Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

PURGATORY

[quote="Ed the Ned Thats almost three hundred years of Church doctrine.
It also stated the following:
Ed[/quote]


It was never Church doctrine.

Stop posting misinformation.
 
We reproduce here the whole passage dealing with the Sabbatine privilege, as it appears in the summary approved by the Congregation of Indulgences on 4 July, 1908. It is noteworthy that the Bull of John XXII, which was still mentioned in the previous summary approved on 1 December, 1866, is no longer referred to (cf. "Rescript. authent. S.C. Indulg.", Ratisbon, 1885, p. 475). Among the privileges, which are mentioned after the indulgences, the following occurs in the first place: "The privilege of Pope John XXII, commonly [vulgo] known as the Sabbatine, which was approved and confirmed by Clement VII ("Ex clementi", 12 August 1530), St. Pius V ("Superna dispositione", 18 Feb., 1566), Gregory XIII ("Ut laudes", 18 Sept., 1577), and others, and also by the Holy Roman General Inquisition under Paul V on 20 January, 1613, in a Decree to the following effect:

It is permitted to the Carmelite Fathers to preach that the Christian people may piously believe in the help which the souls of brothers and members, who have departed this life in charity, have worn in life the scapular, have ever observed chastity, have recited the Little Hours [of the Blessed Virgin], or, if they cannot read, have observed the fast days of the Church, and have abstained from flesh meat on Wednesdays and Saturdays (except when Christmas falls on such days), may derive after death — especially on Saturdays, the day consecrated by the Church to the Blessed Virgin — through the unceasing intercession of Mary, her pious petitions, her merits, and her special protection.

With this explanation and interpretation, the Sabbatine privilege no longer presents any difficulties, and Benedict XIV adds his desire that the faithful should rely on it (Opera omnia, IX, Venice, 1767, pp. 197 sqq.). Even apart from the Bull and the tradition or legend concerning the apparition and promise of the Mother of God the interpretation of the Decree cannot be contested.

The Sabbatine privilege thus consists essentially in the early liberation from purgatory, through the special intercession and petition of Mary, which she graciously exercises in favour of her devoted servants preferentially — as we may assume — on the day consecrated to her, Saturday. Furthermore, the conditions for the gaining of the privilege are of such a kind as justify a special trust in the assistance of Mary. It is especially required of all who wish to share in the privilege that they faithfully preserve their chastity, and recite devoutly each day the Little Hours of the Blessed Virgin. However, all those who are bound to read their Breviary, fulfil the obligation of reciting the Little Hours by reading their Office. Persons who cannot read must (instead of reciting the Little Hours) observe all the fasts prescribed by the Church as they are kept in their home diocese or place of residence, and must in addition abstain from flesh meat on all Wednesdays and Saturdays of the year, except when Christmas falls on one of these days. The obligation to read the Little Hours and to abstain from flesh meat on Wednesday and Saturday may on important grounds be changed for other pious works; the faculty to sanction this change was granted to all confessors by Leo XIII in the Decree of the Congregation of Indulgences of 11 (14) June, 1901.
- http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/13289b.htm

Please explain this?
 
Ed the Ned said:
I did read it, and maybe I misunderstood it, it said the following:

"It was associated with an apocryphal Papal Bull allegedly written in 1322 by Pope John XXII"
and then:

"The Vatican has denied the validity of this document since 1613 and forbade the Carmelites to preach the Sabbatine privilege"

Thats almost three hundred years of Church doctrine.

No, it isn't. First, the "APOCRYPHAL" papal bull means just that - apocryphal. Written long after Pope John 22 died, no doubt, otherwise, it wouldn't have been considered apocryphal. Likely, the Carmelites brought up some supposed document to support their superstition, and the Papal office, certainly knowing what Pope John published as a papal bull (they aren't published in secret...), denied its existence.

There was no "doctrine" on this.

Ed the Ned said:
It also stated the following:

"One of the beliefs most influential in popularizing the brown scapular devotion was a promise known as the Sabbatine privilege."

So it seems that some are still trying to promote the belief.


Superstitious nuns do not a doctrine make.

Ed the Ned said:
Although my argument was not trying to disprove or agree that it was church doctrine. I was merely stating that Vince was not confused and it could have been taught to him.

I never said it couldn't be taught to him. I said that it was not doctrine of the Church, but some confused nuns who had a bit too much devotion to an in-house means of celebrating Mary and her role in the Church.

Regards
 
Ed the Ned said:
It is permitted to the Carmelite Fathers to preach that the Christian people may piously believe in the help which the souls of brothers and members, who have departed this life in charity, have worn in life the scapular, have ever observed chastity...

First of all, note the key word "MAY". Oh yea, you can believe it if you want, but it isn't doctrine, bound upon all Catholics to believe, such as the Trinity or Assumption of Mary.

Secondly, note, that this person was living a life of charity and prayer. It is likely that even without the scapular, the person would be saved by Christ, anyway. As long as someone was living a life of love, pious beliefs about scapulars, superstituous as they may be, are not harmful - as long as they do not become some alleged source of salvation or a requirment placed upon God or any other saint.
As long as people understand that God is the source of salvation, not the wearing of a scapular, the belief is not detrimental - and may even aid in a person's walk in charity.

Regards
 
If a belief offers a "MAY" then surely it is in addition to their fundermental beliefs. The Church is permitting a doctrine to be taught that adds to its basic doctrine. This still makes it doctrine, Just not essential to once ultimate salvation. So what Vince spoke about might not be wrong. If a Catholic church taught this, they would not be seen as teaching wrong teaching, or would they?
 
Ed the Ned said:
If a belief offers a "MAY" then surely it is in addition to their fundermental beliefs. The Church is permitting a doctrine to be taught that adds to its basic doctrine. This still makes it doctrine, Just not essential to once ultimate salvation. So what Vince spoke about might not be wrong. If a Catholic church taught this, they would not be seen as teaching wrong teaching, or would they?


Wrong. You need to do a little research and stop making incorrect assumptions.
 
Ed the Ned said:
If a belief offers a "MAY" then surely it is in addition to their fundermental beliefs.

All Christians have "fundamental beliefs" along with particular things that they do, whether out of piety, devotion, personal opinion, speculation, or alleged private interpretations. Is wearing a wedding ring a "fundamental belief"? Is it found anywhere in Scriptures??? How about your personal prayer life? Specifically, you no doubt have a particular set of rituals you do to prepare you and conduct your prayers. Again, you MAY change them at a later date, because you find a different course of prayer to be more effective.

Methinks you complain too much without looking at your own personal habits.


Ed the Ned said:
The Church is permitting a doctrine to be taught that adds to its basic doctrine.

How many times have I said it is not a doctrine??? It is an allowed teaching, with added caveats that point out that we are not to forget that it is GOD who saves, not wearing a piece of cloth. It is allowed because it can instill within people a more deeper devotion to pray or Christian action. It brings out one's faith more strongly.

Ed the Ned said:
This still makes it doctrine, Just not essential to once ultimate salvation. So what Vince spoke about might not be wrong. If a Catholic church taught this, they would not be seen as teaching wrong teaching, or would they?

A doctrine is something that all Catholics are bound to believe. How can this be a doctrine when the language states MAY believe????

Please. Even Pastor Bob teaches things such as opinion, speculation and interpretation of his experiences in life. Does this mean that EVERYONE hearing Pastor Bob MUST believe every word from his mouth???? When the Church is teaching something doctrinal, dogmatic, people are FIRMLY TOLD SO. Over and over again. By proper authority of the Magesterium. We aren't left to guess or wonder.

Let's try to ask ourselves "does this also apply to me", before launching into another misguided attempt to pluck the splinter out of the Catholic Church's eye...
 
If there is a "purgatory" it is a place where those servants of God who did unjustly are punished. If we can use the bible as a reference to the truth (which we should) there is a cause to the idea of a settling of accounts. Take a look at the words of Jesus...

Luke 12:45But and if that servant say in his heart, My lord delayeth his coming; and shall begin to beat the menservants and maidens, and to eat and drink, and to be drunken;

46The lord of that servant will come in a day when he looketh not for him, and at an hour when he is not aware, and will cut him in sunder, and will appoint him his portion with the unbelievers.

47And that servant, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes.

48But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more.
 
Adullam said:
If there is a "purgatory" it is a place where those servants of God who did unjustly are punished. If we can use the bible as a reference to the truth (which we should) there is a cause to the idea of a settling of accounts. Take a look at the words of Jesus...

Luke 12:45But and if that servant say in his heart, My lord delayeth his coming; and shall begin to beat the menservants and maidens, and to eat and drink, and to be drunken;

46The lord of that servant will come in a day when he looketh not for him, and at an hour when he is not aware, and will cut him in sunder, and will appoint him his portion with the unbelievers.

47And that servant, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes.

48But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more.


Agreed. That's what purgatory is. A final cleansing so that we can see God.
 
chestertonrules said:
Adullam said:
If there is a "purgatory" it is a place where those servants of God who did unjustly are punished. If we can use the bible as a reference to the truth (which we should) there is a cause to the idea of a settling of accounts. Take a look at the words of Jesus...

Luke 12:45But and if that servant say in his heart, My lord delayeth his coming; and shall begin to beat the menservants and maidens, and to eat and drink, and to be drunken;

46The lord of that servant will come in a day when he looketh not for him, and at an hour when he is not aware, and will cut him in sunder, and will appoint him his portion with the unbelievers.

47And that servant, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes.

48But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more.


Agreed. That's what purgatory is. A final cleansing so that we can see God.


Actually, it is a place of shame. We would do better to do the will of God. If we aren't sure of what that is, we should seek this diligently.

It is our God-given right to be wrong about so many things. We come nearer the truth when we give up these rights.
 
Let's try to ask ourselves "does this also apply to me", before launching into another misguided attempt to pluck the splinter out of the Catholic Church's eye...
I am not attempting to pluck any splinter out of the Catholics church eye at all. My initial comment came from a responce to Vince and what he was taught.

The idea that Mary's prayers can assist us is no different an idea that I praying for another Christian. If Vince was taught otherwise, he was taught incorrectly. It wouldn't be the first time a nun didn't know what she was talking about...

This was your response, now it seems that it is an accepted teaching, yet as you put it, not Church doctrine. I accept that it is not official church doctrine. Yet the Catholic Church has allowed it to be taught as a correct teaching and from my previous post it is documented.

It seems that the nun did know what she was talking about and her Church had accepted that teaching as correct within the Catholic Church. Whether you agree with the teaching or not. IT IS ACCEPTED and was taught to Vince as he explained.
 
Ed the Ned said:
Why did it take three hundred years for them to deny it?

Because the Catholic Church has a history of contradictory doctrines. When I was in Massachusetts in the 1970's, the Catholic Church taught that there was neither a Hell nor a Purgatory. One Pope, who was widely-ignored, said that Mary did not descend into Purgatory every first Saturday. Overwhelming evidence showed that the Catholic Church continued to teach the doctrine.

And Folks, you cannot be sure that the Catholic doctrines being taught on this thread won't be declared heretical someday.
 
Back
Top