Purgatory for Protestants?

[guanophore]

The Archbishop said he served the Prime Minister as a gesture of hope and to keep lines of communication open. The Archbishop also appears to be a politician.

Yes, this is regrettable.

That kind of backs up my initial comment.

Ok I think I lost track of that?

where then has the Church been justifying and redefining sexual immorality or any of the sins mentioned

Individuals misbehaving is not equivalent to the Church justifying and redefining sexual immorality or any of the sins mentioned in Scripture. There is official Church teaching on these matters that is found in the Catechism. Not all of the faithful are obedient to the faith, but that does not make the Teaching wrong.

 

[Wannano]

Wannano:

The Archbishop said he served the Prime Minister as a gesture of hope and to keep lines of communication open. The Archbishop also appears to be a politician.

Yes, this is regrettable.

That kind of backs up my initial comment.

Ok I think I lost track of that?

where then has the Church been justifying and redefining sexual immorality or any of the sins mentioned

Individuals misbehaving is not equivalent to the Church justifying and redefining sexual immorality or any of the sins mentioned in Scripture. There is official Church teaching on these matters that is found in the Catechism. Not all of the faithful are obedient to the faith, but that does not make the Teaching wrong.

Sure, but if the Church covers up, hids and doesn’t enforce the official Church teaching found in the Catechism, isn’t that justifying and redefining the root cause of the disobedience of some of the faithful.

 

[guanophore]

Sure, but if the Church covers up, hids and doesn’t enforce the official Church teaching found in the Catechism, isn’t that justifying and redefining the root cause of the disobedience of some of the faithful.

No, because the Teaching of the Church is not changed by those who fail to adhere to it. Failing to respond to the disobedience is a failure of leadership, and it is very damaging to the Church and to the world, through which we are to shine out as lights.

Failure of leadership does not equate to changing the Teaching of Christ, which is infallibly preserved in the Church by the Holy Spirit.

 

[Wannano]

Wannano:

Sure, but if the Church covers up, hids and doesn’t enforce the official Church teaching found in the Catechism, isn’t that justifying and redefining the root cause of the disobedience of some of the faithful.

No, because the Teaching of the Church is not changed by those who fail to adhere to it. Failing to respond to the disobedience is a failure of leadership, and it is very damaging to the Church and to the world, through which we are to shine out as lights.

Failure of leadership does not equate to changing the Teaching of Christ, which is infallibly preserved in the Church by the Holy Spirit.

Yes I agree it doesn’t equate but slowly changes by development. We are all sliding downhill.

 

[guanophore]

Yes I agree it doesn’t equate but slowly changes by development. We are all sliding downhill.

That is what I was trying to get you to give an example. What slow changes by development have been justifying and redefining sins?

 

[Wesrock]

I am new here so please forgive me if this has been discussed already and please direct me to the discussion(s).

In the not-so-distant past my Catholic friends were quite consistent in asserting that all Protestants would go to hell unless they converted to Catholicism. In recent years the Catholic Church has, IMO, shifted its public views of Protestants and now says that Protestants can share in the hope of salvation, that Protestant baptism is valid, and that Protestants are “separated brethren”.

My questions are relatively straightforward, as follow:

1. Can any person be saved who dies in mortal sin?
2. Is willfully and knowingly not attending regular weekly mass at a Catholic church a mortal sin?
3. If a Protestant dies without ever attending regular weekly mass at a Catholic church can he be saved?
4. If Protestants are saved, do they also go to Purgatory?
5. If a Protestant goes to Purgatory does he suffer torment and punishment for his lifetime of not being Catholic or does he merely suffer for the consequences of his other sins?
6. If Purgatory is a pleasant cleansing experience as some Catholics now preach, do Protestants also get this experience or are they sent somewhere else?

(1) No. Mortal sin requires grave matter, full knowledge, and full consent. But anyone who dies in mortal sin is not saved.

(2) It’s hard to know what exactly is meant by knowingly and willingly. A Protestant who chooses to never go to mass could hypothetically still be saved.

(3) Yes.

(4) Yes, unless they die in a state of perfect grace. I think it would be even more difficult for a Protestant to die in a state of perfect grace apart from martyrdom, and it isn’t easy already, but I expect most Catholics go to Purgatory first, too.

(5) I can’t really say. I don’t think it breaks down specifically along those lines, but I imagine someone without access to the sacraments would normally need a bit more cleaning.

(6) I don’t know that Purgatory is pleasant. Any bath metaphor I’d use would still involve some less-than-pleasant abrasove scrubbing to het the dirt off, but to answer your question, there’s only one Purgatory. Some people might need to be scrubbed longer and harder than others to get clean (that goes for Catholics, too), but anyone who ends up in Purgatory goes through the same general idea. It’s the same place.

 

[Wannano]

Wannano:

Yes I agree it doesn’t equate but slowly changes by development. We are all sliding downhill.

That is what I was trying to get you to give an example. What slow changes by development have been justifying and redefining sins?

One obvious one whether Catholic or not is the whole sexual revolution, hetero or homosexual.

 

[guanophore]

One obvious one whether Catholic or not is the whole sexual revolution, hetero or homosexual.

What seems obvious to me is that the whole sexual revolution has required a great deal of shepherding on the part of the Church that was not needed previously. Expectations about proper sexual conduct were not questioned and were taken for granted up through the 1950’s in the US.

At this point, the Church has had to work overtime to define, explain, and instruct the faithful on issues that did not exist. One of those is artificial birth control. Another is in vitro fertilization.

Pope JP 2 saw this and produced Theology of the Body, which is a great gift to the Church. I think we have only just begun to unpack it.

http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-act...ng/catholic-teaching/theology-of-the-body.cfm

As to sexual orientation, there have always been homosexual persons in about the same percentage in the general population. Current societal, political, and legal trends have exacerbated the moral problems associated with it.

 

[Wannano]

Wannano:

One obvious one whether Catholic or not is the whole sexual revolution, hetero or homosexual.

What seems obvious to me is that the whole sexual revolution has required a great deal of shepherding on the part of the Church that was not needed previously. Expectations about proper sexual conduct were not questioned and were taken for granted up through the 1950’s in the US.

At this point, the Church has had to work overtime to define, explain, and instruct the faithful on issues that did not exist. One of those is artificial birth control. Another is in vitro fertilization.

Pope JP 2 saw this and produced Theology of the Body, which is a great gift to the Church. I think we have only just begun to unpack it.

http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-act...ng/catholic-teaching/theology-of-the-body.cfm

As to sexual orientation, there have always been homosexual persons in about the same percentage in the general population. Current societal, political, and legal trends have exacerbated the moral problems associated with it.

I would add that the whole divorce and remarry phenomena has escalated to the point where it is now normal. At one time one was excommunicated from the Church for unrepented sinful practice, now it is termed things like irregular relationships.

 

[guanophore]

I would add that the whole divorce and remarry phenomena has escalated to the point where it is now normal. At one time one was excommunicated from the Church for unrepented sinful practice, now it is termed things like irregular relationships.

Sadly, yes. Prior to the 60’s, there was an expectation that marriage was for life. In fact, most couples don’t even bother getting married. We have serial polygamy on an unprecedented scale. What we have is a need to respond pastorally to persons who have disregarded the teaching of the Church.

At one time one was excommunicated from the Church for unrepented sinful practice, now it is termed things like irregular relationships.

Ah, I see what you are saying. I am not sure what you think “excommunication” means. It does not mean “kicked out of the church”. It means that one is in a state of mortal sin and they are excluded from the Sacraments (except confession) as a discipline to urge them to repentance.

The Church Teaching has been clear and consistent about the expectations around marriage. The challenge we are facing is to shepherd also the faithful who have acted outside of those expectations, and want to correct it. Most Catholics find themselves in these "irregular relationships’ because they are not well catechized. They did not seek an annulment prior to getting remarried, then later want to raise children in the Church. The Church does not want to turn away such persons, but neither can she change Jesus’ teaching about marriage.

This is a good example of how the Church has always been faced with these moral dilemmas. We can see it in the letters of Paul, who, though he did not believe in slavery, still supported this social institution. In the end, the Roman Empire collapsed in due to the rejection of slavery (among other things).

I think what you might be reacting to is a difference in disciplines and pastoral handling of people. The doctrine does not change, but the way we respond to the current culture does change. For example, the current understanding of Protestants as our separated brethren, rather than heretics doomed to hell.

 

[Wannano]

Wannano:

I would add that the whole divorce and remarry phenomena has escalated to the point where it is now normal. At one time one was excommunicated from the Church for unrepented sinful practice, now it is termed things like irregular relationships.

Sadly, yes. Prior to the 60’s, there was an expectation that marriage was for life. In fact, most couples don’t even bother getting married. We have serial polygamy on an unprecedented scale. What we have is a need to respond pastorally to persons who have disregarded the teaching of the Church.

At one time one was excommunicated from the Church for unrepented sinful practice, now it is termed things like irregular relationships.

Ah, I see what you are saying. I am not sure what you think “excommunication” means. It does not mean “kicked out of the church”. It means that one is in a state of mortal sin and they are excluded from the Sacraments (except confession) as a discipline to urge them to repentance.

The Church Teaching has been clear and consistent about the expectations around marriage. The challenge we are facing is to shepherd also the faithful who have acted outside of those expectations, and want to correct it. Most Catholics find themselves in these "irregular relationships’ because they are not well catechized. They did not seek an annulment prior to getting remarried, then later want to raise children in the Church. The Church does not want to turn away such persons, but neither can she change Jesus’ teaching about marriage.

This is a good example of how the Church has always been faced with these moral dilemmas. We can see it in the letters of Paul, who, though he did not believe in slavery, still supported this social institution. In the end, the Roman Empire collapsed in due to the rejection of slavery (among other things).

I think what you might be reacting to is a difference in disciplines and pastoral handling of people. The doctrine does not change, but the way we respond to the current culture does change. For example, the current understanding of Protestants as our separated brethren, rather than heretics doomed to hell.

All joking aside, were not the “heretics” in the Reformation time and before “kicked out” of the Church in the way I might be phrasing? Were they just excluded from the Sacraments?

 

[Spyridon]

1. Can any person be saved who dies in mortal sin?
2. Is willfully and knowingly not attending regular weekly mass at a Catholic church a mortal sin?
3. If a Protestant dies without ever attending regular weekly mass at a Catholic church can he be saved?
4. If Protestants are saved, do they also go to Purgatory?
5. If a Protestant goes to Purgatory does he suffer torment and punishment for his lifetime of not being Catholic or does he merely suffer for the consequences of his other sins?
6. If Purgatory is a pleasant cleansing experience as some Catholics now preach, do Protestants also get this experience or are they sent somewhere else?

1. No. A person who dies in a definite state of mortal sin, without repenting, becomes guilty of the unforgivable sin (blasphemy against the Holy Ghost/final impenitence) and is eternally lost.
2. For a Catholic, yes. For a non-Catholic, probably not since most non-Catholics don’t possess the knowledge, but if they are sufficiently informed about the truth of the Church, and with full knowledge and deliberate consent reject it, it certainly could be a mortal sin.
3. Technically yes, but only through a combination of invincible ignorance and God’s Great Mercy. His chances of salvation are reduced however.
4. I would wager that between 95-99% of Protestants who end up in heaven, do so through the purifying flames of God. I would wager for faithful Catholics, probably 70-80% get to heaven via purgatory. I think the vast majority of people who end up in heaven, do so after some sort of purification.
5. A Protestant in purgatory will undergo the just amount of purification and temporal punishment for his sins as God deems fit, and God is not a respecter of persons.
6. I don’t think purgatory is necessarily a positive experience, aside from the fact that those being purified have the knowledge they are headed heavenward.

 

[guanophore]

All joking aside, were not the “heretics” in the Reformation time and before “kicked out” of the Church in the way I might be phrasing? Were they just excluded from the Sacraments?

No, there is no way to “kick” anyone out of the Church. We believe that Baptism joins a soul permanently to Christ, and there are supernatural changes that occur which cannot be undone. One cannot be “unborn again”. They may become “dead weight” in the Body, sources of necrosis to the community.

No, they are not just excluded from sacraments, but also fellowship.

15 “If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. 16 But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every word may be confirmed by the evidence of two or three witnesses. 17 If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector. " Matt. 18

Jesus was clear that we are to love our enemies, so we are bound to love the Gentile (non-believer) and tax collector (traitor). But we do not fellowship with them.

17 I appeal to you, brethren, to take note of those who create dissensions and difficulties, in opposition to the doctrine which you have been taught; avoid them.Rom. 16

10 As for a man who is factious, after admonishing him once or twice, have nothing more to do with him, 11 knowing that such a person is perverted and sinful; he is self-condemned.Titus 3

The term 'self condemned" is used in the Latin Church for self excommunication.

Ex latae sententiae means that the sinful act, in itself, triggers the excommunication.

So in answer to your question, no, the original Protestants were not “kicked out”, they excommunicated themselves.

Luther was given a formal pronouncement and document, since he had created so much public dissention, but this is not necessary for excommunication to be valid.

 

[Wannano]

Wannano:

All joking aside, were not the “heretics” in the Reformation time and before “kicked out” of the Church in the way I might be phrasing? Were they just excluded from the Sacraments?

No, there is no way to “kick” anyone out of the Church. We believe that Baptism joins a soul permanently to Christ, and there are supernatural changes that occur which cannot be undone. One cannot be “unborn again”. They may become “dead weight” in the Body, sources of necrosis to the community.

No, they are not just excluded from sacraments, but also fellowship.

15 “If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. 16 But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every word may be confirmed by the evidence of two or three witnesses. 17 If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector. " Matt. 18

Jesus was clear that we are to love our enemies, so we are bound to love the Gentile (non-believer) and tax collector (traitor). But we do not fellowship with them.

17 I appeal to you, brethren, to take note of those who create dissensions and difficulties, in opposition to the doctrine which you have been taught; avoid them.Rom. 16

10 As for a man who is factious, after admonishing him once or twice, have nothing more to do with him, 11 knowing that such a person is perverted and sinful; he is self-condemned.Titus 3

The term 'self condemned" is used in the Latin Church for self excommunication.

Ex latae sententiae means that the sinful act, in itself, triggers the excommunication.

So in answer to your question, no, the original Protestants were not “kicked out”, they excommunicated themselves.

Luther was given a formal pronouncement and document, since he had created so much public dissention, but this is not necessary for excommunication to be valid.

I see. Learned something today.

 

[steve-b]

where the Church has been justifying and redefining

steve-b:

Wannano,

I asked where has the Church redefined morality. Not any particular cleric who goes against the teaching.
if I make a controversial claim in a post, I automatically give the reference properly referenced, (usually a link) anticipating the one I’m talking to will ask for it. I never assume or presume the one I’m talking to will have to do their own work to prove what I’m saying.

Wannano:

I gave an actual reference to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and you passed it off saying participating in an abortion is automatic excommunication. Did you really think my point in that was that he was having an abortion?

Sorry if I left that impression

Participating in, can mean driving a woman to the abortion clinic, OR voting for (as ordinary voters) , or as politicians making law, for the right to have an abortion.

These subjects you bring up are also covered by the Church in canon law as well

Catholics in political life

Can homosexual men be priests

Worthiness to receive communion by then Card Ratzinger

Explaining canon 915 Card Burke

Biden etc etc denied communion

 

[steve-b]

Wannano:

guanophore:

Wannano:

Are there not homosexual priests actively and openly advocating homosexuality from the pulpits?

I would be interested to learn where you heard these priests doing this.

At the Vatican I guess.

What would make you think this was authorized by the Vatican?

---

Like I explained I have read about these incidents. Surely you have heard of a Father James Martin? If it isn’t approved by the Vatican why do they not excommunicate and remove any Bishops/Priests obviously involved in it?

Fr Martin doesn’t pretend to teach what the Church teaches. All ANYONE has to do is read the CCC (Catechism of the Catholic Church).

I agree, he should be removed from active practice as a priest. It’s called being laicized.

Is he not also guilty of causing dissension/division?

if he has done what is reported, then Yes

 

[steve-b]

In the not-so-distant past my Catholic friends were quite consistent in asserting that all Protestants would go to hell unless they converted to Catholicism.

in this explanation scripture and tradition, teach about division from Our Lord’s Church. The consequences for that, once someone knows. is condemnation

bbbbbbb:

In recent years the Catholic Church has, IMO, shifted its public views of Protestants and now says that Protestants can share in the hope of salvation, that Protestant baptism is valid, and that Protestants are “separated brethren”.

From: Vat II council.
Scroll to paragraph 14 of Lumen Gentium

Note: it qualifies, once a person “knows”…

bbbbbbb:

1. Can any person be saved who dies in mortal sin?

Here’s why it is No

bbbbbbb:

1. Is willfully and knowingly not attending regular weekly mass at a Catholic church a mortal sin?

Catholics teaching, unless excused , that’s true, it’s a mortal sin

Re: Protestants ?
they have to deal with the following Heb 10

unpacking that

deliberate Failure to meet on the Day, (the Lord’s Day, i.e. Sunday) is already a sin with huge consequences

“sacrifice for sin”, & “blood of the covenant” = the words Our Lord spoke instituting the
Eucharist .
Matthew 26:28
Mark 14:24

i.e. They are celebrating the Eucharist when they meet. The Mass
those then who deliberately fail to celebrate Mass (the Eucharist) on Sunday after being given the knowledge of truth,

THEN
◦ there no longer remains for Them, a sacrifice for sin
◦ They Spurn the Son of God
◦ They outrage the spirit of grace
◦ a fearful prospect of judgement awaits Them
◦ and a fury of fire will consume these adversaries
That is not a suggestion but a command to meet on Sunday
The consequence for deliberately missing Mass on Sunday then, is a mortal sin

bbbbbbb:

1. If a Protestant dies without ever attending regular weekly mass at a Catholic church can he be saved?

Not being Catholic they can’t receive the Eucharist.

bbbbbbb:

1. If Protestants are saved, do they also go to Purgatory?

if one is saved, they will die without mortal sin on their soul

bbbbbbb:

1. If a Protestant goes to Purgatory does he suffer torment and punishment for his lifetime of not being Catholic or does he merely suffer for the consequences of his other sins?
2. If Purgatory is a pleasant cleansing experience as some Catholics now preach, do Protestants also get this experience or are they sent somewhere else?

purgatory is not necessarily pleasant.