice at the Cross.

Maybe you could better define what (Hebrews 1:3) means, as regarding the purging of our sins. Thanks.

No where did I insinuate Christ’s Sacrifice as being less than total, this is part of one’s “glasses” through which some protestants (mis)read the Bible, separated from the Church.This is highlighting exactly what I was posting, a total rejection of “works” in any form, so immediately one is insinuating that Grace must be being belittled. This is the error so often propagated in the protestant “anti-Catholic” theology and “grace as a covering that changes you”. This changing in the Catholic view does happen eventually, in heaven, as you are changed, made anew. On earth though, we must cooperate.

This cooperation is seen in the very act of accepting faith, or is “predestination” something that condemns someone to perdition because he was created to be condemned? This is where Calvin’s theology led him due to his version of the protestant error of condemning works due to an error in reading St. Paul.

To St. Paul, law came from his background, a Pharisee, the Jewish law, and works is the adherence of the 613 statutes that the “old law”, and if adhered to, made one “blameless” so called. The Grace of Christ makes one able to adhere to the “law written on our hearts”, God’s divine law. If we fall, there is confession and reconciliation through the person authorized by Jesus, “He who hears you, hears Me”, the priest. Since protestants are separated from this, their theology has only a “covering” and little sacrifice, as sin entails no loss of grace.

The verse you use here does not seem to be talking about any sin that we have already committed, but rather the sin that we might commit without God’s grace preventing it by His strengthening us against those sins “that so easily besets us”.

Are you implying that we can somehow lay aside (purge) a sin, that we have already committed, by any sort of our own “graced” work?

Work-out and grace-alone are opposites of each other. It has to be one or the other that accomplishes the purging of sin for salvation; not both at the same time.

This is reading into the text from a view that is in error. The Church’s authority dictates the importance of the text into the situation one is acting in or is involved in. A thorough study of Catholicism is the only way to fully know what one is rejecting. Your concept of “work out” is less than complete as compared to the Catholic Church that has defined it in 2000 years of exhaustive study compared to a personal reading of the Bible separated from the “pillar and ground of the truth”. Grace is what causes works to be worthy. From Ephesians 3:

and to know the Messiah’s love that surpasses knowledge, so you may be filled with all the fullness of God.

20 Now to Him who is able to do above and beyond all that we ask or think —according to the power that works in you— 21 to Him be glory in the church and in Christ Jesus to all generations, forever and ever. Amen.

Christ’s Grace is given to “work out” our salvation. If we accept this grace then we are able to have our sins forgiven. Again, if we can’t “do” anything, then how do we even accept grace in the first place? The entire error comes from the mistake in defining “works”

A rejection of works is the misnomer coloring the view of the Bible and is the basis for the reformation revolt Luther instigated. Just highlighting works and seeing grace as a covering devoid of our participation is the error of “faith alone” to the exclusion of the reason we were created by God in the first place, to love and be loved by Him. We cooperate in this by our actions through the gift of grace to the sacrifice of what the flesh (concupiscence left over after baptism which cleanses original sin) desires. Anything less than cooperation and union with God as the reason we were created is just seeing mankind not as a loving creation but as a plaything. To oppose Catholic theology on a Catholic forum is not what this site is for. If you have questions as to Catholic theology that is different than yours, we will help. Otherwise, one just seems to be looking to argue.

 

[brkn1]

No where did I insinuate Christ’s Sacrifice as being less than total, this is part of one’s “glasses” through which some protestants (mis)read the Bible, separated from the Church.This is highlighting exactly what I was posting, a total rejection of “works” in any form, so immediately one is insinuating that Grace must be being belittled. This is the error so often propagated in the protestant “anti-Catholic” theology and “grace as a covering that changes you”. This changing in the Catholic view does happen eventually, in heaven, as you are changed, made anew. On earth though, we must cooperate.

This cooperation is seen in the very act of accepting faith, or is “predestination” something that condemns someone to perdition because he was created to be condemned? This is where Calvin’s theology led him due to his version of the protestant error of condemning works due to an error in reading St. Paul.

To St. Paul, law came from his background, a Pharisee, the Jewish law, and works is the adherence of the 613 statutes that the “old law”, and if adhered to, made one “blameless” so called. The Grace of Christ makes one able to adhere to the “law written on our hearts”, God’s divine law. If we fall, there is confession and reconciliation through the person authorized by Jesus, “He who hears you, hears Me”, the priest. Since protestants are separated from this, their theology has only a “covering” and little sacrifice, as sin entails no loss of grace.

This is reading into the text from a view that is in error. The Church’s authority dictates the importance of the text into the situation one is acting in or is involved in. A thorough study of Catholicism is the only way to fully know what one is rejecting. Your concept of “work out” is less than complete as compared to the Catholic Church that has defined it in 2000 years of exhaustive study compared to a personal reading of the Bible separated from the “pillar and ground of the truth”. Grace is what causes works to be worthy. From Ephesians 3:

Christ’s Grace is given to “work out” our salvation. If we accept this grace then we are able to have our sins forgiven. Again, if we can’t “do” anything, then how do we even accept grace in the first place? The entire error comes from the mistake in defining “works”

A rejection of works is the misnomer coloring the view of the Bible and is the basis for the reformation revolt Luther instigated. Just highlighting works and seeing grace as a covering devoid of our participation is the error of “faith alone” to the exclusion of the reason we were created by God in the first place, to love and be loved by Him. We cooperate in this by our actions through the gift of grace to the sacrifice of what the flesh (concupiscence left over after baptism which cleanses original sin) desires. Anything less than cooperation and union with God as the reason we were created is just seeing mankind not as a loving creation but as a plaything. To oppose Catholic theology on a Catholic forum is not what this site is for. If you have questions as to Catholic theology that is different than yours, we will help. Otherwise, one just seems to be looking to argue.

The cooperative work that you claim contributes to a person’s actual salvation is an idea that makes Christ’s redeeming Sacrifice less than the Bible describes, since we then still must add our imperfect works to Christ’s already Perfect (Complete) Work of Redemption. This cooperative-work addition denies Christ’s Work as a sufficient redemption for our salvation, which I strongly disagree with. Your idea is that Christ only provided grace by His Sacrifice, so that you can then work out your own salvation. The Bible clearly says that our own works can not do this in Romans.
Protestants do not “condemn” the works that result from being born again by true faith in what Christ did to save us. Those works are not what saves us though and those, who die depending on such works to save them, will end up being condemned as boastful workers of iniquity, no matter how ‘nice’ those works appeared to mankind.

Your highlighted last three sentences present a criteria that makes it impossible for continued discussion, so I leave the last word to you. The subtitle under Non-Catholic Religion has “Comparing and contrasting beliefs”, which would seem to allow opposition to Catholic theology on this site.

 

[ryanoneil]

Here are some other verses of interest.

They strengthened the spirits of the disciples and exhorted them to persevere in the faith, saying, “It is necessary for us to undergo many hardships to enter the kingdom of God.” (Acts 14:22)

(But) whatever gains I had, these I have come to consider a loss because of Christ. More than that, I even consider everything as a loss because of the supreme good of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord. For his sake I have accepted the loss of all things and I consider them so much rubbish, that I may gain Christ and be found in him, not having any righteousness of my own based on the law but that which comes through faith in Christ, the righteousness from God, depending on faith to know him and the power of his resurrection and (the) sharing of his sufferings by being conformed to his death, if somehow I may attain the resurrection from the dead. (Phil 3:7-11)

Remember Jesus Christ, raised from the dead, a descendant of David: such is my gospel, for which I am suffering, even to the point of chains, like a criminal. But the word of God is not chained. Therefore, I bear with everything for the sake of those who are chosen, so that they too may obtain the salvation that is in Christ Jesus, together with eternal glory. This saying is trustworthy: If we have died with him we shall also live with him; if we persevere we shall also reign with him. But if we deny him he will deny us. If we are unfaithful he remains faithful, for he cannot deny himself. (2 Tim 2:8-13)

Beloved, do not be surprised that a trial by fire is occurring among you, as if something strange were happening to you. But rejoice to the extent that you share in the sufferings of Christ, so that when his glory is revealed you may also rejoice exultantly. If you are insulted for the name of Christ, blessed are you, for the Spirit of glory and of God rests upon you. But let no one among you be made to suffer as a murderer, a thief, an evildoer, or as an intriguer. But whoever is made to suffer as a Christian should not be ashamed but glorify God because of the name. (1 Pet 4:12-16)

 

[Shin]

There is a direct relation between the amount you suffer for the sake of God, and merit and place in Heaven you obtain, the former of which aids all the rest of mankind, i.e. suffering souls in purgatory, souls in danger of damnation, reparation, etc.

Suffering, sacrifice, that is indeed the Catholic religion, and the cross.

A good reading to understand this would be something like the life of St. Lydwine of Schiedam, who at least physically suffered near the limit of suffering possible for a human being, for the majority of her life. An agony of which was beyond imagination for most of us, and which she at first could not bear, and then when she learned to accept it as God’s will, could not bear to part with for His sake. I also found, at least for a time, St. Margaret Mary’s autobiography, she who delivered the devotion of the Sacred Heart of Jesus to us, painful reading.

The more sorrow and suffering you bear the more you are like Christ, the ‘Man of Sorrows’, and ‘Our Lady of Sorrows’. It is said if the saints could envy those still on earth, the one thing they would envy would be the ability to suffer and so gain merit before God.

So hair shirts, penitential chains, holy pains for the sake of Christ, these are very Catholic. Penance is the emphasis in repentance. The body and material world are dust, they exist for the sake of Heaven, not for their own sake and are to be used for Heaven’s purposes.

Those who love God suffer for Him, and those who have pleasant lives without suffering are in fact often advised by the saints to fear for their soul’s eternal destination, because they do not resemble Christ.

One normally suffers when one first separates oneself from the worldly pleasures for the sake of Heavenly, and if one is not capable of doing this one certainly is in danger.

Suffering, willingly born, also I must add, turns hedonists and babies into spiritual atheletes and giants.

In the beginning people can bear very little suffering often enough, but with prayer and exercise this can change.

‘All the honey that can be gathered from the flowers of this world has less sweetness than the vinegar and gall of Jesus Christ our Lord.’

St. Ignatius of Loyola

‘It is your self love which makes you resent not being able to do what others can do or having so much dismay on finding that you have need of the help of others; if you were dead to self, you would not be so unhappy.’

The Lord, to St. Gemma Galgani

 

[antonabe]

This is a question I’ve had for a while… having been Protestant and now Catholic, I do see a distinction there. Everything from the prayers to the writings of the Saints or statues or artwork… seems to emphasize suffering: either the suffering of Christ, Mary, or our own. Then in theology…the whole concept of redemptive suffering. When I was Protestant it wasn’t really mentioned, except that it’s something bad that’s not from God. Maybe it depends what denomination you are. I was non denominational, a lot like Baptist.

what do you think? what are the implications of this?

I’m looking for different views, both Catholic and non Catholic

We have to accept that sufferings form an integral part of lifes journey.Some sufferings are man made by virtue of the free will given to man and some cannot be explained as in the case of infirmaties thrust on man at birth.However how does man cope with these sufferings? Does he curse God or accept them as a means fo cleansing for eternal Glory.I am sure this version will not be popular with the persons who do not believe in a God but all Christians do and this explanation is addressed to them.

 

[Sailor_Kenshin]

This is a question I’ve had for a while… having been Protestant and now Catholic, I do see a distinction there. Everything from the prayers to the writings of the Saints or statues or artwork… seems to emphasize suffering: either the suffering of Christ, Mary, or our own. Then in theology…the whole concept of redemptive suffering. When I was Protestant it wasn’t really mentioned, except that it’s something bad that’s not from God. Maybe it depends what denomination you are. I was non denominational, a lot like Baptist.

what do you think? what are the implications of this?

I’m looking for different views, both Catholic and non Catholic

Everyone suffers; but I believe the Catholic Church is the only one that makes suffering meaningful.

 

[PJM]

=Monica4316-This is a question I’ve had for a while… having been Protestant and now Catholic, I do see a distinction there. Everything from the prayers to the writings of the Saints or statues or artwork… seems to emphasize suffering: either the suffering of Christ, Mary, or our own. Then in theology…the whole concept of redemptive suffering. When I was Protestant it wasn’t really mentioned, except that it’s something bad that’s not from God. Maybe it depends what denomination you are. I was non denominational, a lot like Baptist.

what do you think? what are the implications of this?

I’m looking for different views, both Catholic and non Catholic

Luke 9:"23 And he said to all, "If any man would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross daily and follow me.For whoever would save his life will lose it; and whoever loses his life for my sake, he will save it.For what does it profit a man if he gains the whole world and loses or forfeits himself?

John 15: "20 Remember the word that I said to you, ‘A servant is not greater than his master.’ If they persecuted me, they will persecute you; if they kept my word, they will keep yours also. But all this they will do to you on my account, because they do not know him who sent me. If I had not come and spoken to them, they would not have sin; but now they have no excuse for their sin."

**1 Peter 4:15 "But let none of you suffer as a murderer, or a thief, or a wrongdoer, or a mischief-maker; 16 yet if one suffers as a Christian, let him not be ashamed, but under that name let him glorify God. For the time has come for judgment to begin with the household of God; and if it begins with us, what will be the end of those who do not obey the gospel of God?

***Your question seems to require a subjective reply, although there exist Biblical evidence to support your conclusion.

I suspect that if there is a single culprit, it is the errant theology of OSAS. If this were actually true, there would be no reason, no justification for suffering. Indeed it would seem to give evidence that "God is not “all good” which of course God, is has to be in Conformance to His Divine Nature.

Suffering is a gift from God and it is necessary to never forget that God will never test one beyond ones endurance WITH God as helper.

The purpose of suffering, mental, physical, spiritual is to first aid us in attaining our personal salvation as a means of purification or the process of being be perfected. ***

***James 1: 2 “Count it all joy, my brethren, when you meet various trials, 3 for you know that the testing of your faith produces steadfastness. 4 And let steadfastness have its full effect, that you may be perfect and complete, lacking in nothing.”

Mt. 5: 48 “You, therefore, must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect.” ***

1 Peter 1: 14 “ As obedient children, do not be conformed to the passions of your former ignorance, 15 but as he who called you is holy, be holy yourselves in all your conduct; since it is written, “You shall be holy, for I am holy.” 17 And if you invoke as Father him who judges each one impartially according to his deeds, conduct yourselves with fear throughout the time of your exile.”

Catholics are graced and blessed by God by virtue of His Will and Sacramental Graces not available outside of His CC, to be able to understand the purpose of suffering. Knowing full well that only those who “are perfect” can attain heaven. Suffering has the same effect as Purgatory on our souls. Both have the effect of purification, as preparation for entry into heaven.
*
The more one suffers on earth, the more one accepts the crosses God makes for us, and the more we are conformed to the very Will of God, and thus lessen the necessary time for us in Purgatory.

Love and prayers*

 

[ledwith]

A very good question,For a start i dont like suffering and dont ever go out of my way to pursue it.On the other hand is living my catholicism suffering (no) what i mean is, fasting
absitnence of one kind or another.tolerance at home workplace and so on.forgiving and this is a big one.Bankers Politicians.Realistically were it not for the examples we have in our faith
and scripture and the saint’s and to realize that life is much the same now as then .Anyway it is a great journey and i always hold on to John 10.I have come that you may have life and have it to the full.(keep on the sunny side)

 

[ML561]

None of us can escape suffering in this world. I believe that we as Catholics are blessed with that understanding and we can pray for the strength to bear such suffering as will inevitably come to us. One beautiful prayer I have heard says in part…“Do not pray for an easy life…pray to become a stronger person” the better to bear whatever suffering may come.

That said, I must say that I am extremely perplexed and disturbed by what I have heard of certain saints and religious people who inflict tortures upon themselves, starve themselves, go without bathing, wear hair shirts full of lice, and so on. I am inclined to think that that is a sign of serious mental disturbance rather than holiness, and not to be imitated. Instead of these extreme practices, wouldn’t it be better to make every attempt to serenely bear the trials and tribulations which will come to all of us anyway? Or does God really want us to do bizarre things like wrap ourselves in barbed wire?

Some denominations do minimize suffering or even hint that if someone is suffering it is because God is displeased with him or her or they preach the “gospel of wealth and health”. I have never agreed with that. But some Catholics in my opinion have let the emphasis on suffering get way out of hand. I welcome your feedback on this question, as it still perplexes me. Grace and Peace be with you.

 

[Gabriella_San_S]

What’s the healthy balance? For instance, self inflicted suffering like hairshirts or cilice, or other types of suffering? I have heard it is done under spiritual direction but I am trying to imagine how far this can go. I also have seen cases where it is not endorsed by the church but horrendous self punishment goes on in a public setting by getting nailed to crosses and other bloody bloody stuff. So, if that is the non approved extremist way I guess I am looking for the boundry line and how far one can go.
How about fasting to the point of passing out? Would that be okay?

Most penitential practices and fasts have the potential to be carried to the extreme depending on individual personalities, the extent of one’s zeal to make reparation for sin and especially in the case of scrupulosity,that is why spiritual direction is critical.
But many saintly penitents throughout the ages, and even to the present day, in the simple living out of their state in life “with great love” as in the little way of St.Therese of Lisieux, are meriting many graces for themselves and for souls most in need of God’s mercy.

 

[antonabe]

Most penitential practices and fasts have the potential to be carried to the extreme depending on individual personalities, the extent of one’s zeal to make reparation for sin and especially in the case of scrupulosity,that is why spiritual direction is critical.
But many saintly penitents throughout the ages, and even to the present day, in the simple living out of their state in life “with great love” as in the little way of St.Therese of Lisieux, are meriting many graces for themselves and for souls most in need of God’s mercy.

Quite true,in addition I would like to add that penitance,fasting,inflicting pain on oneself done over the years by Saints are done in reparation for the Sins of man particularly the Sins of the Flesh.Some Saints performed these acts to discipline themselves during bouts of temptations.Even in the context of our daily life vivid thoughts flash through our minds maybe as dreams, remniscent of our past Sins,and penance,fasting etc is the best way of staying in the path of grace.

 

[brkn1]

Quite true,in addition I would like to add that penitance,fasting,inflicting pain on oneself done over the years by Saints are done in reparation for the Sins of man particularly the Sins of the Flesh.Some Saints performed these acts to discipline themselves during bouts of temptations.Even in the context of our daily life vivid thoughts flash through our minds maybe as dreams, remniscent of our past Sins,and penance,fasting etc is the best way of staying in the path of grace.

I understand that a Christian must expect all sorts of persecution as a result of being a Christian. Christ told us this would be the case.

Fasting also has a biblical basis.

Self-inflicted pain for the reparation of any sort of sin has no basis in Scripture. Christ did not inflict His physical sufferings upon Himself as He paid the full purchase price for sin.
Where is there any Scripture that supports the idea that a sinful man can pay for any of his own or other’s sins by self-inflicted pain etc.?

The whole idea of ‘meriting grace’ is the same as saying ‘earning a free gift’. There is no such thing as an ‘earned free gift’. ‘Earned’ and ‘free gift’ are mutually exclusive and opposite terms.

 

[antonabe]

I understand that a Christian must expect all sorts of persecution as a result of being a Christian. Christ told us this would be the case.

Fasting also has a biblical basis.

Self-inflicted pain for the reparation of any sort of sin has no basis in Scripture. Christ did not inflict His physical sufferings upon Himself as He paid the full purchase price for sin.
Where is there any Scripture that supports the idea that a sinful man can pay for any of his own or other’s sins by self-inflicted pain etc.?

The whole idea of ‘meriting grace’ is the same as saying ‘earning a free gift’. There is no such thing as an ‘earned free gift’. ‘Earned’ and ‘free gift’ are mutually exclusive and opposite terms.

I reproduce a passage from the original Catholic Encyclopaedia on Mortification with a quotation from St Paul.Penance and other forms of martification will not expiate ones own sins but will expiate the Sins of the World.

“Mortification, one of the methods which Christian asceticism employs in training the soul to virtuous and holy living. The term originated with St. Paul, who traces an instructive analogy between Christ dying to a mortal and rising to an immortal life, and His followers who renounce their past life of sin and rise through grace to a new life of holiness. “If you live after the flesh”, says the apostle, “you shall die, but if through the spirit you mortify the deeds of the flesh, you shall live” (Rom., viii, 13; cf. also Col., iii, 5, and Gal., v, 24). From this original use of the term we see that mortification, though under one aspect it is a law of death, under another and more fundamental aspect it is a law of life, and so does not destroy but elevates nature. What it slays is the disease of the soul, and by slaying this it restores and invigorates the soul’s true life.”

 

[Shin]

I understand that a Christian must expect all sorts of persecution as a result of being a Christian. Christ told us this would be the case.

Fasting also has a biblical basis.

Self-inflicted pain for the reparation of any sort of sin has no basis in Scripture. Christ did not inflict His physical sufferings upon Himself as He paid the full purchase price for sin.
Where is there any Scripture that supports the idea that a sinful man can pay for any of his own or other’s sins by self-inflicted pain etc.?

The whole idea of ‘meriting grace’ is the same as saying ‘earning a free gift’. There is no such thing as an ‘earned free gift’. ‘Earned’ and ‘free gift’ are mutually exclusive and opposite terms.

Christ’s crucifixion was His decision, and the decision of the Father. . Christ’s entire life was one of freely chosen suffering by Him, on the contrary to any idea that His life was not that of The Man of Sorrows.

While it is true we cannot merit the grace of initial salvation, we can merit other graces – because God has promised them. And those other graces can make or break our salvation while not being the one grace we can’t merit, that of salvation. It’s not a contradiction, there are simply different kinds of graces (in fact if you look at the Catholic Encyclopedia there are -many- -many- different names and kinds of grace).

A rocket may gain the fuel needed to fly from one person, but it also needs a lot of other equipment to complete the trip – the other equipment isn’t what fuels the rocket, but without it you’ll never make it. So too it is with the grace of initial justification. You may be justified but if you lack graces that are virtues to maintain it, it’s all over, you’re back in sin in a heartbeat.

If your Father gives you a dollar to go to the store and buy candy, you paid for the candy with the money He gave you – so you merited the candy, it’s what’s promised for the money – but the ability to gain the candy and merit it was given to you first. You had to cooperate with it and actually go buy the candy yourself too. That’s cooperation with grace.

Earned and free gift aren’t exclusive. It’s like mowing the lawn for your Father… He gave you the lawn, the work, the promise of money afterwards – it’s all Him that enabled you to do it, but nevertheless you had to do it to get it and merit it.

We don’t merit salvation directly of ourselves, but we do gain it in Christ, through His merit because of His gift. And what we merit in other ways in Christ can make or break it in ourselves and in others.

Our suffering is a sacrifice we can offer up and be joined and a part of Christ in doings so. The more we suffer with Christ, the more we are like Him in His life because that was what His life was, for our sake, a suffering sacrifice to atone for us. Glory be to the Lord. . .

 

[Bob_Crowley]

This is a question I’ve had for a while… having been Protestant and now Catholic, I do see a distinction there. Everything from the prayers to the writings of the Saints or statues or artwork… seems to emphasize suffering: either the suffering of Christ, Mary, or our own. Then in theology…the whole concept of redemptive suffering. When I was Protestant it wasn’t really mentioned, except that it’s something bad that’s not from God. Maybe it depends what denomination you are. I was non denominational, a lot like Baptist.

what do you think? what are the implications of this?

I’m looking for different views, both Catholic and non Catholic

I don’t hear it so much in ordinary Catholic circles, but there seems to be far more emphasis on suffering in Catholic literature. There are some Protestant books on suffering, eg. Phillip Yancey’s “DIsappointment with God”, but there seems to be more emphasis in Catholic literature. I quite often browse though Protestant bookstores (one of my bad habits is buying too many books, and the other reason is that there is a distinct shortage of easily accessible Catholic bookstores where I live - the Protestants seem to be more into books, even if they aren’t into suffering) and they don’t emphasise suffering a great deal.

In particular I don’t see redemptive suffering feature much in Protesant literatue. They seem to think Christ had to do it all by Himself, and by and large ignore the bit about being part of Christ’s (suffering) body, or Paul’s comment that he helped to fill the suffering of Christ.

That said, I’m really not all that keen on suffering myself.:nope:

 

[PJM]

***Dear friends in Christ,

Please consider carefully and prayerfully.

Suffering is neither accidental nor incidental!

God has a plan, God is in charge.

Love and prayers,***

 

[anode]

I think that there is a tendency among certain groups to emphasize suffering and passivity. The latter in the ‘accepting God’s will’ school, praying to Mary or the saints and lighting candles to salve one’s woes. Protestants tend to rely action and self-help as a way to resolve difficulties. This has been very noticeable in the Protestant inroads being made in Central and South America.

The other is a tendency to romanticize the suffering and death of the saints, particularly young nuns like St. Therese and St. Teresa of the Andes. Also Mother Teresa, who appeared to treasure suffering, in herself and others. (She apparently did not make serious attempts to alleviate suffering in her hostels, for which she had ample funds.) This can be quite dangerous in the impressionable young, particularly young girls, who romanticize St. Therese’ terrible suffering from TB, (and St. Bernadette, much worse and less well-known) and want to imitate her. Fortunately I don’t think that this tendency is nearly as widespread as the passivity, but in its way, is just as dangerous.

 

[peary]

I’m Catholic, and I want to respond to this.

NonCatholic denominations have never understood suffering except that I even heard that ‘bad’ people suffer, otherwise they weren’t bad or sinful. And that has to do with the “feel good” and “prosperity gospel” embraced by so many. If God loves you, you will not suffer; if you are not part of his favor, you suffer.

I hate to suffer, and that is being honest. I don’t like crisis in my life; I don’t like battling other people, I don’t like to hurt physically, etc. I flee from pain. But I have to face it, in one way or another, just as Our Lord did, just as His disciples did, and do.

Many Catholics who suffer in one way or another have rediscovered what “redemptive suffering means” - that they consciously unite their sufferings to those of Christ. They turn suffering into a grace rather than a curse. Does it make life any easier? Absolutely not. But it gives suffering a meaning that would otherwise be meaningless. Christ, who suffered for our own sins, understands our personal sufferings and loves us to the point that he takes our sufferings to His own.

 

[ez3714]

I understand that a Christian must expect all sorts of persecution as a result of being a Christian. Christ told us this would be the case.

Fasting also has a biblical basis.

Self-inflicted pain for the reparation of any sort of sin has no basis in Scripture. Christ did not inflict His physical sufferings upon Himself as He paid the full purchase price for sin.
Where is there any Scripture that supports the idea that a sinful man can pay for any of his own or other’s sins by self-inflicted pain etc.?

The whole idea of ‘meriting grace’ is the same as saying ‘earning a free gift’. There is no such thing as an ‘earned free gift’. ‘Earned’ and ‘free gift’ are mutually exclusive and opposite terms.

“Piling On” is a 15-yard penalty, so I don’t want to do that to you. However, we apparently have some common background; perhaps we can help each other make sense of these doctrines.

One thing that makes me pause and gives the Catholic position additional credence is the concept of “heavenly heirarchy,” to coin a phrase. While it is true we are “joint heirs with Christ,” (Romans 8:17) it doesn’t appear we are equal heirs. In the Sermon on the Mount, Our Lord speaks of those who are greater and lesser. Then His answer to the question of how to become great in Heaven (Matthew 18:1) suggests our hosts might have a point.

Salvation is the gift freely given. But would you agree there are costs involved in accepting the gift, and further costs incurred in getting the “upgrade”?

 

[Shin]

‘Our Lord and Savior lifted up his voice and said with incomparable majesty: “Let all men know that grace comes after tribulation. Let them know that without the burden of afflictions it is impossible to reach the height of grace. Let them know that the gifts of grace increase as the struggles increase. Let men take care not to stray and be deceived. This is the only true stairway to paradise, and without the cross they can find no road to climb to heaven.” When I heard these words, a strong force came upon me and seemed to place me in the middle of a street, so that I might say in a loud voice to people of every age, sex and status: “Hear, O people; hear, O nations. I am warning you about the commandment of Christ by using words that came from his own lips: We cannot obtain grace unless we suffer afflictions. We must heap trouble upon trouble to attain a deep appreciation in the divine nature, the glory of the sons of God and perfect happiness of soul.” “If only mortals would learn how great it is to possess divine grace, how beautiful, how noble, how precious. How many riches it hides within itself, how many joys and delights! No one would complain about his cross or about troubles that may happen to him, if he would come to know the scales on which they are weighed when they are distributed to men.”’

St. Rose of Lima

‘When it is all over you will not regret having suffered; rather you will regret having suffered so little, and suffered that little so badly.’

St. Sebastian Valfre

‘Those who reach the goal without falling do so through hating themselves and all worldly desires, distractions, pleasures and preoccupations, for this is what ‘denying oneself’ amounts to. Hence everyone expels himself from the kingdom by his own choice, through not embracing suffering and denying himself for the sake of the truth, but wanting to enjoy something of this world in addition to that divine longing, and not surrendering the whole inclination of his will to God. This may be understood from a single example. On examining himself a man realizes that what he is so eager to do is wicked. At first he feels doubt about it in his heart. Next, the measure and balance in his conscience make it clear inwardly whether the bias inclines to love for God or love for the world; and after that he proceeds to outward action.’

St. Symeon Metaphrastis