Purgatory?

[theistgal]

I wasn’t writing for me personally, but what the Orthodox Church has said.

Personally, I think that if the fire described is not a second fire, then perhaps it could be true.

Hi Marina - -

I don’t think the fire is a “second fire” as you are describing it. In fact, many of the saints (for example, Catherine of Siena) have described the fires of Purgatory as being the eternal fire of God’s love, which purifies and refines us.

 

[Marina14]

Hi Marina - -

I don’t think the fire is a “second fire” as you are describing it. In fact, many of the saints (for example, Catherine of Siena) have described the fires of Purgatory as being the eternal fire of God’s love, which purifies and refines us.

It sounds like St. Catherine of Siena’s thoughts are compatible with the Orthodox Teaching.

So when the CCC describes it as a “different” fire do they mean that it is a different experience of that same fire or literally a different fire?

It’s interesting to note that St. Photios the Great died in union with Rome. I read that somewhere this weekend. Interesting.

What’s up with Limbo? I was listening to a C.D. this morning of a Catholic Priest: Do Catholics Still Teach That? or Does the Catholic Church Still Teach That? Produced by St. Joseph’s Communication I think. Which has 3 C.D.'s one of Purgatory, the other on Predestination and the last on Limbo. He’s saying that yes, the Catholic Church still teachs Limbo and that basically all babies born without sin are condemned to live an eternity in Hell, in what he calls the “outter circle” of Hell where they will be eternally separated from the love of God, but will not suffer the pains of hell. They will be as happy as it is possible to be naturally. This rubs me the wrong way. What do you think?

 

[Alexius]

It sounds like St. Catherine of Siena’s thoughts are compatible with the Orthodox Teaching.

So when the CCC describes it as a “different” fire do they mean that it is a different experience of that same fire or literally a different fire?

It’s interesting to note that St. Photios the Great died in union with Rome. I read that somewhere this weekend. Interesting.

What’s up with Limbo? I was listening to a C.D. this morning of a Catholic Priest: Do Catholics Still Teach That? or Does the Catholic Church Still Teach That? Produced by St. Joseph’s Communication I think. Which has 3 C.D.'s one of Purgatory, the other on Predestination and the last on Limbo. He’s saying that yes, the Catholic Church still teachs Limbo and that basically all babies born without sin are condemned to live an eternity in Hell, in what he calls the “outter circle” of Hell where they will be eternally separated from the love of God, but will not suffer the pains of hell. They will be as happy as it is possible to be naturally. This rubs me the wrong way. What do you think?

He is incorrect as far as the Catholic Church is concerned (it is not an official teaching) and so is this teaching in my opinion. One can believe it I suppose, but I think it is wrong. As an easterner, I believe that an infant, though born into death, is not guilty before God, therefore the child is undeserving of hell. If one desires to believe that an infant is a sinner born of guilt, then I suppose it would make sense. Otherwise, the child is without fault and so would go to heaven by the mercy and justice of God. Just my thoughts…

Prayers and petitions,
Alexius

 

[manualman]

Limbo is a theological speculation, not a doctrine.

It was recently pointed out to me that Ludwig Ott wrote an extremely useful reference book that explains the level of authoritativeness of most catholic teachings.

amazon.com/review/product/0895550091/ref=dp_top_cm_cr_acr_txt/105-8751835-8003659?%5Fencoding=UTF8&showViewpoints=1

Thus, eastern catholics (or any catholic properly instructed) have never been OBLIGATED to embrace the concept of Limbo.

 

[Marina14]

Limbo is a theological speculation, not a doctrine.

It was recently pointed out to me that Ludwig Ott wrote an extremely useful reference book that explains the level of authoritativeness of most catholic teachings.

amazon.com/review/product/0895550091/ref=dp_top_cm_cr_acr_txt/105-8751835-8003659?%5Fencoding=UTF8&showViewpoints=1

Thus, eastern catholics (or any catholic properly instructed) have never been OBLIGATED to embrace the concept of Limbo.

Okay. The bookstore which sold this CD set to me prides itself on not offering anything which is not officially Catholic. They tell me that St. Joseph’s Communication is the same way. Perhaps this slipped through the cracks, you think?

The priest quoted many of the Catholic Church Councils and Catholic Early Church Fathers which supported Limbo, so he sounded legit. Just what he was saying seemed quite off base. But then that was my opinion which has been molded with the Eastern perspective of Original Sin and it’s consequences.

He did say that although a baby born may not have any personal sin, the stain of original sin was enough to prevent the baby from experiencing the joys of Heaven because the baby didn’t do anything to deserve Heaven…I was thinking that no one deserves Heaven. But that’s just me.

I’ll look up the book you mention, sounds interesting.

 

[Alexius]

The priest quoted many of the Catholic Church Councils and Catholic Early Church Fathers which supported Limbo, so he sounded legit. Just what he was saying seemed quite off base. But then that was my opinion which has been molded with the Eastern perspective of Original Sin and it’s consequences.

He did say that although a baby born may not have any personal sin, the stain of original sin was enough to prevent the baby from experiencing the joys of Heaven because the baby didn’t do anything to deserve Heaven…I was thinking that no one deserves Heaven. But that’s just me.

I’ll look up the book you mention, sounds interesting.

I see little difference between the Latin position as stated in the CCC and the Eastern understanding of Original Sin other than terms and how the IC applies. As you are well aware, the consequences of the sin of Adam and Eve are death and corruption. Of course, no one accually deserves heaven, but the argument goes two ways. An infant has neither done anything to gain heaven, nor to lose it. Unless you believe in some inherent guilt of the infant’s soul, there is no reason for condemnation. Also, notice how Limbo is still in hell…

Prayers and petitions,
Alexius

 

[Marina14]

I see little difference between the Latin position as stated in the CCC and the Eastern understanding of Original Sin other than terms and how the IC applies. As you are well aware, the consequences of the sin of Adam and Eve are death and corruption. Of course, no one accually deserves heaven, but the argument goes two ways. An infant has neither done anything to gain heaven, nor to lose it. Unless you believe in some inherent guilt of the infant’s soul, there is no reason for condemnation. Also, notice how Limbo is still in hell…

Prayers and petitions,
Alexius

So you as a Greek Catholic…what’s your verdict? Limbo is to be believed or not to be believed? What has your Church taught you in regards to this?

As a Greek Orthodox myself, I trust in the Mercy of Jesus Christ all of the unborn and infants that die without first being baptized.

According to this Fr. Collins who is the Roman Catholic priest at Mother Angelica’s Monastery/Convent says in his C.D. that these innocent babies are condemned to spend an eternity in Limbo which is in Hell.

 

[Vincent]

Limbo is to be believed or not to be believed? What has your Church taught you in regards to this?

I recommend the International Theological Commission’s recent report on Limbo.

In summary,

• “This present text was approved in forma specifica by the members of the Commission, and was subsequently submitted to its President, Cardinal William Levada who, upon receiving the approval of the Holy father in an audience granted on January 19, 2007, approved the text for publication.”
• “[Limbo] remains therefore a possible theological hypothesis.”

Further in the text, it states that limbo “remains a possible theological opinion”. Yet,

• “The conclusion of this study is that there are theological and liturgical reasons to hope that infants who die without baptism may be saved and brought into eternal happiness, even if there is not an explicit teaching on this question found in Revelation.”
  While it’s a bit lengthy, I recommend reading the document in its entirety.

And now back to Purgatory.

 

[ForeverAdam]

Unless you believe in some inherent guilt of the infant’s soul, there is no reason for condemnation. Also, notice how Limbo is still in hell…

For one to enter heaven they must be filled with sanctifying grace. Even if infants are born without personal guilt (which is the Roman Catholic teaching) they are conceived with a lack of sanctifying grace, and thus cannot technically enter heaven. If infants still go to heaven without baptism, their lack of sanctifying grace will have to be filled in some other manner. However, to argue that a lack of sanctifying grace is not enough to keep one out of heaven is not compatible with traditional Roman Catholic teaching. Besides, the fact that Limbo is part of Hell only means that the occupants of limbo are not able to experience heaven. This leaves those in Limbo with no pain of loss, as heaven was something their soul was never capable of inheriting or fathoming in the first place. Conclusion: Limbo is a well-founded theological opinion in Catholicism.

God bless,

Adam

 

[peary]

I thought the Pope retired the whole Purgatory premise…What is the origin of that by the way? I was curious. And one thread spoke of the Holy Souls of Purgatory and the intercession they provide us with. Can some one expound in a way that a Bible-believing, Spirit-filled believer might be able to wrap his mind around?

The belief that one’s soul may go through a period of purgation or purification after death is a solid Church teaching. The pope NEVER ‘retired’ it because He CAN’T! I think you are referring to the theological construct known as LIMBO, a spiritual concept where unbaptized babies go if they die and where they will experience a state of natural happiness without the beatific vision of God.

The origin of a soul’s purification after death was also a main tenet of Judaism and is still believed by orthodox jews throughout the world. Is it a mandatory experience? No. That depends on the disposition of the person who has died. Most probably the early Christians (who were practicing Jews) brought the belief with them into the Church. It has been a solid Church teaching since the very beginning.

 

[AllSaints1631]

I thought the Pope retired the whole Purgatory premise…What is the origin of that by the way? I was curious. And one thread spoke of the Holy Souls of Purgatory and the intercession they provide us with. Can some one expound in a way that a Bible-believing, Spirit-filled believer might be able to wrap his mind around?

I haven’t found enough evidence to sustain the existence of Purgatory as defined by the church. I believe that life progresses after one’s death not in Heaven or Hell yet, but in so far as a place of purification, I cannot bring myself into this belief.

 

[Marina14]

I recommend the International Theological Commission’s recent report on Limbo.

In summary,

• “This present text was approved in forma specifica by the members of the Commission, and was subsequently submitted to its President, Cardinal William Levada who, upon receiving the approval of the Holy father in an audience granted on January 19, 2007, approved the text for publication.”
• “[Limbo] remains therefore a possible theological hypothesis.”

Further in the text, it states that limbo “remains a possible theological opinion”. Yet,

• “The conclusion of this study is that there are theological and liturgical reasons to hope that infants who die without baptism may be saved and brought into eternal happiness, even if there is not an explicit teaching on this question found in Revelation.”
  While it’s a bit lengthy, I recommend reading the document in its entirety.

And now back to Purgatory.

I was asking you this as you claim to be an Eastern Catholic - yet you’re quoting to me from a Roman Catholic Cardinal. In the Eastern Catholic Churches I’ve attended Limbo is believed to be a made up piece of bad theology. I was wondering from your Church’s, Eastern Catholic, hierachy what had been taught to you. By your response, are you saying that they say nothing and have referred you to Western Catholics? Just a little confused here.

 

[Marina14]

For one to enter heaven they must be filled with sanctifying grace. Even if infants are born without personal guilt (which is the Roman Catholic teaching) they are conceived with a lack of sanctifying grace, and thus cannot technically enter heaven. If infants still go to heaven without baptism, their lack of sanctifying grace will have to be filled in some other manner. However, to argue that a lack of sanctifying grace is not enough to keep one out of heaven is not compatible with traditional Roman Catholic teaching. Besides, the fact that Limbo is part of Hell only means that the occupants of limbo are not able to experience heaven. This leaves those in Limbo with no pain of loss, as heaven was something their soul was never capable of inheriting or fathoming in the first place. Conclusion: Limbo is a well-founded theological opinion in Catholicism.

God bless,

Adam

Isn’t it possible that if God did not give an infant sanctifiying grace via Baptisim, the ordinary means of obtaining it initially, that He could choose to give the infant sanctifiying grace via extraordinary means?

Okay, we all know that God has the power to prevent each miscarriage and each infant death, but choses not to intercede in most cases - by the Catholic view of this (Limbo which is in Hell), it’s saying in effect that God is choosing that all the unborn who die (abortion/miscarriage/etc.) and all the infants who die without baptisim to be condemned to Hell for all eternity.
God is then taking away all of those persons (little babies) free will - they have not been given the opportunity to practice their free will as they were killed before they were given the opportunity to use it. This Catholic view doesn’t mesh with God being Love and all Merciful?
Taking this theology a bit further - perhaps God, being All-Knowing, knows that if they were given life, then they would have chosen spiritual death (Hell) on their own…if this were true, then Catholics will need to stop being Pro-Life/Anti-Abortion. This sounds dramatic, but it’s the only conclusion based on this belief in Limbo.

 

[holy_wood]

I haven’t found enough evidence to sustain the existence of Purgatory as defined by the church. I believe that life progresses after one’s death not in Heaven or Hell yet, but in so far as a place of purification, I cannot bring myself into this belief.

Unless your free of temptation right now you will go to Purgatory.

 

[Marina14]

Unless your free of temptation right now you will go to Purgatory.

You mean free of all sin (even Jesus was given temptations) and of all sinful habits and sinful passions which are like a cancer eating away at the soul.
To enter Heaven we must be free from all sin…Orthodox see this as something which can only be done while here on Earth - hence the many monks/nuns/saints who have master this while living on earth glow with the uncreated light of God (similar to Moses of the Old Testament). This takes years of struggling just as St. Paul describes in the New Testament.
Catholics on the other hand state that you can still be purified of these sins, sinful attachments and effects of sin after this life in Purgatory…it’s like a second opportunity for those who struggled in this life, but didn’t reach the ultimate goal (they found themselves at the time of death free of mortal sins, but not venial sins).
Purgatory is a merciful idea; although, the Orthodox Saints warn against it based on the fruits of the belief…many, many Catholics don’t try to purify themselves fully in this life because they have for their goal: Purgatory rather than Heaven. (I over hear Catholics conversating about this very thing all the time!) This ultimate leads many to perdition.
If you aim for Heaven and miss, Catholics say you end up in Purgatory; however if you aim for Purgatory and miss…yikes!
I think that if understood properly, the idea of Purgatory is not an evil doctrine, but a merciful one…but is it true?
If it’s not, what are the consequences for those who think it is?

 

[slybry]

I thought the Pope retired the whole Purgatory premise…What is the origin of that by the way? I was curious. And one thread spoke of the Holy Souls of Purgatory and the intercession they provide us with. Can some one expound in a way that a Bible-believing, Spirit-filled believer might be able to wrap his mind around?

I think it’s best to define Purgatory first and then apply scripture for support.

The doctrine of Purgatory, as I understand it, maintains three principles 1) purification takes place after death 2) There is some form of suffering 3) Prayers can aid those being purified. It’s not defined to a space or time and the Catholic Church does not pretend to know if it is indeed a place. The purification could indeed be instantaneous. The Catechism is very loose in its definition:

a. 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.[604] 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:[605] 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.[606]

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.”[607] 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.[608] 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.[609]

Scriptural Evidence:

a. Other places/states could exist other than Heaven and Hell
1 Pet. 3:19
1 Pet. 4:6
Mt. 12:31-32

b. We are prone to sin
1 Jn. 1:10
Rom. 3:23
Heb. 12:1

c. Nothing imperfect may enter into Heaven
Rev. 21:27
Mt. 5:48
Heb. 12:14
1 Cor. 13:12

d. Therefore, we must be purified before entering into Heaven
Heb. 12:23

e. Purification after death
1 Cor. 3:10-15

f. Sanctification involves suffering
Heb. 12:10-11
Rom. 5:3-5

g. Praying for the remission of sin
2 Tim 1:16-18
2 Macc. 12:40-45

Historicity:

a. Ancient Jews believed in a purification process and prayed for the dead
Today Orthodox Jews pray the Mourner’s Kaddish for 11 months after one’s death and on the anniversary of the burial

Kaddish: from Aramaic qaddiš, holy, sacred, from qədaš, to become holy, be sacred​

b. Early Church Fathers and Christians alike believed in Purgatory and prayed for the dead
Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine by John Henry Newman

“…some notion of suffering, or disadvantage, or punishment after this life, in the case of the faithful departed, or other vague forms of the doctrine of Purgatory, has in its favour almost a consensus of the four first ages of the Church, though some Fathers state it with far greater openness and decision than others. It is, as far as words go, the confession of St. Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, St. Perpetua, St. Cyprian, Origen, Lactantius, St. Hilary, St. Cyril of Jerusalem, St. Ambrose, St. Basil, St. Gregory of Nazianzus, and of Nyssa, St. Chrysostom, St. Jerome, St. Paulinus, and St. Augustine.” newmanreader.org/works/development/introduction.html#protestantism
​

 

[ForeverAdam]

Isn’t it possible that if God did not give an infant sanctifiying grace via Baptisim, the ordinary means of obtaining it initially, that He could choose to give the infant sanctifiying grace via extraordinary means?

He could do so. However, we can only hope for this possibility. There is no guarantee that he will provide this sanctifying grace. What we do know is that a lack of sanctifying grace keeps one out of heaven. And baring any other certainties, we should focus on what he do know and thus limbo is a true and authentic belief in Catholicism.

Taking this theology a bit further - perhaps God, being All-Knowing, knows that if they were given life, then they would have chosen spiritual death (Hell) on their own…if this were true, then Catholics will need to stop being Pro-Life/Anti-Abortion. This sounds dramatic, but it’s the only conclusion based on this belief in Limbo.

An alternative conclusion based on a lack of belief in limbo is that we should stop being pro-life/anti-abortion because the little babies killed by abortion go straight to heaven and don’t miss out either by going to limbo or possibly becoming serious sinners on earth. At least with a belief in limbo one would still have some incentive to save little baby lives. See, it works both ways.

God bless,

Adam

P.S. I feel kind of funny arguing limbo as an Orthodox Christian. Lol. However, I think a good case can be made the idea that limbo corresponds well with traditional Roman Catholic doctrine, even if it is foreign to Orthodoxy.

 

[De_Maria]

He could do so. However, we can only hope for this possibility. There is no guarantee that he will provide this sanctifying grace. What we do know is that a lack of sanctifying grace keeps one out of heaven. And baring any other certainties, we should focus on what he do know and thus limbo is a true and authentic belief in Catholicism.

Limbo has always and only been speculation.

We know the following:

Heaven and Hell are permanent.
People with mortal sin on their soul go to hell.

Children who have not been baptized do not have any sin on their soul. They have a fallen nature which they have had no opportunity to overcome. This is a temporal effect of the Original Sin committed by our first parents.

Now, there is a mechanism by which God removes sin and the temporal effects of sin from people’s souls. Purgatory.

So you have a choice:

1. You can believe that God condemns innocent children to hell because unbaptized children will not be permitted in heaven.
2. You can believe in a permanent state of being which is not taught in either Tradition or Scripture and which has never been taught as doctrine by the Church and which still condemns innocent children to an eternity apart from God. The very definition of an existence in hell.
3. Or you can believe that God will purify these innocent souls in Purgatory so that they may also see Him in eternity.

Besides, perhaps the one thing these innocents haven’t had the opportunity to do is to suffer. Purgatory would permit them to suffer and be numbered amongst God’s children:

                                            [Hebrews 12:7](http://www.whereinthebible.org/index.php?bookId=65&chapterId=12&verseId=7&page=1#x)
                                             Persevere under discipline. God dealeth with you as with his sons; for what son is there, whom the father doth not correct? 


                                             [Romans 8:17](http://www.whereinthebible.org/index.php?bookId=52&chapterId=8&verseId=17&page=1#x)
                    
                     And if sons, heirs also; heirs indeed of God, and joint heirs with Christ: yet so, if we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified with him.

An alternative conclusion based on a lack of belief in limbo is that we should stop being pro-life/anti-abortion because the little babies killed by abortion go straight to heaven and don’t miss out either by going to limbo or possibly becoming serious sinners on earth. At least with a belief in limbo one would still have some incentive to save little baby lives. See, it works both ways.

You forgot that murder is a mortal sin. Abortion is murder.

God bless,

Adam

And you as well.

Sincerely,

De Maria

 

[AllSaints1631]

Unless your free of temptation right now you will go to Purgatory.

I do not believe in a purification process as it would either greatly diminish or completely nullify the sacrifice of the Christ made for sinners. Even Mary said, “I rejoice in God my Savior” which proves that even she needed the saving grace of our Lord’s ultimate sacrifice. Pretty powerful stuff!

 

[Alexius]

So you as a Greek Catholic…what’s your verdict? Limbo is to be believed or not to be believed? What has your Church taught you in regards to this?

As a Greek Orthodox myself, I trust in the Mercy of Jesus Christ all of the unborn and infants that die without first being baptized.

According to this Fr. Collins who is the Roman Catholic priest at Mother Angelica’s Monastery/Convent says in his C.D. that these innocent babies are condemned to spend an eternity in Limbo which is in Hell.

I believe as the Orthodox do. Limbo is outside of my tradition and unnecessary…

Prayers and petitions,
Alexius