Cold in Purgatory

[Pat_Albertson]

Ice, cold, exposure to the elements, that is how the homeless die. In recent weeks I have passed them on the streets, huddled under blankets and surrounded by trash they were trying to make a living on: pop cans, soda bottles, half smoked cigarettes . . .

My own fear of being homeless is one of the main drivers of my suicidal thoughts. I think I would rather take my chances on God’s mercy than on my fellow man’s.

No, I am not contemplating suicide, at least not at this moment, and I haven’t got anything prepared, but I sure think about it often enough. My finances are such that homelessness is not that far off.

I, for one, do not think suffering from cold is a laughing matter. I have spent at least one Christmas and New Year’s in a house without heat and power and with no food. That was before the local government took my house away.

I see them and I know that they are always taught with muscle tension from the way the body reacts to the constant struggle to stay warm by shivering.

This is also the one of the main reasons for my occasional thoughts about euthanasia. If the government, and by extension this society, can’t do any better than it does, then I sometimes think that at least it ought to have the common decency to offer to put the homeless out of their misery the way we put our pets out of theirs.

No, I am not here to push euthanasia, but I don’t think there is anything the least bit funny about contemplating suffering from the cold. We (mostly, but for an exception look at Jessica Chambers; this was due to a merciless thug though . . .) don’t incinerate people the way they do in some parts of the world (necklacing in South Africa, suttee in India, honor killings elsewhere), but we sure do let them die of exposure. I know, because I’ve walked right past it on the streets on the way to a job that doesn’t even pay enough for my monthly rent. And yes, I think I should have done something, but I didn’t want to wake somebody who was struggling to stay asleep, to destroy whatever slight respite he (or she) might be having from his exposure, and I have so little money of my own that I’m just too selfish to part with any. I’m not proud of my behavior, but I sure don’t think there is anything funny about the cold. It really is how people die, and right in front of us too.

 

[Thomas_White]

Whatever may, or may not have been said by recent Popes, it has been understood all the way back to Scripture that animals have souls, by definition. Soul, in Latin, is anima.

Soul is life and so living beings possess soul.

The only difference is the higher functioning ascribed to the **human **soul.

ICXC NIKA

When Greek and Hebrew words are translated from Scripture as soul, where soul means life, then of course all living animals have a soul. The Latin word animus/ anima is normally translated as “soul, mind or spirit”, but Scripture was not written in Latin.

The critical difference for Aquinas is the higher functioning ascribed to the human soul.

What is your point?

 

[Thomas_White]

“even in 2014 it is not yet certain that humans are even the most intelligent animals let alone the only intelligent creatures.”

The postmodern romanticism toward oceanic mammals does not in any way imply that other animals are more intelligent than human life.

ICXC NIKA.

I explained in my comment immediately above that Aquinas’ argument is complex, and what you have quoted is not the full argument. I noted that the full argument in Aquinas is more complex, and that a forum comment is limited in its number of characters. This could not be more fully explained in the number of characters permitted for my original comment which I already necessarily had to shorten to post it.

 

[Thomas_White]

“When body and mind no longer exist…”

Even if body no longer existed, there would remain the mind, which AIUI is an aspect of the human soul.

Which does not mean that part or all of the mind might not go into abeyance until once again in a live human head.

ICXC NIKA.

What this means is that the immortal human soul, which enters eternal life, experiences the eternal present. This experience is no longer relative to time or to a non-existent past or future. The experience of time, which exists in the temporal world, is of the intellect and not the eternal soul.

It is Aquinas that has difficulty in explaining this in his argument concerning Purgatory.

 

[Gorgias]

What this means is that the immortal human soul, which enters eternal life, experiences the eternal present. This experience is no longer relative to time or to a non-existent past or future.

Actually, this may be the key to the whole conundrum. It is Catholic dogma that there are “temporal punishments due to sin;” that is, there are negative effects of our sinful behavior that we experience, even once that sin is forgiven. As a unity of body and soul, it is not just the body that is affected by sin; our soul, itself, is affected. Therefore, that temporal – that is, not immaterial, but bound up in temporality and therefore physicality – punishment due to sin must be purged from the soul before it enters into eternal beatitude.

In other words, since there is a temporal component to the purgation, it would seem that, in a certain way, the soul’s experience of “the eternal present” is compromised. Not until that temporal component is purged, it seems, can the soul fully experience God in the eternal present.

Perhaps, because the soul is still bound up in temporal effects, it still experiences physical effects. Aquinas’ explanation attempts to demonstrate how this might be possible.

It is Aquinas that has difficulty in explaining this in his argument concerning Purgatory.

And, to be fair, Aquinas didn’t place this argument in the Summa; those who survived him did. The arguments found in the Summa were cribbed from some of Aquinas’ prior works.

 

[Thomas_White]

Actually, this may be the key to the whole conundrum. et allia

Yes, that is close to what I’ve been thinking–that in some way, the soul while in Purgatory is not yet in the eternal present. I have wondered if this didn’t perhaps mean that what had to be cleansed involved the awareness of the past and therefore one would suffer the regret for what one had done. This process of purgation would then necessarily be experienced and resolved before one entered the eternal present.

I’ve used the word ‘Aquinas’ in a shorthand way. I realize that the Appendix and Q75 of the Summa were added after Aquinas died, and it isn’t even known who wrote the words. My argument is not with the man who would become Saint Thomas Aquinas and a Father of the Church. The argument is philosophical and does not question his faith and belief at all.

But Aquinas also became a major philosopher in the history of Western philosophy. The argument is in that context. It is academic, and, really, argument is fair play in classical philosophy. I don’t question the basic belief in Purgatory and certainly not the existence of God. It is a question of getting it right if it can be done by reason and the intellect. And Aquinas was of course extraordinarily brilliant.

I mentioned a story that had been on the front page of yesterday’s NYT involving a boy, his dog and Pope Francis that seemed of possible relevance. Now it is said that what was reported never happened, or not in any way close to what was reported. If that can occur in 2014, with Catholic priests writing essays concerning what was reportedly said (but apparently was not said) and the importance of it, one can only imagine what occurred concerning Q75.

 

[Pat_Albertson]

I apologize for my outburst in my last post towards the people on page 1 of this thread. I have been under a lot of stress for a long time, and the things I see around me are not helping. And then too, I think I may have been helped by something I took to help me alleviate my depression, but which also resulted in a very mild burst of energy which I did not foresee coming and which I did not make proper use of.

After catching up on my sleep, I am now feeling better, and in retrospect I think my reaction to the first page of this thread was unwarranted.

Apologies to all concerned; I hope nobody took offense. Please forgive me.

 

[flower_lady]

It must be true. Ask and you shall receive. Thank you all so much for posting. I asked one little question and got an entire class on purgatory. Your views have been so helpful. Have given me a lot to think about. Very interesting!

 

[otjm]

While I also believe that Purgatory is spiritual and not physical, by definition one’s spell in Purgatory would have both a beginning and an end. It would therefore seem it necessarily occurs in time. There is much that could be said about this. But it is enough to say here that it would seem that while in Purgatory one’s soul has not yet entered the eternal present moment of heaven. The eternal present is timeless, or outside of time.

An interesting comment, particularly if one accepts the definition of “time” as a “measure” of change". Since souls in purgatory are undergoing change, then there would be time; but since it is in the spiritual realm instead of the physical, the question of how the time is measured is open to question.

 

[GEddie]

An interesting comment, particularly if one accepts the definition of “time” as a “measure” of change". Since souls in purgatory are undergoing change, then there would be time; but since it is in the spiritual realm instead of the physical, the question of how the time is measured is open to question.

I may have said this before in the thread, but here goes:

I think “psychological time” is the key (psyche means soul, after all.)

Time does not pass for our minds in the same way that it does in our physical heads and bodies. IN dreaming, for example, a long time can seem to pass while only seconds have elapsed in the physical head.

So having a spiritual experience that seems to be timebound need not involve extracorporeal time at all. Time is physical, anyhow.

ICXC NIKA.