Purgatory - Help me refute this

[Cattitude]

I am in a discussion on another site about Purgatory and one posters gave this link:

Historical Purgatory and Prayers for the Dead to argue against it.

The link tries to say that Tertullian in the Treatise of the Soul “denies that the departed saints undergo any suffering”. However, this catholic.com/thisrock/1997/9711frs.asp"]link along with Scripture Catholic.com use the same writing from Tertullian to support the doctrine. Can anyone help me understand plainly what Tertullian is actually saying to help me refute this claim?

It then goes on to say that in Constitutions of the Holy Apostles 61 (its actually 41 or XLI under section 4) it says to pray for the dead for forgiveness and mercy, but “this not the purpose of prayer for those in purgatory — those in purgatory have already been forgiven.” However, Mr McLaughlin fails to provide another reason why this document would recommend such prayers. Any other thoughts on this?

Thanks!

 

[Iron_Donkey]

It seems like a rather vague argument against, to be honest.

“I doubt that many Catholic theologians would argue that all the church fathers believed in prayers for the dead and in purgatory. That would be a rather odd assertion, given the facts that the church fathers were not entirely united on every point of doctrine, and that most of them never wrote about either subject.” seems like a way of not answering the question (though it does inadvertently point at the need for a magesterium, if he is correct.)

As for the rest, he quotes people saying heaven is good and hell is bad.

“prayers for the departed are instructed to be prayed in order that they might be forgiven and receive God’s mercy. This is not the purpose of prayer for those in purgatory — those in purgatory have already been forgiven” is not exactly correct either. Those in purgatory have been judged (and forgiven and so are headed to heaven) but the temporal consequences have not - otherwise they would not be in purgatory. Those are what prayers for the dead are aimed at.

A final thought - The fires of Hell, Purgatory, and Heaven (all said to exist somewhere, I’m sure) all have God as their origin. It might be possible to say that they are all the same fire, if being used for different purposes - for the condemned the fire burns evil (and since souls are eternal and condemned souls are entirely evil, this is not likely to end any time soon), for the suffering in purgatory, the fire purifies - burning out what is still bad and allowing healing, and for those done with purgatory, it would be a the source of all that light that everyone’s always going on about. (Or I could just be wrong, but even so I don’t see a problem with the few things he bothered to quote.)

 

[Belloc_Fan]

Tertullian clearly argues for suffering in purgatory. Here’s how the argument goes:

• Tertullian begins by arguing that all souls await judgment in Hades. He argues this on the basis of Luke 17.
• Given this, Tertullian argues that the souls in Hades experience consolation and/or punishment.
• He then imagines the two arguments his opponents will likely raise – first, “You reply: Because in the judgment of God its matter ought to be sure and safe, nor should there be any inkling beforehand of the award of His sentence.” Second, they’ll argue that judgment cannot occur until physical resurrection.

**The First Argument: Should Souls Experience a Foretaste of Judgment Immediately?
*** To the first of these, Tertullian then notes that there’s no such thing as “soul sleep,” because even when the body sleeps, the soul is awake.

• Then he notes that it’s ridiculous to assume that nothing is done in Hades. So the souls are awake, and experience something - either pleasure or pain.
• It would be absurd and unjust to favor the damned with pleasure while they await judgment: “Now really, would it not be the highest possible injustice, even in Hades, if all were to be still well with the guilty even there, and not well with the righteous even yet?”
• This would be an offense against hope: “What, would you have hope be still more confused after death? Would you have it mock us still more with uncertain expectation?” So the first argument of his opponents is wrong. There should be a foretaste of Heaven or Hell while souls await judgment.

The Second Argument: Must Punishment Await the Bodily Resurrection and Final Judgment?

• Souls often experience suffering or joy without the body experiencing the same thing: “How often, without any pain to the body, is the soul alone tortured by ill-temper, and anger, and fatigue, and very often unconsciously, even to itself? How often, too, on the other hand, amidst bodily suffering, does the soul seek out for itself some furtive joy, and withdraw for the moment from the body’s importunate society?”
• So there’s no reason that the foretaste of suffering or joy must wait until the Final Judgment and physical resurrection.
• Further, "if such sensations occur at its will during life, how much rather may they not happen after death by the judicial appointment of God! " So not only can they occur, but they do occur after death.
• Tertullian then looks to Matthew 5:28 to prove that your soul can sin without your body actually participating. So punishing the soul absent the body fits the crime.

Conclusion

• Scripture proves that there is “compensatory discipline” after Death, but before entrance into Heaven: "In short, inasmuch as we understand the prison pointed out in the Gospel to be Hades, Matthew 5:25 and as we also interpret the uttermost farthing to mean the very smallest offense which has to be recompensed there before the resurrection, no one will hesitate to believe that the soul undergoes in Hades some compensatory discipline, without prejudice to the full process of the resurrection, when the recompense will be administered through the flesh besides. "
• The Holy Spirit confirms this opinion: “This point the Paraclete has also pressed home on our attention in most frequent admonitions, whenever any of us has admitted the force of His words from a knowledge of His promised spiritual disclosures.”

I should note that Tertullian’s understanding of Purgatory is flawed. We believe in immediate (specific) judgment upon death. So while Tertullian is right in his conclusions, he seems to be wrong on some of the specifics.

 

[dmar198]

I am in a discussion on another site about Purgatory and one posters gave this link:

Historical Purgatory and Prayers for the Dead to argue against it.

The link tries to say that Tertullian in the Treatise of the Soul “denies that the departed saints undergo any suffering”. However, this catholic.com/thisrock/1997/9711frs.asp"]link

along with Scripture Catholic.com use the same writing from Tertullian to support the doctrine. Can anyone help me understand plainly what Tertullian is actually saying to help me refute this claim?

It then goes on to say that in Constitutions of the Holy Apostles 61 (its actually 41 or XLI under section 4) it says to pray for the dead for forgiveness and mercy, but “this not the purpose of prayer for those in purgatory — those in purgatory have already been forgiven.” However, Mr McLaughlin fails to provide another reason why this document would recommend such prayers. Any other thoughts on this?

Thanks! The above poster’s detailed analysis of Tertullian’s thoughts on Purgatory is spot-on. Tertullian supports our doctrine of purgatory by believing in temporal punishments after death for those destined for heaven, for their sins.

As for the Apostolic Constitutions, those support Purgatory too; for prayers for the dead certainly are very often for the forgiveness of the venial sins of the souls in purgatory, since venial sins sometimes follow us after death, if they aren’t forgiven in this life. Plus, even if venial sins were all forgiven prior to death, it would not follow that the Apostolic Constitutions do not support purgatory; for the Apostolic Constitutions do not pray that God only forgive the dead their sins, but that He forgive their sins, and be merciful to them; and this mercy which they pray for, could be, that He remit their temporal punishments, and forgive them. So the Apostolic Constitutions support praying for the dead that God (1) forgive their sins and (2) be merciful to the dead, which we do, by praying for the remission of their venial sins, and for the remission of the temporal punishments due to their sins.

So much for his argument from the Apostolic Constitutions. But he also quotes Hippolytus against purgatory, and I do not think he has him on his side. Hippolytus says there are punishments for the unjust, before the final Judgment, and awards for the just; there is no denial of purgatory here. And Hippolytus says that there is no “fierce heat…nor thorn” for the just, before they enter heaven, but this is not a denial of Purgatory either. Purgatory’s main punishment consists in this: that the purged know full well what it would mean to be in full communion with God, but are deprived of it for a time. It is probable that there are really “painful” punishments as well, but that is not a certainty, (I don’t think it is anyway,) so it wouldn’t follow, from the fact that Hippolytus denied extreme heat or thorns for the just, after death – it would not follow from this that he denied Purgatory, which he could have understood simply as a deprivation of full communion with God, knowing the beatitude which that would entail.