Re: Purgatory?

On Thu, 27 Nov 2003 20:15:57 -0500, ":+D"
<<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:

>On Thu, 27 Nov 2003 17:15:01 -0500, Joseph Geloso
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote the following funny stuff in Usenet
>News'Froups! :
>
>>
>>I have a bit of a problem referring to the Baptist Faith, or the
>>Baptist system of religion, as a "Church." That is not what it is.
>>Baptists, as long as they are properly baptized, are members of
>>Christ's One Church, and that Church subsists in the Catholic Church.

>Horse apples.
>Jesus never founded that one.
>I'm not trying to arrogantly or falsely claim that 'the only Church is
>the Baptist Church' either, like roman catholics try to claim about
>the rc religion.
>
>and The Baptist faith IS A CHURCH.

There is no such thing as one among many. The Church is *The* Church.
If you say you and I are part of that One Church, I will take you at
your word. But there is no *my church* vs *your church*. If we are in
*the* Church, we are One in the Lord.

>>
>>So if you want to say you and I belong to the One Church, that is
>>O.K., but it is not *my* Church vs. *your* Church. And if the Baptist
>>religion were to disappear from the face of the Earth, God's Church --
>>the Catholic Church -- would yet remain. By contrast, Our Lord
>>promised that the Church He founded -- the Catholic Church -- would
>>remain on Earth through every age.

>You're talking through your hat.
> The roman religion is NOT the Church fouinded by Christ, and it will
>be overturned.

It will be overturned? When? Hasn't happened in 2000 years, yet.


>>
>>>LOL! 'properly baptized'???? I most certainly WAS properly baptized,
>>>by immersion, as our Lord Himself was also baptized, according to the
>>>Bible.
>>
>>Were you baptized "In the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the
>>Holy Spirit," according to the Commmand of Christ? To be baptized with
>>the Baptism of John is not the same thing, and the Scripture attests
>>to that fact also.
>>
>I most certainly WAS, thank you.

Good. Then you really are a member of Christ's Body, the Church.


>>>I thought better of you than this, Joseph. how dare you assume I was
>>>not 'properly' baptized.
>>
>>I do not assume anything. I said "if you were..."
>>
>Yes, I WAS.
>And properly by IMMERSION, not merely sprinkling a few drops of water!

Pouring is far more common than sprinkling actually. Immersion is the
way Our Lord was baptized by John, no doubt. But what is required for
the validity of the Sacrament is natural water, and the Trinitarian
Formula. So you were really baptized -- a Sacrament of the New Law,
which confers grace. You were made the daughter of the Living God, and
heir to the Kingdom of God. All your previous sins were washed away,
along with all debt of punishment for sin, in that one instant when
you were baptized. You were made literally a New Creature in Christ.
You received the Gift of the Holy Spirit, and there is imprinted upon
your soul, an indelible mark, the Mark of Christ. You belong to Him.


>>>and as for the roman religion,. it is NOT the Church founded by
>>>Christ. I must again disagree with you on that.
>>
>>You are right, the "Roman religion" -- emperor worship -- was not
>>institued by Christ. The Catholic Church was. If you were properly
>>baptized, you are a member of her.
>>
>Bollocks.
>
>As for my baptism, I was baptized into CHRIST's Church, not the
>romanist one.

I am no Romanist. I am Catholic. Since there is only one Church, we
were both baptized into the same One Church. Henceforth no longer say
my religion was not founded by Christ. My religion is Christianity. It
was founded by Christ. We each practice Christianity in our different
ways. But Christ willed for His Church to be One. And God the Father
always answers the prayers of God the Son. So it stands to reason that
God's Church is already One, and cannot either be divided. You
Baptists ought to be worshipping with us, not denouncing our worship
as false. 


>>
>>Do you believe in God the Father Alimighty, Creator of Heaven and
>>Earth?
>>
>>Do you believe in Jesus Christ, His only Son, Our Lord?
>>
>>That He was conceived by the Holy Spirit and born of the Virgin Mary?
>>
>>That He suffered under Pontius Pilate for our sakes, was crucified,
>>died, was buried, and descended to the dead?
>>
>>That He rose from the dead on the third day, ascended into Heaven, and
>>is now seated at the right hand of God the Father Almighty?
>>
>>That He will come again in Glory to judge both the living and the
>>dead?
>>
>>Do you believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the Giver of Life, who
>>proceeds from the Father and the Son, and with the Father and the Son
>>is worshipped and glorified?

>Sure- that doesn't make me a Catholic, nonetheless.
>
>>
>>Do you believe in One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic Church?
>>
>No.

>The Roman Catholic religion is not the one and only, and it's obvious
>from studying its history, it's FAR FROM holy....
>
>remainder of coercive comments ignored.

Look, it is easy for us to be nice to each other. We both love God.
But here we are on our respective religion newsgroups. I did not go
out looking for you and you did not go out looking for me. But we both
got interested in this thread about Purgatory. Now Purgatory is known
to both of us as Catholic Doctrine. The first post I see from you on
this thread was a series of five sentences

Since I did not address these then, I will do so now.

>The place roman catholics call 'purgatory' does not exist.

That is a bare assertion. Your thesis, if you will.

>The BIBLE does NOT support it either.

It would have been more proper for you to simply say, "The Bible does
not support it." That would be you bringing forth evidence in support
of your thesis. Adding the word "either" implies your thesis as a
priori, which is not valid for the sake of argument unless you are in
fact an authority.

>The Bible clearly states that it is appointed for man to die once,
>then face judgement.

That is true.

>No mention of purgy there.

That is also true.

>The doctrine of 'purgatory' is a man-made doctrine, just as the fable
>they call 'transubstantiation' is.

If that is the conclusion, it does not follow from the premises. You
were going along fine until you got to here. There is something
missing in your argument. The fact that one verse of the Bible does
not mention Purgatory does not lead to the conclusion that the
doctrine is man-made. And the stab about transsubstantiation can
safely be discarded, as that is a different subject altogether.

But you and I are in agreement as to certain facts. One that the Bible
is an authority, in the sense that you appealed to authority in this
sentence:
>The BIBLE does NOT support it either.
The only flaw here is, as pointed out, you are presenting it as if you
have two authorities that are in agreement, both you AND the Bible not
supporting the doctrine of Purgatory. You are not an authority. But
the Bible is an authority that we both recognize. So that is progress
towards understanding each other.

It is a point worth making, that you are not an authority that anyone
should have to recognize. Neither am I such an authority. We are each
just human beings, trying to sort things out for ourselves in ways
that make sense to us each individually. Part of my understanding of
God's Church says that there ought to be, there has to be, some way
that will make sense to us both, together, in God's Church. So that is
what I am striving for, with you. Are you game?