Help in answering a Purgatory query of a non-catholic friend

  • Thread starter Thread starter alitaptap
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

alitaptap

Guest
How can I convince my friend (non-catholic) asking me how can I explain the repentant thief on Calvary and Enoch the father of the oldest man recorded in the Bible who wasn’t died and took by God. How can I tell him that they go through the Purgatory?

Thanks.
 
They MAY not have gone through purgatory. God is free to extent whatever degree of mercy that He may wish.
 
alitaptap said:
So how can I convince him that there is such thing as Purgatory?
Click to expand...
You probably can’t. I assume that this person is a noncatholic Christian, and if so is using the 66 book canon of the bible. This canon does not contain one of the books and passages that is used to justify prayer to and for the dead.

About all you can do is provide the evidence and let the Holy Spirit do the rest.

I would suggest you begin by reviewing this part of the Catechism III. 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.606 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:
As for certain lesser faults, we must believe that, before the Final Judgment, there is a purifying fire. He who is truth says that whoever utters blasphemy against the Holy Spirit will be pardoned neither in this age nor in the age to come. From this sentence we understand that certain offenses can be forgiven in this age, but certain others in the age to come.

1032 This teaching is also based on the practice of prayer for the dead, already mentioned in Sacred Scripture: “Therefore [Judas Maccabeus] made atonement for the dead, that they might be delivered from their sin.” From the beginning the Church has honored the memory of the dead and offered prayers in suffrage for them, above all the Eucharistic sacrifice, so that, thus purified, they may attain the beatific vision of God. The Church also commends almsgiving, indulgences, and works of penance undertaken on behalf of the dead:
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.
​

Then to support this there are these passages from Scripture.
This first is present in both the Catholic and Protestant Bibles.
I Corinthians 3:10-15 According to the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder, I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth therupon. For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ. Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble; Every man’s work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man’s work of what sort it is. If any man’s work abid which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. If any man’s work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.

This next is in the Catholic Bible but was removed from the Protestant Bibles when they removed 7 books during the Reformation in the 16th century.
The most definitive evidence of the reality of Purgatory is found in 2 Macabees 12:44-46. In this passage Judas Macabee and his men had found, in the bodies of their fallen comrades, “tokens of the idols of Jamnia, which the Law forbids the Jews to wear.” As a result, “they turned to prayer, beseeching that the sin which has been committed might be wholly blotted out…for if he were not expecting that those who had fallen would rise again, it would have been superfluous and foolish to pray for the dead…Therefore he made atonement for the dead, that they might be delivered from their sin.” This passage shows the practice and attitude of the Jews before the time of Jesus. They PRAYED for their dead and still do today.
(Source)

Finally I would simply tell him that “Purgatory” is only a dscriptive term for the place or state of being during which our “works” are tried “as by fire”, as indicated in 1 Corinthians

I hope this helps.

Peace
James
 
Hope this helps.

Paul

Purgatory
Lk 12:58-59; 1 Cor 3:15; Mt 5:25-26 … temporary agony.
Heb 12:6-11 … God’s painful discipline.
Mt 12:32 … no forgiveness … nor in the age to come.
1 Pet 3:18-20 … might be purgatory (limbo?).
1 Pet 4:6 … preached to the dead.
Rev 21:27 … nothing unclean shall enter heaven.
Heb 12:23 … souls in heaven are perfect.
Col 1:24; 2 Sam 12:13-14 … “extra” suffering.
2 Mac 12:43-46 … sacrifice for the dead. (not in Protestant Bibles)
2 Tim 1:15-18 … prayer for Onesiphorus for “that Day.”
1 Jn 5:14-17 … mortal/venial sins
 
alitaptap said:
So how can I convince him that there is such thing as Purgatory?
Click to expand...
Ask him to answer some questions for you. For instances, in Matt. 12:32 Jesus says, “And anyone who says a word against the Son of man will be forgiven; but no one who speaks against the Holy Spirit will be forgiven either in this world or in the next.” Jesus thus clearly provides that there is forgiveness after death. The phrase “in the next” (from the Greek “en to mellonti”) generally refers to the afterlife (see, for example, Mark 10.30; Luke 18.30; 20.34-35; Eph. 1.21 for similar language). Forgiveness is not necessary in heaven, and there is no forgiveness in hell. This proves that there is another state after death, and the Church for 2,000 years has called this state purgatory

You can also refer him to Luke 16:19-31 – in this story, we see that the dead rich man is suffering but still feels compassion for his brothers and wants to warn them of his place of suffering. But there is no suffering in heaven or compassion in hell because compassion is a grace from God and those in hell are deprived from God’s graces for all eternity. So where is the rich man? He is in purgatory.
 
Sir_Knight said:
You can also refer him to Luke 16:19-31 – in this story, we see that the dead rich man is suffering but still feels compassion for his brothers and wants to warn them of his place of suffering. But there is no suffering in heaven or compassion in hell because compassion is a grace from God and those in hell are deprived from God’s graces for all eternity. So where is the rich man? He is in purgatory.
Click to expand...
The rich man is in hell, not purgatory. Souls in purgatory receive consolation, not so the souls in hell. The rich man wanted to warn his brothers, not out of compassion for them, but because he feared that his brothers would increase his own torment in hell should they end up there due to the rich man’s bad example.
 
Vile_Servant said:
The rich man is in hell, not purgatory. Souls in purgatory receive consolation, not so the souls in hell. The rich man wanted to warn his brothers, not out of compassion for them, but because he feared that his brothers would increase his own torment in hell should they end up there due to the rich man’s bad example.
Click to expand...
That would be incorrect. First off, there is nothing in the passage to indicate that the Rich Man was a source of bad example for his brothers. The brothers could have been a bad example for him. You can not draw a conclusion from an assumption.

Secondly, the demons draw people to hell despite the fact that their own suffering increases for every soul that goes down there as a result of their temptation showing that those in hell prefer the ruin of other souls EVEN IF it increases their own suffering.

Since the Rich Man wanted his brothers to be spared the same fate as he even though he would benefit nothing from it, showed that he cared about them – something not possible for someone in hell.
 
alitaptap said:
How can I convince my friend (non-catholic) asking me how can I explain the repentant thief on Calvary and Enoch the father of the oldest man recorded in the Bible who wasn’t died and took by God. How can I tell him that they go through the Purgatory?

Thanks.
Click to expand...
1Cor.3;12-15 reads, “If any man builds on this foundation using gold, silver. costly stones,wood, hay or straw, 13. his work will be shown for what it is, because the Day will bring it to light. It will be revealed by fire, and the fire will test the quality of each mans work. 14, if what he has built survives, he will receive his reward. 15. If it is burned up, he will suffer loss, he himself will be saVED, BUT ONLY ONE ESCAPING THROUGH THE THE FLAMES.”
(cap lock on) I’m a bad typist… :")
I accept this teaching. 🙂

God bless,
bluelake
 
Sir_Knight said:
That would be incorrect. First off, there is nothing in the passage to indicate that the Rich Man was a source of bad example for his brothers. The brothers could have been a bad example for him. You can not draw a conclusion from an assumption.

Secondly, the demons draw people to hell despite the fact that their own suffering increases for every soul that goes down there as a result of their temptation showing that those in hell prefer the ruin of other souls EVEN IF it increases their own suffering.

Since the Rich Man wanted his brothers to be spared the same fate as he even though he would benefit nothing from it, showed that he cared about them – something not possible for someone in hell.
Click to expand...
*“There was a rich man who was dressed in purple and fine linen and lived in luxury every day. At his gate was laid a beggar named Lazarus, covered with sores and longing to eat what fell from the rich man’s table.” *The rich manned sinned against charity by not feeding the poor or comforting the sick.

‘No, Father Abraham,’ he said, ‘but if someone from the dead goes to them, they will repent.’
The rich man died unrepentant in his sins.

“In Hell, where he was in torment,”
The rich man was sent to Hell, not to Purgatory, where he would have been in a state of purgation or purification instead of torment.

“between us and you a great chasm has been fixed, so that those who want to go from here to you cannot, nor can anyone cross over from there to us.’”
The separation of the blessed and the damned is eternal, while the separation of the blessed and the souls in purgatory is temporal.

The writings of the Doctors of the Church, for example St Alphonsus Liguori, also confirm that Dives (the rich man) was sent to Hell and not to Purgatory.
 
Not meaning to highjack this thread from the original question I would like to help clarify where the rich man was.

A 1959 Bible has the translation for Luke 16:22 as “…And the rich man also died and he was buried in Hell.”

My March 2010 issue of Magnificat translates as “The rich man also died and was buried, and from the netherworld, where he was in torment, …”

Pretty clear the poor man was in Hell from which there is no return.:knight2:

:amen:
 
Vile_Servant said:
*“There was a rich man who was dressed in purple and fine linen and lived in luxury every day. At his gate was laid a beggar named Lazarus, covered with sores and longing to eat what fell from the rich man’s table.” *The rich manned sinned against charity by not feeding the poor or comforting the sick.

‘No, Father Abraham,’ he said, ‘but if someone from the dead goes to them, they will repent.’
The rich man died unrepentant in his sins.

“In Hell, where he was in torment,”
The rich man was sent to Hell, not to Purgatory, where he would have been in a state of purgation or purification instead of torment.

“between us and you a great chasm has been fixed, so that those who want to go from here to you cannot, nor can anyone cross over from there to us.’”
The separation of the blessed and the damned is eternal, while the separation of the blessed and the souls in purgatory is temporal.

The writings of the Doctors of the Church, for example St Alphonsus Liguori, also confirm that Dives (the rich man) was sent to Hell and not to Purgatory.
Click to expand...
Recall that the early Church Fathers use the term “hell” interchangably [sp] with “dead” – which was purgatory. And example of this can be seen where we say the words that Jesus descended into hell. Jesus could not have descended into hell because by definition, hell is the absence of God. If Jesus were to have entered hell, it would have stopped being hell the moment that He entered because God was no longer absent from it. Instead, Jesus descended to the dead – which is purgatory.

When they say “hell”, they are really referring to purgatory.
 
mullenpm said:
Not meaning to highjack this thread from the original question I would like to help clarify where the rich man was.

A 1959 Bible has the translation for Luke 16:22 as “…And the rich man also died and he was buried in Hell.”

My March 2010 issue of Magnificat translates as “The rich man also died and was buried, and from the netherworld, where he was in torment, …”

Pretty clear the poor man was in Hell from which there is no return.:knight2:

:amen:
Click to expand...
Please explain why the Rich Man was concerned about his brothers when compassion is a grace from God and those in hell are forever cut off from God’s graces?
 
Sir_Knight said:
Recall that the early Church Fathers use the term “hell” interchangably [sp] with “dead” – which was purgatory. And example of this can be seen where we say the words that Jesus descended into hell. Jesus could not have descended into hell because by definition, hell is the absence of God. If Jesus were to have entered hell, it would have stopped being hell the moment that He entered because God was no longer absent from it. Instead, Jesus descended to the dead – which is purgatory.

When they say “hell”, they are really referring to purgatory.
Click to expand...
This is what St Alphonsus Liguori wrote about the hell of the damned;

**“And the rich man also died, and he was buried in hell.” (Luke xvi. 22.) ** The damned are buried in the fire of hell; hence they have an abyss of fire below, an abyss of fire above, and an abyss of fire on every side. As a fish in the sea is surrounded by water, so the unhappy reprobate are encompassed by fire on every side. The sharpness of the pain of fire may be inferred from the circumstance, that the rich glutton complained of no other torment. ”I am tormented in this flame." (Ibid, v 23.)

“To suffer a parching thirst, without having a drop of water to quench it, is intolerably painful. It has sometimes happened, that travellers who could procure no refreshment after a long journey, have fainted from the pain produced by thirst. So great is the thirst of the damned, that if one of them were offered all the water on this earth, he would exclaim: All this water is not sufficient to extinguish the burning thirst which I endure. But, alas! the unhappy damned shall never have a single drop of water to refresh their tongues. “He cried out and said: Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, to cool my tongue, for I am tormented in this flame. ” (St. Luke xvi. 24.) The rich glutton has not obtained, and shall never obtain, this drop of water, as long as God shall be God.”

(catholicapologetics.info/scripture/newtestament/liguori.pdf)

If you have sources from the Church Fathers or the Doctors of the Church which clearly state that Dives was sent to Purgatory instead of Hell, please share it with us. Thanks.
 
First of all it seems obvious that Lazarus and the Rich man is a weak argument if even Catholics who believe in Purgatory cannot agree on the meaning of this passage.

Secondly I would tend to ignore it as an argument because it is a “Parable” that Jesus was using to teach about the need for repentance here and now rather than putting it off and/or looking for signs.

Third, I tend to agree with the position that the Rich man was in Hell and not Purgatory because of the compassion issue and also because in verse 26 it says this:
26 And besides all this, between us and you a great chasm has been fixed, in order that those who would pass from here to you may not be able, and none may cross from there to us.'
Note that the Chasm is fixed so that none may cross in either direction. How does such a barrier fit with the idea of purgatory from which souls may advance to heaven ("…cross from there to us.")

Lastly I do agree with Sir Knight regarding the inability of the Rich man to have compassion in hell which only reinforces the idea that this “story” by Jesus is meant as a parable for another purpose than proving the existance of purgatory.

This verse comes off my list as a “Proof Text”

Peace
James
 
Vile_Servant said:
This is what St Alphonsus Liguori wrote about the hell of the damned;

**“And the rich man also died, and he was buried in hell.” (Luke xvi. 22.) ** The damned are buried in the fire of hell; hence they have an abyss of fire below, an abyss of fire above, and an abyss of fire on every side. As a fish in the sea is surrounded by water, so the unhappy reprobate are encompassed by fire on every side. The sharpness of the pain of fire may be inferred from the circumstance, that the rich glutton complained of no other torment. ”I am tormented in this flame." (Ibid, v 23.)

“To suffer a parching thirst, without having a drop of water to quench it, is intolerably painful. It has sometimes happened, that travellers who could procure no refreshment after a long journey, have fainted from the pain produced by thirst. So great is the thirst of the damned, that if one of them were offered all the water on this earth, he would exclaim: All this water is not sufficient to extinguish the burning thirst which I endure. But, alas! the unhappy damned shall never have a single drop of water to refresh their tongues. “He cried out and said: Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, to cool my tongue, for I am tormented in this flame. ” (St. Luke xvi. 24.) The rich glutton has not obtained, and shall never obtain, this drop of water, as long as God shall be God.”

(catholicapologetics.info/scripture/newtestament/liguori.pdf)

If you have sources from the Church Fathers or the Doctors of the Church which clearly state that Dives was sent to Purgatory instead of Hell, please share it with us. Thanks.
Click to expand...
I do not believe that the Church has infallibly ruled on this matter one way or the other and while the writings of the saints (your St Alphonsus Liguori) have merit, those writings and opinions are also not considered to be infallible.

Note that Saint Catherine of Siena professed in her writings that the Blessed Virgin Mary was NOT immaculately conceived. (In Fr. Benedict Groeschel’s book, “A Still, Small Voice”, he talks about St. Catherine of Siena’s declaration that the Virgin Mary herself revealed to the Saint that she was not immaculately conceived.) yet the Catholic Church OFFICIALLY teaches that Mary WAS immaculately conceived.
 
JRKH said:
First of all it seems obvious that Lazarus and the Rich man is a weak argument if even Catholics who believe in Purgatory cannot agree on the meaning of this passage.

Secondly I would tend to ignore it as an argument because it is a “Parable” that Jesus was using to teach about the need for repentance here and now rather than putting it off and/or looking for signs.

Third, I tend to agree with the position that the Rich man was in Hell and not Purgatory because of the compassion issue and also because in verse 26 it says this: 26 And besides all this, between us and you a great chasm has been fixed, in order that those who would pass from here to you may not be able, and none may cross from there to us.’ Note that the Chasm is fixed so that none may cross in either direction. How does such a barrier fit with the idea of purgatory from which souls may advance to heaven ("…cross from there to us.")

Lastly I do agree with Sir Knight regarding the inability of the Rich man to have compassion in hell which only reinforces the idea that this “story” by Jesus is meant as a parable for another purpose than proving the existance of purgatory.

This verse comes off my list as a “Proof Text”

Peace
James
Click to expand...
From the Vatican’s Website …"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.

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. There is also the idea that this state can involve purification and healing which mature the soul for communion with God. The early Church took up these concepts, and in the Western Church they gradually developed into the doctrine of Purgatory"
What produces purification? Fire. It can both destroy AND purify without destroying…at the same time. Just as Paul said in 1 Cor 3: 12-15 A man will suffer loss but will ultimately be saved as one escaping through fire. Who’s the one suffering in fire?
 
Sir_Knight said:
Note that Saint Catherine of Siena professed in her writings that the Blessed Virgin Mary was NOT immaculately conceived.
Click to expand...
In which Dialogue or Letter of Saint Catherine of Siena may I find this profession?
 
It’s covered in Fr. Benedict Groeschel’s book*, “A Still, Small Voice”. *I don’t have it in front of me. I read if at Barnes & Noble while waiting for my wife and daughter to finish shopping.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top