If we're justfully punished in Purgatory, then why was Jesus punished?

[Fidelis]

John Colean:

Fidelis:

Calling Scripture and Sacred Tradition “equal” is probably not the best way to put it, but as Catholics we do regard them as equally authoritative. This is what the Catechism says:

What you seem to be saying is that Scripture and tradition are kinda sorta equal, but not really. Not sure where we stand of this.

Where I stand on this is where the Church stands, as quoted in the Catechism section provided above and here:

**
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TRADITION AND SACRED SCRIPTURE **

One common source. . .

80 “Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture, then, are bound closely together, and communicate one with the other. For both of them, flowing out from the same divine well-spring, come together in some fashion to form one thing, and move towards the same goal.” Each of them makes present and fruitful in the Church the mystery of Christ, who promised to remain with his own “always, to the close of the age”.

**. . . two distinct modes of transmission **

81 “Sacred Scripture is the speech of God as it is put down in writing under the breath of the Holy Spirit.”

“And [Holy] Tradition transmits in its entirety the Word of God which has been entrusted to the apostles by Christ the Lord and the Holy Spirit. It transmits it to the successors of the apostles so that, enlightened by the Spirit of truth, they may faithfully preserve, expound and spread it abroad by their preaching.”

82 As a result the Church, to whom the transmission and interpretation of Revelation is entrusted, “does not derive her certainty about all revealed truths from the holy Scriptures alone. Both Scripture and Tradition must be accepted and honored with equal sentiments of devotion and reverence.”

What do you think of the tradition which says that we should only receive the Eucharist in bare feet, which is along the lines of God telling Moses to remove his shoes when he approach the burning bush?

I think it is a quaint but non-essential ecclesial tradition (with a small “t”) as addressed in the other CCC quote I provided:

**Apostolic Tradition and ecclesial traditions **

83 The Tradition here in question comes from the apostles and hands on what they received from Jesus’ teaching and example and what they learned from the Holy Spirit. The first generation of Christians did not yet have a written New Testament, and the New Testament itself demonstrates the process of living Tradition.

Tradition is to be distinguished from the various theological, disciplinary, liturgical or devotional traditions, born in the local churches over time. These are the particular forms, adapted to different places and times, in which the great Tradition is expressed. In the light of Tradition, these traditions can be retained, modified or even abandoned under the guidance of the Church’s Magisterium.

 

[Kurt_G]

Several posters have tried (unsuccessfully) to get an interpretation from John Colean on 1 Cor. 3:15 “…he will suffer loss, though he himself will be saved.”

John has responded to all the surrounding verses, but not that one. The entire passage, when looked at as a whole, actually fits the Church’s teachings on purgatory to a Tee (T?, Ti?, oh, well). I’m not saying those passages are “final, no way around it” proof for the doctrine, but I’d say let’s just score one for the Church.

As for a battle between Tradition and Scripture, there can be none, since Scripture itself is a Tradition of the Church. For instance, of the four Gospels known as Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, not a single one of these books gives the author… Is that amazing or what? Then how do we know to whom to attribute them? I would have to say CHURCH TRADITION. But then again maybe I’m missing something, I’m just not sure what.

Another “logical” point for the early acceptance of Purgatory would be this:
Even though non-Catholics do not acknowledge the Maccabees books as inspired, those books do make the historical case that Jews before Jesus’ time prayed for their dead. If it was a known practice to pray for the dead already at Jesus’ time, and if that practice were considered wrong by the new Christians, wouldn’t we expect them to include something somewhere in their writings, telling us NOT to pray for the dead?

So, regarding the continuing argument over our “cleanup shower” before we go into the banquet, aka Purgatory, I think I’d score another one for the Church, just from a logical standpoint.

 

[steve_b]

John Colean:

In the Greek, the term “Day” used in this passage is referring to an age as in the end times. In fact, when you see the term “Day of the Lord” or “Day of Christ” as used in the Jerome translation of this passage, it is generally referring to the end-times.

And scripture says a “day” in eternity is like a 1000 years and 1000 years is like a day. Since time and space don’t exist in eternity, I think we can agree that a “day” doesn’t necessarily mean 24 hrs, right?.
John Colean:

The ***fire ***referred to in these passages is being applied to the “works” that a man has done and not to the man himself. Look at your verse 13 again. “Each man’s WORK will be manifest . . . and the FIRE will test what sort of WORK each one has done.”

If Paul is saying Works are seperate from us, then we wouldn’t see punishment OR rewards for what we do. Paul doesn’t say that.
John Colean:

Although I have a general belief and understanding of a purgatorial process, I do not believe that purgatory removes our sins, but rather deals with the scars that are inflicted upon our spirit when we do sin. The illustration I like to use is to hammar a nail into a piece of fine wood, one nail for each of our sins. The Blood of Christ removes the nails, but even after we remove the nails from the wood, the scars still remain. Our spirit knows that it cannot entire into the presence of the Father is a scarred condition.

Blessings,

John

I’m cool with your example.

I sense we’re saying similar things, we’re just saying them differently.

Here’s an analogy that isn’t perfect, but I like the imagery…

Malachi 3:3 says: “He will sit as a refiner and purifier of silver.”

"This verse puzzled some women in a Bible study and they wondered what this statement meant about the character and nature of God. One of the women offered to find out the process of refining silver and get back to the group at their next Bible Study.
That week, the woman called a silversmith and made an appointment to watch him at work. She didn’t mention anything about the reason for her interest beyond her curiosity about the process of refining silver. As she watched the silversmith, he held a piece of silver over the fire and let it heat up. He explained that in refining silver, one needed to hold the silver in the middle of the fire where the flames were hottest as to burn away all the impurities.

The woman thought about God holding us in such a hot spot then she thought again about the verse that says: “He sits as a refiner and purifier of silver.” She asked the silversmith if it was true that he had to sit there in front of the fire the whole time the silver was being refined.

The man answered that yes, he not only had to sit there holding the silver, but he had to keep his eyes on the silver the entire time it was in the fire. If the silver was left a moment too long in the flames, it would be destroyed.

The woman was silent for a moment. Then she asked the silversmith,“How do you know when the silver is fully refined?” He smiled at her and answered, “Oh, that’s easy when I see my image in it.”

I think this also applies to 1 Corinthians that we’re talking about.

**

**

 

[GAssisi]

Also, never forget that our suffering is efficacious for our temporal debt ONLY and ONLY because it has been joined to Christ’s at our baptism. Without Him, we can do nothing.

Greg

 

[justinmatter]

John Colean:

Your point is well taken with regard to the New Testament canon being supported by the Traditions handed down from the time of the Apostles. We have always been taught that Sacred Scripture was the inspired word of God Traditions do not appears to enjoy this same level of inspiration and have not to my knowledge been codified on the same level as Sacred Scripture. If this be the case, then it does not appear to be reasonable to make the two (Scripture and Tradition) co-equals.

if we accept that the canon is accurate, we accept that Tradition made an infallible descision; logically Tradition should be considered infallible in all other doctrinal issues also. the term inspiration is used for scripture. as for Tradition…
perhaps we need to clearly define Tradition (upper case T) as in the CCC:

In the apostolic preaching. . .
76 In keeping with the Lord’s command, the Gospel was handed on in two ways:

• *orally *“by the apostles who handed on, by the spoken word of their preaching, by the example they gave, by the institutions they established, what they themselves had received - whether from the lips of Christ, from his way of life and his works, or whether they had learned it at the prompting of the Holy Spirit”;33
• in writing “by those apostles and other men associated with the apostles who, under the inspiration of the same Holy Spirit, committed the message of salvation to writing”.34
  . . . continued in apostolic succession
  [77](javascriptpenWindow(‘cr/77.htm’) "In order that the full and living Gospel might always be preserved in the Church the apostles left bishops as their successors. They gave them their own position of teaching authority."35 Indeed, "the apostolic preaching, which is expressed in a special way in the inspired books, was to be preserved in a continuous line of succession until the end of time."36
  [78](javascriptpenWindow(‘cr/78.htm’) This living transmission, accomplished in the Holy Spirit, is called Tradition, since it is distinct from Sacred Scripture, though closely connected to it. Through Tradition, "the Church, in her doctrine, life and worship, perpetuates and transmits to every generation all that she herself is, all that she believes."37

note especially 77 & 78 which say that it is the living transmission of the apostolic preaching, accomplished in the holy spirit. thus, Tradition, as understood from above, is the living teaching authority (majesterium) of the church
further, majesterial authority is infallible.
this is the true meaning of Tradition (as different from tradition). thus, while scripture is inspired and inerrant, Tradition is infallible. thus, they are coequal
further, Tradition is “codified” (i presume you mean officially written) as and when the need arises (usually in the form of a heresy that goes against the established teachings)
hope this helps. thanks

 

[John_Colean]

steve b:

And scripture says a “day” in eternity is like a 1000 years and 1000 years is like a day. Since time and space don’t exist in eternity, I think we can agree that a “day” doesn’t necessarily mean 24 hrs, right?.

That is correct, the term day has many meanings. The term “day” (in the greek the word is hemera) that Paul is using in I Cor is really referring to the end-times such as the final Judgement Day, which would probably be subsequent to our stay in purgatory. I am still not sure that the passage in I Cor 3:10ff would lead you to a purgatioral conclusion.

If Paul is saying Works are seperate from us, then we wouldn’t see punishment OR rewards for what we do. Paul doesn’t say that.

I assume you are talking about working your way to heaven, which is an entirely new subject that is probably out of the scope of this discussion.

I’m cool with your example.

Thanks http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon7.gif
I sense we’re saying similar things, we’re just saying them differently.

Noted and concur.http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon7.gif

Here’s an analogy that isn’t perfect, but I like the imagery…

Malachi 3:3 says: “He will sit as a refiner and purifier of silver.”

"This verse puzzled some women in a Bible study and they wondered what this statement meant about the character and nature of God. One of the women offered to find out the process of refining silver and get back to the group at their next Bible Study.
That week, the woman called a silversmith and made an appointment to watch him at work. She didn’t mention anything about the reason for her interest beyond her curiosity about the process of refining silver. As she watched the silversmith, he held a piece of silver over the fire and let it heat up. He explained that in refining silver, one needed to hold the silver in the middle of the fire where the flames were hottest as to burn away all the impurities.

The woman thought about God holding us in such a hot spot then she thought again about the verse that says: “He sits as a refiner and purifier of silver.” She asked the silversmith if it was true that he had to sit there in front of the fire the whole time the silver was being refined.

The man answered that yes, he not only had to sit there holding the silver, but he had to keep his eyes on the silver the entire time it was in the fire. If the silver was left a moment too long in the flames, it would be destroyed.

The woman was silent for a moment. Then she asked the silversmith,“How do you know when the silver is fully refined?” He smiled at her and answered, “Oh, that’s easy when I see my image in it.”

I think this also applies to 1 Corinthians that we’re talking about.

---

I see your analogy and concur that it could have a link to 1 Cor 3:10ff, but will have to pray on this a little further. http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon5.gif

 

[steve_b]

patg:

I fail to see “mass” mentioned in the third commandment, I see no ripple effects, and I don’t see God saying that eternal damnation is the automatic penalty.

Hebrews

25not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as is the habit of some, but exhorting one another, and so much the more as you see the day approaching.

26For if we sin willfully after we have received the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, 27but a certain fearful expectation of judgment, and fiery indignation which will devour the adversaries. 28Anyone who has rejected Moses’ law dies without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. 29Of how much worse punishment, do you suppose, will he be thought worthy who has trampled the Son of God underfoot, counted the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified a common thing, and insulted the Spirit of grace?

1. The apostles met every Lords Day. Failute to meet as you can see is a deadly sin
2. The sacrifice talked about is the Eucharist. That is what the Mass is. That is what the apostles celebrated when they met.
3. The one who misses mass on purpose as the scriptures say, dismisses the sacrifice which has saved him, regards it as something common, so why bother, it’s no big deal to miss. And the consequences to this attitude is frightful as you can see.

When the Church met on the Lords day, they celebrated the Eucharist [breaking of the bread] each time. That is from “Acts”. Jn 6:[bread of life discourse], shows the importance of the teaching on the Eucharist, and the Last Supper narrative in the Gospels, we see Jesus institute the Eucharist, where Jesus says;

“This is my body…this is the cup of my blood, the blood of the new and everlasting covenant, it will be shead for you and for all so that sins may be forgiven, DO this in memory of me.”

As scripture says above, to neglect such a grace by missing mass purposefully, is a deadly sin, because it makes common our salvation, and tramples the Son of God underfoot.

patg:

Ah, but no matter how many dinners I missed and no matter ho
w important they were MY father would not deny me his love or submit me to temporary or eternal torture.

You’ve been given very bad advice. Think about what you said by calling the Eucharist just a “dinner” you’ve missed. Review the above passages where it talks about reducing your salvation to something common.

As scripture says so well, if we sin willfully after we have received the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, for YOU.

 

[steve_b]

patg:

I fail to see “mass” mentioned in the third commandment, I see no ripple effects, and I don’t see God saying that eternal damnation is the automatic penalty.

Ah, but no matter how many dinners I missed and no matter how important they were MY father would not deny me his love or submit me to temporary or eternal torture.

on my last post to you I gave just verse but not the chapter to Hebrews it should read

Heb 10:

 

[Descipleof1]

enanneman:

We’re forgiven of our sins only because of Jesus’ sacrifice, and we will achieve Heaven (as long as we died in God’s friendship), but the stain of sin still is on our souls and must be purified. We can’t enter His presence unless we are perfect, and Purgatory provides that perfection.

Peace and God bless!

Eric

Eric so you are saying that Jesus’ sacrifice was not sufficient to purge us from all of our sin??? Check out Hebrews 10:10 By that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. There seems to be a contradiction doesn’t there…

 

[GAssisi]

Dear Descipleof1,

Please see my post #43.
God bless,
Greg

 

[steve_b]

John Colean:

I see your analogy and concur that it could have a link to 1 Cor 3:10ff, but will have to pray on this a little further. http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon5.gif

One comment. The word “the day” [hemera] used in 1 Cor 3:11 , has the following meanings from Strongs lexicon. As you can see, it can mean what we both suggested.

1) the day, used of the natural day, or the interval between sunrise and sunset, as distinguished from and contrasted with the night

a) in the daytime

b) metaph., “the day” is regarded as the time for abstaining from indulgence, vice, crime, because acts of the sort are perpetrated at night and in darkness

2) of the civil day, or the space of twenty four hours (thus including the night)

a) Eastern usage of this term differs from our western usage. Any part of a day is counted as a whole day, hence the expression “three days and three nights” does not mean literally three whole days, but at least one whole day plus part of two other days.

3) of the last day of this present age, the day Christ will return from heaven, raise the dead, hold the final judgment, and perfect his kingdom 4) used of time in general, i.e. the days of his life.

 

[steve_b]

GAssisi:

Also, never forget that our suffering is efficacious for our temporal debt ONLY and ONLY because it has been joined to Christ’s at our baptism. Without Him, we can do nothing.

Greg

True

 

[Fidelis]

GAssisi:

Dear Descipleof1,

Please see my post #43.
God bless,
Greg

And also my post # 6.

 

[John_Colean]

steve b:

One comment. The word “the day” [hemera] used in 1 Cor 3:11 , has the following meanings from Strongs lexicon. As you can see, it can mean what we both suggested.

1) the day, used of the natural day, or the interval between sunrise and sunset, as distinguished from and contrasted with the night

a) in the daytime

b) metaph., “the day” is regarded as the time for abstaining from indulgence, vice, crime, because acts of the sort are perpetrated at night and in darkness

2) of the civil day, or the space of twenty four hours (thus including the night)

a) Eastern usage of this term differs from our western usage. Any part of a day is counted as a whole day, hence the expression “three days and three nights” does not mean literally three whole days, but at least one whole day plus part of two other days.

3) of the last day of this present age, the day Christ will return from heaven, raise the dead, hold the final judgment, and perfect his kingdom 4) used of time in general, i.e. the days of his life.

The Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance has also been my source for determining the exact meanings of words from the original language. Even though Strong’s is based upon the KJV, it almost always contains the key words.
As you indicated above, the term “day” has many meaning some more subtle than others. The specific passage under discussion is referred to as “Day of Christ”, which as a Biblical phrase has a very special meaning related to the final judgement or end-times. My Jerome Cyclopedic index contains several NT references to “Day of the Lord” and again they relate to end-times. The specific references are Matt 24:29, 2 Peter 3:10 and Rev 16:14. Bottom line – not sure that the 1 Cor 3:10ff lead you to a Purgatorial conclusion.

Blessings,

John

 

[steve_b]

John Colean:

The Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance has also been my source for determining the exact meanings of words from the original language. Even though Strong’s is based upon the KJV, it almost always contains the key words.
As you indicated above, the term “day” has many meaning some more subtle than others. The specific passage under discussion is referred to as “Day of Christ”, which as a Biblical phrase has a very special meaning related to the final judgement or end-times. My Jerome Cyclopedic index contains several NT references to “Day of the Lord” and again they relate to end-times. The specific references are Matt 24:29, 2 Peter 3:10 and Rev 16:14. Bottom line – not sure that the 1 Cor 3:10ff lead you to a Purgatorial conclusion.

Blessings,

John

As you can see from the definition out of Strongs that I provided, the word for “the day” in 1 Cor 3:11 is not restricted to the final judgement. It CAN mean the day one dies. Judgement is then presumed at that moment, where everything one did in their life is tested by fire, as Paul says…

 

[steve_b]

John Colean:

The Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance has also been my source for determining the exact meanings of words from the original language. Even though Strong’s is based upon the KJV, it almost always contains the key words.
As you indicated above, the term “day” has many meaning some more subtle than others. The specific passage under discussion is referred to as “Day of Christ”, which as a Biblical phrase has a very special meaning related to the final judgement or end-times. My Jerome Cyclopedic index contains several NT references to “Day of the Lord” and again they relate to end-times. The specific references are Matt 24:29, 2 Peter 3:10 and Rev 16:14. Bottom line – not sure that the 1 Cor 3:10ff lead you to a Purgatorial conclusion.

Blessings,

John

Ooops! It was 1 Cor 3:13 not 1 Cor 3:11 that I meant. Anyway, here is the Strongs definition for “day” used in the passage we’re talking about.

blueletterbible.org/tmp_dir/words/2/1102547493-4813.html

 

[Kurt_G]

While we are bouncing around , can we address 1 Cor. 3:15 directly?
**“If someone’s work is burned up, he will suffer loss; the person will be saved but only as through fire”. **

It just sounds to me an awful lot like a final purification process, aka Purgatory. Am I the only one who sees it this way?

GOD BLESS US ALL!

 

[Immaculata]

PMV:

If we go to Purgatory and get all of our sins burned out, we’re punished and freed from our sins according to their length and all is fair and just, then why did Jesus suffer? We ourselves already justfully get punished for our own sins.
If we already justfully get punished in Purgatory for our sins, then why did Jesus have to be punished for our sins? It doesn’t seem to make any sense to me…it’s as if Jesus went through uneccesary pain for no reason!

We are changed from our imperfect soulish existence into a exquisitely soulful and heavenly existence. We are enabled to exist in the presence of an all holy God. Jesus has paid the price in full; we are simply putting on the wedding garments which are fire and light and might sting a bit if we haven’t yet become one with the fire of God.

 

[John_Colean]

steve b:

Ooops! It was 1 Cor 3:13 not 1 Cor 3:11 that I meant. Anyway, here is the Strongs definition for “day” used in the passage we’re talking about.

blueletterbible.org/tmp_dir/words/2/1102547493-4813.html

Yep, 3:13 is the correct verse and the Strong’s reference is 2250. Also, thanks for the blueletterbible web site. I was not familiar with it, but it looks much easier than thumbing through a 2 inch thick paper book.http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon7.gif

Blessings,

John

 

[steve_b]

Kurt G.:

While we are bouncing around , can we address 1 Cor. 3:15 directly?
"If someone’s work is burned up, he will suffer loss; the person will be saved but only as through fire".

It just sounds to me an awful lot like a final purification process, aka Purgatory. Am I the only one who sees it this way?

GOD BLESS US ALL!

You’re right on the money.