Purgatory, and the Orthodox and Roman Catholic Views on Sin and Forgiveness

Irish Hermit

Merarches
Joined
Oct 11, 2003
Messages
10,980
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Middle Earth
elijahmaria said:
Since the Magisterium is the teaching authority of the Church then the catechetical texts I offered here are part of the ordinary magisterium.  

That should be obvious to anyone who has your training in Catholic matters.
It means pretty much zilch.  Catholic training in the old ways is meaningless in the face of the modern insistence on revamping and of hiding inconvenient doctrines of the past.  In fact such training invites scorn and derision from much of the modern Catholic clergy and from the seminaries.

Every article in the Catholic Encyclopedia http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/ has the Imprimatur of some Archbishop.

But people keep telling us -- that's wrong and that's wrong and that's just a lot of hooey!

From among my many sources within the Catholic priesthood I am familiar with both sides of this modern divide.

-oOo-
Please go back to message 63 in this thread for further commentary

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,28892.msg457168.html#msg457168
 

theistgal

Archon
Site Supporter
Joined
Jun 16, 2008
Messages
2,477
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Sunny Southern Cal
Irish Hermit said:
From among my many sources within the Catholic priesthood I am familiar with both sides of this modern divide.
Hmm, maybe we need to introduce your Catholic priest friends to Mary's Orthodox priest friends and see if they can work things out.  ;)
 

Irish Hermit

Merarches
Joined
Oct 11, 2003
Messages
10,980
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Middle Earth
Mary has confirmed it!!  Limbo is the formal teaching of the Roman Catholic Church.  It is formal teaching, it is inalienable, it is truth.

Shultz wrote:
Schultz said:
But for the vast majority of laity who were catechized prior to the 1960s, Limbo was de facto Catholic doctrine.
Mary repied:
elijahmaria said:
You cannot have a de facto Catholic doctrine.  It is either formal teaching or it falls into some other category with the most benign being a pious belief or mistake.
Mary confirms that Limbo is formal teaching:

elijahmaria said:
Limbo was always formally taught as a place in heaven where unbaptized innocents would rest in peace.
 

stanley123

Protokentarchos
Joined
Nov 23, 2007
Messages
3,814
Reaction score
0
Points
0
elijahmaria said:
stanley123 said:
elijahmaria said:
I can tell you this much...again....This quote does NOT mean what you say or think it means. 
What does: "Otherwise the expiation must be made in the next life through fire and torments or purifying punishments."  this mean?
I covered this in the explanation of the Latin poena that translates into English most commonly as punishment...but also means penalty and loss, with the first meaning being loss.

So if you read the Baltimore Catechism you will find the language of punishment.

If you read the saints it comes out as loss or pain.

If you read systematic theology books you get the full explanation.

Mary
Apparently you do not accept the official teaching of the Roman Catholic Church as given in the Baltimore Catechism No. 3: Q 184: Who are punished in purgatory?
Those are punished for a time in purgatory who die in the state of grace but are guilty of venial sin, or have not fully satisfied for the temporal punishment due to their sins.
…(c) The souls in purgatory are certain of entering heaven as soon as God’s justice has been fully satisfied.
elijahmaria said:
I am saying that what you are touting as justice is the heresy of works.
Is the Roman Catholic Baltimore catechism guilty of touting justice as the heresy of works?
 

elijahmaria

Taxiarches
Joined
Mar 28, 2010
Messages
6,515
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Website
irenikontheskete.blogspot.com
theistgal said:
Irish Hermit said:
From among my many sources within the Catholic priesthood I am familiar with both sides of this modern divide.
Hmm, maybe we need to introduce your Catholic priest friends to Mary's Orthodox priest friends and see if they can work things out.  ;)
LOL....That has actually happened over the years on a variety of Listservs and it does not matter one wit.  What you see here is what he continues to repeat in the face of all kinds of people including my spiritual father, and a very traditional Latin rite Catholic,  and another friend who was a Trappist monk, telling him that he is wrong and my reading and explanations are correct...as well as other Orthodox participants who were in agreement.

There's no attempt to seek out meaning.  The focus is on form and black and white. 

At any rate...it's been done to no avail.

M.
 

elijahmaria

Taxiarches
Joined
Mar 28, 2010
Messages
6,515
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Website
irenikontheskete.blogspot.com
stanley123 said:
elijahmaria said:
stanley123 said:
elijahmaria said:
I can tell you this much...again....This quote does NOT mean what you say or think it means. 
What does: "Otherwise the expiation must be made in the next life through fire and torments or purifying punishments."   this mean?
I covered this in the explanation of the Latin poena that translates into English most commonly as punishment...but also means penalty and loss, with the first meaning being loss.

So if you read the Baltimore Catechism you will find the language of punishment.

If you read the saints it comes out as loss or pain.

If you read systematic theology books you get the full explanation.

Mary
Apparently you do not accept the official teaching of the Roman Catholic Church as given in the Baltimore Catechism No. 3: Q 184: Who are punished in purgatory?
Those are punished for a time in purgatory who die in the state of grace but are guilty of venial sin, or have not fully satisfied for the temporal punishment due to their sins.
…(c) The souls in purgatory are certain of entering heaven as soon as God’s justice has been fully satisfied.
elijahmaria said:
I am saying that what you are touting as justice is the heresy of works.
Is the Roman Catholic Baltimore catechism guilty of touting justice as the heresy of works?
I have worked through meaning here and you can accept it or reject it as Catholic teaching.

As I have said before I commune with many Catholics who do not believe as I believe, who have not been taught and formed as I have been.

If you want to see God as the Divine Punisher and thereby Author of Evil...have it it.  If you want to believe that Jesus cannot sanctify who He chooses, when He chooses...have at it.

It is not Catholic.  But that is not the end of the world either and nothing new.

Mary
 

elijahmaria

Taxiarches
Joined
Mar 28, 2010
Messages
6,515
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Website
irenikontheskete.blogspot.com
stanley123 said:
elijahmaria said:
stanley123 said:
elijahmaria said:
I can tell you this much...again....This quote does NOT mean what you say or think it means. 
What does: "Otherwise the expiation must be made in the next life through fire and torments or purifying punishments."   this mean?
I covered this in the explanation of the Latin poena that translates into English most commonly as punishment...but also means penalty and loss, with the first meaning being loss.

So if you read the Baltimore Catechism you will find the language of punishment.

If you read the saints it comes out as loss or pain.

If you read systematic theology books you get the full explanation.

Mary
Apparently you do not accept the official teaching of the Roman Catholic Church as given in the Baltimore Catechism No. 3: Q 184: Who are punished in purgatory?
Those are punished for a time in purgatory who die in the state of grace but are guilty of venial sin, or have not fully satisfied for the temporal punishment due to their sins.
…(c) The souls in purgatory are certain of entering heaven as soon as God’s justice has been fully satisfied.
elijahmaria said:
I am saying that what you are touting as justice is the heresy of works.
Is the Roman Catholic Baltimore catechism guilty of touting justice as the heresy of works?
PS: The reformed and protestant world has always had trouble understanding the Catholic teaching on divine justice.  Divine justice for the reformers is a God with blood in his eye, and Old Testament God of vengeance and an eye for an eye.  It is not that way for Catholics.

Much of what I am talking about is the teaching of saints and doctors of the Church. 

The Baltimore Catechism was written as a short-hand for those whose faith was child-like and has strong Jansenist influences and also is the product of clerical elitism that was prevalent in the 1800 and 1900's in America and Northern Europe...southern France as well.

In Orthodoxy St. Symeon the New Theologian thought that only monks could understand certain parts of theology and only monks could achieve theosis.  That mentality was not lost in the west.  It carried through and rose its head strongly after Catholic monastic life all but died out after the Protesters and Protestant Reformers and the attendant wars.  Only this time it was secular clergy who treated the laity as though they were idiots and barbarians....maybe we were.... :angel:

Reading more than one doctrinal history always helps a good bit in sorting out what is truly Catholic and what passes in and out on shifting historical currents.

M.
 

Irish Hermit

Merarches
Joined
Oct 11, 2003
Messages
10,980
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Middle Earth
elijahmaria said:
theistgal said:
Irish Hermit said:
From among my many sources within the Catholic priesthood I am familiar with both sides of this modern divide.
Hmm, maybe we need to introduce your Catholic priest friends to Mary's Orthodox priest friends and see if they can work things out.  ;)
LOL....That has actually happened over the years on a variety of Listservs and it does not matter one wit.  What you see here is what he continues to repeat in the face of all kinds of people including my spiritual father,
Removed by Irish Hermit.
 

Irish Hermit

Merarches
Joined
Oct 11, 2003
Messages
10,980
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Middle Earth
elijahmaria said:
The Baltimore Catechism was written as a short-hand for those whose faith was child-like and has strong Jansenist influences and also is the product of clerical elitism that was prevalent in the 1800 and 1900's in America and Northern Europe...southern France as well.
This is awfully unfair.  The Baltimore Catechism has glowing recommendations and Imprimaturs from literally dozens of Catholic bishops

See http://www.cin.org/users/james/ebooks/master/baltimore/bapprob.htm

It was also officially in use in most of the United States from 1885 to 1970, almost a hundred years.  It cannot have been too foul!

You are very quick to denigrate whatever does not agree with your own faith agenda.    It is quite comical in this instance because you have just recommended that we look at the catechetical material and so we mention the longest running Catechism in the States and you are rubbishing it because you do not find it sympathetic.  These things should be marked with a Mary's Imprimatur or Non Licet Imprimari.   :laugh:
 

elijahmaria

Taxiarches
Joined
Mar 28, 2010
Messages
6,515
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Website
irenikontheskete.blogspot.com
Irish Hermit said:
elijahmaria said:
The Baltimore Catechism was written as a short-hand for those whose faith was child-like and has strong Jansenist influences and also is the product of clerical elitism that was prevalent in the 1800 and 1900's in America and Northern Europe...southern France as well.
This is awfully unfair.  The Baltimore Catechism has glowing recommendations and Imprimaturs from literally dozens of Catholic bishops

See http://www.cin.org/users/james/ebooks/master/baltimore/bapprob.htm

It was also officially in use in most of the United States from 1885 to 1970, almost a hundred years.  It cannot have been too foul!

You are very quick to denigrate whatever does not agree with your own faith agenda.    It is quite comical in this instance because you have just recommended that we look at the catechetical material and so we mention the longest running Catechism in the States and you are rubbishing it because you do not find it sympathetic.  These things should be marked with a Mary's Imprimatur or Non Licet Imprimari.   :laugh:
Well you can thank the Irish Jansenists in America for that marvelous publication...set for people who were not expected to read much and write even less.

Even my monsignor in grade school taught me its shortfalls very early in my life.

He was Irish too but not a Jansenist.  He, like my mother's family, came from Tyrone, green through and through,  and he'd always invite me for tea when I would get in trouble for asking too many questions in religion class and he'd teach me and then we'd look at pictures from his trips back home. I was always the tallest girl and taller than all the boys in my class so I did everything last for 10 years,  and when I graduated from that school to go to the public high school in my town...last in line again... he whispered in my ear as he gave me my diploma, "Don't fret, they always save the best for last."  I think it is what kept me from landing in the ditch and staying there later in life.

BTW:  My spiritual father is a Catholic, so your somewhat sour private note to me fell a tad flat.

M.

 

elijahmaria

Taxiarches
Joined
Mar 28, 2010
Messages
6,515
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Website
irenikontheskete.blogspot.com
I think this article carries some interesting messages with respect to a loving God and purgation:

http://josephkarlpublishing.blogspot.com/2010/08/did-you-know-that-god-isnt-nice.html

Did you know that God isn’t nice?
Well, He’s not. And neither should you be.

So says Sister John Sheila Galligan, I.H.M, S.T.D., professor in theology at Immaculata University in Immaculata, PA.

“The young people that I’m meeting are coming from a culture that seems to promote religion and spirituality as ‘niceness’,” said Sr. Galligan. “…The commandment that’s out there today is, ‘Be nice,’ or [in] other language, ‘Be tolerant, never make a judgment,’ et cetera.”

The culture of niceness rejects anything that challenges the autonomy of the individual. It has bastardized the meanings of words such as “love”, “freedom” and “marriage”, confusing people and leaving them ignorant about God, the meaning of life, and the dignity of the human person. In fact, the origin of the word “nice” is the Latin word nescius, which means “ignorant”.

“That kind of culture activity of ‘being nice’ is destructive, and it’s not what Christianity is all about,” said Sr. Galligan. “God is not nice. God is good, and goodness is different from niceness.”

The culture of niceness also eschews the rich intellectual tradition of the Catholic Church.

“We have a tradition that is [almost 2,000] years of the best of philosophical and theological minds, with the contemporary blessings of [Popes] John Paul II and Benedict [XVI], who are also very able to engage young people, old people—the culture,” said Sr. Galligan.

But “instead of looking at the world in light of the Church and its teachings,” she said, “we come from the world and make a judgment on the Church and its teachings.”

Niceness is the fruit of sloth, what Sr. Galligan calls “the most neglected capital sin,” and “the ultimate boredom.” Commonly regarded as laziness, sloth is a “poisoning of the will,” she said, a lack of the will for the good. Niceness is the symptom of a soul poisoned by sloth.

“Niceness [is the attitude], ‘I do not have the will for your good, [so] I’m just going to go with the flow and be pleasing’,” she said.

Sr. Galligan is trying to free her students from the shackles of the “go with the flow” mentality of niceness because “They haven’t been trained to think, to argue” she said. “They’ve only been trained to accept.”

So for all its destructiveness, why have we allowed ourselves to be hypnotized by niceness?

The reason is, said Sr. Galligan, “we don’t want to ever think about the existential questions: ‘Who or what am I? Where am I going? How do I get there?’ And, even more, ‘Whose am I?’”

To ask the existential questions is to open oneself up to the possibility there is an “other” toward whom one must center himself. In a culture of niceness that fosters self-centeredness, the tendency is to avoid pursuing the answers to those questions.

“We’re always into that self-protective mode,” said Sr. Galligan. “…Truth and goodness become a threat, because then I have to acknowledge my humanity, which is wounded and tends toward self.”

Self-centeredness, however, “makes for unhappiness, loneliness,” she said. “I’m enclosed within myself. I’m imprisoned, and I’m made to be looking at you.”

The other-centeredness that is at the heart of true Christian living reveals the answers to the existential questions. To be other-centered is to image Him Who is other-centeredness itself, the Trinitarian God. Only in the penetrating intimacy of other-centeredness can we be truly happy.

But in a futile attempt to find happiness and alleviate their “ultimate boredom”, those who have fallen into the quicksand of sloth pursue empty and fleeting passion, a pursuit Sr. Galligan described as “getting into bizarre things to excite [oneself] for a few minutes.” Yet fulfilling and lasting passion can come only from the other-centered, self-giving life of charity.

So don’t be nice. Instead, burn with love for God and neighbor, as God burns with love for you.

“God is fire,” said Sr. Galligan. “He’s not bland fogginess.”
 

Irish Hermit

Merarches
Joined
Oct 11, 2003
Messages
10,980
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Middle Earth
elijahmaria said:
BTW:  My spiritual father is a Catholic, so your somewhat sour private note to me fell a tad flat.
Either your forgettery or mine is faulty because soon after I came back onto your list and while the Orthodox priestmonk in question was not on it himself, you told us that he was your spiritual father.
 

elijahmaria

Taxiarches
Joined
Mar 28, 2010
Messages
6,515
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Website
irenikontheskete.blogspot.com
Irish Hermit said:
elijahmaria said:
BTW:  My spiritual father is a Catholic, so your somewhat sour private note to me fell a tad flat.
Either your forgettery or mine is faulty because soon after I came back onto your list and while the Orthodox priestmonk in question was not on it himself, you told us that he was your spiritual father.
It is also possible that you misunderstood.  But my spiritual father has always been Catholic and always nearby when I am writing publicly so as to guide should I err, though more and more he says that is no longer necessary.  He says he now reads because he likes what I write.

M.

 

elijahmaria

Taxiarches
Joined
Mar 28, 2010
Messages
6,515
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Website
irenikontheskete.blogspot.com
I do think this article deserves some comment since it does represent traditional Catholic teaching.  The nun commenting in the article would be about my age, and would have been taught out of the same Baltimore, with all of its shortcomings, but this woman seems to have found a more constant truth in the teaching of the Church, as have I been able also to discern a more adult and spiritually accurate way of understanding the ancient teaching of the Church.

Mary

elijahmaria said:
I think this article carries some interesting messages with respect to a loving God and purgation:

http://josephkarlpublishing.blogspot.com/2010/08/did-you-know-that-god-isnt-nice.html

Did you know that God isn’t nice?
Well, He’s not. And neither should you be.

So says Sister John Sheila Galligan, I.H.M, S.T.D., professor in theology at Immaculata University in Immaculata, PA.

“The young people that I’m meeting are coming from a culture that seems to promote religion and spirituality as ‘niceness’,” said Sr. Galligan. “…The commandment that’s out there today is, ‘Be nice,’ or [in] other language, ‘Be tolerant, never make a judgment,’ et cetera.”

The culture of niceness rejects anything that challenges the autonomy of the individual. It has bastardized the meanings of words such as “love”, “freedom” and “marriage”, confusing people and leaving them ignorant about God, the meaning of life, and the dignity of the human person. In fact, the origin of the word “nice” is the Latin word nescius, which means “ignorant”.

“That kind of culture activity of ‘being nice’ is destructive, and it’s not what Christianity is all about,” said Sr. Galligan. “God is not nice. God is good, and goodness is different from niceness.”

The culture of niceness also eschews the rich intellectual tradition of the Catholic Church.

“We have a tradition that is [almost 2,000] years of the best of philosophical and theological minds, with the contemporary blessings of [Popes] John Paul II and Benedict [XVI], who are also very able to engage young people, old people—the culture,” said Sr. Galligan.

But “instead of looking at the world in light of the Church and its teachings,” she said, “we come from the world and make a judgment on the Church and its teachings.”

Niceness is the fruit of sloth, what Sr. Galligan calls “the most neglected capital sin,” and “the ultimate boredom.” Commonly regarded as laziness, sloth is a “poisoning of the will,” she said, a lack of the will for the good. Niceness is the symptom of a soul poisoned by sloth.

“Niceness [is the attitude], ‘I do not have the will for your good, [so] I’m just going to go with the flow and be pleasing’,” she said.

Sr. Galligan is trying to free her students from the shackles of the “go with the flow” mentality of niceness because “They haven’t been trained to think, to argue” she said. “They’ve only been trained to accept.”

So for all its destructiveness, why have we allowed ourselves to be hypnotized by niceness?

The reason is, said Sr. Galligan, “we don’t want to ever think about the existential questions: ‘Who or what am I? Where am I going? How do I get there?’ And, even more, ‘Whose am I?’”

To ask the existential questions is to open oneself up to the possibility there is an “other” toward whom one must center himself. In a culture of niceness that fosters self-centeredness, the tendency is to avoid pursuing the answers to those questions.

“We’re always into that self-protective mode,” said Sr. Galligan. “…Truth and goodness become a threat, because then I have to acknowledge my humanity, which is wounded and tends toward self.”

Self-centeredness, however, “makes for unhappiness, loneliness,” she said. “I’m enclosed within myself. I’m imprisoned, and I’m made to be looking at you.”

The other-centeredness that is at the heart of true Christian living reveals the answers to the existential questions. To be other-centered is to image Him Who is other-centeredness itself, the Trinitarian God. Only in the penetrating intimacy of other-centeredness can we be truly happy.

But in a futile attempt to find happiness and alleviate their “ultimate boredom”, those who have fallen into the quicksand of sloth pursue empty and fleeting passion, a pursuit Sr. Galligan described as “getting into bizarre things to excite [oneself] for a few minutes.” Yet fulfilling and lasting passion can come only from the other-centered, self-giving life of charity.

So don’t be nice. Instead, burn with love for God and neighbor, as God burns with love for you.

“God is fire,” said Sr. Galligan. “He’s not bland fogginess.”
 

stanley123

Protokentarchos
Joined
Nov 23, 2007
Messages
3,814
Reaction score
0
Points
0
elijahmaria said:
stanley123 said:
elijahmaria said:
stanley123 said:
elijahmaria said:
I can tell you this much...again....This quote does NOT mean what you say or think it means. 
What does: "Otherwise the expiation must be made in the next life through fire and torments or purifying punishments."   this mean?
I covered this in the explanation of the Latin poena that translates into English most commonly as punishment...but also means penalty and loss, with the first meaning being loss.

So if you read the Baltimore Catechism you will find the language of punishment.

If you read the saints it comes out as loss or pain.

If you read systematic theology books you get the full explanation.

Mary
Apparently you do not accept the official teaching of the Roman Catholic Church as given in the Baltimore Catechism No. 3: Q 184: Who are punished in purgatory?
Those are punished for a time in purgatory who die in the state of grace but are guilty of venial sin, or have not fully satisfied for the temporal punishment due to their sins.
…(c) The souls in purgatory are certain of entering heaven as soon as God’s justice has been fully satisfied.
elijahmaria said:
I am saying that what you are touting as justice is the heresy of works.
Is the Roman Catholic Baltimore catechism guilty of touting justice as the heresy of works?
I have worked through meaning here and you can accept it or reject it as Catholic teaching.

As I have said before I commune with many Catholics who do not believe as I believe, who have not been taught and formed as I have been.

If you want to see God as the Divine Punisher and thereby Author of Evil...have it it.  If you want to believe that Jesus cannot sanctify who He chooses, when He chooses...have at it.

It is not Catholic.  But that is not the end of the world either and nothing new.

Mary
The Baltimore catechism has been officially approved. Many theologians have not been.
 

elijahmaria

Taxiarches
Joined
Mar 28, 2010
Messages
6,515
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Website
irenikontheskete.blogspot.com
stanley123 said:
The Baltimore catechism has been officially approved. Many theologians have not been.
The Baltimore catechism has also been recognized as an insufficient instrument, and replaced by the universal catechism and also by local catechisms.

I tend to read professional theologians very selectively, Stanley.  I most often stay pretty close to the saints and doctors of the Church who did address doctrinal issues in their spiritual writings and who the Church recognize as being orthodox teachers of the faith.

Only after one is well grounded spiritually and doctrinally is it really possible to approach some of the other great teachers of the Church who have been acknowledged for the orthodoxy of their teaching and writing.

Takes a long time even for a cradle Catholic to really become imbued with insight.  Some day I hope to come close to increasing in wisdom.

M.
 

stanley123

Protokentarchos
Joined
Nov 23, 2007
Messages
3,814
Reaction score
0
Points
0
elijahmaria said:
stanley123 said:
The Baltimore catechism has been officially approved. Many theologians have not been.
The Baltimore catechism has also been recognized as an insufficient instrument, and replaced by the universal catechism and also by local catechisms.
I don't believe that the RCC has ever declared that anything in the Baltimore catechism was heretical. On the contrary it has been officially approved and has been the  standard Catholic school catechism on Catholic teaching in the USA from 1885 to 1965.
 

elijahmaria

Taxiarches
Joined
Mar 28, 2010
Messages
6,515
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Website
irenikontheskete.blogspot.com
stanley123 said:
elijahmaria said:
stanley123 said:
The Baltimore catechism has been officially approved. Many theologians have not been.
The Baltimore catechism has also been recognized as an insufficient instrument, and replaced by the universal catechism and also by local catechisms.
I don't believe that the RCC has ever declared that anything in the Baltimore catechism was heretical. On the contrary it has been officially approved and has been the  standard Catholic school catechism on Catholic teaching in the USA from 1885 to 1965.
The Church is pretty slow to claim something is heretical.  They may say that it is insufficient or that it comes close to an edge of some kind, or that an idea is not fully representative of the truth, but there's a great deal of leeway in secular documents and discussions.  It takes a great deal to have a book banned or an idea banned or a person banned. 

The freedom to think and express things of the faith, in a variety of ways, often makes some people very uncomfortable.  Some people need the security of a very straightforward, black and white pronouncement.  That is what makes a question and answer catechism so attractive for teaching the average layman.  There's real security in that format.  The trouble is that it often does not tell the whole story or explain things that really ought to be explained.

Mary
 

stanley123

Protokentarchos
Joined
Nov 23, 2007
Messages
3,814
Reaction score
0
Points
0
elijahmaria said:
stanley123 said:
elijahmaria said:
stanley123 said:
The Baltimore catechism has been officially approved. Many theologians have not been.
The Baltimore catechism has also been recognized as an insufficient instrument, and replaced by the universal catechism and also by local catechisms.
I don't believe that the RCC has ever declared that anything in the Baltimore catechism was heretical. On the contrary it has been officially approved and has been the  standard Catholic school catechism on Catholic teaching in the USA from 1885 to 1965.
The Church is pretty slow to claim something is heretical.  They may say that it is insufficient or that it comes close to an edge of some kind, or that an idea is not fully representative of the truth, but there's a great deal of leeway in secular documents and discussions.  It takes a great deal to have a book banned or an idea banned or a person banned. 

The freedom to think and express things of the faith, in a variety of ways, often makes some people very uncomfortable.  Some people need the security of a very straightforward, black and white pronouncement.  That is what makes a question and answer catechism so attractive for teaching the average layman.  There's real security in that format.  The trouble is that it often does not tell the whole story or explain things that really ought to be explained.

Mary
It is a clear, unambiguous statement:
Q 184: Who are punished in purgatory?
Those are punished for a time in purgatory who die in the state of grace but are guilty of venial sin, or have not fully satisfied for the temporal punishment due to their sins.
…(c) The souls in purgatory are certain of entering heaven as soon as God’s justice has been fully satisfied.
.................
Purgatory has been officially taught in Catholic schools in the USA for more than eighty years from the Baltimore catechism. 
Now some dissenting Catholics are trying to change the Catholic teaching on it.
How many bishops were there who signed the documents of the third plenary Council of Baltimore held in 1884? Was it fourteen archbishops, sixty-one bishops, and six abbots?
 

stanley123

Protokentarchos
Joined
Nov 23, 2007
Messages
3,814
Reaction score
0
Points
0
elijahmaria said:
stanley123 said:
The Baltimore catechism has been officially approved. Many theologians have not been.
The Baltimore catechism has also been recognized as an insufficient instrument, ....
If an RC does not believe the teaching of the Baltimore Catechism, perhaps that RC can take a look at the RC book Read me or Rue It;
According to the RC Cardinal Patriarch of Lisbon: “We approve and recommend with all our heart the beautiful little book Read Me or Rue It by E. D. M. [These initials used by Fr. O'Sullivan stand for Engant de Marie, that is, "Child of Mary" Ed.]
Although small, it is destined to do great good among Catholics, many of whom are incredibly ignorant of the great doctrine of Purgatory.”
http://www.theworkofgod.org/Library/Purgatry/Readme.htm#PURGATORY
WHAT IS PURGATORY?
It is a prison of fire in which nearly all [saved] souls are plunged after death and in which they suffer the intensest pain. …..
St. Thomas Aquinas, the Prince of Theologians, says that the fire of Purgatory is equal in intensity to the fire of Hell, and that the slightest contact with it is more dreadful than all the possible sufferings of this Earth!
….
The existence of Purgatory is so certain that no Catholic has ever entertained a doubt of it. It was taught from the earliest days of the Church and was accepted with undoubting faith wherever the Gospel was preached.

1. The fire we see on Earth was made by the goodness of God for our comfort and well-being Still, when used as a torment, it is the most dreadful one we can imagine.
2. The fire of Purgatory, on the contrary, was made by the Justice of God to punish and purify us and is, therefore, incomparably more severe


 

elijahmaria

Taxiarches
Joined
Mar 28, 2010
Messages
6,515
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Website
irenikontheskete.blogspot.com
stanley123 said:
elijahmaria said:
stanley123 said:
The Baltimore catechism has been officially approved. Many theologians have not been.
The Baltimore catechism has also been recognized as an insufficient instrument, ....
If an RC does not believe the teaching of the Baltimore Catechism, perhaps that RC can take a look at the RC book Read me or Rue It;
According to the RC Cardinal Patriarch of Lisbon: “We approve and recommend with all our heart the beautiful little book Read Me or Rue It by E. D. M. [These initials used by Fr. O'Sullivan stand for Engant de Marie, that is, "Child of Mary" Ed.]
Although small, it is destined to do great good among Catholics, many of whom are incredibly ignorant of the great doctrine of Purgatory.”
http://www.theworkofgod.org/Library/Purgatry/Readme.htm#PURGATORY
WHAT IS PURGATORY?
It is a prison of fire in which nearly all [saved] souls are plunged after death and in which they suffer the intensest pain. …..
St. Thomas Aquinas, the Prince of Theologians, says that the fire of Purgatory is equal in intensity to the fire of Hell, and that the slightest contact with it is more dreadful than all the possible sufferings of this Earth!
….
The existence of Purgatory is so certain that no Catholic has ever entertained a doubt of it. It was taught from the earliest days of the Church and was accepted with undoubting faith wherever the Gospel was preached.

1. The fire we see on Earth was made by the goodness of God for our comfort and well-being Still, when used as a torment, it is the most dreadful one we can imagine.
2. The fire of Purgatory, on the contrary, was made by the Justice of God to punish and purify us and is, therefore, incomparably more severe
If this is what you want to believe you go right ahead.  I have half a dozen books in my library that tell the most gruesome tales.

I also have saints and doctors of the Church who do not, apparently, have the need to "visualize" purgation as you do and these seers do.

It is not the teaching of Trent and it is not the teaching of the CCC.

So please...enjoy!!  You and Father Ambrose.  You love it.  He hates it.

The Church does not teach it.

M.
 

Irish Hermit

Merarches
Joined
Oct 11, 2003
Messages
10,980
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Middle Earth
/\ 
elijahmaria said:
It is not the teaching of Trent and it is not the teaching of the CCC.
Here is the teaching of Trent.....
Decree on Purgatory by the Council of Trent, 25th session, 1563. 

"The Catholic Church, instructed by the Holy Spirit and in accordance with sacred Scripture and the ancient Tradition of the Fathers, has taught in the holy Councils and most recently in this ecumenical Council that there is a purgatory and that the souls detained there are helped by the acts of intercession (suffragia) of the faithful, and especially by the acceptable sacrifice of the altar."

The Council simply affirms the existence of purgatory and the value of praying for the deceased.

Mary wrote:
I adhere to the historic teaching of the Catholic Church, not its various and sundry perversions.
In fact Mary does not adhere to the formal teaching of the Catholic Church and the Council of Trent but adds in all manner of other elements and guesswork and a patchwork of favourite ideas which are not taught by the Catholic Church and may be seen as a perversion of its teachings.

For example:
Mary:
This is the burning punishment of Purgation.  The realization that the Beloved Lord is there but we cannot experience the sweetness and peace of his presence because our souls are not ready to receive him.
This, as with so much other material presented by Mary as the formal teaching of the Church with regard to Purgatory, is not formally taught at all by the Catholic Church.  One could go through message after message and point to her idiosyncratic ideas.

 

akimel

High Elder
Joined
Dec 21, 2009
Messages
523
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Website
afkimel.wordpress.com
Dear Fr Ambrose,

Please stop telling the world what the Catholic Church teaches about purgatory.  You possess neither the  authority nor the theological background to speak on Catholic teaching on purgatory.  Your knowledge of the subject is limited and distorted by polemic intent.  

The definitive and formal teaching of the Catholic Church on purgatory is quite minimal, as Mary has accurately stated.  Beyond that, there exists a fairly wide and legitimate diversity of opinion, just as there exists a fairly wide and legitimate diversity of Orthodox opinion on the intermediate state.   Mary's presentation of purgatory is hardly idiosyncratic, as is easily confirmed by reading Popes John Paul II and Benedict XVI; nor is it novel, as is easily confirmed by reading St Catherine of Genoa and the Venerable John Henry Newman.    

Perhaps you find it disturbing that the Catholic Church in fact allows a diversity of views on purgatory.  Inter-Catholic debate on purgatory can be vigorous and controverted.  But do not be too gleeful.  Given the absence of authoritative and irreformable Orthodox teaching on the intermediate state, and given the diversity of positions that I know to exist within Orthodoxy, I would suggest that those who live within ecclesial glass houses should not throw stones.  

Restrict yourself to interpreting Orthodox theology, and allow Catholics to interpret and present the teaching of the Catholic Church.  

I am reminded of an Orthodox priest who responded to an Orthodox layman who was quoting the canons of the Church against his parochial teaching:  "Who gave you permission to read the canons and who gave you the authority to quote them against your bishops and priests?"  And so I say to you, "Who gave you permission to read the dogmas of the Catholic Church and who gave you authority to quote them against Catholics?"   The principle here is basic:  those who speak fluently the language of a community are those who are best equipped to understand and interpret the teachings of their community.  You live outside the Catholic Church and understand neither its theology nor praxis.  Catholicism is a foreign language to you.  You have neither the right nor competence nor sympathy to correct Mary or any other Catholic on their apprehension of the teachings of their Church.  

I have repeatedly addressed the subject of purgatory on this forum and find it beyond frustrating that you continue to present yourself as an infallible spokesman for the Catholic Church, especially when your interpretation of Catholic teaching is so often off-base.  

Fr Alvin Kimel  

 

Irish Hermit

Merarches
Joined
Oct 11, 2003
Messages
10,980
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Middle Earth
akimel said:
Please stop telling the world what the Catholic Church teaches about purgatory.  You possess neither the  authority nor the theological background to speak on Catholic teaching on purgatory.  Your knowledge of the subject is limited and distorted by polemic intent.
Or perhaps from too long an immersion in the world and teachings of the pre-Vatican II Church?  I realise you are a new convert to Catholicism and perhaps you are aware of the former teaching and do not want to pay it any heed, or perhaops you simply do not know.

The changes in the teaching which have taken place are not insignficant. 

Is it really worth the bother to examine the modern Roman Catholic interpretation?  The doctrine is so unstable at this point in time.  It may well change again. It may well have a fresh revamping with the next generation of Catholics who may choose to return to the traditional Roman Catholic belief about Purgatory or to continue down the path of transmogrifying the new teaching into something different again.

Pope Paul VI issued his "Apostolic Constitution on Indulgences" Indulgentiarum Doctrina in 1967.  This traditional understanding of Purgatory was proclaimed by Peter a mere 43 years ago.  But now, less then 50 years later, speculative theologians are presenting a reconstructed understanding which differs radically from the Pope's.  Purgatory Lite.

Now this theological instability is something of a worry for Orthodoxy.  On the one hand there is no doubt that the modern teaching of Purgatory as Fr Kimel proposes in line with contemporary progressive theologians is a welcome change to Orthodoxy since it represents a revamping of the older and unacceptable traditional version of the Popes and Western Saints and it is deconstructing Purgatory in a manner quite acceptable to the Orthodox.  With the passage of time we may hope that the conscious belief in Purgatory may become as vitiated in the Catholic West as Limbo is becoming and, in many areas, has already become.

On the other hand we have concerns about the reconstruction theology which is at work within Catholicism because of the bizarre attempt to make out that this reconstruction is not taking place and that the modern theology is the same as the traditional theology.  This problem is spoken of here

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,13820.msg421044.html#msg421044

 

Irish Hermit

Merarches
Joined
Oct 11, 2003
Messages
10,980
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Middle Earth
akimel said:
[size=10pt]Perhaps you find it disturbing that the Catholic Church in fact allows a diversity of views on purgatory.  Inter-Catholic debate on purgatory can be vigorous and controverted.  But do not be too gleeful.  Given the absence of authoritative and irreformable Orthodox teaching on the intermediate state, and given the diversity of positions that I know to exist within Orthodoxy, I would suggest that those who live within ecclesial glass houses should not throw stones.
 


You are comparing apples and oranges and wish to criticize us (the apples) because we do not act like oranges.

We have been told uncountable times on this forum that the only genuine Catholic teaching is found in magisterial definitions.  Outside of that we are only looking at theological dubia.  It is for this reason that the opinion about Limbo is so easily dismissed from the Catholic Catechism, no matter how many hundreds of years it has formed part of the living faith and tradition of the bishops, the clergy and the faithful.  The concept of "magisterial teaching" is absent from Orthodoxy and hence the apples and oranges of your comparison.

All through this discussion on Purgatory Elijahmaria has stepped outside the magisterial teaching and has offered us her own opinions, not marking them as being merely opinions but claiming them as the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church.

So I criticize her and hold her to account within the context of your own Church's teaching and the apprehension of the way authority is given to that teaching.  You may do the same with orthodox teaching if you wish, but we must be aware of the difference between the two approaches and judge each by its own criteria.

 

Irish Hermit

Merarches
Joined
Oct 11, 2003
Messages
10,980
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Middle Earth
akimel said:
I am reminded of an Orthodox priest who responded to an Orthodox layman who was quoting the canons of the Church against his parochial teaching:  "Who gave you permission to read the canons and who gave you the authority to quote them against your bishops and priests?"
Yikes. I do not know why a priest would say such a stupid and unorthodox thing, unless maybe he had been driven to the edge of exasperation by an annoying individual.

The Orthodox faithful are taught their responsibility for maintaining and transmitting the faith and its praxis.  Having a knowledge of the Ecumenical Councils and their sacred canons is an imperative if the Orthodox are to fulfill their Spirit-led obligation to guard holy Orthodoxy.

Removing the study of the Ecumenical Councils and the canons to the preserve of clergy only is so far removed from the authentic spirit of Orthodoxy!  A very disturbing thought!  I can only surmise that this priest was truly ignorant of what Orthodoxy expects of the entire Church including the faithful.  Either that or he was, as I say, simply at the end of his tether with a pesky parishioner.

 
Joined
Feb 17, 2010
Messages
85
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
51
Location
McKinney, TX
To me its sad what we've let this thread come down to polemics and personal attacks.  There are many lost folks, like me, who are hoping there's a loving yet conservative place to rest our spiritual souls.  This thread has been insightful at times... can we get back on track?  Better yet maybe that all that needs to be said has alreayd been said...
 

Irish Hermit

Merarches
Joined
Oct 11, 2003
Messages
10,980
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Middle Earth
Dave in McKinney said:
To me its sad what we've let this thread come down to polemics and personal attacks.  There are many lost folks, like me, who are hoping there's a loving yet conservative place to rest our spiritual souls.  This thread has been insightful at times... can we get back on track?  Better yet maybe that all that needs to be said has alreayd been said...
Dave,

You may be right, but there's no denying that Purgatory is one of the hot subjects which pops up time and again in Catholic-Orthodox discussion groups.  If you click the tag "Purgatory" at the bottom of the messages it will take you to some of the numerous threads which have also been tagged with "Purgatory".

It's also a hot topic in Catholic discussion groups where you will find the Catholics taught the older understanding battling with the younger Catholics in an effort to understand one another.
 

elijahmaria

Taxiarches
Joined
Mar 28, 2010
Messages
6,515
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Website
irenikontheskete.blogspot.com
Irish Hermit said:
Dave in McKinney said:
To me its sad what we've let this thread come down to polemics and personal attacks.  There are many lost folks, like me, who are hoping there's a loving yet conservative place to rest our spiritual souls.  This thread has been insightful at times... can we get back on track?  Better yet maybe that all that needs to be said has alreayd been said...
Dave,

You may be right, but there's no denying that Purgatory is one of the hot subjects which pops up time and again in Catholic-Orthodox discussion groups.  If you click the tag "Purgatory" at the bottom of the messages it will take you to some of the numerous threads which have also been tagged with "Purgatory".

It's also a hot topic in Catholic discussion groups where you will find the Catholics taught the older understanding battling with the younger Catholics in an effort to understand one another.
You skip the part where I AM one of those Catholics taught under the basic question and answer format of the Baltimore Catechism.

I've read all of the lurid books on purgatory reprinted by TAN and other traditional book printers and sellers. 

But as Father Kimel says one turns to the saints and doctors of the Church, and the formal teaching texts of the Church which have achieved universal status...when seeking the formal teaching of the Church and not the wild piety of those who find fear to be the most expedient teacher.

To Father Kimel's list I would add Teresa of Avila's works for a strong spiritual synthesis of the Church's doctrinal body, including the here and the hereafter, and the realized but unrecognized Eschaton... :laugh:

Father Kimel's letter is quite kind and balanced and should mean something since, as you were so quick to say earlier in this thread, Father and I do not always agree in perspective.

Mary

 

elijahmaria

Taxiarches
Joined
Mar 28, 2010
Messages
6,515
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Website
irenikontheskete.blogspot.com
Dave in McKinney said:
To me its sad what we've let this thread come down to polemics and personal attacks.  There are many lost folks, like me, who are hoping there's a loving yet conservative place to rest our spiritual souls.  This thread has been insightful at times... can we get back on track?  Better yet maybe that all that needs to be said has alreayd been said...
Dear Dave,

In some ways all of the basic Catholic truths concerning purgation have been laid out here. 

What is your experience as a Catholic with these teachings and with spiritual teachings of the saints in general? 

Mary

 

elijahmaria

Taxiarches
Joined
Mar 28, 2010
Messages
6,515
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Website
irenikontheskete.blogspot.com
Irish Hermit said:
akimel said:
Please stop telling the world what the Catholic Church teaches about purgatory.  You possess neither the  authority nor the theological background to speak on Catholic teaching on purgatory.  Your knowledge of the subject is limited and distorted by polemic intent.
Or perhaps from too long an immersion in the world and teachings of the pre-Vatican II Church?   I realise you are a new convert to Catholicism and perhaps you are aware of the former teaching and do not want to pay it any heed, or perhaops you simply do not know.

The changes in the teaching which have taken place are not insignficant. 

Is it really worth the bother to examine the modern Roman Catholic interpretation?  The doctrine is so unstable at this point in time.  It may well change again. It may well have a fresh revamping with the next generation of Catholics who may choose to return to the traditional Roman Catholic belief about Purgatory or to continue down the path of transmogrifying the new teaching into something different again.

Pope Paul VI issued his "Apostolic Constitution on Indulgences" Indulgentiarum Doctrina in 1967.  This traditional understanding of Purgatory was proclaimed by Peter a mere 43 years ago.   But now, less then 50 years later, speculative theologians are presenting a reconstructed understanding which differs radically from the Pope's.  Purgatory Lite.

Now this theological instability is something of a worry for Orthodoxy.   On the one hand there is no doubt that the modern teaching of Purgatory as Fr Kimel proposes in line with contemporary progressive theologians is a welcome change to Orthodoxy since it represents a revamping of the older and unacceptable traditional version of the Popes and Western Saints and it is deconstructing Purgatory in a manner quite acceptable to the Orthodox.  With the passage of time we may hope that the conscious belief in Purgatory may become as vitiated in the Catholic West as Limbo is becoming and, in many areas, has already become.

On the other hand we have concerns about the reconstruction theology which is at work within Catholicism because of the bizarre attempt to make out that this reconstruction is not taking place and that the modern theology is the same as the traditional theology.  This problem is spoken of here

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,13820.msg421044.html#msg421044
Dear Father Ambrose,

When you have at least one Catholic saint and doctor of the Church some 500 years ago now teaching a deeply integrated apophatic spirituality that expresses this New Theology that you are claiming has occurred in the Catholic Church over the past 50 years, you are certainly going to loose your credibility among well formed and well educated Catholics with active spiritual lives.  They will simply smile politely and move on, much they way they do with people on the street handing out Chick Tracts.

And the reformed saints of Carmel are not the only ones in their life times.  So there others from that time and then those who lived considerably longer than 500 years ago.

The only people where you are going to find currency with your well practiced polemics are wavering Catholics who have not been well formed and in some cases have been deformed through no fault of their own, and other sympathetic Orthodox believers and reformed groups or protestants.

There is no stopping you but I know without a doubt that what you are doing is done with full knowledge and there is a price to be paid for knowingly telling half-truths even if it is, as you believe, for a good cause.  You might some day, before you pass on over, give that some serious consideration.

Mary

 

Wyatt

Archon
Joined
Jun 26, 2008
Messages
2,465
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
32
Location
Illinois, US
akimel said:
Dear Fr Ambrose,

Please stop telling the world what the Catholic Church teaches about purgatory.  You possess neither the  authority nor the theological background to speak on Catholic teaching on purgatory.  Your knowledge of the subject is limited and distorted by polemic intent.  

The definitive and formal teaching of the Catholic Church on purgatory is quite minimal, as Mary has accurately stated.  Beyond that, there exists a fairly wide and legitimate diversity of opinion, just as there exists a fairly wide and legitimate diversity of Orthodox opinion on the intermediate state.   Mary's presentation of purgatory is hardly idiosyncratic, as is easily confirmed by reading Popes John Paul II and Benedict XVI; nor is it novel, as is easily confirmed by reading St Catherine of Genoa and the Venerable John Henry Newman.    

Perhaps you find it disturbing that the Catholic Church in fact allows a diversity of views on purgatory.  Inter-Catholic debate on purgatory can be vigorous and controverted.  But do not be too gleeful.  Given the absence of authoritative and irreformable Orthodox teaching on the intermediate state, and given the diversity of positions that I know to exist within Orthodoxy, I would suggest that those who live within ecclesial glass houses should not throw stones.  

Restrict yourself to interpreting Orthodox theology, and allow Catholics to interpret and present the teaching of the Catholic Church.  

I am reminded of an Orthodox priest who responded to an Orthodox layman who was quoting the canons of the Church against his parochial teaching:  "Who gave you permission to read the canons and who gave you the authority to quote them against your bishops and priests?"  And so I say to you, "Who gave you permission to read the dogmas of the Catholic Church and who gave you authority to quote them against Catholics?"   The principle here is basic:  those who speak fluently the language of a community are those who are best equipped to understand and interpret the teachings of their community.  You live outside the Catholic Church and understand neither its theology nor praxis.  Catholicism is a foreign language to you.  You have neither the right nor competence nor sympathy to correct Mary or any other Catholic on their apprehension of the teachings of their Church.  

I have repeatedly addressed the subject of purgatory on this forum and find it beyond frustrating that you continue to present yourself as an infallible spokesman for the Catholic Church, especially when your interpretation of Catholic teaching is so often off-base.  

Fr Alvin Kimel  
Post of the month right here. Can I get an "Amen"?  ;D
 

Irish Hermit

Merarches
Joined
Oct 11, 2003
Messages
10,980
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Middle Earth
elijahmaria said:
There is no stopping you but I know without a doubt that what you are doing is done with full knowledge and there is a price to be paid for knowingly telling half-truths...
Mary, Mary, you measure me with your measure and speak untruths against me. I would rather admit to ignorance than confess to half truths.  I do not deal in half truths.  I most certainly do NOT use half truths in any evangelising work, whether among Catholics or atheists or Buddhists.

"Is de réir an tomhais lena dtomhaiseann sibh a thomhaisfear chugaibh"
Mark 4:24
 

Irish Hermit

Merarches
Joined
Oct 11, 2003
Messages
10,980
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Middle Earth
akimel said:
Please stop telling the world what the Catholic Church teaches about purgatory.  You possess neither the  authority nor the theological background to speak on Catholic teaching on purgatory.  Your knowledge of the subject is limited and distorted by polemic intent.
Certainly what the Orthodox have felt when a certain Ruthenian Catholic lady has been expounding on her limited knowledge of Orthodoxy and abortion.   :laugh:  But we still love her and devote prayer time for her.

 

elijahmaria

Taxiarches
Joined
Mar 28, 2010
Messages
6,515
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Website
irenikontheskete.blogspot.com
Irish Hermit said:
elijahmaria said:
There is no stopping you but I know without a doubt that what you are doing is done with full knowledge and there is a price to be paid for knowingly telling half-truths...
Mary, Mary, you measure me with your measure and speak untruths against me. I would rather admit to ignorance than confess to half truths.  I do not deal in half truths.  I most certainly do NOT use half truths in any evangelising work, whether among Catholics or atheists or Buddhists.

"Is de réir an tomhais lena dtomhaiseann sibh a thomhaisfear chugaibh"
Mark 4:24
You cannot duck this one. 

You have too much formal Catholic training and experience to duck this one.

Mary
 

theistgal

Archon
Site Supporter
Joined
Jun 16, 2008
Messages
2,477
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Sunny Southern Cal
Mary, wouldn't you agree that part of the reason RC teaching is somewhat confusing is that all those "wild books" published by TAN that you referred to earlier received the same approval from the Church - the 'nihil obstats' and 'imprimaturs' indicating the Church's approval - as the undeniably more reliable saints and doctors of the church you yourself tend to agree with more?  And even some of those fear-mongering books you quite rightly dislike were authored by saints.  How would the average Catholic in the pews know that what they were told was "approved Catholic teaching" might not be after all?
 

elijahmaria

Taxiarches
Joined
Mar 28, 2010
Messages
6,515
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Website
irenikontheskete.blogspot.com
theistgal said:
Mary, wouldn't you agree that part of the reason RC teaching is somewhat confusing is that all those "wild books" published by TAN that you referred to earlier received the same approval from the Church - the 'nihil obstats' and 'imprimaturs' indicating the Church's approval - as the undeniably more reliable saints and doctors of the church you yourself tend to agree with more?  And even some of those fear-mongering books you quite rightly dislike were authored by saints.  How would the average Catholic in the pews know that what they were told was "approved Catholic teaching" might not be after all?
They don't know.  They can't know and that has been a very serious problem in the Catholic Church for a while but not really more than four or five generations passed.

So the circumstances that you decry and rightly so are not old in the Church relatively speaking, and it did not begin really until well after the decline in western monasticism in England and Europe.  The pain and punishment of purgation as taught to the people by monastics was nothing more than a continuation of the difficulties in the spiritual life begun here.  The burning desire for God that was a punishment in itself when it could not be slaked by his presence and grace...and so on.

That is part of it but as monastic life declined one saw an increase in various places...southern France...Ireland...in particular.  Places where Jansenist tendencies arose in response to circumstance, be it the Albigensian heresies or the attitude of some Benedictines which said that the laity really could never achieve sanctity in this life or union with God, divinization or theosis, however you call it...only monastics could achieve such spiritual heights.

Once that began, the only thing left to keep the flock in line was fear.  

Caritas had been removed from them...the Way of Perfection no longer guided many faithful who were caught up in areas of virulent heresy or where the protestants destroyed the organic development of healthy asceticism over generations for the laity as well as for the monk.

It is a complicated history and I am telling it in short choppy bursts but I only intend to point to particular circumstances that led to some of the more rigid pieties of the 17 and 18 hundreds...and into the 20th century when the renewal of monastic life began to reverse some of these trends.

Mary
 

theistgal

Archon
Site Supporter
Joined
Jun 16, 2008
Messages
2,477
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Sunny Southern Cal
And yet the nihil obstats and imprimaturs on those books, which continue to be reprinted and sold by TAN and other Catholic publishing houses, have never been revoked.  I see these books all the time in Catholic bookstores and gift shops.  So Catholics today are still learning these "rigid" teachings which you say are mistaken and not current Catholic doctrine.

Since the Magisterium has found the time to condemn the likes of Charles Curran, Hans Kung, et al (and rightly so), why don't they occasionally aim their guns at some of these popular books which will undoubtedly be read by FAR more Catholic laity than those more scholarly works?

For example, just take a look at these books published by TAN at a site called "Marianland" - the very first one is by St. Alphonsus Liguori!

http://www.marianland.com/hell010.html
 

elijahmaria

Taxiarches
Joined
Mar 28, 2010
Messages
6,515
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Website
irenikontheskete.blogspot.com
theistgal said:
And yet the nihil obstats and imprimaturs on those books, which continue to be reprinted and sold by TAN and other Catholic publishing houses, have never been revoked.  I see these books all the time in Catholic bookstores and gift shops.  So Catholics today are still learning these "rigid" teachings which you say are mistaken and not current Catholic doctrine.

Since the Magisterium has found the time to condemn the likes of Charles Curran, Hans Kung, et al (and rightly so), why don't they occasionally aim their guns at some of these popular books which will undoubtedly be read by FAR more Catholic laity than those more scholarly works?

For example, just take a look at these books published by TAN at a site called "Marianland" - the very first one is by St. Alphonsus Liguori!

http://www.marianland.com/hell010.html
Charles Curran's and Hans Kung's teachings are explicitly heterodox and now and then they are heretical. 

These others are not. 

The expectation is that the well informed Catholic, these days, should be able to distinguish between the a punishing experience and God inflicting punishments in a way that would render God the purveyor of evil.

Not all pain is evil, ect., etc.

The expectation is that there are clergy and monastics out here teaching the flock AND that the flock will seek out the teaching if the pastors are lax.

Most of what you and Father Ambrose are complaining about is a matter of not making distinctions and understanding meaning in proper context.  The rest is popular pieties that may or may not be useful to all but are not, in themselves, heresy or heterodoxy when rightly understood.

Mary
 

stanley123

Protokentarchos
Joined
Nov 23, 2007
Messages
3,814
Reaction score
0
Points
0
akimel said:
Restrict yourself to interpreting Orthodox theology, and allow Catholics to interpret and present the teaching of the Catholic Church.
I don't think that this is such a good idea. If the RCC is serious about union with the EO Church, I would think that it would be  important and necessary for Catholics to know how the EO see and interpret RC teaching.
 
Top