Eastern Catholics and Purgatory

[twf]

So you are saying that there is no “temporal punishment” on earth, and only in Purgatory? Why do you restrict indulgence to only “purgatorial” purification? Is there a magisterial source that restricts the definition of indulgence in that way?

In the early Church, the “temporal punishment” due to sin was penance. Penances are canonical penalities because they are imposed by the Church. An indulgence remits this penance. It was an act of economy (penances in the early Church were more intensive and extensive than what any of the Churches have today). The Latin Church has developed in its understanding of “temporal punishment,” and hence of “indulgences.” “Temporal punishment” is no longer perfectly equated with penance, but is more of a condition that can still exist in the afterlife (in short, penance has become merely a subset of a more general concept of “temporal punishment”). I am simply adhering to the patristic concept rather than the later Latin development (not that there is anything wrong or heterodox with that development).

The Catechism does not call the suffering of the souls in purgatory a punishment, but a purification. The relevant text from the Catechism was quoted by brother Dcointin.

According to the Catechism, “temporal punishment” is more of a condition that naturally results from having sinned, rather than an outside action done on the Christian. What happens in “Purgatory” is that the soul is purified of this condition, not that the soul is punished.

So I would disagree about calling the suffering of the souls in Purgatory a punishment.

Blessings,
Marduk

I’ve always used the phrase “temporal penalties” - as opposed to “temporal punishments” - I wonder if I read that somewhere or simply made the shift myself on an unconscious level? Penalty, to my mind, could more readily be seen as a “natural consequence”. I think we have to remember that everything that happens in this life is allowed by God - even if He doesn’t directly take action - God is sovereign. For this reason, there is a long tradition, starting in the Old Testament, of associating things God allows (eg. the natural consequences of sin) with things God does. That being said, the book of Hebrews does speak of God disciplining His children out of love…which could imply a temporal punishment of sort in the literal sense (but with the intention of that “punishment” drawing us closer to Him along the path of holiness - or of participating in the redemptive work of Christ by sharing in His suffering - as per St. Paul in Col. 1:24).

Regarding indulgences, they certainly can apply to this life as well. There’s a reason why Laitn priests impose a penance after every single confession…
You are quite correct that indulgences evolved from the early practice of bishops remitting canonical penances. The Church no longer associates specific penances with specific sins, but she knows that there are still natural consequences for sin in both this life and in the next - indulgences remit some of those natural consequences in a way fully understood only by God.

 

[mardukm]

Dear brother Sepp,

Please correct me if I am wrong, but my understanding is that the EO Patriarch of Jerusalem used to grant indulgences. For example, I recall reading that Nicodemus the Hagiorite requested an indulgence in a letter, and that a 19th century council in Constantinople condemned the sale (but not issuance) of indulgences.

If accurate, how are we to understand this if the entire theology of indulgences is at odds with Eastern theology? Were these indulgences somehow different from the western understanding of the term?

I just read Mark of Ephesus’ letter against the union and I’d like to pursue this question more.

Cavaradossi seems to be correct that absolution certificates had a different intention than the Latin concept of indulgences - namely, while the concept of indulgence is for the growth of holiness after the forgiveness of sin, the EO use of absolution certificates was for the forgiveness of sin itself.

But despite that explanation, there are several questions that remain.

(1) The practice of granting absolution certificates (despite its difference in intention) was approved by a plenary Council of the Eastern Orthodox (i.e., approved by all the Patriarchs). Would a Council of the Eastern Orthodox really accept a practice if they did not find it had support from the early Fathers?

(2) Though the intention was different, the granting of absolution certificates was nevertheless considered the equivalent of granting indulgences. The language of indulgence certificates actually leads to that conclusion - certificates of indulgence stated that they are given for “the remission of sin” (though it actually meant “the remission of the penalty of sin”). I think everyone knew that granting indulgences was partly for the deceased. Did the Eastern Orthodox once have a belief that sins could be forgiven in the afterlife? I already mentioned earlier in this thread that there are some in the Oriental Tradition who hold that even a sinner can be transformed in the afterlife through their suffering in Hades. Is it so hard to believe that that such a belief was also present among the Eastern Orthodox (I’m not claiming it was official doctrine, but probably a very popular theologoumenon). For example, though I know that the Eastern Orthodox accept the doctrine of particular judgment, Mark of Ephesus indicated that he did not. A lack of belief in the particular judgment naturally leads to the notion that sin can still be forgiven even in the afterlife before the Final Judgment. If this belief by Mark of Ephesus was more widespread at the time, then it is not hard to understand why the Eastern Orthodox would accept the practice of granting absolution certificates and equate it with the Latin practice of indulgences.

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[Cavaradossi]

Marduk, what do you mean by, “once have a belief that sins could be forgiven in the afterlife?” We have always believed that sins may be forgiven while the soul awaits final judgment, and frankly, I don’t know where one would get the idea that we don’t, since, as some posters have pointed out, our public prayers for the dead entreat God to forgive the dead of their sins and place them among the blessed where His light shines (see also the kneeling prayers from the vespers of Pentecost). That sins can be forgiven after death is no mere theologoumenon, but is a part of the liturgical tradition, making it doctrine.

We object, just as St. Mark of Ephesus did (and as I have constantly insisted in this thread), to purgatory in three ways, the first is that the suffering of sinners is not the cause of their receiving forgiveness from God for their transgressions; instead, this is effected by the prayers of the Church and the liturgical commemoration of the dead during the bloodless sacrifice, and above all, the loving-kindness and grace of God. The second is that the suffering experienced in the intermediate state is not caused by any sort of purgation or purgatorial fire, but by the deprivation of light and uncertainty over the final judgment experienced by the sinner. The third is that sins which have been forgiven do not necessitate punishment (this is also the reason for our rejection of indulgences; even though the council you mention equates indulgences and absolution certificates, it is clear from the differing manners that the two are used that the council did not sufficiently understand indulgences to realize thad they differed in some respects).

Now I have a question for you, on canonical penance, if I may. What is your understanding of why a penitent is to abstain from the Eucharist?

 

[mardukm]

Marduk, what do you mean by, “once have a belief that sins could be forgiven in the afterlife?” We have always believed that sins may be forgiven while the soul awaits final judgment, and frankly, I don’t know where one would get the idea that we don’t, since, as some posters have pointed out, our public prayers for the dead entreat God to forgive the dead of their sins and place them among the blessed where His light shines (see also the kneeling prayers from the vespers of Pentecost). That sins can be forgiven after death is no mere theologoumenon, but is a part of the liturgical tradition, making it doctrine.

In your post#182, you said that the transformation of the sinner ends upon his physical death. What did you mean by that? If you say sinners cannot be transformed after physical death, how does that line up with the idea that forgiveness of sins can occur after physical death?

We object, just as St. Mark of Ephesus did (and as I have constantly insisted in this thread), to purgatory in three ways, the first is that the suffering of sinners is not the cause of their receiving forgiveness from God for their transgressions; instead, this is effected by the prayers of the Church and the liturgical commemoration of the dead during the bloodless sacrifice, and above all, the loving-kindness and grace of God.

I grant that there are probably Latins who believe that the suffering is the cause of the forgiveness or remittance of sin, but that is not the teaching of the Catholic Church. In the afterlife, forgiveness or remittance of sin is obtained from an act of God alone. The purpose of the suffering, according to the Latins, is for growth in holiness, not for forgiveness or remittance of sin. This latter statement requires qualification - the Latin teaching understands that venial sin can be forgiven in the afterlife, but that mortal sin can only be forgiven in this life.

The second is that the suffering experienced in the intermediate state is not caused by any sort of purgation or purgatorial fire,

Granted. This is not a teaching of the Catholic Church. It was argued at Florence, but the dogmatic decree indicates that the Latins relented on the matter (not that the Latins no longer believed in purgatorial fire, but that they agreed it could not be imposed on the Easterns as a universal teaching).

but by the deprivation of light and uncertainty over the final judgment experienced by the sinner.

I’ve read snippets from Latin theologians and saints who express it this way too.

The third is that sins which have been forgiven do not necessitate punishment

Granted. The Catholic Church affirms that suffering can occur after forgiveness. That it is conceived of as punishment is a Latin understanding of the suffering, but it is not the dogma of the Catholic Church.

(this is also the reason for our rejection of indulgences; even though the council you mention equates indulgences and absolution certificates, it is clear from the differing manners that the two are used that the council did not sufficiently understand indulgences to realize thad they differed in some respects).

I can agree with that.

Now I have a question for you, on canonical penance, if I may. What is your understanding of why a penitent is to abstain from the Eucharist?

Canonical penance was/is intended to instill in the penitent the gravity of his/her sin in the face of God’s holiness. Through that awareness, the penitent will be inspired to transform his/her life for the love of God. What do you understand is the purpose of canonical penance?

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[Cavaradossi]

In your post#182, you said that the transformation of the sinner ends upon his physical death. What did you mean by that? If you say sinners cannot be transformed after physical death, how does that line up with the idea that forgiveness of sins can occur after physical death?

I wrote that “[canonical penance] is for the transformation of the sinner, and it is dissolved upon death.” That is to say, the canonical penance dissolves upon death, since we cannot demand that the dead fast from meat, perform so many metanies daily, etc. The possibility of the forgiveness of sins even after death is a constant affirmation made in Orthodoxy.

I grant that there are probably Latins who believe that the suffering is the cause of the forgiveness or remittance of sin, but that is not the teaching of the Catholic Church. In the afterlife, forgiveness or remittance of sin is obtained from an act of God alone. The purpose of the suffering, according to the Latins, is for growth in holiness, not for forgiveness or remittance of sin. This latter statement requires qualification - the Latin teaching understands that venial sin can be forgiven in the afterlife, but that mortal sin can only be forgiven in this life.

We also believe this, to some degree. But we have no consistent definition of which sins which are unto death. The Seventh Ecumenical Council in one of its canons defines such sins to be ones which have not been repented of, while some commentators defined them to be passions, while some still defined them to be sins which were punished by death under the Law. At any rate, we have a bit more leeway because of this, than the Latins do, as to what can be forgiven by God after death.

Canonical penance was/is intended to instill in the penitent the gravity of his/her sin in the face of God’s holiness. Through that awareness, the penitent will be inspired to transform his/her life for the love of God. What do you understand is the purpose of canonical penance?

My interest was more specifically in what the purpose of mandatory abstention from the Eucharist is. To answer your question, my understanding of penance is that it is an act of ascesis designed to help the penitent acquire discipline (which is the meaning of ascesis), allowing him to use his faculty of the will correctly in order to avoid falling again into sin.

 

[John_oxios]

Hello,

I am a Roman Catholic and I was wondering how do Eastern Catholics define Purgatory?

Roman Catholic beliefs:
The church teaches that when a person dies, their body starts its process of decomposition. Meanwhile, the soul leaves the body and is immediately evaluated in a Particular Judgment. This belief is partly based on Hebrews 9:27: “And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment.”

The Eastern Orthodox churches differ in beliefs from the Roman Catholic church. They have no formal doctrine about purgatory. According to Eastern Orthodox

Bishop Kallistos Ware:

"…Eastern Orthodox Bishop Kallistos Ware** acknowledges several schools of thought among the Eastern Orthodox on the topic of purification after death.**…he writes that 'Today most if not all Orthodox theologians reject the idea of Purgatory, at least in [Roman Catholic] form.’ "

However, Orthodox believers do pray and make offerings for the dead.

For example, "Again we pray for the repose of the soul(s) of the servant(s) of God (name(s)), departed this life; and that he (she, they) may be pardoned all his (her, their) sins, both voluntary and involuntary.

The Council of Florence, 1438
When the unsuccessful attempt to merge the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches was made at the Council of Florence, the Roman Catholics and all but one of the Eastern Orthodox representatives agreed to a statement about the existence of purgatory:

The Council reached a near consensus that:
“But if souls have departed this life in faith and love, while nevertheless carrying away with themselves certain faults, whether small ones [what Catholics call “venial sins”] over which they have not repented at all, or greater ones for which - even though they have repented over them - they did not undertake to show fruits of repentance: such souls, we believe, must be cleansed from this kind of sins but not by means of some purgatorial fire or a definite punishment in some place.” 1
The lone objector,** St. Mark of Ephesus,** disagreed on only two minor points: he did not believe that torture in Purgatory was limited to fire. He believed that it could take many forms, and so preferred the use of the generic term “pains” in place of “fire.” He also objected to Purgatory being referred to as being “in some place.” He wrote:
“The souls of those who depart this life with true repentance and in the love of God, before they have rendered satisfaction for their trespasses and negligences by worthy fruits of repentance, are cleansed after death by cleansing pains.” 1
This near consensus ended shortly after the council when most of the Eastern Orthodox represented retracted their agreement.

In his Encyclical “Spe Salvi” Pope Benedict XVI says some really interesting things about purgatory and afterlife, specifically, the intermediate state of the dead.

44…"In the parable of the rich man and Lazarus (cf. Lk 16:19-31), Jesus admonishes us through the image of a soul destroyed by arrogance and opulence, who has created an impassable chasm between himself and the poor man; the chasm of being trapped within material pleasures; the chasm of forgetting the other, of incapacity to love, **which then becomes a burning and unquenchable thirst. **We must note that in this parable Jesus is not referring to the final destiny after the Last Judgement, but is taking up a notion found, inter alia, in early Judaism, namely that of an intermediate state between death and resurrection, a state in which the final sentence is yet to be pronounced."

1. "This early Jewish idea of an intermediate state includes the view that these souls are not simply in a sort of temporary custody but, as the parable of the rich man illustrates, are already being punished or are experiencing a provisional form of bliss (A la St. Mark of Ephesus, -Leo).
   There is also the idea that this state can involve purification and healing which mature the soul for communion with God (Does it get more Orthodox than that people? -Leo).

The early Church took up these concepts, and in the Western Church they gradually developed into the doctrine of Purgatory. We do not need to examine here the complex historical paths of this development; it is enough to ask what it actually means. With death, our life-choice becomes definitive—our life stands before the judge. Our choice, which in the course of an entire life takes on a certain shape, can have a variety of forms. There can be people who have totally destroyed their desire for truth and readiness to love, people for whom everything has become a lie, people who have lived for hatred and have suppressed all love within themselves. This is a terrifying thought, but alarming profiles of this type can be seen in certain figures of our own history. In such people all would be beyond remedy and the destruction of good would be irrevocable: this is what we mean by the word Hell. On the other hand there can be people who are utterly pure, completely permeated by God, and thus fully open to their neighbours—people for whom communion with God even now gives direction to their entire being and whose journey towards God only brings to fulfilment what they already are."

Cont’d

 

[John_oxios]

… On the other hand there can be people who are utterly pure, completely permeated by God, and thus fully open to their neighbours—people for whom communion with God even now gives direction to their entire being and whose journey towards God only brings to fulfilment what they already are."

Cont’d

Greek: Apocatastasis (Greek (ἀποκατάστασις) pronounced /æpoʊkəˈtæstəsɨs/) also anglicized as apokatastasis,** meaning either reconstitution or restitution[1] or restoration to the original or primordial condition.**

toll houses : as the soul ascends it finds demons, persecutors, tax collectors/”revenue officials” (servants of the prince of the air/world) holding and preventing souls from ascending that threaten us, the evil spirits observe the departure of the soul with so much more vigilant attention than do the enemies over a besieged city or thieves over a treasury house.” (Paraphrase of St Cyril, St John Chrysostom)

Russian orthodox: believe in a repair state

orthodox.net/articles/life-after-death-john-maximovitch.html

Jewish: 

lam Haba - the afterlife and the world to come
Although Judaism concentrates on the importance of the Earthly world (Olam Ha’zeh — “this world”), all of classical Judaism posits an afterlife. Jewish tradition affirms that the human soul is immortal and thus survives the physical death of the body. The Hereafter is known as Olam Haba (the “world to come”), Gan Eden (the Heavenly “Garden of Eden”, or Paradise) and Gehinom (“Purgatory”).[7][8][9]

St. John Chrysostom likewise calls demons "revenue officials" who threaten us and who are "overbearing powers with a fearful countenance that horrifies the soul that looks upon them."

In another place St. John says that these evil spirits are called “persecutors and revenue officials and collectors of taxes in the Sacred Scripture.”

According to St. John, even the souls of innocent infants must pass through these toll-houses, for the all-evil devil seeks to snatch their souls, too. However, the infants make the following confession (according to St. John): "We have passed by the evil spirits without suffering any harm. For the dark custom officials saw our spotless body and were put to shame; they saw the soul good and pure and were embarrassed; they say the tongue immaculate and pure and blameless and they were silenced; we passed by and humiliated them. This is why the holy angles of God who met and received us rejoiced, the righteous greeted us with joy and the saints with delight said, ‘Welcome, the lambs of Christ!’

God Bless,
John

 

[John_oxios]

The Catechism refers to the suffering of the souls in purgatory as punishment.

God is a consuming fire,

How does the smelter remove impurities from mined gold?

He heats it with fire til the impurities are burned away, how does he know when it is purified? When he can see his own reflection in it.

Zec 13:9 And I will put this third into the fire, and refine them as one refines silver, and test them as gold is tested. They will call on my name, and I will answer them. I will say, ‘They are my people’; and they will say, 'The LORD is my God.

Even diamonds have to be cleansed so there brilliance can be revealed.

Hbr 12:29 “for our God is a consuming fire”

Rev 4:5 From the throne issue flashes of lightning, and voices and peals of thunder, and before the throne burn seven torches of fire, which are the seven spirits of God;

There has to be a reason we pray for our dead and departed.
If they’re in heaven they don’t need our prayers, if they’re in hell there is nothing our prayers can do for them. Hence we believe there is a middle ground, where God does cleanse of unconfessed sins.

Mat 5:25 Make friends quickly with your accuser, while you are going with him to court, lest your accuser hand you over to the judge, and the judge to the guard, and you be put in prison;
26 truly, I say to you, you will never get out till you have paid the last penny.

After death we are that much closer to God, we can see Him, however our hearts/souls burn to be closer to be with Him yet we are still unable to do so.

It is also been describes as a process for those not deserving hell, but a maturation and spiritaual growrth prior tp entering heaven.

Pope Paul VI’s Credo of the People of God (1968)

"Purgatory is best understood as a process by which we are purged of our residual selfishness so that we can really become one with the God who is totally oriented to others i.e. the self giving God. it is part of the process from which we are called out of nothingness into existence, from existence to selfhood, or responsible human existence to responsible Christian existence, from Christian existence and to full and final incorporation into God. The kind of suffering asociated with purgatory , therefore, is not inflicted upon us from the outside as punishment for sin, but for the intrinsic pain that we all feel when we are asked our ego-centered self so that the God-centered loving self may take its place. It is part of the process by which we are called to die and rise with Christ

Wisdom 1: 12 Do not court death* by your erring way of life,
nor draw to yourselves destruction by the works of your hands.

13 Because God did not make death,l
nor does he rejoice in the destruction of the living.

14 For he fashioned all things that they might have being,

God bless,
John

 

[devoutchristian]

I grant that there are probably Latins who believe that the suffering is the cause of the forgiveness or remittance of sin, but that is not the teaching of the Catholic Church.

I’ve read snippets from Latin theologians and saints who express it this way too.

Catechism of the Catholic Church 1022:

Each man receives his eternal retribution in his immortal soul at the very moment of his death

Catechism of the Catholic Church 1030:

All who die in God’s grace and friendship, but still imperfectly purified, are indeed assured of their eternal salvation; but after death they undergo purification, so as to achieve the holiness necessary to enter the joy of heaven.

 

[mardukm]

Pope Paul VI’s Credo of the People of God (1968)

"Purgatory is best understood as a process by which we are purged of our residual selfishness so that we can really become one with the God who is totally oriented to others i.e. the self giving God. it is part of the process from which we are called out of nothingness into existence, from existence to selfhood, or responsible human existence to responsible Christian existence, from Christian existence and to full and final incorporation into God. The kind of suffering asociated with purgatory , therefore, is not inflicted upon us from the outside as punishment for sin, but for the intrinsic pain that we all feel when we are asked our ego-centered self so that the God-centered loving self may take its place. It is part of the process by which we are called to die and rise with Christ

EXCELLENT!!! ABSOLUTELY EXCELLENT!!! I would much rather listen to a Pope tell us what the Catholic Church teaches than someone who depends on non-Catholic sources to explain to him what the Catholic Church teaches.

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[devoutchristian]

Pope Paul VI’s Credo of the People of God (1968)

"Purgatory is best understood as a process by which we are purged of our residual selfishness so that we can really become one with the God who is totally oriented to others i.e. the self giving God. it is part of the process from which we are called out of nothingness into existence, from existence to selfhood, or responsible human existence to responsible Christian existence, from Christian existence and to full and final incorporation into God. The kind of suffering asociated with purgatory , therefore, is not inflicted upon us from the outside as punishment for sin, but for the intrinsic pain that we all feel when we are asked our ego-centered self so that the God-centered loving self may take its place. It is part of the process by which we are called to die and rise with Christ

Your quote is spurious.

ewtn.com/library/PAPALDOC/P6CREDO.HTM

 

[SanctusPeccator]

John oxios;10144394:

Pope Paul VI’s Credo of the People of God (1968)

"Purgatory is best understood as a process by which we are purged of our residual selfishness so that we can really become one with the God who is totally oriented to others i.e. the self giving God. It is part of the process from which we are called out of nothingness into existence, from existence to selfhood, or responsible human existence to responsible Christian existence, from Christian existence and to full and final incorporation into God. The kind of suffering asociated with purgatory , therefore, is not inflicted upon us from the outside as punishment for sin, but for the intrinsic pain that we all feel when we are asked our ego-centered self so that the God-centered loving self may take its place.

It is part of the process by which we are called to die and rise with Christ
Your quote is spurious.

ewtn.com/library/PAPALDOC/P6CREDO.HTM

Misattributed would likely be more accurate? Do recognize the aforementioned citation is taken nearly verbatim from pages 1168-1169 of Richard P. McBrien’s Catholicism: New Study Edition–Completely Revised and Updated.

 

[SanctusPeccator]

Misattributed would likely be more accurate? Do recognize the aforementioned citation is taken nearly verbatim from pages 1168-1169 of Richard P. McBrien’s Catholicism: New Study Edition–Completely Revised and Updated.

Perhaps John oxios meant to (insufficiently) state the citation is merely the McBrien’s personal commentary on Servant of God Pope Paul VI’s Apostolic Letter [of 30 June 1968] issed “motu proprio” on the Solemn Profession of Faith Solemni hac Liturgia?

 

[SanctusPeccator]

devoutchristian;10145513:

John oxios;10144394:

Pope Paul VI’s Credo of the People of God (1968)

"Purgatory is best understood as a process by which we are purged of our residual selfishness so that we can really become one with the God who is totally oriented to others i.e. the self giving God. It is part of the process from which we are called out of nothingness into existence, from existence to selfhood, or responsible human existence to responsible Christian existence, from Christian existence and to full and final incorporation into God. The kind of suffering asociated with purgatory, therefore, is not inflicted upon us from the outside as punishment for sin, but for the intrinsic pain that we all feel when we are asked our ego-centered self so that the God-centered loving self may take its place.

It is part of the process by which we are called to die and rise with Christ
Your quote is spurious.

ewtn.com/library/PAPALDOC/P6CREDO.HTM
Misattributed would likely be more accurate? Do recognize the aforementioned citation is taken nearly verbatim from pages 1168-1169 of Richard P. McBrien’s Catholicism: New Study Edition–Completely Revised and Updated.

Perhaps John oxios meant to (insufficiently) state the citation is merely McBrien’s personal commentary on Servant of God Pope Paul VI’s Apostolic Letter [of 30 June 1968] issued “motu proprio” on the Solemn Profession of Faith Solemni hac Liturgia?

 

[SanctusPeccator]

devoutchristian;10145513:

John oxios;10144394:

Pope Paul VI’s Credo of the People of God (1968)

"Purgatory is best understood as a process by which we are purged of our residual selfishness so that we can really become one with the God who is totally oriented to others i.e. the self giving God. It is part of the process from which we are called out of nothingness into existence, from existence to selfhood, or responsible human existence to responsible Christian existence, from Christian existence and to full and final incorporation into God. The kind of suffering asociated with purgatory, therefore, is not inflicted upon us from the outside as punishment for sin, but for the intrinsic pain that we all feel when we are asked our ego-centered self so that the God-centered loving self may take its place.

It is part of the process by which we are called to die and rise with Christ
Your quote is spurious.

ewtn.com/library/PAPALDOC/P6CREDO.HTM
Misattributed would likely be more accurate? Do recognize the aforementioned citation is taken nearly verbatim from pages 1168-1169 of Richard P. McBrien’s Catholicism: New Study Edition–Completely Revised and Updated.

Perhaps John oxios meant to (insufficiently) state the citation is merely McBrien’s personal commentary on Servant of God Pope Paul VI’s Apostolic Letter [of 30 June 1968] issed “motu proprio” on the Solemn Profession of Faith Solemni hac Liturgia?

 

[John_oxios]

Your quote is spurious.

ewtn.com/library/PAPALDOC/P6CREDO.HTM

Hi,

Allow me to Clarify:

I got it from the book titled ‘Catholicsm’ By Richard P. McBrien (study edition) Winston Press .
copy write 1980, Library of Congress Catalogue 79-55963. Page # 1144, 3rd paragraph.

Nihil- Obstat Bishop William E. McManus, Bishop of FortWayne- South Bend, July 1981

Fr. Richard P. OBrien, Chairman of the dept. Of Theology University of Notre Dame.

Paragraph prior ends with
paragraph begins:

The Doctrine is reaffirmed in Pope Paul VI’s Credo of the people of God (1968) and by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith’s “Letter on Certain Questions Concerning Eschatology”(1979) and is assumed by the Second Vatican Council’s on the Church, n.51

Purgatory is best understood as a process by which we are purged of our residual selfishness so that we can really become one with the God who is totally oriented to others i.e. the self giving God. It is part of the process from which we are called out of nothingness into existence, from existence to selfhood, or responsible human existence to responsible Christian existence, from Christian existence and to full and final incorporation into God. The kind of suffering asociated with purgatory, therefore, is not inflicted upon us from the outside as punishment for sin, but for the intrinsic pain that we all feel when we are asked our ego-centered self so that the God-centered loving self may take its place. It is part of the process by which we are called to die and rise with Christ.

I greatly appreciation EWTN, but Maybe the Vatican Website has it?

still digging this Might be helpful;
HOW TO EXPLAIN PURGATORY TO PROTESTANTS
James Akin

ewtn.com/library/answers/how2purg.htm

excerpt: You see, Protestant are very firm (in fact, insistent) about the fact that we continue sinning until the end of this life because of our corrupt nature. However, they are equally firm (if you press them) about the fact that we will not be sinning in heaven because we will no longer have a corrupt nature. Thus between death and glory there must be a sanctification—a purification—of our natures. This purification may take no time, but as we have seen, this is no barrier to the doctrine of purgatory. The fact remains that between death and glory must come purification, and that is purgatory by definition—the final purification or, to put it in more Protestant terms, “the final sanctification” or "the last rush of sanctification.

THE FINAL PURIFICATION, OR PURGATORY 1030> All who die in God’s grace and friendship, but still imperfectly purified, are indeed assured of their eternal salvation; but after death they undergo purification, so as to achieve the holiness necessary to enter the joy of heaven.

1031 The Church gives the name Purgatory to this final purification of the elect, which is entirely different from the punishment of the damned.[Cf. Council of Florence (1439): DS 1304; [COLOR=“Red”]Council of Trent (1563): DS 1820; (1547): 1580; see also Benedict XII, Benedictus Deus (1336): DS 1000] The Church formulated her doctrine of faith on Purgatory especially at the Councils of Florence and Trent. The tradition of the Church, by reference to certain texts of Scripture,** speaks of a cleansing fire**:[Cf. 1 Cor 3:15; 1 Pet 1:7]

Let us help and commemorate them. If Job’s sons were purified by their father’s sacrifice, why would we doubt that our offerings for the dead bring them some consolation? Let us not hesitate to help those who have died and to offer our prayers for them."[St. John Chrysostom, Hom. in 1 Cor. 41, 5: PG 61, 361; cf. Job 1:5] Amen

God bless,
John

 

[Vico]

This is from Bl. Pope John Paul II:
5. In following the Gospel exhortation to be perfect like the heavenly Father (cf. Mt 5:48) during our earthly life, we are called to grow in love, to be sound and flawless before God the Father ‘at the coming of our Lord Jesus with all his saints’ (1 Thes 3:12f.). Moreover, we are invited to ‘cleanse ourselves from every defilement of body and spirit’ (2 Cor 7:1; cf. 1 Jn 3:3), because the encounter with God requires absolute purity.

       Every trace of attachment to evil must be eliminated, every imperfection       of the soul corrected. Purification must be complete, and indeed this is       precisely what is meant by the Church's teaching on *purgatory.       *The term does not indicate a place, but a condition of existence.       Those who, after death, exist in a state of purification, are already in       the love of Christ who removes from them the remnants of imperfection (cf.       Ecumenical Council of Florence, *Decretum pro Graecis: *DS 1304;       Ecumenical Council of Trent, *Decretum de iustificatione:* DS 1580;       *Decretum de purgatorio: *DS 1820).

       It is necessary to explain that the state of purification is not a       prolungation of the earthly condition, almost as if after death one were       given another possibility to change one's destiny. The Church's teaching       in this regard is unequivocal and was reaffirmed by the Second Vatican       Council which teaches: 'Since we know neither the day nor the hour, we       should follow the advice of the Lord and watch constantly so that, when       the *single course of our earthly life *is completed (cf. *Heb*       9:27), we may merit to enter with him into the marriage feast and be       numbered among the blessed, and not, like the wicked and slothful       servants, be ordered to depart into the eternal fire, into the outer       darkness where "men will weep and gnash their teeth' (*Mt*       22:13 and 25:30)" (*Lumen gentium, *n. 48).

General Audience 4 August 1999
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/audiences/documents/hf_jp-ii_aud_04081999_en.html

 

[John_oxios]

Perhaps John oxios meant to (insufficiently) state the citation is merely McBrien’s personal commentary on Servant of God Pope Paul VI’s Apostolic Letter [of 30 June 1968] issed “motu proprio” on the Solemn Profession of Faith Solemni hac Liturgia?

Thank You!!!

 

[mardukm]

Your quote is spurious.

ewtn.com/library/PAPALDOC/P6CREDO.HTM

Yet the Credo, when it describes purgatory, specifically uses the word “purification,” not “punishment.” And as I mentioned before, the only three dogmatic statements on Purgatory to come from the Church (Benedictus Deus, the Council of Florence, and the Council of Trent) don’t even mention punishment.

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[John_oxios]

The CCEO states that you must believe all of the dogmatic teachings of the Catholic Church. That includes purgatory.

I’d have to lean towards accepting them belief and understanding can and does come later. If one is negative about a teaching they’re not open to understanding.

Not everyone is a scholar, blessed is he who believes but has not seen with their own eyes.

God bless,
John