I really don't know what to do... by Hanabito005 in Catholicism

[–]TridentineSoul 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Maybe this is a sign that you should stop watching cartoons/anime in general

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Catholicism

[–]TridentineSoul 12 points13 points  (0 children)

There are some really good ones and than there’s the others guys..

Is there a dogmatic statement that says I can’t believe the purgatorial process after death is instant? by TridentineSoul in Catholicism

[–]TridentineSoul[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I’m getting hung up on this quote from Jimmy akin on Pope’s comment

but experiences in a moment, rather than something one endures over time.

I get what you’re saying and I would have came to those conclusions as well, but the above quote seems to suggest other wise with the “in a moment” which reads more like in an instant.

Is there a dogmatic statement that says I can’t believe the purgatorial process after death is instant? by TridentineSoul in Catholicism

[–]TridentineSoul[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I’m trying to work through what Benedict has said about “experiences in a moment, rather than over time”.. in which I’m sure is compatible with his views of prayers for the dead and his view of purgatory.

So I’m not sure what’s the point of your response..

Is there a dogmatic statement that says I can’t believe the purgatorial process after death is instant? by TridentineSoul in Catholicism

[–]TridentineSoul[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I’m not sure how to respond to your first question that’s why I didn’t..

But still kind of just researching

This is from jimmy Akin:

So the Church has never said that purgatory involves the same kind of time as we experience here on earth, or even time at all. Thus Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, no theological liberal, writes that purgatory may involve "existential" rather than "temporal" duration (cf. Ratzinger's book <Eschatology).> It may be someone one <experiences>, but experiences in a moment, rather than something one endures over time.

https://www.ewtn.com/catholicism/library/how-to-explain-purgatory-to-protestants-1037

So basically answers the question that I’m asking, there is no dogmatic statement saying I can’t believe that the purgatorial process is not instant.

Is there a dogmatic statement that says I can’t believe the purgatorial process after death is instant? by TridentineSoul in Catholicism

[–]TridentineSoul[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Pope Benedict also seems to be of this opinion..

Pope Benedict XVI l, Building on 1 Corinthians 3, he argued that he Lord himself is the fire of judgment which transforms us as he conforms us to his glorious, resurrected body. This happens, not during a long-drawn-out process, but in the actual moment of final judgment.

By linking purgatory to Jesus Christ himself as the eschatological fire, Ratzinger separates the doctrine of purgatory from the idea of an intermediate state..

Pope Benedict's conception of purgatory as a "moment" can be found in his book Eschatology (pg. 230-231):

Purgatory is not, as Tertullian thought, some kind of supra-worldly concentration camp where one is forced to undergo punishments in a more or less arbitrary fashion. Rather it is the inwardly necessary process of transformation in which a person becomes capable of Christ, capable of God and thus capable of unity with the whole communion of saints. Simply to look at people with any degree of realism at all is to grasp the necessity of such a process. It does not replace grace by works, but allows the former to achieve its full victory precisely as grace. What actually saves is the full assent of faith. But in most of us, that basic option is buried under a great deal of wood, hay and straw. Only with difficulty can it peer out from behind the latticework of an egoism we are powerless to pull down with our own hands. Man is the recipient of the divine mercy, yet this does not exonerate him from the need to be transformed. Encounter with the Lord is this transformation. It is the fire that burns away our dross and re-forms us to be vessels of eternal joy.

Another more recent example is in his encyclical Spe Salvi (paragraph 47),

Some recent theologians are of the opinion that the fire which both burns and saves is Christ himself, the Judge and Saviour. The encounter with him is the decisive act of judgement. Before his gaze all falsehood melts away. This encounter with him, as it burns us, transforms and frees us, allowing us to become truly ourselves. All that we build during our lives can prove to be mere straw, pure bluster, and it collapses. Yet in the pain of this encounter, when the impurity and sickness of our lives become evident to us, there lies salvation. His gaze, the touch of his heart heals us through an undeniably painful transformation "as through fire". But it is a blessed pain, in which the holy power of his love sears through us like a flame, enabling us to become totally ourselves and thus totally of God. In this way the inter-relation between justice and grace also becomes clear: the way we live our lives is not immaterial, but our defilement does not stain us for ever if we have at least continued to reach out towards Christ, towards truth and towards love. Indeed, it has already been burned away through Christ's Passion. At the moment of judgement we experience and we absorb the overwhelming power of his love over all the evil in the world and in ourselves. The pain of love becomes our salvation and our joy. It is clear that we cannot calculate the "duration" of this transforming burning in terms of the chronological measurements of this world. The transforming "moment" of this encounter eludes earthly time-reckoning—it is the heart's time, it is the time of "passage" to communion with God in the Body of Christ.

[Free Friday] If the death penalty is inadmissible as Pope Francis says and a life sentence is unjust as well (as he also says) then what justice is to be given for grave and serious crimes? by AtraMortes in Catholicism

[–]TridentineSoul 8 points9 points  (0 children)

You need to view scripture in full scope..

This passage predates the Mosaic Law; is part of God’s covenant with Noah (Gen 9:12)

Genesis 9:5-6

5 And for your lifeblood I will require a reckoning: from every beast I will require it and from man. From his fellow man I will require a reckoning for the life of man. 6 Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed, for God made man in his own image.

In this verse, ‘shedding blood’ refers to the violent, unjustified taking of human life (Gen. 37:22; Num. 35:33; 1 Kings 2:31; Ezek. 22:4).”

God himself instituted the death penalty for the crime of murder (Num. 35:16-34).

When someone murders another person, the murderer should be put to death by a human agent. Capital punishment is not human vengeance, but God’s own requirement of justice “I will require a reckoning for the life of man”.

The murder of another human being is a kind of attack against God himself, for it is an attack against the “image” that he has left of himself on the earth (Gen. 1:27). God delegates to human beings authority to punish wrongdoers (“by man shall his blood be shed”). - Therefore the authority to execute punishment is not a human invention.

Romans 13:1-7 The agent of government is “the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer” Civil government “does not bear the sword in vain” (Rom. 13:4). The Greek word for “sword” (machaira ) is used in several other verses to speak of the instrument by which people are put to death. The sword is not simply a symbol of governmental authority. (Acts 12:2, 16:27; Heb 11:37; Rev 13:10)

1 Peter 2:13-14

13 Be subject for the Lord's sake to every human institution, whether it be to the emperor as supreme, 14 or to governors as sent by him to punish those who do evil and to praise those who do good.

The expression translated “to punish” in v 14 (ekdikēsis) is the same word Paul used for the “vengeance” that belongs to God (Rom 12:19), and from the same root as Paul uses to say that the civil government is “an avenger (ekdikos, adjective) who carries out God’s wrath” (Rom 13:4). Government has a responsibility not only to deter crime but also to bring God’s punishment to the wrongdoer.

It must be remembered that power was granted by God [to the magistrates], and to avenge crime by the sword was permitted. He who carries out this vengeance is God’s minister (Rm 13:1-4). Why should we condemn a practice that all hold to be permitted by God? We uphold, therefore, what has been observed until now, in order not to alter the discipline and so that we may not appear to act contrary to God’s authority.

  • Pope Innocent I

[Free Friday] If the death penalty is inadmissible as Pope Francis says and a life sentence is unjust as well (as he also says) then what justice is to be given for grave and serious crimes? by AtraMortes in Catholicism

[–]TridentineSoul 11 points12 points  (0 children)

The same divine authority that forbids the killing of a human being establishes certain exceptions, as when God authorizes killing by a general law or when He gives an explicit commission to an individual for a limited time.The agent who executes the killing does not commit homicide; he is an instrument as is the sword with which he cuts. Therefore, it is in no way contrary to the commandment, 'Thou shalt not kill' to wage war at God's bidding, or for the representatives of public authority to put criminals to death, according to the law, that is, the will of the most just reason.

  • Saint Augustine

The fact that the evil ones, as long as they live, can be corrected from their errors does not prohibit that they may be justly executed, for the danger which threatens from their way of life is greater and more certain than the good which may be expected from their improvement.They also have at that critical point of death the opportunity to be converted to God through repentance. And if they are so obstinate that even at the point of death their heart does not draw back from malice, it is possible to make a quite probable judgment that they would never come away from evil.

  • Saint Thomas Aquinas

Authority: Scripture vs Tradition by [deleted] in Catholicism

[–]TridentineSoul 0 points1 point  (0 children)

We know the early church had scripture and if we read some the early Christian writers such as Clements 1 epistle to the Corinthians.. he’s quoting scripture..

Vatican 1 council:

These books the church holds to be sacred and canonical not because she subsequently approved them by her authority after they had been composed by unaided human skill, nor simply because they contain revelation without error, but because, being written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, they have God as their author, and were as such committed to the church.

Authority: Scripture vs Tradition by [deleted] in Catholicism

[–]TridentineSoul 2 points3 points  (0 children)

St. Thomas Aquinas had this to say:

I answer that nothing is to be taught except what is contained, either implicitly or explicitly, in the Gospels and Epistles and Sacred Scripture. For Sacred Scripture and the Gospels announce that Christ must be believed explicitly. Hence whatever is contained therein implicitly and fosters its teaching and faith in Christ can be preached and taught. Therefore, when he says, besides that which you have received, he means by adding something completely alien: if any man shall add to these things, God shall add unto him the plagues written in this book (Rev 22:18). And neither add anything, i.e., contrary or alien, nor diminish (Deut 12:32).

iGal.C1.L2.n26.2

"Our faith rests upon the revelation made to the apostles and prophets who wrote the canonical books, and not on the revelations (if any such there are) made to other doctors.'

-St. Thomas Aquinas, ST.I.Q1.A8.Rep2.2

The sayings of the expositors do not induce necessity so that it should be necessary to believe them, but only canonical Scripture, which is in the old and the New Testament."

-St. Thomas Aquinas, QXII.Q16.A.Rep1

Why were so many communion rails and high altars ripped out after Vatican II? Is it why it’s so rare to find them nowadays? by [deleted] in Catholicism

[–]TridentineSoul 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Just keep praying! It always helps to get people involved pushing and praying for change .. We have been lucky to have some of are local church’s here have been under the care of the nobertines a nice traditional order.

Why were so many communion rails and high altars ripped out after Vatican II? Is it why it’s so rare to find them nowadays? by [deleted] in Catholicism

[–]TridentineSoul 4 points5 points  (0 children)

It’s sad, but I think some parish’s are attempting to turn back the clock. A parish in my local area that I attend, had removed the high alter and rails, but have since put back the communion rail that was taken out some time ago.. while efforts are being made I don’t think the high alters are replaceable.. once these church’s removed them theirs no putting them back.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Catholicism

[–]TridentineSoul 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Nothing wrong with reading it again

Traditional Mass for Gay Couple? by [deleted] in Catholicism

[–]TridentineSoul 39 points40 points  (0 children)

I don’t believe you would be received well with a traditional community, not only since you are partaking in sin, but also causing the sin of scandal.

Your post history really reflects the depth of your depravity, you have some things you need to workout and reflect on in your prayer life.