Purgatory and 1 Cor. 3

[SteveVH]

At the very least, there is not a single passage that presents a conclusive negative as it does for faith alone . Which by its very nature demonstrates the need for an interpretative authority - in like manner as the one demonstrated in Matt 28’s great commission.

And also keeping in mind that when you read all the references in the CCC, it is obvious that this is not a single passage theology proposal.

Like all or most of Catholic doctrine, we did not rely solely on the Bible to arrive at this understanding of life after death. There is evidence galore, through the writings of the Early Church Fathers, that purgatory has always been a belief within the Tradition of the Christian Church. To be required to prove, through Scripture only, that the doctrine of purgatory is true, is asking to only consider part of the story.

 

[rcwitness]

To be required to prove, through Scripture only, that the doctrine of purgatory is true, is asking to only consider part of the story.

But its there, as plain as day! But the Spirit whom inspired the Scripture must be our interpreter in order to see clearly.

Defining details about Purgatory is definitely going into deeper realms of revelation. And I agree with anyone who advises me to be carefull how I interpret above what the Church Teaches. So, I try NOT to go above what the Church Teaches, but stay within everything she has Taught.

 

[SteveVH]

But its there, as plain as day! But the Spirit whom inspired the Scripture must be our interpreter in order to see clearly.

Defining details about Purgatory is definitely going into deeper realms of revelation. And I agree with anyone who advises me to be carefull how I interpret above what the Church Teaches. So, I try NOT to go above what the Church Teaches, but stay within everything she has Taught.

Agreed.

 

[Koineman]

Ok, I think I need to allow you to finish your examination of the passage, because I am already basing my view of the latter part on the whole passage. If you are waiting for the terms ‘purification’ and ‘purgatory’ to show up in order to prove that’s what Paul is Teaching, then you’ve made your point and can assume that’s not what he’s talking about.

No, again, you’re jumping the gun, only now you’re doing it with my words. I’m not waiting for the TERMS to appear. I never said that. I’m looking for those concepts to appear (or not appear).

If you want to understand the nature of fire burning away useless material to reveal what is strong and pure, then you have understood Paul is talking about purification and purging. As for your insistant desire to find Paul applying the purging fire to the person, well continue your examination of the remaining texts.

I will. The CCC refers to Purgatory as purification of actual people: “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.” That’s what I’m looking for in this 1 Cor. 3 passage.

Ok, so you’ve had a change of direction from your OP question? What do you conclude regarding your initial question - “Does 1 Corinthians 3 prove Purgatory?”

No change of direction. See post #8. Whose definition of Purgatory would I have in mind if it weren’t the RCC’s?

Fair enough. So join the club which is always trying to nail down a correct understanding of orthodox Catholic faith regarding the many different issues of the Deposit of Faith! I dont claim to have an infallible knowledge of the mysteries of Purgatory. Neither has the Church (other than giving a name to what Paul is talking about and a few certain things regarding it, which I posted in #45). I do try to form a solid understanding of it though, since it is a source of contention with many non-Catholic Christians. I usually do try to stay reserved about throwing too much of my personal understanding of Purgatory, and I can definitely take some constructive criticism from you and others who can correct something that I’ve shared which is straying too far outside of what we can gather from the Faith.

I appreciate your humility, but I am not correcting your alleged straying from your own faith. You may be, but then you may not be. I simply don’t want to take your word for it, for the reasons I mentioned earlier.

I think its best for me to wait for you to finish your examination of the passage, share what you agree with, regarding the Catholic Faith, what you feel I have strayed from the Catholic Faith, and then also bring in some other passages that deal with the Judgement of Christians and how it relates to the Churches Teaching about Purgatory and my own personal understanding of it.

I’m up for everything you mentioned here–except for the boldfaced parts: the first boldfaced part because I am not claiming you have strayed from, or stayed faithful to, the Catholic faith, and the second part because I want to stick with what the CCC says, not individual Catholics’ perceptions of what it says.

 

[Koineman]

And also keeping in mind that when you read all the references in the CCC, it is obvious that this is not a single passage theology proposal.

Are there other passages on Purgatory in the CCC that I did not include in post #8? If so, please, by all means, feel free to let me know. I want to compare 1 Cor. 3 with the RC definition of Purgatory, and I surely don’t want to do that if I have not in view the full definition the RCC provides.

 

[Denise1957]

Are there other passages on Purgatory in the CCC that I did not include in post #8? If so, please, by all means, feel free to let me know. I want to compare 1 Cor. 3 with the RC definition of Purgatory, and I surely don’t want to do that if I have not in view the full definition the RCC provides.

Perhaps you’d like to look at the history of the Catholic Church’ views on Purgatory. Here’s a piece written by Fr. John A. Hardon, S.J., which you may find interesting:

therealpresence.org/archives/Eschatology/Eschatology_006.htm

 

[Koineman]

Perhaps you’d like to look at the history of the Catholic Church’ views on Purgatory. Here’s a piece written by Fr. John A. Hardon, S.J., which you may find interesting:

therealpresence.org/archives/Eschatology/Eschatology_006.htm

No thank you. One Catholic’s view–even if coming from a priest–is not official or considered infallible. That’s why I quoted the CCC in post #8.

 

[Denise1957]

No thank you. One Catholic’s view–even if coming from a priest–is not official or considered infallible. That’s why I quoted the CCC in post #8.

Then why are you posting this thread, if you don’t want individual’s views? Aren’t you also posting your own views?

 

[Koineman]

Then why are you posting this thread, if you don’t want individual’s views? Aren’t you also posting your own views?

That’s a fair question. It’s not that I don’t want individuals’ views. If people’s views don’t go beyond the scope of the CCC’s definition, that’s fine.

What I am trying to avoid are views that add details that go above and beyond the CCC’s definition of Purgatory. When that starts happening, how do we know that such additional details are really approved of by the RCC? So when the CCC refers to purification of people, I’m going with that and not going beyond it. I’m doing the same with the 1 Cor. 3 text.

 

[thinkandmull]

“only as through fire.” The Holy Ghost?

 

[Denise1957]

That’s a fair question. It’s not that I don’t want individuals’ views. If people’s views don’t go beyond the scope of the CCC’s definition, that’s fine.

What I am trying to avoid are views that add details that go above and beyond the CCC’s definition of Purgatory. When that starts happening, how do we know that such additional details are really approved of by the RCC? So when the CCC refers to purification of people, I’m going with that and not going beyond it. I’m doing the same with the 1 Cor. 3 text.

So…are you asking for the Church’s definition of 1 Cor 3? After all, you can look up the Church’s teaching on Purgatory on the internet. Why ask about it from Catholics?

 

[Koineman]

So…are you asking for the Church’s definition of 1 Cor 3? After all, you can look up the Church’s teaching on Purgatory on the internet. Why ask about it from Catholics?

All I can say is reread the OP. I don’t think you’re grasping the point of this thread.

 

[Denise1957]

I’m not sure. I don’t know of any Lutheran teaching that would go against that notion, assuming you mean an instantaneous purification and not the idea of being punished for your impurities over a period of time.

You’re asking if 1 Cor 3 really proves Purgatory, right? How do you expect Catholics to come up with infallible Church teaching about 1 Cor 3 specifically? Catholics don’t think like that, and neither does the Catholic Church, so you’re asking an impossible question, but maybe you know that already.

 

[Denise1957]

All I can say is reread the OP. I don’t think you’re grasping the point of this thread.

I’ll try to express this charitably, but it seems that you continually tell Catholics that they’re wrong, or don’t grasp the point, or don’t really understand. It’s getting a little old.

 

[Isaiah45_9]

No thank you. One Catholic’s view–even if coming from a priest–is not official or considered infallible. That’s why I quoted the CCC in post #8.

Sigh… There is no infallible teaching on Purgatory. In fact, there is no such thing as a list of infallible teachings made by the Church. If that is what you seek, then there is no point being here or asking questions. All the answers you need can be found on the CCC, Papal Encyclicals, Council minutes and documents and notes, Sources of Catholic Dogma, Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma - both of which will include Official “de fide” teachings of the Catholic Church. The CCC, while authoritative, is not considered to be completely infallible. It contains infallible teachings, but as far as I know it’s not declare infallible as a whole. If you read the preface and introduction, you can see that it is a faithful systematic theological teaching of the Catholic Faith - but it does not include all the teachings.

For example, in OrdinatioSacerdotalis, St John Paul II - declared that the Church does not have the authority to ordain women. This is held to be “de fide”.

The book recommendation given serves as an explanation as well as a point of reference of the various documents used by the Church throughout the years to promulgate the teaching of Purgatory. “Cliff notes” will not work, nor will power points . We are looking at almost 2,000 years of theological development.

The section of the CCC that deals with Purgatory includes references in the form of numbers (607, for example) at the end of each page these references are listed. I included those references in the quotation of the CCC, for the benefit of readers.

 

[Reuben_J]

No, again, you’re jumping the gun, only now you’re doing it with my words. I’m not waiting for the TERMS to appear. I never said that. I’m looking for those concepts to appear (or not appear).

The term won’t appear; so is the Trinity.

However the concept did - of purification.

1 Cor 3 does not mean as description of purgatory; it is more of the idea. Similarly when we refer to 2 Maccabbee, it is the idea that praying for the dead was indeed practiced during its time, that there was a state where some would be before entering heaven.

I will. The CCC refers to Purgatory as purification of actual people: “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.” That’s what I’m looking for in this 1 Cor. 3 passage.

13 the work of each builder will become visible, for the Day will disclose it, because it will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test what sort of work each has done. 14 If what has been built on the foundation survives, the builder will receive a reward. 15 If the work is burned up, the builder will suffer loss; the builder will be saved, but only as through fire.​

You need only to agree that there is purification after death and which this passage alludes to and what purgatory is. I think dwelling on the semantic (work or person) is a bit legalistic as you rightly do not expect the TERMS to be explicitly mentioned.

Repentance is work in progress for many people until we attain its perfection. Do we know when we do? Did we do the right thing in our repentance here on earth?

Perhaps yes, perhaps no. No matter, the purification by the ‘fire’ of purgatory ensures it will be so.

No change of direction. See post #8. Whose definition of Purgatory would I have in mind if it weren’t the RCC’s?

I appreciate your humility, but I am not correcting your alleged straying from your own faith. You may be, but then you may not be. I simply don’t want to take your word for it, for the reasons I mentioned earlier.

I’m up for everything you mentioned here–except for the boldfaced parts: the first boldfaced part because I am not claiming you have strayed from, or stayed faithful to, the Catholic faith, and the second part because I want to stick with what the CCC says, not individual Catholics’ perceptions of what it says.

You still need the CCC explained to you though. If you do not take it from Catholic posters here, you can go all the way up to the compilers of the CCC and I am sure their explanation will not be too much different.

Even Catholics have to learn the CCC from their instructors and there are many who can articulate the CCC truthfully, among them may be theologians and clergies, depending on how weighty you want them to be for your taste.

You should take those recommendations given to you and then judge for yourself, of course.

God bless.

Reuben

 

[Koineman]

Sigh… There is no infallible teaching on Purgatory.

Really? So then are you saying that ***all ***Catholic teaching on Purgatory is fallible?

All the answers you need can be found on the CCC, Papal Encyclicals, Council minutes and documents and notes, Sources of Catholic Dogma, Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma - both of which will include Official “de fide” teachings of the Catholic Church. The CCC, while authoritative, is not considered to be completely infallible. It contains infallible teachings, but as far as I know it’s not declare infallible as a whole. If you read the preface and introduction, you can see that it is a faithful systematic theological teaching of the Catholic Faith - but it does not include all the teachings.

The CCC is the official teaching of the CC, is it not? If it is, then we can depend on its definition of Purgatory as representing the Catholic view that all Catholics are to believe.

If it isn’t, by all means, please point me to the official source so that I may address a Catholic definition that is not written by some priest or layman–because, whether you folks care to admit it or not, even priests at times give conflicting interpretations of Catholic dogma. For example, I’ve had different priests give me contradictory statements about whether a particular sin is mortal. If that happens with priests, how much more likely is it to happen among laypeople? That’s why I’m so leery of these different ideas and interpretations of Purgatory that people are giving me.

The book recommendation given serves as an explanation as well as a point of reference of the various documents used by the Church throughout the years to promulgate the teaching of Purgatory. “Cliff notes” will not work, nor will power points . We are looking at almost 2,000 years of theological development.

That’s understandable, and if you or anyone else wants to post other insights on Purgatory that are considered to be official Catholic teachings rather than mere suppositions, theories or personal interpretations by priests or laypeople, by all means, share them.

 

[Koineman]

Continuing with the passage:

14 If the work which any man has built on the foundation survives, he will receive a reward.

This is clear: If the “material” is not burned up–“survives” the test–the person will receive a reward for that labor. Again, it’s important to remember that, based on the clear context, it is the person’s labor on the foundation that is being tested.

15 If any man’s work is burned up, he will suffer loss, though he himself will be saved, but only as through fire.

If the person’s work on the foundation does not survive the testing fire, he will suffer loss. What is this loss? It is the loss of a reward. Based on the mention of reward in v. 14, this is the clear, sensible reading of this phrase.

So far, there is still no mention of the people themselves being purified.

16 Do you not know that you are God’s temple and that God’s Spirit dwells in you? 17 If any one destroys God’s temple, God will destroy him. For God’s temple is holy, and that temple you are.

Paul seems to be pointing out here why the explanation he just gave is so important: How we build on the one foundation is vital, since it is God’s temple, and that temple is holy.

So what works does Paul have in mind when he speaks of the labor that is done on this foundation? He seems to have in mind the factious mentality he mentioned at the beginning of the passage:

“But I, brethren, could not address you as spiritual men, but as men of the flesh, as babes in Christ. 2 I fed you with milk, not solid food; for you were not ready for it; and even yet you are not ready, 3 for you are still of the flesh. For while there is jealousy and strife among you, are you not of the flesh, and behaving like ordinary men? 4 For when one says, “I belong to Paul,” and another, “I belong to Apol′los,” are you not merely men?”

After all, that was the very reason why he went into his admonition to be careful how we build on the foundation, and it’s also the reason he went into his explanation of the future judgment of our works.

What kinds of works, then, should we strive to be doing as we build on the foundation? The works of “spiritual men,” not works of the flesh that “ordinary men” do. When our engagements with other church members and our labors in the church are done carnally, we should expect those works to be burned up.

So, the question now looms before us: Does this passage convey any idea of Purgatory, and equally important is the question: Did Paul actually intend to convey any idea of Purgatory? Based on the text itself, the honest, objective answer to both questions must be no. Why do I say that with certainty? Because:

1. The idea of our labor/works is stressed repeatedly throughout the passage.
2. The passage stresses the testing of our labor.
3. The passage says nothing about the testing of the people themselves. Only the works are stated as undergoing testing. Thus, the idea of purification of people is not in view here.
4. The passage says nothing about the testing of works that occur outside the context of the church. Paul speaks here only of the testing of our labor on “God’s temple,” “God’s building.” If Paul really meant to convey the idea of Purgatory, why didn’t he say that all of our works will be tested, not just our labor on God’s building but also all our other works, such as how we conducted ourselves at work among unbelievers, how much we mortified our flesh, how much we loved God in our private devotions, and so on?

If Purgatory is true, this passage does not indicate so.

 

[Reuben_J]

So, the question now looms before us: Does this passage convey any idea of Purgatory, and equally important is the question: Did Paul actually intend to convey any idea of Purgatory? Based on the text itself, the honest, objective answer to both questions must be no. Why do I say that with certainty? Because:

On the contrary, the answer is a resounding yes, that Paul speaks of the judgment of God where the works of the faithful will be tested after death.

Why would work be tested after death? What good it does after death? After all there is nothing one can do to change it, unless of course, if it is unfinished work that still can affect a man’s destiny. This is purgatory – a purification by figurative fire so that one is worthy of heaven.

1. The idea of our labor/works is stressed repeatedly throughout the passage.

Yes, but what kind of work?

1. The passage stresses the testing of our labor.

Why would our labor is to be tested? What significance is it to the laborer? Is it being tested independent of the doer or that it is intertwined with his destiny?

What is Catholic’s teaching on one’s work that together with grace can save us? Why is that some work can be done in vain without the foundation of the Lord?

Can penance and repentance fit into the definition of work? Catholicism says it can. And if it is so, then that work is to be tested by fire.

That if what has been built on the foundation survives, the builder will receive a reward (heaven) (1 Cor 3:14).

Or if the work is burned up (imperfect repentance), the builder will suffer loss; the builder will be saved, but only as through fire (of purgatory) (1 Cor 3:15). Italic mine.

1. The passage says nothing about the testing of the people themselves. Only the works are stated as undergoing testing. Thus, the idea of purification of people is not in view here.

Wrong. Read this again: If the work is burned up the builder will suffer loss; the builder will be saved, but only as through fire (v.15)

1. The passage says nothing about the testing of works that occur outside the context of the church. Paul speaks here only of the testing of our labor on “God’s temple,” “God’s building.” If Paul really meant to convey the idea of Purgatory, why didn’t he say that all of our works will be tested, not just our labor on God’s building but also all our other works, such as how we conducted ourselves at work among unbelievers, how much we mortified our flesh, how much we loved God in our private devotions, and so on?

You are actually supporting purgatory with that question as it is imperfect work on the foundation of the Lord, IOW, within the context of the church, not outside of it.

If Purgatory is true, this passage does not indicate so.

It is there alright. You just do not want to see it.

Reuben

 

[Koineman]

On the contrary, the answer is a resounding yes, that Paul speaks of the judgment of God where the works of the faithful will be tested after death.

Your own words contradict your statement. The works of the faithful are tested; the faithful themselves are not being purified. There is a huge difference.

Why would work be tested after death? What good it does after death?

The passage tells us why clearly and plainly: for the determination of reward or lack of reward.

Yes, but what kind of work?

I got into that at the end of my post.

Why would our labor is to be tested? What significance is it to the laborer? Is it being tested independent of the doer or that it is intertwined with his destiny?

As to the first two questions, the text loudly and clearly tells us why: to determine reward or lack of reward.

As to your third question, of course it is intertwined with his destiny: what rewards (if any) he or she will have in eternity.

What is Catholic’s teaching on one’s work that together with grace can save us? Why is that some work can be done in vain without the foundation of the Lord?

Can penance and repentance fit into the definition of work? Catholicism says it can. And if it is so, then that work is to be tested by fire.

As I pointed out in my last post–and I think I made a reasonable, clear case of this–the text says absolutely nothing–zero–about work done outside of the context of building on the foundation. It is that specific kind of work that Paul has in view here. If you want to see penance and repentance as part of that work, you will need to show that those things are in fact ways that we build on the church’s foundation.

Wrong. Read this again: If the work is burned up the builder will suffer loss; the builder will be saved, but only as through fire (v.15)

Suffering loss does not involve suffering of pain or purification; it is the loss of a reward. The phrase “as through fire” could refer to purification of the person by fire, but I would doubt that view since Paul includes the word “as” (ὡς), thus indicating that the person is not actually going through fire. If you disagree, please explain why Paul would include that word “as.”

It is there alright. You just do not want to see it.

LOL It is not there; you just want to see it there. To see Purgatory in this passage is not to do exegesis but gross eisegesis. Someone who has never heard of Purgatory at all would not see it in this passage; only if you first learned of it, then embraced it, and then decided it must be in this passage, would you see it here. You first made up your mind that this passage teaches it, and now you’re trying to show that it does–but not through exegesis.

Folks, this passage does not convey the idea that people are being purified. It just doesn’t. Read the text honestly and objectively. I know it’s hard, but try to do so.