How is 2 Maccabees 12:43-46 evidence for Purgatory?

[Nathan_Wagar]

Scripture also says not to test God, but I digress.

The plenary indulgence only applies if there is no attachment to venial sin, so no, the Church can’t just “wipe it all away.” If there is no attachment in life to venial sin, then the plenary indulgence is effective. However, since the very fact that the person IS in purgatory implies that person had some form of attachment to venial sin, a plenary indulgence that wipes away all temporal punishment would be impossible to bestow, at least “all at once.” Now keep in mind, this is a logical argument on my part. I could be in error here. However, praying each individual person out of purgatory, determining when that person is out, etc; I just don’t see that as being feasible. It would also seem to deny individuals’ responsibility to pray for their own family members.

As for assurance of salvation that Protestants have, I fail to see it. Protestants have to rely on what they call “saving faith.” Yet the only one that judges that faith is a God that doesn’t speak audibly to them. So basically, if they follow it to their logical conclusion, they have no way of knowing if their faith passed God’s standards or not. If it sprouts good works, eh? What if they die before they had a chance to commit good works? Even admitting that there is a possible “degree” of faith is pretty risky for a Protestant’s theology.

We have a reasonable assurance of salvation, as Paul did. There is no guarantee. God is always faithful, but we are not. We can fall along the way. The forgiveness from Christ through the priest is our rock-solid proof of forgiveness. And purgatory isn’t Indian giving. Purgatory is being purified as we draw closer to God. Hell is we are going in the oppositie direction. If you consider the analogy of the temple, or even of the Jewish bride, your understanding doesn’t fit Padre. Is the Jewish bride that takes the purifying bath not still getting married? She isn’t being cast aside as an adulteress. Is the priest going through the section of purification not still on his way to the presence of God? He’s not walking out… You are drawing an analogy based off a false premise.

God Bless.

 

[bookgirl32]

As iron sharpens iron, so a [wo}man of God sharpens a [wo]man of God."

:yup:

 

[catholicsuffer]

If you read it though, it speaks specifically of those that were disobedient, and in the time on Noah, not necessarily to the limbo of the fathers. Also, the word tanslated as “spirits” (pneumata) is not normally a word associated with the souls of the dead. Also, since they are spirits that were disobedient in the time of Noah, it was unknown for some time what singled them out for the preaching of Christ.

Modern scholarship recovered Jewish traditions about the flood long lost. The main element of interest concerns an interpretation of “sons of God” mentioned in Gen 6:1. According to several Jewish texts, they are rebel angels called “watchers” who corrupted the world of men before the flood (1 Enoch 14, 5 and 18, 14). One tradition has them locked up, not in the depths of the earth, but in the lower heavens (2 Enoch 7, 1-3). The benefit of retrieving this passage is in the helping of the interpretation of the passage in 1 Peter. It seems that the spirits in prison are not human souls but fallen angels whose wickedness was closely connected with the flood in Jewish tradition. This accords well with the frequent use “spirits” for angels in the NT. The question remains whether Peter locates these angels in heaven above or the netherworld below. Some connect the verse with the ascension; that Christ proclaimed himself the victor over evil as he passed the spirits bound in the lower part of heaven. More likely, Peter is referring to Christ’s descent into Hades, for that is where the disobedient angels are kept in chains, according to other biblical texts that allude to this Jewish tradition ( 2 Peter 2:4, Jude 6). So in addition to liberating the righteous dead of the OT, he proclaimed himself conqueror of evil to the spirits whose power had just been shattered by his death.

The above paragraph was paraphrased from the Ignatius Catholic Study Bible by Scott Hahn and Curtis Mitch.

The limbo of the fathers merely refers to the portion of Hades where the righteous went awaiting the death of Christ, and that’s where the “descended into hell” from the apostles’ creed comes from. Hope that clears up some confusion.

That was some interesting thoughts. I always thought that there was a possible purgatory that some people go through while they were still in the flesh upon the earth. Sort of like there is a Hell for some people that are the children of Satan or have been turned over to the devil while still here in the world and there is a Heaven for those who are the children of God that some people attains(talking about people like Saint Francis, Saint Teresa of Avila, ect.). Guess, I have always ponders on these things and thought that it does exists. But for those who are more study in these matters, I guess they have specific(more refine) words for these conditions of men spiritual state

 

[Padrej]

Scripture also says not to test God, but I digress.

The plenary indulgence only applies if there is no attachment to venial sin, so no, the Church can’t just “wipe it all away.” WAIT a minute! the catechism says that the church has that power through the binding and loosing. This is covered in the Indulgences.

If there is no attachment in life to venial sin, then the plenary indulgence is effective. However, since the very fact that the person IS in purgatory implies that person had some form of attachment to venial sin, a plenary indulgence that wipes away all temporal punishment would be impossible to bestow, at least “all at once.” Hence my comment on Plenary indulgence moving to temporal looking like “Indian giving.” Either the church has the power or it does not. the way I am reading the catechism the indulgences, through the binding and loosing, relieve the temporal punishment of sin.

Now keep in mind, this is a logical argument on my part. I could be in error here. However, praying each individual person out of purgatory, determining when that person is out, etc; I just don’t see that as being feasible. It would also seem to deny individuals’ responsibility to pray for their own family members.

As for assurance of salvation that Protestants have, I fail to see it. Protestants have to rely on what they call “saving faith.” Yet the only one that judges that faith is a God that doesn’t speak audibly to them. So basically, if they follow it to their logical conclusion, they have no way of knowing if their faith passed God’s standards or not. If it sprouts good works, eh? What if they die before they had a chance to commit good works? Even admitting that there is a possible “degree” of faith is pretty risky for a Protestant’s theology.
**OK Here is where the terms are getting confused. In order for you to have a “saving faith” you must be “justified by faith” which there are paragraph after paragraph in the catechism that speak to this. So essentially Protestants and Catholics ARE on the same page HERE. We may refer to things differently at times. As to the works part of your comment, protestants are taught that we cannot judge another, but the Bible tells us that “you will know them by their fruits” so we can be fruit inspectors. Faith that is put into action will naturally produce the works because of the Holy Spirit dwelling in you. Yes a person outside of the church can do good deeds, but that does not make him right in the eyes of God. It is because of God working in us that we do the works, not because we want to earn favor or get someone out of Purgatory. We do the works because we love. Jesus said that “all will know you are my disciples if you have love for one another.”
As to the if they die comment: We believe that they would also be in the presence of God. Not risky. Just as if you had a new Catholic; the priest just absolved you and you just got a plenary indulgence and you died where would you go, you didn’t have the time to do the works. How would that same person have the same assurance that they would not be in Hell? We each have justification by faith in our beliefs.
**
We have a reasonable assurance of salvation, as Paul did. There is no guarantee. God is always faithful, but we are not. We can fall along the way. The forgiveness from Christ through the priest is our rock-solid proof of forgiveness.
I would say Paul had the full assurance of salvation and that there is guarantee there. you are correct about God being faithful and we are not.
Question: if you need rock solid proof of forgiveness from a priest then why have scripture?
The words are there in scripture that you are forgiven, is that not rock solid enough???

And purgatory isn’t Indian giving. Purgatory is being purified as we draw closer to God. Hell is we are going in the oppositie direction. If you consider the analogy of the temple, or even of the Jewish bride, your understanding doesn’t fit Padre. Is the Jewish bride that takes the purifying bath not still getting married? She isn’t being cast aside as an adulteress. Is the priest going through the section of purification not still on his way to the presence of God? He’s not walking out… You are drawing an analogy based off a false premise.
**I only drew the analogy of Indian giving on the basis that you receive a plenary indulgence then it it seems that you have some sin attachment it is no longer a plenary but temporal. How does that line up with “when the Son of Man sets you free you are free indeed.” To me a full pardon is just that. When Nixon was pardoned they couldn’t go back and say “oh he did this” and the the pardon would be limited so that they could arrest him for certain crimes. I believe that when God issues a pardon that is it, it is GONE! And I believe that when the church was given the power of binding and loosing they do have the power to say this sin is gone too and this punishment is gone too. Now I do understand that If they just handed out “get out of jail free” cards like candy people would run rampant in sin so there has to be a limitation. **
God Bless.

 

[Padrej]

That was some interesting thoughts. I always thought that there was a possible purgatory that some people go through while they were still in the flesh upon the earth. Sort of like there is a Hell for some people that are the children of Satan or have been turned over to the devil while still here in the world and there is a Heaven for those who are the children of God that some people attains(talking about people like Saint Francis, Saint Teresa of Avila, ect.). Guess, I have always ponders on these things and thought that it does exists. But for those who are more study in these matters, I guess they have specific(more refine) words for these conditions of men spiritual state

There used to be an early Protestant teaching that because Christ descended to Hell, The place of departed spirits (limbo), that it was empty and therefore because of Christ fulfilling ALL prophesies there was no need for belief in Purgatory. Your mentioning suffering here on earth tied into that belief.

 

[Nathan_Wagar]

Padrej, honestly it appears you did not read Randy’s post, because most of your questions you stated were answered by his response.

 

[Padrej]

I asked a friend about this; here is her response:
A brief response to your question would be: The Church can grant a plenary indulgence to anyone who seeks it, but she cannot retroactively apply it to someone who is dead. It requires the active cooperation of the one who seeks it, not a passive acceptance. In other words, the Church has a storehouse of spiritual treasures, based most heavily on Christ’s sacrifice, which also contains other people’s sacrifices, almsgiving, and so forth, their corporeal and spiritual acts of mercy. She can apply it to those seeking to amend their lives and who cooperate with God’s Will.

If the Church just flat-out granted them to anyone she sees fit or anyone who says he wants one but doesn’t want to do what’s required to gain one, she is denying the role of free will in our salvation. She would then in essence become like a overindulgent parent, letting children get something for nothing. That is the Lutheresque model; sit back, stay sinful, and let God do all the work. Yes, He gets the credit, but there’s a whole lot of Scripture that contradicts such quietism.

Since Christ requires us to drink the cup He drank and be baptized in the baptism He underwent, He expects us to take up our crosses and follow Him. We are called upon to suffer and make sacrifices, for our own spiritual good and the good of others around us.

In other words, we don’t get the bonus without the onus. Even a plenary indulgence (which is incredibly difficult to get, by the way) requires our cooperation, free will actions and some sort of sacrifice, and even then, it’s not a guaranteed ticket to Heaven. We can toss it away if we commit another mortal or even venial sin. It isn’t permanent.

And with all possible respect, this bishop has it exactly backward: From its earliest days, the Church recognized miracles as a sign of extraordinary holiness. The Apostles performed them regularly to establish the Divinity of the Gospel. Later generations didn’t have the Apostles, but every one had its saints, special men and women who performed miracles while living and even after death. The Church still requires miracles (which can, as in the case of Thomas Aquinas or Mother Teresa, be a body of work that impacted Christianity or the world positively) as proof of holiness.

One bad canonization would undermine the whole process. That’s why there is such care exercised to be certain that a person wasn’t just good enough to make it into purgatory or even Heaven, but so heroically good that they manifested God’s grace via miracles while still on the earth or even when having left it behind in death.

Regarding the part about you having it backwards, it may be that I did not convey your question correctly. Perhaps I was the one who had it backwards!

I do sincerely hope this is helpful.

It is helpful
Now that John Paul II has made the canonization process easier and Benedict XVI has followed suit it would seem that there may be a little more criticism coming from persons who think the process too easy.
I also am still looking at the many “justification through faith” passages of the catechism and thinking how close Protestants and Catholics truly are in beliefs; this was further evidenced by the post on the Cardinals meeting with the Lutherans and Methodists over that matter.
From what I have read and the link I have posted plenary indulgences are not that hard to come by. I posted a question to my died in the wool Catholic aunt on the indulgence matter and her response was it is more of an ongoing thing that you need to keep getting the Plenary indulgences and temporal indulgences as they “build up” because you never stop sinning and you never stop the need for indulgences. This is why frequent communion is important to some more liturgical protestants as it helps to feed us in the spiritual body and blood.
I do not agree with Luther, let us get this clear it keeps getting brought up by many Catholics and surprising there are many Lutherans that do not agree with Luther’s teachings either; to them he is their founder. So to paint them with a broad brush is unfair, and to include all Protestants with Luther’s beliefs is also unfair.

 

[Nathan_Wagar]

Padrej, in your link it said that to grant a plenary indulgence you have to be free of ALL attachment to venial sin. Do you have any idea how difficult that is? I don’t know if I’ll ever get over my addiction to pepsi-cola products…

 

[Padrej]

Padrej, in your link it said that to grant a plenary indulgence you have to be free of ALL attachment to venial sin. Do you have any idea how difficult that is? I don’t know if I’ll ever get over my addiction to pepsi-cola products…

The Bible also says that with all temptation that the Lord gives you a way out and that you will also not be tempted beyond what you are capable of enduring lest you say, “I am tempted by God.”
Does the Bible say that there is an addiction to Pepsi? It does speak of doing things to excess which then becomes a sin. It is like alcohol, the Bible forbids being drunk, but yet in another area it says , “drink a little wine for your stomach and your often infirmities.” The question then becomes, “how often are you infirm?”
If Little Debbie Swiss Rolls are in the house, I can think of all kinds of excuses to consume the whole box of those when I know I only need one. I think that is when it becomes the sin-- when we start to justify eating the rest of the pack when we know we only need ONE. I can make up stories to tell my wife about starving Etheopians coming for a visit and me needing to feed them and that is when the Swiss Roll becomes the sin.

I like to use the illustration of Christ, “if your right arm offends you, cut if off” to explain getting over an addiction. When I was giving up smoking it felt like some one was going to cut my arm off because it had become so much a part of me.

 

[Javl]

padrej:
Returning to the subject of purgatory. Have you read “Purgatory” by Fr. F.X.Schouppe?
If not, I have a copy which I will gladly send to you for your information. Although it was
written in the nineteenth century, I think it holds just as true today as it did then.

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

 

[Padrej]

padrej:
Returning to the subject of purgatory. Have you read “Purgatory” by Fr. F.X.Schouppe?
If not, I have a copy which I will gladly send to you for your information. Although it was
written in the nineteenth century, I think it holds just as true today as it did then.

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

From a Protestant viewpoint parts of this book would be considered heretical. For example:
Fr. Schouppe, who has written about purgatory from the revelations of the saints, tells us that Our Lady herself goes to purgatory to release the souls on Saturdays and her feast days. (Fr. F.X. Schouppe S.J. Purgatory Explained page 137 in 1973 edition) Fr. Schouppe refers to St. Peter Damien’s account of Our Lady releasing souls on the feast of her Assumption on August 15th. St. Peter Damien wrote of a certain lady having received an apparition from her deceased godmother who said,

during this great solemnity the Queen of Heaven descended into the midst of the purgatorial flames and delivered me, together with a large number of other souls, that we might enter Heaven on the feast of her Assumption. She exercises this great act of clemency each year; and, on this occasion alone, the number of those whom she delivered equals the population of Rome…In proof of the truth of my words, know that you yourself will die a year hence on the feast of the Assumption; if you outlive that period, believe that this was an illusion. (Fr. F.X. Schouppe S.J. Purgatory Explained page 138-139 in 1973 edition)

Other mystical sources indicate that the greatest number of souls is released from purgatory on Christmas Day. Our Lady promised to release from purgatory quickly those who wear the Scapular of Mount Carmel devoutly, not as a charm, but with proper devotion while living a holy life.

From a Protestant view point the power to forgive or grant clemency is in God’s hands alone. Find me scriptural backing for the above. I can find scriptural backing for praying to saints for intersession. But to believe in something that is a “vision” is where many protestants draw the line.

I know that there are some Catholics of the hard line conservative stock that believe that the priest has not said a proper funeral mass unless his stole is BLACK. If the stole is not black that person’s soul will never be delivered from Purgatory OR Hell. They believe this because of a “vision” that somebody had of their relative in the flames of hell begging them to have the priest say the mass with a black stole instead of whatever the current liturgical color. I know there are nuts in most every tree but when I heard that one I thought I had heard it all.

 

[Javl]

From a Protestant viewpoint parts of this book would be considered heretical. For example:
Fr. Schouppe, who has written about purgatory from the revelations of the saints, tells us that Our Lady herself goes to purgatory to release the souls on Saturdays and her feast days. (Fr. F.X. Schouppe S.J. Purgatory Explained page 137 in 1973 edition) Fr. Schouppe refers to St. Peter Damien’s account of Our Lady releasing souls on the feast of her Assumption on August 15th. St. Peter Damien wrote of a certain lady having received an apparition from her deceased godmother who said,

during this great solemnity the Queen of Heaven descended into the midst of the purgatorial flames and delivered me, together with a large number of other souls, that we might enter Heaven on the feast of her Assumption. She exercises this great act of clemency each year; and, on this occasion alone, the number of those whom she delivered equals the population of Rome…In proof of the truth of my words, know that you yourself will die a year hence on the feast of the Assumption; if you outlive that period, believe that this was an illusion. (Fr. F.X. Schouppe S.J. Purgatory Explained page 138-139 in 1973 edition)

Other mystical sources indicate that the greatest number of souls is released from purgatory on Christmas Day. Our Lady promised to release from purgatory quickly those who wear the Scapular of Mount Carmel devoutly, not as a charm, but with proper devotion while living a holy life.

From a Protestant view point the power to forgive or grant clemency is in God’s hands alone. Find me scriptural backing for the above. I can find scriptural backing for praying to saints for intersession. But to believe in something that is a “vision” is where many protestants draw the line.

I know that there are some Catholics of the hard line conservative stock that believe that the priest has not said a proper funeral mass unless his stole is BLACK. If the stole is not black that person’s soul will never be delivered from Purgatory OR Hell. They believe this because of a “vision” that somebody had of their relative in the flames of hell begging them to have the priest say the mass with a black stole instead of whatever the current liturgical color. I know there are nuts in most every tree but when I heard that one I thought I had heard it all.

OK on your point, and no I cannot provide scriptual evidence other than what the Jews believed up to this day.

As far as the episode of the Black Stole goes, that is absolutely ridiculous! I know that there are many old time European Catholics who are extremely superstitious, in violation
of God’s warnings, but thank God they are few and far between and those that ensue are dwindling. Many people though, regardless of their affiliation, through the ages have
looked upon religion as nothing but superstition. For these I pray the Holy Spirit to
enlighten them. Meanwhile, God Bless.

Len

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

 

[Javl]

padrej:

The latest news from the Vatican is that Pope Benedict XVI has changed the rules and to
allow disafffected Anglicans and Episcopalians to join the Catholic Church and still keep
their identity ( much like Hebrew Catholics ). The priests and Bishops will also retain their
status.To me this is great news! I hope that you are included in this rules change.
God Bless.

Len

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

 

[Padrej]

padrej:

The latest news from the Vatican is that Pope Benedict XVI has changed the rules and to
allow disafffected Anglicans and Episcopalians to join the Catholic Church and still keep
their identity ( much like Hebrew Catholics ). The priests and Bishops will also retain their
status.To me this is great news! I hope that you are included in this rules change.
God Bless.

Len

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

I know. I just got an email (lengthy) on this subject. Apparently I could come in as married and remain so until my wife dies and then I must remain celibate. For a while Benedict had the door more closed then John Paul. I and a few other of my colleagues had an audience with the Pope (John Paul II) but when he died the invitation was withdrawn by the Vatican with the explanation the Benedict was not as open to meeting with others as John Paul was.
That was rather a slap in the face.

 

[Padrej]

OK on your point, and no I cannot provide scriptual evidence other than what the Jews believed up to this day.

As far as the episode of the Black Stole goes, that is absolutely ridiculous! I know that there are many old time European Catholics who are extremely superstitious, in violation
of God’s warnings, but thank God they are few and far between and those that ensue are dwindling. Many people though, regardless of their affiliation, through the ages have
looked upon religion as nothing but superstition. For these I pray the Holy Spirit to
enlighten them. Meanwhile, God Bless.

Len

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

“What the Jews believe up to this day.” Which sect of Jews do you refer? Not even all Orthodox Jews believe in the holding place or “Gehenna” where you can be tormented by demons of your own making. Now does that belief of “demons tormenting” carry over into Catholic Purgatory??? I have not read about anything but a purifying fire in Catholic beliefs.
There are some Jews that also believe that the soul that gets reincarnated, that “that is the fire” of the holding place. Does that belief also carry over also?
Some Orthodox Jews believe that the soul goes to a holding place that is similar in description to the Christian heaven to await the Messiah.
So when you say you believe as the Jews do, I think you have to be very careful. Even in Jesus’ day there were debates on this; as you had the Sadusees who believed in no raising of the dead and the Pharisees who did. So even then who would you believe. Jesus only mentioned two places-- Heaven and Hell. So who do you believe??? The Jews or Jesus.

 

[crowcounty]

its talking more about the resurection than purgatory they show christian intercession which applys not jst to purgatory but mainly this is an act of faith iin the resurection.

 

[Padrej]

its talking more about the resurection than purgatory they show christian intercession which applys not jst to purgatory but mainly this is an act of faith iin the resurection.

The point hat was brought up was regarding the Jews believed in a holding place and this was carried over into Catholicism.
My point is there is no sect of the Jewish faith that can even come to agreement on this and each have things that differ on what happens to the body/soul after death. My other point was Jesus mentioned only two places in ALL of His teachings Heaven and Hell, he did not mention the holding place, that is claimed to be believed to exist be Jews of his time and today. Now the argument has been thrown up in past posts that “just because Jesus didn’t speak to this didn’t mean it didn’t exist.” HOWEVER, this SAME argument is thrown up by the gay rights groups also in defense of their actions. TO ME, IN MY OPINION, this is like saying, “We Jesus never spoke about the Easter Bunny so he must be real too because the rabbit was the first animal to see the risen Christ and God blessed that rabbit with magic powers.”
With all due respect does any of the other Jewish beliefs about “the holding place” also carry over when it comes to Purgatory like the “demons of our own making that torture us” and “our souls being reincarnated”? So why do Catholics cling to the excuse that “Jews had the belief so do we.” Can anyone answer me this question?

 

[crowcounty]

because by the holy spirit we are grafted into the family of david which is well a jewish family so if we are the heirs of the house of david then we are israelites and recipients of the promises of the covenant of the jews

 

[Padrej]

because by the holy spirit we are grafted into the family of david which is well a jewish family so if we are the heirs of the house of david then we are israelites and recipients of the promises of the covenant of the jews

So then you espouse the beliefs then of demons of your own making attacking you in this holding place? You espouse the teachings of reincarnation then if you are heirs of the promises and covenants of the Jews??? I have yet to see a Catholic who believes in those things.

What I am trying to say is IF you claim to believe as the Jews you must tread very cautiously as not all Jews believe the same even in the Orthodox portion of the Jewish faith. Reformed Jews may not even believe this way. So when you say, “we follow what the Jews believed” and say you have a reformed Jew that does not believe in the “holding place” your argument is lost.

 

[crowcounty]

So then you espouse the beliefs then of demons of your own making attacking you in this holding place? You espouse the teachings of reincarnation then if you are heirs of the promises and covenants of the Jews??? I have yet to see a Catholic who believes in those things.

What I am trying to say is IF you claim to believe as the Jews you must tread very cautiously as not all Jews believe the same even in the Orthodox portion of the Jewish faith. Reformed Jews may not even believe this way. So when you say, “we follow what the Jews believed” and say you have a reformed Jew that does not believe in the “holding place” your argument is lost.

we believe that the jews made one covenant and messed it up so bad that god himself hadto fullfill it and in fullfilling th old covenant he opened the door for a new blood covenant based on the blood of god since it is infinite and now since the new covenant with jesus who is god so basically we believe that the jews are beating a dead horse where as we catholics carry the mark of the new covenant in our hearts we are post messianic jews sort of but on the subject of betwen here and heaven ,before jesus death and resurection all the deacd faithful were alseep when saul conjres up samuel he alludes to the disturbance of his rest however after jesus the living god died and rose so that we could when you die you undergo purification before entering heaven some folks call it purgatory but who nows how long it takes or what exactly the proccess is and what difference would it make in the departement of saving souls.