Is Purgatory Dogma?

[CutlerB]

Hi there everyone,

I’m in a discussion with some Catholics who say that Purgatory isn’t dogma and not part of infallible teaching. So my question is really simple:

Is Purgatory “dogma” (in the official sense)? If not, is it at least part of the infallible teaching of the Magisterium?

If possible, could you provide sources? I’ve looked through Trent, but there is not a direct quote saying “If anyone denies the existence of Purgatory, let him be anathema.”

Thanks.

 

[njlisa]

This is the official teaching according to the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

1031 The Church gives the name Purgatory to this final purification of the elect, which is entirely different from the punishment of the damned. 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.

You can find all the footnotes and references (which I have omitted here) at the following link: scborromeo.org/ccc/p123a12.htm

 

[Razanir]

Purgation is dogma. As Catholics, we do believe that souls get purified before entering Heaven. On the other hand, though, I don’t think there’s any official teaching on what that entails.

 

[bzkoss236]

Simplest answer, yes, it is an infallibly defined doctrine.

Try this on them.

In general, people on earth are a sinners, correct? (yes)
And those in heaven are no longer a sinners, correct? (yes)
Therefore there needs to be something that happens, some process, that makes someone go from being a sinner to not being a sinner. That, in general, is purgatory.

 

[bzkoss236]

Purgation is dogma. As Catholics, we do believe that souls get purified before entering Heaven. On the other hand, though, I don’t think there’s any official teaching on what that entails.

The only things that are official are the following:

1. there is a purification after death for those who are entering heaven, but are not yet clean
2. this purification involves some kind of suffering
3. this purification can be aided by the prayers and offerings of the faithful

 

[CutlerB]

The only things that are official are the following:

1. there is a purification after death for those who are entering heaven, but are not yet clean
2. this purification involves some kind of suffering
3. this purification can be aided by the prayers and offerings of the faithful

And where can I point them to to have them see that they need to positively affirm this? That’s what I need.

Basically, this guy is saying: “Dogmas are always to be interpreted as that the opposite proposition is false. They never mean more, and do not require positive assent.”

 

[capablanca911]

Why ‘suffering?’ I’ve heard this, but can’t find a statement at Lyons, Florence, or Trent for supporting it? (I only did a quick scroll on my phone so if someone can help by all means cite away!)

 

[njlisa]

The Holy Father Pope Benedict XVI wrote extensively on the doctrine of Purgatory in his encyclical Spe Salvi.

There are loads of details that you may find helpful in understanding this teaching.

vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/encyclicals/documents/hf_ben-xvi_enc_20071130_spe-salvi_en.html

 

[Corki]

The only things that are official are the following:

1. there is a purification after death for those who are entering heaven, but are not yet clean
2. this purification involves some kind of suffering
3. this purification can be aided by the prayers and offerings of the faithful

It’s also official that the name for this purification is Purgatory, that there is still a need for purification even after mortal sins are absolved and that no one enters into this period/state of purification unless they are ultimately bound for Heaven.

 

[Razanir]

It’s also official that the name for this purification is Purgatory, that there is still a need for purification even after mortal sins are absolved and that no one enters into this period/state of purification unless they are ultimately bound for Heaven.

Right. I just said purgation to distinguish it from any preconceived notions of what Purgatory is actually like

 

[porthos11]

Why ‘suffering?’ I’ve heard this, but can’t find a statement at Lyons, Florence, or Trent for supporting it? (I only did a quick scroll on my phone so if someone can help by all means cite away!)

The “suffering” part isn’t strictly dogmatic but it can be drawn from reason. Just as any kind of cure or purification here on earth involves some kind of pain or unpleasantness, so must the cleansing in purgatory, because there, we are shedding more of our uncleanness and becoming more pure, something like self-denial extraordinaire.

But it must also follow that because the souls in purgatory know they are saved, and that the purification is by God’s very power and love, this suffering is a joyful suffering, perhaps even of greater joy than one could ever experience in this life.

It is on this account that I would not be afraid to go to Purgatory. I would skip it if I could by the merits of Christ, but should I find myself there, I have no doubt I will be a happy soul.

 

[CutlerB]

The question really is, is one allowed to withhold positive belief in Purgatory?

“Withholding positive belief” is not “obstinately denying”, merely not saying “I really believe there is a Purgatory”.

The person I’m writing to says “Purgatory is just anthropomorphic”, viz. a human invention. Does he have to believe in Purgatory?

 

[CutlerB]

OK, so it appears I was misunderstanding what this person was writing.

I don’t like to accuse others for my faults, but he was writing in a very ambiguous way!

He says that all he was saying is that a Catholic cannot disagree with the Church on the existence of Purgatory, but that our understanding of time in relation to Purgatory was rather anthropomorphic.

With that, I can agree.

 

[bzkoss236]

And where can I point them to to have them see that they need to positively affirm this? That’s what I need.

Basically, this guy is saying: “Dogmas are always to be interpreted as that the opposite proposition is false. They never mean more, and do not require positive assent.”

Look no further than the Catechism of the Catholic Church for the explanation:

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:[607] (954, 1472)
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.[608]
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.”[609] 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.[610] The Church also commends almsgiving, indulgences, and works of penance undertaken on behalf of the dead: (958, 1371, 1479)
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.[611]

More things:
catholic.com/tracts/purgatory (Description of)
catholic.com/tracts/the-roots-of-purgatory (Early Church Fathers)
catholic.com/blog/matt-fradd/the-logical-case-for-purgatory (thinking through it)
usccb.org/beliefs-and-teachings/ecumenical-and-interreligious/ecumenical/lutheran/hope-eternal-life.cfm (a more in depth look at purgatory and the hope for eternal life between Catholics and Lutherans)

 

[bzkoss236]

OK, so it appears I was misunderstanding what this person was writing.

I don’t like to accuse others for my faults, but he was writing in a very ambiguous way!

He says that all he was saying is that a Catholic cannot disagree with the Church on the existence of Purgatory, but that our understanding of time in relation to Purgatory was rather anthropomorphic.

With that, I can agree.

Yes, the idea that purgatory takes a certain amount of time or that purgatory is a place is all speculation. We only assert some kind of time because of the fact that purgatory is only temporary, but it could be instantaneous; we just don’t know for sure.

 

[Pitcharan]

It’s also official that the name for this purification is Purgatory, that there is still a need for purification even after mortal sins are absolved and that no one enters into this period/state of purification unless they are ultimately bound for Heaven.

Exactly. Absolution and purging are different. The penalty for committed crimes (sins) is absolved through genuine repentance, while the cause for crime, viz., the sinful nature or tendency is purged or cleansed through suffering, If we don’t shed our sinful habit in this life, it has to be most painfully purged in the afterlife.

 

[Elizium23]

OK, so it appears I was misunderstanding what this person was writing.

I don’t like to accuse others for my faults, but he was writing in a very ambiguous way!

He says that all he was saying is that a Catholic cannot disagree with the Church on the existence of Purgatory, but that our understanding of time in relation to Purgatory was rather anthropomorphic.

With that, I can agree.

I don’t understand. “Anthropomorphic” means that it is in the form of man. If we anthropomorphize Purgatory, we might say that Purgatory isn’t happy we don’t believe in him. Or we might say that the dead are welcomed into the open arms of Purgatory. It is to give human characteristics to an inanimate thing. So what does your interlocutor mean in this instance by that?

 

[CutlerB]

I don’t understand. “Anthropomorphic” means that it is in the form of man. If we anthropomorphize Purgatory, we might say that Purgatory isn’t happy we don’t believe in him. Or we might say that the dead are welcomed into the open arms of Purgatory. It is to give human characteristics to an inanimate thing. So what does your interlocutor mean in this instance by that?

He means something similar to what you said: “It is to give human characteristics to an inanimate thing.”

He was referring to the idea that Purgatory “takes time” as something brought about by the fact that we live in time and this project that image onto Purgatory.

 

[Elizium23]

The reason it is said that purification in Purgatory takes time is because Purgatory is defined as the state of temporal punishment for sins committed. It is “temporal” as opposed to “eternal” - the punishment of Hell is eternal.

It is not known or defined how long purification takes. It used to be that partial indulgences came tagged with a set number of years, which I believe was only meant as a comparative measure and not an actual number of years spent in Purgatory. For perhaps this reason, the number of years is no longer specified for indulgences, but rather they are either partial or plenary.

 

[CutlerB]

The reason it is said that purification in Purgatory takes time is because Purgatory is defined as the state of temporal punishment for sins committed. It is “temporal” as opposed to “eternal” - the punishment of Hell is eternal.

It is not known or defined how long purification takes. It used to be that partial indulgences came tagged with a set number of years, which I believe was only meant as a comparative measure and not an actual number of years spent in Purgatory. For perhaps this reason, the number of years is no longer specified for indulgences, but rather they are either partial or plenary.

About the days: From what I understand the days attached to Indulgences were comparative to days of penance.

Anyhow: I have come to believe Purgatory is, oddly enough, a beautiful doctrine.