Saint Paul in that passage is talking about the resurrection and how, “if Christ has not been raised, your faith is vain; you are still in your sins.” 1 Cor. 15:17. By taking that particular passage out of context you are ascribing to Saint Paul a position which he doesn’t hold, namely that people should only be good out of fear of punishment or reward for proper behaviour.
The author of the article was arguing that all people are going to heaven (amongst other arguments) and Saint Paul was arguing that Christ was truly resurrected physical and in that lies our hope in the resurrection. There is no correlation between the two.
I am reminded of the first book of Plato’s Republic where Thrasymachus engages Socrates on a similar subject and the remainder of the book is Socrates’ attempt to deal with the argument from Thrasymachus that there is no advantage (in this life) to being good.
I don’t believe either of them ever tried to deny the existence of Purgatory or Hell.
Perhaps you had better read up more on Origen and the apokatastasis panton then if you understand Hell as eternal torment:
“(4) Universality of the Redemption and the Final Restoration
Certain Scriptural texts, e.g., I Cor. xv, 25-28, seem to extend to all rational beings the benefit of the Redemption, and Origen allows himself to be led also by the philosophical principle which he enunciates several times, without ever proving it, that the end is always like the beginning: “We think that the goodness of God, through the mediation of Christ, will bring all creatures to one and the same end” (De princip., I, vi, 1-3). The universal restoration (apokatastasis) follows necessarily from these principles.”
newadvent.org/cathen/11306b.htm
No, actually he claimed that Hell IS already an empty prison.
I stated that the doctrine of Hell should be explained so Catholics will understand that hell is an empty prison. No one, not me nor the author, thinks that if the Church pronounced Hell empty, it would automatically empty itself. His writings are essentially in accordance with the writings of Hans Urs Von Balthasar
theuniversityconcourse.com/II,9,5-6-1997/Healy.htm
The two statements are not contradictory. And the encyclopedia is not a statement of Catholic doctrine, but merely information about a theological theory.
Actually, the two statements are very much contradictory and hence the present papal commission on the status of Limbo in Catholic theology. Though the CE is not a doctrinal source, neither is the Catechism. Both however reflect positions which are doctrinal, as the CE article on the fate of the unbaptized reads:
“The Catholic teaching is uncompromising on this point, that all who depart this life without baptism, be it of water, or blood, or desire, are perpetually excluded from the vision of God. This teaching is grounded, as we have seen, on Scripture and tradition, and the decrees of the Church”
newadvent.org/cathen/02258b.htm
No, the main scriptural proofs of the existence of Purgatory are in the Gospels. “You will not get out of prison till you have paid the last penny” etc. etc.
If this were true you would expect the CE to emphasize it, however the CE emphasizes prayers for the dead:
“The proofs for the Catholic position, both in Scripture and in Tradition, are bound up also with the practice of praying for the dead.”
newadvent.org/cathen/12575a.htm
Praying for the dead is found in 2 Maccabees 12: 43-46, not in the Gospels. Though certain ECF’s held to various proofs in the Gospels, under modern biblical scholarship the ‘proofs’ do not old up.
As the old act of contritions reads, essentially, to deny the purer motivation (love) in right behaviour and rely solely on imperfect contrition (fear of punishment) is to deny the very core message of the Gospels and deny the essence of natural law.
