Purgatory

[fcfahs]

Thank you, James, for your very conscientious and well articulated reply. However, your reply seems to only echo what I, as a “cradle Catholic,” have been hearing my entire life.

What I am looking for are the actual Scriptural teachings which led The Church Fathers to deduce what they did about afterlife and formulate the very detailed and definitive descriptions of purgatory that I read here.

Fortunately we Catholics can simply just point to the CC and papal rulings with the confidence that the Church has already done all the work in justifying it for us.

This worked fine for me, as a child. But now, with reasoning and deductive strengths of a mathematician by profession and software engineer by trade, my intellect requires more. I want to see the actual analysis and reasoning behind these doctrinal calls, as well as the Scriptural sources drawn upon. Indeed, when I turn from the Catechism and look directly at Scripture, I read:

Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. (1 Thess 5:21)

These [those of Berea] were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word [from Paul] with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so. (Acts 17:11)

For he [Apollos] mightily convinced the Jews openly, shewing by the scriptures, that Jesus was Christ. (Acts 18:28)

After all, the Catechism is only an interpretive summary of Scriptural teaching, and it rarely (if ever) points to the actual Scriptural renderings which support (much less prove) the doctrines it professes.

As for my having total reliance of the teachings of The Church Fathers (who were clearly not in full agreement with each other), I again argue that these teachings were only interpretations of Scriptural writings and do not enjoy the inherent infallibility of the Scripture writings themselves. And, that’s exactly why I’m on this forum - to learn the actual justification for and reasoning behind the doctrines of my church.

Just as repentance and faith are needed for the remission of eternal penalties, so they are needed for the remission of temporal penalties. Penance (and purgatory) are the very things that are used to remove the tendency, or concupiscence arising from a familiarity with past sin to compel us to sin again.

Again (as in my post #73), I ask that you to consider the man sentenced to 90 days in jail for public violence, say for damaging someone’s property out of rage. Once the offender has replaced (or reimbursed the person) for the property damage, why is a jail sentence also necessary and what purpose does it serve? First, It temporarily quarantines a potential threat to society. Secondly, It provides the offender time and an environment for him to be “born again of the spirit” and amend his violent ways. Spankings, beatings, and other physical torture can also serve to reverse a persons bad behavior, by establishing in the person a mental association between the bad behavior and pain. But in this case the amended behavior is for reasons of pain avoidance, rather than love and a desire to be righteous.

Notwithstanding, wouldn’t an early “bail-out,” made possible through the intervention of our friends, only serve to thwart the underlying objectives of a jail sentence (or purgatory)?

Thanks again for your insights,
Frank

 

[fcfahs]

At the end of his Homily on love and marriage, he said, “Remember! Marriage is for ALL Eternity!” This scandalized both me and my husband and caused us great distress.

Hi Lenore.

This is what Jesus himself had to say about the matter, in **Matthew 22: 23-30 **…

The same day came to him the Sadducees, which say that there is no resurrection, and asked him [Jesus], saying, Master, Moses said, If a man die, having no children, his brother shall marry his wife, and raise up seed unto his brother. Now there were with us seven brethren: and the first, when he had married a wife, deceased, and, having no issue, left his wife unto his brother: Likewise the second also, and the third, unto the seventh. And last of all the woman died also. Therefore in the resurrection whose wife shall she be of the seven? for they all had her. Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God. **For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.

** Notwithstanding, I think you can be pretty sure that, in Heaven, there will be know remembrance of the things or people or relationships of this world. Remember, Heaven is promised to be a state of perfect happiness. And, I fail to see how a woman taken to heaven could realize perfect happiness, knowing that her loving husband of 50 years or children of her whomb never made it through the “Pearly Gates” and are now spending an eternity in Hell.

Best Regards,
Frank

 

[CentralFLJames]

Hi Lenore.

This is what Jesus himself had to say about the matter, in **Matthew 22: 23-30 **…

The same day came to him the Sadducees, which say that there is no resurrection, and asked him [Jesus], saying, Master, Moses said, If a man die, having no children, his brother shall marry his wife, and raise up seed unto his brother. Now there were with us seven brethren: and the first, when he had married a wife, deceased, and, having no issue, left his wife unto his brother: Likewise the second also, and the third, unto the seventh. And last of all the woman died also. Therefore in the resurrection whose wife shall she be of the seven? for they all had her. Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God. **For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.

** Notwithstanding, I think you can be pretty sure that, in Heaven, there will be know remembrance of the things or people or relationships of this world. Remember, Heaven is promised to be a state of perfect happiness. **And, I fail to see how a woman taken to heaven could realize perfect happiness, knowing that her loving husband of 50 years or children of her whomb never made it through the “Pearly Gates” and are now spending an eternity in Hell. **

Best Regards,
Frank

That last bit I have mused on at length Frank. It’s an interesting notion that I have considered myself.But I don’t think it’s really rooted in scripture. I take in faith from the revealed character and nature of God that He has some way of “making it right” irrespective of what happens to loved ones. This whole area is a separate topic onto itself but it begs the question if there is an implied scriptural basis or a yet to be revealed truth that the marriage contract extends beyond the confines of oneness in flesh to join as it where “at the wing” the spiritual essential relational merits of husband and wife as a marriage entity itself? I see plausible rationale in giving the sacrament of marriage for the very purpose for developing a teamed relationship that works to benefit husband and wife to gain them entrance to heaven and possibly share in the beatific vision in that special relational context as well as separately.

It’s intriguing to think of and if I am tempted to develop a thesis to see where it contradicts or reinforces any known scriptural truths. We have no way of even imagining what God extends to the Holy Souls in Heaven through the beatific vision. I’d imagine if we can imagine a happy though here then in heaven it must be more than even we can imagine.

I see potential in the metaphor of The Church as Christ’s bride and also as the body of Christ. I suppose one could see how God would subordinate in heaven the marriage relationship for the greater good and communion of the saints if necessary. But we have the compelling evidence that God currently respects in heaven all the relationships that existed on earth between Jesus, Joseph and Mary for example since we appeal for intercessions in those relational roles (what good Jewish son can deny anything his mother asks in love?). But of course a contradiction can also be found in the fact that a large number of people go to Hell where some members of a same earthly family go instead to Heaven. Unless this is the severity of the final judgement where collections of relationships are judged (nations, people etc.) I do not think God holds individuals to the gravity of the groups they belong to unless they are committed to the errors or sins of that group by free choice. Alternatively it seems very consistent that God does extend the merits the the group (e.g. The Church) to individuals when his Justice permits him to do that for the benefit of the individual.

So in the case of one spouse being condemned and one “making it” God must find a way to separate or divorce the pain of the loss from his saints with an overwhelming inflow of grace and happiness that somehow completely severs the impression of the relationship. That implies there was no “good” in the relationship attributed to the other person.

This is where I suppose some of the false doctrines develop the notion of God anhilating the souls of the wicked at death to make it as if they did not ever exist.

We also have no insight into what happens in the new age after God defeats all evil and saves the souls destined to be His. It begs the question too if there is a recursive salvation that operates to remove the very notion or impression of evil from the memory of creation in the new heaven and the new creation? Thoughts for later…

All very theologically and spiritually Interesting stuff.

James

 

[rich1lenore]

Hi fcfahs and thank you for your reply. I do wonder the same thing sometimes: how happy would I be in Heaven knowing that a relative or loved one has gone to Hell? I do agree with James that God will somehow make it right, but while we are here on earth, we simply can have no concept of the wonders that await us in Heaven.

As to your question about Scriptural references, here is a link to New Advent with supporting links from both Scripture and Sacred Tradition: newadvent.org/cathen/12575a.htm.

I have also seen a Companion Guide to the CCC at EWTN.com bookstore, which has both supporting scripture references and supporting Sacred Tradition teaching for each point in the CCC.

Thanks again!

 

[rich1lenore]

Hi again James, yes that’s the pamphlet I have, but again it doesn’t really explain WHY the Holy Souls cannot pray for themselves. Any ideas?

Thank you for that prayer too, I was actually getting ready to Google for it after someone else mentioned it to me.

Lenore

 

[fcfahs]

This whole area is a separate topic onto itself but it begs the question if there is an implied scriptural basis or a yet to be revealed truth that the marriage contract extends beyond the confines of oneness in flesh to join as it where “at the wing” the spiritual essential relational merits of husband and wife as a marriage entity itself? I see plausible rationale in …

James,

I applaud your impeccable rhetoric and creative imagination, with regard to how things might be in Heaven. But, when we already have an unambiguous answer to Lenore’s question, directly from the mouth of Jesus, there’s no reason to speculate.

In Matthew 22:29-30, we have the Sadducees asking Jesus, "In the resurrection whose wife shall she be of the seven? for they all had her[as a wife]***." *** And Jesus in no uncertain terms told them, "In the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven." *

Best Regards,
Frank
*

 

[CentralFLJames]

James,

I applaud your impeccable rhetoric and creative imagination, with regard to how things might be in Heaven. But, when we already have an unambiguous answer to Lenore’s question, directly from the mouth of Jesus, there’s no reason to speculate.

In Matthew 22:29-30, we have the Sadducees asking Jesus, "In the resurrection whose wife shall she be of the seven? for they all had her[as a wife]***." *** And Jesus in no uncertain terms told them, "In the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven." *

Best Regards,
Frank
*
Frank, I find in “interesting” how you on one hand embrace a fundamental view of scripture when it suits a particular perspective you hold but then reject that same basis as not worthy of your “mature” intellect in other areas such as we discuss here about purgatory. Are you playing devil’s advocate? If not then why have an inconsistent preference here?

Also, do you imagine that the relationships of “Father”, “Son”, “Mother”, “Brother”, “Sister”, “Child” lost their human or spiritual semantic value when souls ascend to heaven as if neutered both in gender as well as in relationship? Do you imagine that Jesus meant to imply by that statement that God somehow especially singles out only the role of “Husband” and “Wife” from all others to terminate the relational linkage and the others still stand? Do you imagine that Jesus when he speak to us in terms lauding and meriting “His mother” that he only does so to relate to us as humans here on earth in a comfortable lingua-franca? But that in heaven there is no such concept? Would it not be divine disingenuousness to teach with parables that express a semantic of “fatherly love” where there is no such actual similar relationship in heaven in fact?

Please elaborate from a context of “adult” enlightenment rather than from a child-like adherence to literal meaning if you will.

James

 

[fcfahs]

Frank, I find in “interesting” how you on one hand embrace a fundamental view of scripture when it suits a particular perspective you hold but then reject that same basis as not worthy of your “mature” intellect in other areas such as we discuss here about purgatory. Are you playing devil’s advocate? If not then why have an inconsistent preference here?

Also, do you imagine that the relationships of “Father”, “Son”, “Mother”, “Brother”, “Sister”, “Child” lost their human or spiritual semantic value when souls ascend to heaven as if neutered both in gender as well as in relationship? Do you imagine that Jesus meant to imply by that statement that God somehow especially singles out only the role of “Husband” and “Wife” from all others to terminate the relational linkage and the others still stand? Do you imagine that Jesus when he speak to us in terms lauding and meriting “His mother” that he only does so to relate to us as humans here on earth in a comfortable lingua-franca? But that in heaven there is no such concept? Would it not be divine disingenuousness to teach with parables that express a semantic of “fatherly love” where there is no such actual similar relationship in heaven in fact?

Please elaborate from a context of “adult” enlightenment rather than from a child-like adherence to literal meaning if you will.

James

James,

I hardly meant to set a sour note here, nor do I fancy myself as having a profoundly “mature” intellect. I simply feel that, after many years of schooling and work experience in the analytical sciences, I have at least developed the wherewithal to follow and scrutinize the Pope’s, or an Early Church Father’s, or YOUR analysis of Scripture, to ascertain whether or not it really supports a doctrine being promulgated.

Pure speculation about Heaven and/or God’s salvation plan is not only useless, but dangerous. Why? because, if spread widely enough and for long enough, it comes to be regarded as fact.

Notwithstanding, I have provided Scriptural support for MY claim about earthly unions (e.g. marriages) not continuing into Heaven. But, you have not (so far) provided core Scriptural material to support YOUR ideas. And, until you do, I have no choice but to regard your ideas as pure (and dangerous) speculation.

To be even more emphatic about this, I notice your link to St. Gertrude’s “revelation” from God promising her that for saying a 50-word prayer (even shorter that the Lord’s Prayer), a THOUSAND souls “at a pop” will be released from purgatory. And, I have indeed seen this same “revelation” cited elsewhere on this forum, as indisputable fact.

But, do not all Christian Churches (including the Catholic church) profess that divine revelation ceased with the writing of John’s book of Revelation (circa. 90 A.D)? To be sure, in Revelation 22:18-19, John warns,

*“For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book.
And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.”
*
Yet, what we have from St. Gertrude is, in no uncertain terms, new revelation! It is NOT simply a “coming to greater understanding” of some already-established revelation in Scripture. It’s entirely new revelation, and therefore speaks a lie to what we’ve already accepted on faith (i.e. the Sacred Scriptures, including the book of Revelation, are the infallible word of God).

Best Regards,
Frank

 

[CentralFLJames]

…
Yet, what we have from St. Gertrude is, in no uncertain terms, new revelation!
…
Frank

In the interest of staying on topic I’ll defer my speculation on what relationships are permitted to be perpetuated into heaven with the exception of stating unequivocally & as self-evident that only God’s Saints/Children/People/Church/Brothers/ Sisters/ Apostles/Disciples and all the other metaphors make it to heaven. My slight interest in exploring an exegesis that might be valid within the current cannon was meant to enrich my own depth of insight through a synergy of ideas. It was not intended as a mechanism of division or error.

I assume you know your adult CCD well enough to know that our faith is formed not only from scripture but also from revelation, tradition & teaching/interpretation. Tradition is extremely important since it is a living manifestation of Church revelation and belief expressed in the life actions of “The Church” itself. Living expresses belief & what is revealed to the soul and taken to heart. There is also has a place for private revelation as long as it defers to the authority of the area Bishop - but I honestly do not know what the rules are in deciding which Bishop has jurisdiction on the Internet (perhaps the one who presides over the dioceses nearest the web-server or database?).

I will confirm what I thought was implicit in my first rhetorical point that my “inspired idea” was speculative with respect to God permitting the unique relational aspects in the special love of marriage relationship (but of course not sanctioning the continuation of the intimate terms of the marriage obligation itself) to be respected in heaven. It is not all that dangerous if not presented as fact. Anyway, it wasn’t central to my main point anyway and now I regret bringing it up tangentially. But I will also add that to deny the memory of a special earthly relationship would imply that all souls in heaven retain no memory of the love shared for each other on earth! If personal relationships were denied then humanity would simply distill down to pure robotic and generic souls. As a Christian that just does not “feel right”. In fact it would be contradictory to the notion of Charity implied in loving God as well as neighbor & only be possible if everyone became “God” in heaven. But since we know each saint by name that can not be the case. And if you want to go down that later path about humanity all being God I won’t follow. That one I suspect is dangerous since it no doubt does lead to the same place Luther and some of the other heretics currently gnash their teeth.

As for St. Gertrude’s prayer being a lie (!!) since it came after John’s Book of Revelation. Please do note the tell tale signs of fundamentalism in your thinking. All revelations are post “Book of Revelation” just as much as all new church teaching and ex cathedra edicts and ecumenical edicts are. I suppose you’d have us believe that John’s warning in Revelation to not add anything to his writings composed in 95 AD (est). meant that the Holy Spirit was chained from revealing any more to The Church repository of knowledge and teaching? Or you would think that the early church committed blasphemy when it gave the benefit of the doubt that if should even form that dubious writing into its core cannon (many church father’s didn’t like it)? Does that idea sound silly when one stops to think that The Catholic Church actually constructed the Bible 300 years later in the Third Council of Carthage in 397AD? and put the Book of Revelation at the end!! The order of the NT Gospels and writings are not all that relevant. The bible does not read front to back like a chronological story book!! Please - let’s be sensible!!

Besides St. Gertrude The Great was extremely regarded and among the most educated saints in her time. So much so that Saint Teresa of Avila, the very first female designated “Doctor of the Church” ever (!!) had a strong devotion to St. Gertrude. That’s more than enough pedigree for me. And given the downside that if one is not really sincerely praying that the number released is less than 1000 is it so bad? Praying for the Church and her Holy Souls can NEVER be wrong! (That fact could well be spoken with a self evident ex cathedra authority onto itself.) I think you owe the poor souls in purgatory an apology if you scared anyone off about praying for them! These people suffer and rely on our help - it’s charity and an obligation of the laity to pray!

Also, so you know, the prayer (without the latter extension to souls on earth) was approved and recommended by M. Cardinal Pahiarca, Lisbon, Portugal March 4, 1936.

Either you follow the full suite of Catholic dogma which includes scripture, teaching and tradition AND you follow Church Authority or you follow your own ideas; or you are Protestant D). Which is it Frank? Come on fess up…

James

 

[fcfahs]

Either you follow the full suite of Catholic dogma which includes scripture, teaching and tradition AND you follow Church Authority or you follow your own ideas; or you are Protestant D). Which is it Frank? Come on fess up…
James

James,

This is what the New Advent has to say about Private Revelations:

There are two kinds of revelations: (1) universal revelations, which are contained in the Bible or in the depositum of Apostolic tradition transmitted by the Church. These ended with the preaching of the Apostles and must be believed by all; (2) particular or private revelations which are constantly occurring among Christians. When the Church approves private revelations, she declares only that there is nothing in them contrary faith or good morals, and that they may be read without danger or even with profit; no obligation is thereby imposed on the faithful to believe them.
Speaking of such revelations as (e.g.) those of St. Hildegard (approved in part by Eugenius III), St. Bridget (by Boniface IX), and St. Catherine of Siena (by Gregory XI) Benedict XIV says: “It is not obligatory nor even possible to give them the assent of Catholic faith, but only of human faith, in conformity with the dictates of prudence, which presents them to us as probable and worthy of pius belief)” (De canon., III, liii, xxii, II).
**
FYI** - St. Catherine of Sienna, another great Catholic theologian and mystic, denied the the doctrine of The Immaculate Conception after she had a personal revelation from Christ that Mary was conceived in original sin.

Should we believe in St. Catherine’s revelation, or not! IMHO, I think we should stick to what is public revelation (Scripture, Tradition + Magisterium), for on this can be stamped as irrefutable truth.

Please elaborate from a context of “adult” enlightenment rather than from a child-like adherence to literal meaning if you will.

If Jesus’ statement in Matthew 22:30, “In the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven” in not to be taken literally, but instead as a parable. Then what, in your opinion, is the spiritual meaning of this parable?

BTW, after your reply, I think we had better get back on topic or “kiss this thread good by.” After all, the thread monitors do have their upper-limit of patience.

Best Regards,
Frank

 

[CentralFLJames]

James,

This is what the New Advent has to say about Private Revelations:

There are two kinds of revelations: (1) universal revelations, which are contained in the Bible or in the depositum of Apostolic tradition transmitted by the Church. These ended with the preaching of the Apostles and must be believed by all; (2) particular or private revelations which are constantly occurring among Christians. When the Church approves private revelations, she declares only that there is nothing in them contrary faith or good morals, and that they may be read without danger or even with profit; no obligation is thereby imposed on the faithful to believe them.

If Jesus’ statement in Matthew 22:30, “In the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven” in not to be taken literally, but instead as a parable. Then what, in your opinion, is the spiritual meaning of this parable?

BTW, after your reply, I think we had better get back on topic or “kiss this thread good by.” After all, the thread monitors do have their upper-limit of patience.

Best Regards,
Frank

Frank,
I don’t have much more time to devote to this tangential thread. I’ll make just a few more comments. There is never any danger of adhering to a devotion or a thing that is privately revealed and publicly opined on from The Church as being non-contradictory to core cannon. The Church used to place the imprimatuer on books and writings from the laity but it became too burdensome for the offices of bishops to administer and still attend to all their other normal duties. That seal was sufficient authority (like a signet ring imprint from a prince of the church) to indicate that it was safe for consumption so to speak but was not necessary for God’s salvation. When an official ruling is given on such private revelations or practices the statement from some recognized authority (Pope, Cardinal, Bishop) usually contains the boiler plate escape clauses as you state above: It is not obligatory nor even possible to give them the assent of Catholic faith, but only of human faith, in conformity with the dictates of prudence, which presents them to us as probable and worthy of pious belief.

We only differ on the underlined bit. Where I prefer to be bold and optimistic in this area of fallible faith to give the benefit of doubt to the merit of the ruling as well as the life merit to the saint you prefer to be timid out of fear that it might be less than perfect. But in both cases it does not condemn us if it is right or wrong. But again in both cases why not be bold if there is a strong possibility (e.g. “probable and worthy”) it is spiritual truth when the rewards and benefits are so profound?! That’s personal choice - and a thing God has always respected. But in this case neither choice can lead to condemnation but both lead to salvation; one from a selfish perspective of self and the other one only risking to bring along another holy soul as a friend. I think Jesus always preferred boldness over timidness but let us each defer to the nature of our hearts.
Luke 10:41-42:

But the Lord answered and said to her, “Martha, Martha, you are worried and bothered about so many things; 42 but only one thing is necessary, for Mary has chosen the good part, which shall not be taken away from her.

On the other matter of Jesus’ parable being literal vs. symbolic I have no compelling need or desire to expand further on it since its not germane to this topic and can not benefit anyone since it was an academic insight only. I will say that certainly no one is given in marriage in heaven. But I can not believe that Jesus’ words can ever be construed to mean sever a human relational bond that is rooted in genuine love anymore so than I could imagine that God would want to sever the relational love of a mother from her child. The only things we can take with us when we physically die are our life’s merits, our sins, our love, our faith, and our relationships. Why would God sever the memory or imprint of His love that operated through our relationships? We are looking at this from slightly different semantic angles. I acknowledge that marriage is no longer recognized in heaven. But I hold in faith that the prior relational aspects of love are respected and held special; otherwise we would not even recognize each other in heaven.

James

 

[guanophore]

Jesus Christ death was a full atonement for our sins as scripture plainly says. And as Hebrews says, “There no longer remains a sacrifice for sins”, since Jesus death was the atoning work for the sins of man. The doctrine of purgatory contradicts the gospel message of Christ atoning death. I am not saying there is not a purgatory, but I think man made rules are to be avoided, especially when they contradict the work of Jesus Christ death for our sins. Also, if a person is truly born again, they will not WANT to sin and when they do sin they quickly repent and confess it.

Indeed, Jesus is all sufficient for the expiation of sins. However, not everyone participates in His atoning work. Purgatory does not “contradict the gospel message” but affirms it. Nothing unclean will enter heaven, and purgatory is a state of cleansing from the effects of sins.

You are right, if a person is born again, they should not “want” to sin, however, we know that most of us that are born again have a very unhealthy attachment to sins. Even Peter denied Christ, after spending three years with Him, and being convinced He was the Christ. Did he “want” do to this?

 

[guanophore]

withallmyheart - Your profile says that you are Catholic. That means that you believe what the holy Catholic Church teaches, if you are in full communion with the Church. You don’t get to make up your own rules and dogma if you are Catholic. That is what the Protestants do. To not believe what the Church teaches about purgatory means that you are a heretic.

Time to get with the program…

This is not entirely true, Thad. A heretic is someone who understood and embraced the truth, then willfully abandoned it. A Catholic who has been poorly catechized often does not understand the teaching of the Church, and therefore, does not qualify as a “heretic”.

 

[CentralFLJames]

Indeed, Jesus is all sufficient for the expiation of sins. However, not everyone participates in His atoning work. Purgatory does not “contradict the gospel message” but affirms it. Nothing unclean will enter heaven, and purgatory is a state of cleansing from the effects of sins.

You are right, if a person is born again, they should not “want” to sin, however, we know that most of us that are born again have a very unhealthy attachment to sins. Even Peter denied Christ, after spending three years with Him, and being convinced He was the Christ. Did he “want” do to this?

This to me in bold above is the key. The soul retains a tendency or desire (e.g. concupiscence) to sin even when in a state of non-sin. That is why it is so so very hard to refrain from committing a same sin over and over again. Once the soul has tasted a sin, even after forgiven it retains a memory of it and like an addiction it wants it again. It takes tremendous will, commitment to God, mortification, denial and active cooperation with the grace of God to truly repent and cleanse oneself from that tendency. On earth while we are distracted by the concerns of secular life (job, family, etc.) it is hard to keep it all going 100%. That is why virtually all of us without having promises of special salvific grace at the hour of death (what some of these indulgences are all about) must go to purgatory.

Purgatory not only purifies for any small number of remaining venial sins but it also expunges the concupience or tendency to sin as through a spiritual fire that purifies and refines our soul. It is an act of mercy that permits the soul to be purified so that is can enter heaven and be in full communion with God. It completely removes all doubt and makes it impossible for the soul to judge itself as being naked (like in the Garden) and unworthy to see God. It completely removes the soul’s fear of being overwhelmed by God’s majesty and holiness and dieing in fright.

Purgatory is a manifestation of God’s Mercy that is in full accordance with His justice. We should rejoice that He gives us such a place! All souls in purgatory know they are saved and can hear God speaking to them and while suffering are joyful in that certain knowledge. But that certainty of salvation makes these souls pine in agony for their debt to be satisfied so that they may see God face to face!

James

 

[withallmyheart]

guanophore,
Thanks for your insight, it is well respected.
Below is a email I received from a question I asked my parish priest regarding purgatory. It is possible for us to enter heaven just as theif on the cross was able, and this should be our ultimate goal. To me wanting anything less would be not to want to truly give up sin for forgivness as the priest said. And I do believe purgatory is for those who did not live out their Christian life by obeying Christ.

Email:

The issue of purgatory has to do with our acceptance of God’s gift of forgiveness. God’s forgiveness is absolute, and complete. However, God always respects our free will, and God does not impose anything on us.

Purgatory relates to our attachment to sin. It is the belief of the Catholic Church that to be in God’s presence in heaven, there must be no attachment to sin. Thus, all attachment to sin must be purified before entrance to heaven.

The Good Thief accepted Jesus gift of forgiveness totally and completely. He gave up all attachment to sin, and totally surrendered to God’s mercy and love. Anyone who offers this total acceptance to God will go directly to heaven.

But it is possible that some may not totally accept God’s forgiveness.

One example may help. Suppose that someone has done something to hurt me. I am trying to forgive that person, but I still hold a grudge against that person. The call of the Gospel is to love all people and to forgive all people If I hold a grudge, that is an attachment to sin. Before entrance to heaven, I would need to be purified of that grudge against the person who hurt me.

For a more detailed presentation, you can go the the Catechism of the Catholic Church, which you can access on-line at the Vatican web site. The relevant passages are paragraphs 1030-1032, and paragraph 1472

I hope that this is helpful.

Peace,

Father Ray

Did I receive incorrect doctrine from the Catholic priest who wrote the above email? My argument with the DOCTRINE of purgatory is not that I feel I should be accepted into heaven immediately upon my last breath, but rather have overlooked and trampled upon what my Lord Jesus Christ did on the cross for me and the world. That his blood was pure enough to cleanse me from my sins, (that is confessed sins of a true repentant heart) or did I consider it not enough or take Him serious enough about my sins. As the priest explained “not everyone accepts His total forgivness” out of the will of the person not wanting to see their sin and give it up and confess it, and therefore that soul must be purified because they died in their sins without forgiveness. I see this purgatory more as a judgement and a suffering so close to hell that we can’t imagine the suffering of those in that prison. So that is why I feel we should exhort one another in entering into heaven (as Jesus and the apostles did) rather than entering purgatory, (and as of which no one really knows for sure of its purposes and judgements but God alone who is the only one true judge.) Scripture says that after Peter had denied Jesus that he went away and wept bitterly. He was repentant and certainly asked for forgiveness, as I am when I sin against God out of weakness rather than not accepting His forgiveness out of a harden heart against a sin I refuse to let go of. Surely Peter did not enter purgatory after asking forgiveness and repenting of this? Is this not what the new testament scriptures teach us on how to behave in serving the Lord and knowing that our salvation comes from a true and pure heart? I prefer to stick with what the apostles taught to be exact on my salvation, rather than trust with my whole heart what was written after them. I agree with the cathechism of the the church, but I will always be skeptical as to what man teaches that was not a divine relevation in the sight of God. We should learn from our Jewish brother and sisters from the old testament that they trusted in themselves and their own rules and by trying to keep them (ironically) was disobedient to God’s law, as Christ pointed out to the Pharisees. We must be careful to make Christ the center of our hearts and lives and to make sure that our faith comes from a true faith in God, and not follow in the footsteps of some of our Jewish brethren. As to which their wayward ways were given to us as a warning and example as to what happens for being disobedient. We are justified by faith and counted righteous by faith in God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, as Abraham was who is the father of our faith in God. We should follow the examples of these faith fathers as God told us because their faith came from a pure heart who loved God above all things and trusted Him.
Can you give your insight on this?
Thanks!

 

[withallmyheart]

Let me be more precise on my explanation of agreement with the catechism. I agree with it. It is the misinterpretations of other catholic brothers and sisters that confuses me on the doctrine of purgatory, or what the councils have considered to be accepted that I sometimes do not fully trust in.

 

[agangbern]

Let me be more precise on my explanation of agreement with the catechism. I agree with it. It is the misinterpretations of other catholic brothers and sisters that confuses me on the doctrine of purgatory, or what the councils have considered to be accepted that I sometimes do not fully trust in.

This is nice. But which “misinterpretation” of our brothers and sisters particularly is confusing you? What particular concept about purgatory do they teach and what particular part of the CCC do they “misinterprete”?

 

[agangbern]

It is possible for us to enter heaven just as theif on the cross was able, and this should be our ultimate goal. To me wanting anything less would be not to want to truly give up sin for forgivness as the priest said. And I do believe purgatory is for those who did not live out their Christian life by obeying Christ.

Let me butt in? I agree that it is possible to enter heaven just like that thief. But to believe in purgatory does not mean “wanting anything less…and not to want to truly give up sin…” Obey Christ, yes we should strive to do that wholeheartedly. And how do we know that we have obeyed him perfectly? We do not simply presume or imagine that we have done that. Humility is one of his words as opposed to presumptousness. Which is safer: To presume that we have perfectly obeyed Christ? Or to remain humble and continue begging for his generosity? Humility would lead a person to believe in purgatory.

 

[withallmyheart]

This is nice. But which “misinterpretation” of our brothers and sisters particularly is confusing you? What particular concept about purgatory do they teach and what particular part of the CCC do they “misinterprete”?

I have heard different scenarios from different catholics. I have heard that we have been forgiven of our sin, but we must still be punished for our sin in purgatory. I have seen catholics use prayers, novenas, certain days of adoration, and etc to gain less time for themselves in purgatory. Many of these catholics are not as interested in ones who have gone before us and helping them out in purgatory as they are in helping themselves. I find it quiet shallow and I am astonished as how people can think that saying prayers will get them time out of purgatory, rather than making the decision to stop gossiping and fighting and etc. This is what God wants from us, not empty prayers. God looks at the heart. What God wants from us is a changed repentant heart. And for anyone to say that this change of thinking cannot be done and it is hard, then I can testify that it is possible. Changing our ways and getting rid of the habitual sin in our lives is very very much possible, gossiping is one of them. I use to be very bad about gossiping, but after a spiritual awakening I experienced I can say that I no longer live life gossiping as I used to.
Also, the catholics I am around would rather say prayers and novenas for these indulgences than read scripture for a half hour as it states in my catechism that (a plenary indulgence will be granted to the faithful who read 30 minutes a day of scripture!)
They tell me I am wrong… I find that hard to believe… I know God looks at the heart and intention.

 

[withallmyheart]

Let me butt in? I agree that it is possible to enter heaven just like that thief. But to believe in purgatory does not mean “wanting anything less…and not to want to truly give up sin…” Obey Christ, yes we should strive to do that wholeheartedly. And how do we know that we have obeyed him perfectly? We do not simply presume or imagine that we have done that. Humility is one of his words as opposed to presumptousness. Which is safer: To presume that we have perfectly obeyed Christ? Or to remain humble and continue begging for his generosity? Humility would lead a person to believe in purgatory.

Wow, did I miss something in the gospels where Christ makes more of a claim on us not being able to attain holiness, or rather what I read was His exhorting us to strive to be holy by looking to Him, and only because of Him it is possible for us to be holy. I look to Christ to perfect me by following His will in my life instead of relying own my merits and will. Obeying Christ and having assurance of eternal life is not a presumption for the faithful who trust in HIM for their very holiness, but rather it is a all believing childlike faith that He (Christ) is the author and fininsher of our faith and that if we trust and obey in Him he will finish the good work of purifying us that he started by the way we live our lives according to His word and by obeying the Holy Spirit that lives within us instead of obeying our flesh -as scripture says. Christ is the reason we can attain holiness, we could and never will be able to do it without His Spirit living in us, which are those who are born again. Humilty would be accepting Christ as the way to perfection, rather than relying on my own strength and merits. He is faithful to his promises and will make us holy if that is what our hearts really desire is to be more like Him. Believe me, I beg for mercy and ask Christ to make me holy everyday. Presumption is what you are doing. It is humilty that leads one to Christ to gain perfection.
Glory to the Lord Jesus!
“Those who believe in the Son will have life, but those who disobey the Son will not have life but remain under God’s punishment.” From Johns gospel. Sorry was not able to get to my bible.