Questions on Trent

[Anthony_V]

But if his sacrifice is sufficient to pay for our sins then whats the need of purgatory? Is it catholic belief that Christ only paid for the eternal debt due for our sin, but the temporal debt needs to be paid by us? Can purgatory be avoided or do we all have to go there automatically since Christ could not sufficiently save us?

Those in purgatory are “saved”, as you use the word there. They are in no danger of falling from justification.
You are thinking of this in too legal a manner, as if “temporal debt” is a quota we have to fill. Temporal punishment is a countermeasure of the disposition of the soul towards sin, and away from perfect love. Purgatory’s goal is to remit the disposition of the soul towards sin-- a purging of the disposition, if you will.

 

[fhansen]

**

His sacrifice is sufficient to save the whole world, but the whole world will not be saved, because some people refuse to accept His payment for their sins. Those that refuse the free gift of grace will make their own payment for their sins.

But if his sacrifice is sufficient to pay for our sins then whats the need of purgatory? Is it catholic belie that Christ only paid for the eternal debt due for our sin, but the temporal debt needs to be paid by us? Can purgatory be avoided or do we all have to go there automatically since Christ could not sufficiently save us?

Sinners don’t enter heaven according to scripture. Sin is opposition to the will of God. It is to be attracted to lesser goods than the supreme Good, God, Himself, first above all else. To the extent that we’re still so attracted we’re not yet pure, we’re not yet even capable of “seeing” God, I’d submit.

 

[guanophore]

So my understanding of merits being God’s gifts and reward being based on God’s promise and not a strict contract are correct right? Heaven as our reward is based on God’s promise right?

So there’s nothing for man to do? Salvation is universal due to the merits of Christ?

I am in no way arguing for universalism.

You are not making any sense, Vinny. If Salvation is universal, then how is that NOT universalism?

I think what you are trying to say is that atonement is universal. Jesus pait the price on the cross to redeem all of humanity. However, salvation is not universal because not everyone avails themselves of His redemption.

The statement “there is nothing for man to do” is absurd.

1 Cor 6:19-20
19 Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, which you have from God? You are not your own; 20 you were bought with a price. So glorify God in your body.

Our whole lives, body, soul, and Spirit belong to Him, and we are to do ALL to glorify Him in ourselves, because He has paid the price for us.

But if his sacrifice is sufficient to pay for our sins then whats the need of purgatory?

Purgatory, or purging, is God’s gift to us, in cleansing from us all attachment to sin that prevents us from entering into His presence.

1 Cor 3:13-15
3 each man’s work will become manifest; for the Day will disclose it, because it will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test what sort of work each one has done. 14 If the work which any man has built on the foundation survives, he will receive a reward. 15 If any man’s work is burned up, he will suffer loss, though he himself will be saved, but only as through fire.

The purgation burns all that is not from God. It is only available to those who have been purchased already by the all sufficient sacrifice of Christ.

 Is it catholic belie that Christ only paid for the eternal debt due for our sin, but the temporal debt needs to be paid by us?

Yes and no. Yes, Christ paid all the debt, but there are times when He allows temporal debts to be paid by those who incur them, because it is a necessary step to prepare us to live with Him eternally. A good example of this is the thief on the cross next to him. We call him St. Dismas (the “good” thief). Jesus promised him paradise, but rather than sparing him the pain of crucifixion, Jesus left him alive and his legs were broken. Jesus could have taken Him when He breathed His last. But, as the thief himself testified, “we deserve this punishment”.

Can purgatory be avoided or do we all have to go there automatically since Christ could not sufficiently save us?

Purgatory (the process of being purified for heaven) is only available to those who have already been saved. Nothing unclean can enter heaven, so if someone dies with “works” that were not built upon Christ, they will be burned away like dross.

 

[Vinny213]

So my understanding of merits being God’s gifts and reward being based on God’s promise and not a strict contract are correct right? Heaven as our reward is based on God’s promise right?

So far nobody has attempted to engage with the above quote. The above quote is based on the teachings of the Council of Trent, which taught us that our merits are God’s gifts to us and heaven is a reward of grace based on God’s promise to us not on some contractual obligation for God can never be indebted to us. That is the whole meaning of condign merit. With respect to purgatory its purpose is also to have us pay the debt due to the temporal punishment for sin, and I was told that we wont be released until we pay the last penny. If purgatory cannot be avoided then whats the point of indulgences?

 

[Anthony_V]

So my understanding of merits being God’s gifts and reward being based on God’s promise and not a strict contract are correct right? Heaven as our reward is based on God’s promise right?

Define “strict contract”.

 

[guanophore]

So my understanding of merits being God’s gifts and reward being based on God’s promise and not a strict contract are correct right? Heaven as our reward is based on God’s promise right?

So far nobody has attempted to engage with the above quote. The above quote is based on the teachings of the Council of Trent, which taught us that our merits are God’s gifts to us and heaven is a reward of grace based on God’s promise to us not on some contractual obligation for God can never be indebted to us. That is the whole meaning of condign merit.

Not sure what kind of “engagement” you were expecting. This is the teaching of the Church.

With respect to purgatory its purpose is also to have us pay the debt due to the temporal punishment for sin, and I was told that we wont be released until we pay the last penny. If purgatory cannot be avoided then whats the point of indulgences?

The purpose of purgatory is to separate a person from anything cliniging to them that is not holy, since nothing unholy can enter heaven.

Rev 21:27
7 But nothing unclean shall enter it, nor any one who practices abomination or falsehood, but only those who are written in the Lamb’s book of life.

Of course purgatory can be avoided!

One can be purged from all that is unholy in this life. This is exactly what it means to become a saint.

1 Cor 3:12-15
12 Now if any one builds on the foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, straw - 13 each man’s work will become manifest; for the Day will disclose it, because it will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test what sort of work each one has done. 14 If the work which any man has built on the foundation survives, he will receive a reward. 15 If any man’s work is burned up, he will suffer loss, though he himself will be saved, but only as through fire.

One can build on the firm foundation, so that the work receives a reward. If one builds in a manner less than worthy of heaven, one will be purged of any attachments to such things before one enters.

My advice? Be purged NOW!

 

[Vinny213]

Not sure what kind of “engagement” you were expecting. This is the teaching of the Church.

I was expecting people to tell me if what I wrote was the catholic teaching on merit or not. So far nobody has answered that. I just want to make sure that our merits are still God’s gifts and that him rewarding us with heaven is based on his promise to us.

Define “strict contract”.

By it I mean that God is in debt to us and under obligation to us outside of his sheer benevolence and promise.

The purpose of purgatory is to separate a person from anything cliniging to them that is not holy, since nothing unholy can enter heaven.

You still have not dealt with the issue of indulgences and temporal punishment.

 

[Vinny213]

Not sure what kind of “engagement” you were expecting. This is the teaching of the Church.



The purpose of purgatory is to separate a person from anything cliniging to them that is not holy, since nothing unholy can enter heaven.

Rev 21:27
7 But nothing unclean shall enter it, nor any one who practices abomination or falsehood, but only those who are written in the Lamb’s book of life.

Of course purgatory can be avoided!

One can be purged from all that is unholy in this life. This is exactly what it means to become a saint.

1 Cor 3:12-15
12 Now if any one builds on the foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, straw - 13 each man’s work will become manifest; for the Day will disclose it, because it will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test what sort of work each one has done. 14 If the work which any man has built on the foundation survives, he will receive a reward. 15 If any man’s work is burned up, he will suffer loss, though he himself will be saved, but only as through fire.

One can build on the firm foundation, so that the work receives a reward. If one builds in a manner less than worthy of heaven, one will be purged of any attachments to such things before one enters.

My advice? Be purged NOW!

Here is an interesting link on purgatory, I suggest you read it and tell me what you think.
opusangelorum.org/formation/purgatory.html

 

[guanophore]

I was expecting people to tell me if what I wrote was the catholic teaching on merit or not. So far nobody has answered that. I just want to make sure that our merits are still God's gifts and that him rewarding us with heaven is based on his promise to us.

God loves us, as a father to His children, so it is more than just keeping His Word for His own glory, as the Calvanists teach.

I am not sure what else we can offer you, Vinny. We have given you Scripture, Catechism, and clearly you are reading the documents of Trent.

The popular misperception that Catholics believe they can “work their way to heaven” is just that.

Define “strict contract”.

By it I mean that God is in debt to us and under obligation to us outside of his sheer benevolence and promise.

No, this is not Catholic.

You still have not dealt with the issue of indulgences and temporal punishment.

Dear brother, we dont’ have an “issue” with it. If you have one, we can discuss it, but you will have to find a way to articulate it first.

Perhaps you don’t understand several essential principles that are necessary to help you understand it, including the communion of saints, and the definition of an indulgence?

 

[guanophore]

Here is an interesting link on purgatory, I suggest you read it and tell me what you think.
opusangelorum.org/formation/purgatory.html

It is an excellent article. Perhaps you can use part of it to summarize your “issue”?

 

[Vinny213]

God loves us, as a father to His children, so it is more than just keeping His Word for His own glory, as the Calvanists teach.

I am not sure what else we can offer you, Vinny. We have given you Scripture, Catechism, and clearly you are reading the documents of Trent.

The popular misperception that Catholics believe they can “work their way to heaven” is just that

So Catholics do not teach that we can earn heaven because it is ours by legal right? Heaven is still a gift more than an earned wage. With regards to purgatory, I have a couple of more questions. How long does somebody have to suffer there? Also, is time in purgatory counted similarly to time on earth?

 

[guanophore]

So Catholics do not teach that we can earn heaven because it is ours by legal right?

Not at all.

We are legaly adopted, and become heirs, but this is a privilege, not a “right”. Further, it is a privilege we can throw away by failing to finish the race.

 Heaven is still a gift more than an earned wage.

It is not a matter of more or less. It is not possible to “earn” heaven as though payment of a wage.

With regards to purgatory, I have a couple of more questions. How long does somebody have to suffer there? Also, is time in purgatory counted similarly to time on earth?

No one has to suffer in purgatory. If you read that article you posted that point is made plain.

Purgatory, like heaven and hell, exist outside the space time continuum. Concepts of amounts of time people had to suffer were simply a misperception on the part of humans who projected their limited understanding of existence within the space time continuum into the afterlife.

Purgation can happen in an instant.

1 Cor 15:51-54

51 Lo! I tell you a mystery. We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, 52 in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we shall be changed. 53 For this perishable nature must put on the imperishable, and this mortal nature must put on immortality. 54 When the perishable puts on the imperishable, and the mortal puts on immortality,

Those who are still alive on earth when the time comes for the trumpet to sound will be purged instantly!

 

[Vinny213]

No one has to suffer in purgatory. If you read that article you posted that point is made plain.

Purgatory, like heaven and hell, exist outside the space time continuum. Concepts of amounts of time people had to suffer were simply a misperception on the part of humans who projected their limited understanding of existence within the space time continuum into the afterlife.

Then why is purgatory counted in days, weeks, years and centuries? Do you know that indulgences are still measured according to earthly time? Like this quote from the very article I linked to you, “However, if we do not take the initiative and move the Poor Souls to the pool of God’s grace by our prayers and sacrifices, they will languish for years and maybe centuries in the fires of purgatory.”

 

[Vinny213]

In Catholic thought, justification was not considered something in the present as much as a process leading to the ultimate future judgment.

Is this true? Can justification in Catholicism also be something that is past, present and future without an either or? Can justification also be understood to mean to declare righteous and make righteous, the former being initial justification and the latter progressive? Of course the main difference with the reformers being that the declaration effects what it declares and truly transforms the believer who is not some snow-covered dunghill.

 

[guanophore]

No one has to suffer in purgatory. If you read that article you posted that point is made plain.

Purgatory, like heaven and hell, exist outside the space time continuum. Concepts of amounts of time people had to suffer were simply a misperception on the part of humans who projected their limited understanding of existence within the space time continuum into the afterlife.

Then why is purgatory counted in days, weeks, years and centuries?

I gave you the answer to this already in the paragraph above your question.

Do you know that indulgences are still measured according to earthly time?

Some of them are, but it is more a reflection of ancient penitential requirements. Certain types of sins carried long penances, sometimes for years.

Like this quote from the very article I linked to you, “However, if we do not take the initiative and move the Poor Souls to the pool of God’s grace by our prayers and sacrifices, they will languish for years and maybe centuries in the fires of purgatory.”

It seems that way from our point of view, since we are inside the space time continuum. The length of time applies to us, but not to them. It is difficult for us to concieve of their state, since it is so unlike ours.

The most important point of that statement is that we are obligated to assist the suffering souls by our prayres and sacrifices.

 

[Vinny213]

Is this accurate of Catholicism?

Roman Catholicism. In the Roman tradition the righteousness of God was understood more as that which was demanded by God. The medieval understanding of the nature of justification referred not merely to the beginning of the Christian life, but to its continuation and ultimate perfection, in which the Christian is made righteous in the sight of God and the sight of others through a fundamental change in nature (McGrath). The prevailing pre-Reformation view in the West of the righteousness of God was that of a distributive justice whereby God judges justly according to God’s holiness. A common theological position was that righteousness of God was a subjective genitive, God’s holiness being the norm by which all would be judged. Luther’s personal struggle with the inexorable righteousness of God resulted in an understanding of the righteousness of God that was deeper than his tradition had grasped. In Catholic thought, justification was not considered something in the present as much as a process leading to the ultimate future judgment.

 

[guanophore]

In Catholic thought, justification was not considered something in the present as much as a process leading to the ultimate future judgment.

No, it is very much present. It is also past, and future. There are some aspects in which we have already been saved, some in which we are currently being saved, and some that we will be saved.

Justification in the present is the best way to arrive at ultimate future justification.

Rom 2:6-11
6 For he will render to every man according to his works: 7 to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life; 8 but for those who are factious and do not obey the truth, but obey wickedness, there will be wrath and fury. 9 There will be tribulation and distress for every human being who does evil, the Jew first and also the Greek, 10 but glory and honor and peace for every one who does good, the Jew first and also the Greek. 11 For God shows no partiality.

Is this true? Can justification in Catholicism also be something that is past, present and future without an either or?

It is true for us, but I think people who have difficulty abstracting, and only see things in black and white have difficulty grasping it this way. For some concrete minded persons, “both/and” is beyond the mental capacity.

 Can justification also be understood to mean to declare righteous and make righteous, the former being initial justification and the latter progressive?

It can, and it is, in Reformed thought. Such a conception is considered a heresy, though.

We are declared righteous at initial justification because we are actually MADE righteous in baptism.

Of course the main difference with the reformers being that the declaration effects what it declares and truly transforms the believer who is not some snow-covered dunghill.

Yes. But both sides are in agreement that the soul requires sanctification, which is progressive.

 

[fhansen]

Is this accurate of Catholicism?

Roman Catholicism. In the Roman tradition the righteousness of God was understood more as that which was demanded by God. The medieval understanding of the nature of justification referred not merely to the beginning of the Christian life, but to its continuation and ultimate perfection, in which the Christian is made righteous in the sight of God and the sight of others through a fundamental change in nature (McGrath). The prevailing pre-Reformation view in the West of the righteousness of God was that of a distributive justice whereby God judges justly according to God’s holiness. A common theological position was that righteousness of God was a subjective genitive, God’s holiness being the norm by which all would be judged. Luther’s personal struggle with the inexorable righteousness of God resulted in an understanding of the righteousness of God that was deeper than his tradition had grasped. In Catholic thought, justification was not considered something in the present as much as a process leading to the ultimate future judgment.

Luther deep? Now that’s a novel idea. I’d read Matt 25:31-46 to get an idea of what God expects man’s righteousness to “look like”, what He wants it to progress to. And yes, man’s righteousness is based on God’s own righteousness. We’re made in His image, destined to be partakers of His nature. Scripture exhorts man to “Be holy, because I am holy” (1Pet 1:16), and to "be perfect, ad your heavenly father is perfect" (Matt 5:48). The reason that man’s righteosness is based on God’s is simply because God’s holiness issues from His love and this is why love is what constitutes man’s justice according to to the greatest commandments. In fact, in Catholic terms, holiness, righteousness, justice, perfection, purity are synonymous terms.

In any case man’s righteousness doesn’t issue from himself, but was determined for him by God. However, at the Fall, man departed from Gods righteousness, doing what was right in his own eyes, determining righteousness for himself, which God gave him the freedom to do. And all sin actually follows from this condition of man, no longer in subjugation to God.

Paul tells us in Phil 3:9 that “I consider them [his own acts of righteousness] garbage, that I may gain Christ and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ—the righteousness that comes from God on the basis of faith.” Obedience to the Law, which Paul tells us he excelled at, is not true righteousness because it’s not true subjugation to God-rather its a pretense, a show, of subjugation. The righteousness that comes from God, which is the only place man’s righteousness can come from, is based on faith, because faith is the beginning of authentic subjugation to God. IOW, faith is not the equivalent of justice or righteousness for man, it is the basis of said righteousness.

God wants man truly, ontologically, just, not merely declared just. Otherwise He’d be in the awkward position of giving man laws he couldn’t possibly obey, then blaming him for disobedience anyway, then sort of capriciously deciding at some later date to forgive sins and declare man just-at least some-in spite of his sin. God’s creation, in this case, remains soiled, out of sync with His will, with sinners apparently entering heaven.

But this is not the New Covenant. The NC is not about merely being forgiven and having our sins forgotten/covered over. The NC is about being forgiven and then ‘going, and sinning no more’. This, generally speaking, is a process of the Divine Potter molding the clay, salvation being a work of His hands in which we participate: "…work out your own salvation with fear and trembling, for it is God who works in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure. (Phil 2:13). In this process He truly becomes the God of man again, placing His Laws on our hearts and writing them in our minds as per Jer 31.

 

[Vinny213]

“Luther points to Augustine for the sense that the righteousness of God is that by which God imparts and makes people righteous. Luther emphasized the immediacy of justification.”

I think a Catholic can agree with the above statement since they also believe that God gives us an infused righteousness as a gift which makes us righteous.

“The prevailing pre-Reformation view in the West of the righteousness of God was that of a distributive justice whereby God judges justly according to God’s holiness. A common theological position was that righteousness of God was a subjective genitive, God’s holiness being the norm by which all would be judged.”

Is the above quote accurate of the Roman Catholic understanding of judgement and salvation? Does not God deal with us in mercy and love instead of strict justice? Is he not a loving father instead of some stern distant judge?

 

[Vinny213]

God wants man truly, ontologically, just, not merely declared just. Otherwise He’d be in the awkward position of giving man laws he couldn’t possibly obey, then blaming him for disobedience anyway, then sort of capriciously deciding at some later date to forgive sins and declare man just-at least some-in spite of his sin. God’s creation, in this case, remains soiled, out of sync with His will, with sinners apparently entering heaven.

But does God deal with us in mercy and love or is he some stern judge who demands absolute perfect obedience from us? Can God be lenient and merciful?