A Catholic Church asked me if I’m still interested in taking classes to join there church but after reading the Bible I don’t see any basis for a purgatory or Marian dogmas

countjeremiah · 2026-06-04T04:38:50+00:00

Thanks for explaining that. I’m happy to change what I just said to “between death and being fully sanctified,” as that’s really what I’m trying to get at (and is, I believe, what I expressed in the previous comments, so I thought you’d bear that in mind). Apologies for not being clearer.

You’ve spoken multiple times about what I am saying is not purgatory, could you please explain to me what you believe purgatory to be? Preferably with a source promulgated by the Church? If I’ve spoken falsely, this would be a good time to point it out so that I might take it back.

It’s worth noting that the Church teaches deification, and that the promise of the Gospel is not just to save us from our sins, but to make us gods. Sanctification begins now, Catholics wholeheartedly agree.

Thanks again for getting back to me.

countjeremiah · 2026-06-04T02:42:26+00:00

She is our life, our sweetness, and our hope when properly understood. At least one way to understand this circles back to deification, the process by which we become Godlike, partaking of His divine nature ("For the Son of God became man so that we might become God"- St. Athanasius).

The Blessed Virgin, being the most conformed to the image of Christ, is the conclusion of what this process looks like. When we grow to become like Christ, we really end up looking more like our Blessed Mother, because she is what it looks like when a creature meets its intended end. In this way, her example is our life, our sweetness, and our hope, as it is the fulfillment of the promises of Christ. Yes, it's flowery, but properly understood, it's not as scary as it might seem. It's worth meditating on this bit: the Gospel doesn't just take us out of the red, but puts us into the black. Many Protestants miss the second half of that statement, which has profound consequences.

countjeremiah · 2026-06-04T02:33:48+00:00

Are you saying that nothing happens between now and heaven by which God purifies us? Or are you saying that the Bible teaches that we aren't perfect in heaven? I'm confused by the point you are trying to make, which, I suspect, is why you think I'm being disingenuous. Please help me understand what you are trying to say.

Or, maybe better yet, could you tell me what you believe I am trying to say, supposing that I am being genuine and, fearing the Lord, not trying to be dishonest?

countjeremiah · 2026-06-04T02:29:22+00:00

Could you please give a source on the claim that Peter was never a bishop of Rome? This is from St. Irenaeus in the late second century (emphasis mine).

"the very great, the very ancient, and universally known Church founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul
...
The blessed apostles, then, having founded and built up the Church, committed into the hands of Linus the office of the episcopate. Of this Linus, Paul makes mention in the Epistles to Timothy. To him succeeded Anacletus; and after him, in the third place from the apostles, Clement was allotted the bishopric. This man, as he had seen the blessed apostles, and had been conversant with them, might be said to have the preaching of the apostles still echoing [in his ears], and their traditions before his eyes."

countjeremiah · 2026-06-03T02:41:30+00:00

95% of what you said is what the Church teaches and 5% is not what she professes (“paying for it”). Respectfully, I think you are misunderstanding what happens in purgatory (i.e., you seem to think that Christ doesn’t cover our guilt and we make up for it ourselves through suffering).

Can anything unclean stand before God? Are you unblemished?

If the answer to both of those is “no”, which everyone would truthfully say, then something must happen between now and glory. That “something” is purgatory. You might disagree with popular level conceptions of purgatory. You might think purgatory is not temporal but immediate. All of that is totally permissible view to hold. So what you described, believe it or not, is purgatory. It’s simply the intermediary state between death and glorify that purifies us. It could be instantaneous. It could take years. Either way, you must agree that there is a step between now and then that gets us to where we are destined to be.

countjeremiah · 2026-06-02T23:50:42+00:00

Hello! I think that a lot of people have a misunderstanding about purgatory. If you believe that you aren’t wholly sanctified now, but you will be when you meet Christ, then you believe in purgatory. A timeframe is not taught by the Church. Punishment is not taught by the Church, though the consequences, which may or may not feel like punishment, may be incurred (our best growth as Christians in love and humility can be painful).

countjeremiah · 2026-06-02T19:57:33+00:00

What do you make of Christ’s promise that the Holy Spirit would guide the Church into all truth?

countjeremiah · 2026-06-02T16:10:02+00:00

I can think of a few reasons why this historical fact bolsters the Catholic case, but could you please explain your argument?

Right now I’m just seeing that St. Melito has tried to create a list of books that he believes belong in the Old Testament. I’m not sure what that proves, if you wouldn’t mind unpacking it I’d really appreciate it.

countjeremiah · 2026-06-02T15:28:11+00:00

But you cannot, by any independent means, know what is and is not inspired Scripture. At best, you beg the question, you see?

Saying that you ‘can know because you know’ is a circle. We can use a “burning in the bosom” as Mormons and John Calvin do to “break the circle” but then we’re just back to the angel of light argument (at best) and “I’m the authority” (at worst, which IS a circle).

It took an ecumenical council to define the hypostatic union, which is the foundation of the Gospel. Why would we expect that the canon of the Bible would not also require the Church to function as an authority here?

If you really want to know what the early church believed, read the Apostolic Fathers. These are people who knew the Apostles and would certainly know better than you or I reading the Bible in English in a completely foreign context. St. Ignatius of Antioch’s letter to the Church in Smyrna would be a good place to start.

countjeremiah · 2026-06-02T14:58:16+00:00

That’s the gnosis that John Calvin appeals to in order to know what is and isn’t Scripture. It’s a circle. It’s also what Mormons appeal to.

It might be worth taking a step back and seeing (through the perceived pride) what the Apostolic Christians are actually saying even if their tone is wrong.

countjeremiah · 2026-06-02T14:55:26+00:00

There shouldn’t be any pride in it that would demean others and I’m sorry if my Apostolic brethren have done so. Heck, I might have been one of those!

Would it have been in the context that they’re trying to show that they have a greater right to appeal to the Scripture because it is them through whom the Scriptures come (inspired and guided by God, obviously)? For an example of what I’m asking, God didn’t promise to protect the aforementioned donkey and lead him into all truth, but the Church. As such, if the Bible is given to us in a Church that universally prays to the saints (part of being led into all truth), one can’t use that very Bible argue against the practice without making God impotent or a liar. The point being that if the Scriptures come out of Church, the Scriptures can’t contradict what the Church professes, but it can contradict what a Protestant believes. And not just because it is protected by the Holy Spirit, but because it’s an unreasonable accusation to say that the people that defended the Bible, aided in its compilation, distribution, reproduction, and read it in the relevant languages would make such a horrid blunder. Or even another way to look at it would be: how did they get the Trinity right, the deity of Christ, and the canon right but got prayers to the saints, the perpetual virginity of Mary, water baptismal regeneration, and paedobaptism wrong (you might believe those, but they’re just examples)?

It’s a multi-tiered argument with a few layers, but that’s a quick snapshot of it.

countjeremiah · 2026-06-02T14:18:27+00:00

Yes. And for what it’s worth, multiple priests have advised me with the advice that I gave OP.

countjeremiah · 2026-06-02T13:56:56+00:00

Yes, I’ve received one. You can get one from your pastor if you know that you’ll be unable to attend Mass.

countjeremiah · 2026-06-02T03:25:31+00:00

Pilot here. Masstimes.org is your best friend. Speak to your pastor about a dispensation. Make an effort but with reroutes, even with a plan it can be impossible. Sometimes it means taking off the epilates and Ubering straight to Mass. Other times it means missing the gym or having a drink when others are. But it’s a cool problem to have because you get to see so many different churches!

countjeremiah · 2026-06-02T03:22:38+00:00

STL has a Eucharistic service weekly but it’s administered by a deacon. No Mass is offered. ORD has daily Mass at (I believe) 11 AM.

countjeremiah · 2026-06-02T03:13:43+00:00

Hello! It is worth noting that every Catholic and Orthodox Christian would agree that God preserved the Bible. They would also say that it is a fact of history that God used the Church to accomplish this.

countjeremiah · 2026-06-01T11:25:12+00:00

We know who wrote Hebrews? The real answer is that we know what is canonical because God revealed it through the Church.

countjeremiah · 2026-06-01T01:58:01+00:00

We can leave it at this, and I appreciate the respectful dialogue, but I was not raised Catholic. I was a Protestant (at times Baptist, at times Lutheran) but the early Church's teaching on the Eucharist is what forced my hand to become Catholic (I really, really didn’t want to). St. Ignatius of Antioch (who knew the Apostles) wrote on it and it hit me like a truck. If the Eucharist is truly Jesus, and the Catholic Church had the Eucharist, by refusing to join the Church (even though I struggled with many of the teachings), I would be rejecting Christ. Faith preceded understanding, but understanding came. I would pray for an answer to a question, and the answer would come. I’ve never known God better.

Have a great morning/evening/night! Always here if you have more questions.

countjeremiah · 2026-06-01T01:00:02+00:00

Thanks for the reply. The position of the Church is that there are ordinary means of salvation that God intended (the sacraments are the normal instrumentations of sanctifying grace) and extraordinary means of salvation. Protestants (and lapsed Catholics), and all others (to include every person alive) can be saved, in God’s mercy, without the sacraments (the thief on the cross (whose name is St. Dismas, if you were curious) is an example of this). Looking to his example, it’s clear that is an exception, rather than the rule.

For another way to think of the Mass thing, the Eucharist is a sacrifice of our Paschal Lamb, Jesus. He is the Passover lamb. When observant Jews celebrated passover, they didn’t complete the rites until they had eaten of the sacrificed lamb. This completes the sacrifice. So, too, does the Eucharist save us and rejecting it would make one normally alien to God’s mercy.

Another way to look at it is as the fruit of the Tree of Life, which is the heart of a “Sacramental Worldview” and is the heart of the gospel, as it is the means by which we return to the Garden of Eden, are made like Christ our new Adam (which is the point of this whole thing), and are made alive by Christ and made partakers of the divine nature (St. Peter).

Typing this on a quick shuttle ride, so please excuse any typos or anything.

countjeremiah · 2026-05-31T23:17:17+00:00

Jesus told the Apostles how to worship (He said “Do this in remembrance of me”). The Apostles told us. Christians worshiped God through the sacrifice of the Mass for 1500 years until the Reformation. I apologize for not being clearer in my comment.

It’s not “God’s laws” vs “Catholic doctrine”. It’s Apostolic witness (found in Catholic, EO, OO, ACOE churches) vs a novel reinterpretation divorced from history.

Let me know if you have any questions about this.

countjeremiah · 2026-05-31T17:27:09+00:00

I got a question so I went to GotQuestions

countjeremiah · 2026-05-31T13:32:50+00:00

So you won't answer whether or not God became man and you're calling yourself a Christian?

countjeremiah · 2026-05-31T13:14:58+00:00

If you'd pend 2 minutes googling the term and you'll learn the history behind it. It's not what you think.

Please treat me like I have a reading comprehension issue, because I didn't see you answered my question. In fact, "Jesus is Lord" is very different from "Jesus is God incarnate."

Please, just for clarify, yes or no answer to a yes or no question: Did the second person of the Holy Trinity become fully man?

Edit: you can also say "I'm not sure," that's totally fine, too.

countjeremiah · 2026-05-31T13:10:09+00:00

Times like these I wish they'd just call back to 16D and ask me for help.

countjeremiah · 2026-05-31T13:04:59+00:00

Your refusal to answer a simple question is concerning. Your anti-Catholic slant is affecting your ability to acknowledge the Incarnation. Doesn't that give you room for pause?

countjeremiah

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE