Staples White debate on Purgatory

[Pete_Holter]

Dr. White:

He probably would disagree for example with Richard McBrien when he said, “ basis for it.biblical” He would just simply dismiss those folks.

Whether Tim dismisses this comment from Fr. McBrien (he didn’t have a chance to say one way or the other), I do not know. But I certainly dismiss it. It is directly contrary to the Catechism of the Council of Trent, which states that the “truth of this doctrine” is “founded, as holy Councils declare, on Scripture, and confirmed by Apostolic tradition” (Article V – He Descended into Hell, The Third Day He Rose Again from the Dead). The Catechism tells us that the councils declare and tradition confirms, but that purgatory’s sole foundation is in Scripture. If the biblical basis isn’t clear for Fr. McBrien, then he should sincerely take heed to this instruction and give more thought to what he has read in the Bible.

By the way, this is the priest who wants to affix the disparaging “pro-birth” label to the entire prolife movement: “, has not worked.the so-called pro-life movement, which is really a pro-birth movement” From what I’ve read of his, I’ve found very little to be helpful.

White: I would agree that this is at the final judgment. The “Day” of verse 13 – “for the Day will show it” – I do believe ἡμέρα there is clearly the Day of the Lord, it is the Day of Judgment. So, I would agree with the caller…

Staples: Yeah, I would say that on the literal level that St. Paul is talking about the Day of Judgment. But we can also, by allusion, refer to this text not only to the final judgment but also to the particular judgment that each one of us will face at the moment that we die. And so, you receive a reward long before the final judgment. In other words, as soon as you die as we see in Luke 16 you know when Jesus talks about the rich man and Lazarus when they die immediately they go one to paradise and the other to hell there. So I think this text can apply to either the final judgment or the particular judgment.

I have a different thought on this. “It is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment” (Hebrews 9:27). I believe that this is the judgment (the particular judgment) that Paul has in mind because he tells us in Chapter 4 of 1 Corinthians not to “pronounce judgment before the time, before the Lord comes” (v. 5), and in Chapter 7 he says that “the appointed time has grown very short” (v. 29). It appears to me that he is talking about the same “time” here. If this is the case, then unless one thinks that Paul was wrong about the Second Coming, the most plausible solution is to think that this “time” refers to the time of His coming to us at our death, which is “very short” to come for all of us. “For salvation is nearer to us now than when we first believed… the day is at hand” (Romans 13:11, 12). The “Day” in 1 Corinthians 3:13 is our encounter with Christ the Judge at our death, which is a single day for all of us when considered individually.

I think that this is it for my interaction with this debate. I have used the Scriptures alone to expound this doctrine (offering brief comments from the Catechism, Aquinas, and the Catholic Encyclopedia to simply clarify what’s been taught by the Church). I’ve tried to relate everything I’ve said to the text of 1 Corinthians 3:10-15, referring to other passages as they were pertinent to our understanding of the former one.

By the way, anything that’s been underlined in my posts on this thread is a hyperlink, not an emphasis.

If anyone is struggling in their faith and would like me to take up another point, or feels that I didn’t handle one of the objections well enough, please let me know if you think I could help.

If anyone has read my posts and would like to engage me on any of the points I’ve tried to make, feel welcome to!

Lay it Down - Thank God for Matt Maher!

By the grace and love of our Lord Jesus Christ toward us,
Pete

 

[Redrum]

That`s circular. Lots of books claim to be the Word of God.
“Self-praise is no recommendation”
It requires an outside authoritative source.

The Church is full of sinners, but as an Entity, the Mystical Body of Christ, it has never erred re Faith and Morals.

It would only be circular if my post was claiming the Bible is the Word of God because the Bible says it’s the word of God. I was only making the point that it claims to be, as do many books -yes.

So the question now is with all of these books that claim to be super natural, how do I know the Bible is the one without a CC church or a human institution telling me? I think there are many things that seperate the worldview found in Scripture from other religions. As a simple human being trying to make sense of this world, what Jesus taught and the way he lived makes a lot of sense to me.

Now if you want to go from here to the nature of the canon and the historical process and which that was put together then we will be way off topic.

 

[Redrum]

Churchmouse is under review? What is that? I got a message that he can’t post anymore. This is kind of a bummer because I was enjoying the exchange on both sides.

 

[PRmerger]

So the question now is with all of these books that claim to be super natural, how do I know the Bible is the one without a CC church or a human institution telling me?

No, that is not the question, Red. The question is how do you know that the Gospel of Mark is inspired, but that the Gospel of Thomas is not?

Because the CC told you so–that’s essentially the answer.

 

[Redrum]

No, that is not the question, Red. The question is how do you know that the Gospel of Mark is inspired, but that the Gospel of Thomas is not?

Because the CC told you so–that’s essentially the answer.

I get it. You’re saying the CC is responsible for putting the Bible together through an infallible process. I’m sure there is another thread on here discussing the nature of the Canon.

 

[PRmerger]

I get it. You’re saying the CC is responsible for putting the Bible together through an infallible process. I’m sure there is another thread on here discussing the nature of the Canon.

Yes, there are many threads discussing this.

So now we have established that men indeed have been infallible on multiple occasions–when they wrote the theopneustos Scriptures, when they determined the canon and reaffirmed it at the Councils of Rome, Carthage and Hippo II Nicea (787), Florence (1442), and Trent (1546).

 

[Pete_Holter]

One final point of interest was this quote that he also made toward the end of the debate …]:*Did you all notice? Tim never touched the Jerome Bible Commentary. Never touched it. Never even made reference to it. It gives the exact same interpretation I did. He doesn’t touch it with a 10-foot pole.*Now, sifting through the usual polemical language here, consider this. First, if the JBC did agree completely with him, so what. It would be a rather isolated view from Catholic sources. But second, White said the JBC gives the “exact same interpretation” of 1 Cor 3:15 as him. You wonder if that was true, why James White argued against parts of that interpretation on his own website!

This is a good observation. In connection with this, I’d like to draw attention once again to what Dr. White said in the debate:

I note that the commentary I just read is the Roman Catholic Jerome Bible Commentary, which goes on to directly state that this text does not teach the doctrine of purgatory, however the doctrine can find “support” in the text. A far cry from the claim that this text clearly teaches purgatory.

Reading from the link that you provided, and going back to what I said in my last post, it is clear why the commentary only grants “support” as coming from this text: they think that this text refers to the final judgment and that Paul was wrong about its timing. As if he pretended to know its timing.

So I’d just like to reiterate that this is exactly why we cannot see 1 Corinthians 3:10-15 as referring to the final judgment at the second coming. Paul asserts that this impending judgment is something that will happen soon (cf. 1 Corinthians 7:29-31; Romans 13:11-14). The only way it refers to Christ’s second coming, it seems to me, is through its primary reference to the particular judgment at death. That is to say, the particular judgment and final judgment will be condensed into a single judgment to take place at the second coming for those who are still alive at Christ’s return. But this text refers directly to the particular judgment.

If the super-apostles of the Jerome commentary held to the dogma of biblical inerrancy and recognized Paul’s authority as an apostle – “not from men nor through man, but through Jesus Christ and God the Father, Who raised Him from the dead” (Galatians 1:1) – they wouldn’t utter such nonsense. I truly have to say, away with such madness! If I am wrong in my understanding of Paul’s teaching, then so be it. But I am not wrong when I say that Paul is right!

In Christ,
Pete

 

[MarcoPolo]

This is a good observation. In connection with this, I’d like to draw attention once again to what Dr. White said in the debate:

I note that the commentary I just read is the Roman Catholic Jerome Bible Commentary, which goes on to directly state that this text does not teach the doctrine of purgatory, however the doctrine can find “support” in the text. A far cry from the claim that this text clearly teaches purgatory.

Reading from the link that you provided, and going back to what I said in my last post, it is clear why the commentary only grants “support” as coming from this text: they think that this text refers to the final judgment and that Paul was wrong about its timing. As if he pretended to know its timing.

Yeah, I think the JBC is merely saying Purgatory is not explicitly taught here. In White’s quote, he’s arguing against a straw-man that Purgatory must be “clear” in 1 Corinthians 3:15, which is not necessarily the case. The Catechism refers to 1 Cor 3:15 for it’s reference to a cleansing “fire.” So the question is, is Purgatory explicit in 1 Cor 3:15?; is it suggested?; is it supported? White calls all these a “far cry” from one another—but he would still argue against them all because any of these opinions include at a minimum, support for Purgatory.

White denies any “cleansing” in this passage altogether, which puts him at odds with the JBC as well as all of us in this thread demonstrating the purifying nature of the passage (not to mention the ECFs). At any rate, I think using the JBC was not a good idea for him. For one, it exposed him in a deception on his Monday radio show. And secondly, the JBC says the doctrine of Purgatory IS supported by 1 Cor 3:15!!

 

[Redrum]

Yes, there are many threads discussing this.

So now we have established that men indeed have been infallible on multiple occasions–when they wrote the theopneustos Scriptures, when they determined the canon and reaffirmed it at the Councils of Rome, Carthage and Hippo II Nicea (787), Florence (1442), and Trent (1546).

I’m not sure where you see where that we established this, I was simply trying to help you affirm YOUR position, not mine.

 

[PRmerger]

I’m not sure where you see where that we established this, I was simply trying to help you affirm YOUR position, not mine.

What part do you disagree with? Do you believe that Paul wrote infallibly when he wrote Romans? Do you think Matthew was fallible when he wrote his Gospel? If so, where was his error?

And if you think the councils were fallible when the determined the canon of Scripture and re-affirmed it, where was their error? Do you think they should have included the Didache? Or the Gospel of the Nazoreans? Where was* their* error?

 

[Redrum]

What part do you disagree with? Do you believe that Paul wrote infallibly when he wrote Romans? Do you think Matthew was fallible when he wrote his Gospel? If so, where was his error?

And if you think the councils were fallible when the determined the canon of Scripture and re-affirmed it, where was their error? Do you think they should have included the Didache? Or the Gospel of the Nazoreans? Where was* their* error?

Well, You’ve said quite a bit for me to target every single point that I disagree with. I suppose you are asking me again if I think the councils and popes are fallible and you know my answer is yes. Just because they went through a selecting process in establishing a formal list of the canonical books doesn’t mean they couldn’t have erred. It also doesn’t mean there was no canon or rule prior to the decision of Church councils. Their actions simply recognized the emerging consensus of the people of God as they recognized the authentic Scriptures.

You imply that popes and councils must tell us what books are in the Bible. Therefore we didn’t have a Bible until Pope Damasus offered a list or until the council of Trent? I would argue that the people of God had a Bible before 1546 and before 382.

I came on here to learn about the RCC. It seems that all of your arguments have boiled down to Rome is right because Rome says so. This is, to me anyway, very circular.

Now stay on topic before I get banned like Churchmouse.

 

[steve_b]

I don’t really get the argument that—if there was a third realm at one time, that must mean there can still be a third realm. I know that the Orthodox believe that a “foretaste” of heavenly glory is present today, but it surely isn’t purgatorial.

They don’t believe in “purgatory” but they believe in the process even though they don’t call it purgatory. Otherwise there is no reason to pray for the dead. And they DO pray for the dead. Read through this link particularly the efficacy of prayers for the dead.

http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/death/prayer_dead.aspx
cm:

Jewish sages later indulged the possibility of a purificational state, but when one realizes that Jews, for the most part, are universalist, because hell is temporary and purificational, not eternal and damned, one can see how far it has strayed.

Not “later”.

Is hell eternal? Jesus says yes. And He’s the one who will do ALL judging.

Do Jews believe in purification after death? Yes. And Jesus tells us hell is eternal.

Therefore with your understanding here, you have backed yourself into a recognision of heaven, purgatory, and hell.
cm:

(Edited) And although I would agree that Christ purifies, the issue is one of afterlife purgation of which I reject. Purgatory has gone through many stages, from a place in the middle ages, to the present-day “state.” Still,1 Corinthians 3:10-15 presents the works as being the object of purification and not the man.

You’re incorrect. Does James seperate faith from works? NO [Ja 2:14…] Can a man be seperated from what he does? NOPE!!! They are absolutely connected. NOT either /or as Protestants teach but both together as scripture teaches.
cm:

Staples had stated that you can’t take the “works” from the soul, as if they are attached and not independent, but I have yet to see a worker “attached” to his work and what are being tested is evidently the materials the worker used to build on the foundation and not the man himself.
CM

When a man is sentenced for a crime, does he say to the judge after sentencing, punish my crime but not me. Put my crime in prison NOT me? Make my crime suffer but not me. Ever hear of a judge making that seperation so that a criminal participates in NOTHING?

 

[Pete_Holter]

Hi Churchmouse!

First a word of help to the moderators and you: I’ve read all of Churchmouse’s posts on this thread and did not note anything questionable in them. I have the impression that he’s been treated worse than he’s treated others. I hope this helps in your evaluation.

Most dudely Churchmouse! I have your fetus line on the back of my car.

Here’s what I’m looking at from your website:

“[W]e know that the ‘work’ passes through the fire. According to vss. 12 and 13, the works are those men build on the foundation of Jesus Christ. In the context of the rest of the chapter, these are the ‘works’ of ministry. Contextually, the incorruptible materials used to build upon the foundation of Christ will endure the fire, but that which is corruptible will burn away. So, it makes perfect sense that the corruptible works of the man will be destroyed by the fire, thus this correlates with how he suffers. He suffers in the same manner one does when he sees his possessions go up in flames. Yet, he isn’t the object of the flames. He escapes the fire. This is comparable to the man whose home catches fire. All his possessions, that which he worked for remain inside. He runs out before the flames claim him” (Let’s look at 1 Corinthians 3:12-15).

Can you explain to me where the house external to the man and the possessions external to the man all come from? It seems to me that you are remaining in the language of the teaching aid and failing to bring your argument back around to what is being represented by the words.

Here is a collection of what I’ve posted on this thread so that if you or Redrum or TertiumQuid would like to respond, it will be easier for you to find what I’ve already written:

Every Christian Builds on the Foundation of Jesus Christ
The Effecting Means in Us, Not the Effected Ends in Others
Selfishness and Vainglory Are Sins.
Paul Elsewhere Identifies Such Materials As Sin in Us
More Than the Loss of Reward
Not All Golden, Not All Purged
Different Aspects of Purgatory (Not Essential)
Purging the Inner Man
Founded on Scripture, and Not the Second Coming Part I
Not the Second Coming Part II

As I was working on this, I see that your status has been updated to Suspended. Not sure how long suspensions last, but, since I’ll be gone for the next 40 days too, maybe they will coincide.

Your brother in the Lord,
Pete

 

[PRmerger]

I would argue that the people of God had a Bible before 1546 and before 382.

Here’s a nonexhaustive listing of all of the ancient texts written by Christians that the people of God (i.e. early Christians) used in the first years–that the CC finally declared non-theopneustos infallibly. (Agreed they did not formally proclaim “The Dead Sea Scrolls are not inspired” but by excluding them from the codex they infallibly made that declaration.)

I think you will see that the fact that you know that Acts of the Apostles is inspired and the Dead Sea Scrolls are not is because of the CC. If it weren’t for the CC, your preacher might be quoting from the Zadokite Document at your services.

New Testament Apocrypha
Dead Sea Scrolls
Community Rule
The ‘Zadokite’ Document
Narrative of Joseph of Arimathaea
Epistle of the Apostles
Report of Pilate the Procurator
History of Joseph the Carpenter
Apocryphon of James (Another version)
The Letter of Peter to Philip
Book of John the Evangelist
Ptolemy’s Commentary on the Gospel of John Prologue
Avenging of the Saviour
The Apocryphon of John (Long Version)
The Sentances of Sextus
Book of Thomas the Contender
Lost Books of the Bible
The GOSPEL of the BIRTH OF MARY
The PROTEVANGELION (Another version)
The first Gospel of the INFANCY of JESUS CHRIST
The Infancy Gospel of Thomas Composit
Greek (A)
Greek (B)
Latin
Infancy Compilation (all)
The Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew
THE EPISTLES of JESUS CHRIST and ABGARUS KING of EDESSA (Another version)
The GOSPEL of NICODEMUS (or ACTS of PONTIUS PILATE) (Another Version)
Letters of HEROD and PILATE
The APOSTLES’ CREED
THE EPISTLE of PAUL the APOSTLE to the LAODICEANS
The EPISTLES of PAUL the APOSTLE to SENECA (w/SENECA’s to PAUL)
The ACTS of PAUL and THECLA
The FIRST EPISTLE of CLEMENT to the CORINTHIANS
The SECOND EPISTLE of CLEMENT to the CORINTHIANS
The GENERAL EPISTLE OF BARNABAS
The EPISTLE of IGNATIUS to the EPHESIANS
The EPISTLE of IGNATIUS to the MAGNESIANS
The EPISTLE of IGNATIUS to the TRALLIANS
The EPISTLE of IGNATIUS to the ROMANS
The EPISTLE of IGNATIUS to the PHILADELPHIANS
The EPISTLE of IGNATIUS to the SMYRNAEANS
The EPISTLE of IGNATIUS to POLYCARP
The EPISTLE of POLYCARP to the PHILIPPIANS
HERMAS
The First Book of HERMAS (or VISIONS)
The Second Book of HERMAS (or COMMANDS)
LETTERS OF HEROD AND PILATE
THE LOST GOSPEL ACCORDING TO PETER
THE GOSPEL of PETER - LAST
The EPISTLE of IGNATIUS to the PHILIPPIANS
The MARTYRDOM of IGNATIUS
The MARTYRDOM of POLYCARP
TERTULLIAN on SPECTICALS
TERTULLIAN on PRAYER
TERTULLIAN on PATIENCE
TERTULLIAN on MARTYRS
The Report of Pilate to Caesar

List originally cited here.

I came on here to learn about the RCC
.

Glad to hear that, Red. It seemed at first that you were saying that as a Catholic who attended an all boys Catholic high school you were well catechized. I’m glad to hear that you realize now that you have much to learn about the RCC.

 

[Redrum]

Here’s a nonexhaustive listing of all of the ancient texts written by Christians that the people of God (i.e. early Christians) used in the first years–that the CC finally declared non-theopneustos infallibly. (Agreed they did not formally proclaim “The Dead Sea Scrolls are not inspired” but by excluding them from the codex they infallibly made that declaration.)

I think you will see that the fact that you know that Acts of the Apostles is inspired and the Dead Sea Scrolls are not is because of the CC. If it weren’t for the CC, your preacher might be quoting from the Zadokite Document at your services.

New Testament Apocrypha
Dead Sea Scrolls
Community Rule
The ‘Zadokite’ Document
Narrative of Joseph of Arimathaea
Epistle of the Apostles
Report of Pilate the Procurator
History of Joseph the Carpenter
Apocryphon of James (Another version)
The Letter of Peter to Philip
Book of John the Evangelist
Ptolemy’s Commentary on the Gospel of John Prologue
Avenging of the Saviour
The Apocryphon of John (Long Version)
The Sentances of Sextus
Book of Thomas the Contender
Lost Books of the Bible
The GOSPEL of the BIRTH OF MARY
The PROTEVANGELION (Another version)
The first Gospel of the INFANCY of JESUS CHRIST
The Infancy Gospel of Thomas Composit
Greek (A)
Greek (B)
Latin
Infancy Compilation (all)
The Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew
THE EPISTLES of JESUS CHRIST and ABGARUS KING of EDESSA (Another version)
The GOSPEL of NICODEMUS (or ACTS of PONTIUS PILATE) (Another Version)
Letters of HEROD and PILATE
The APOSTLES’ CREED
THE EPISTLE of PAUL the APOSTLE to the LAODICEANS
The EPISTLES of PAUL the APOSTLE to SENECA (w/SENECA’s to PAUL)
The ACTS of PAUL and THECLA
The FIRST EPISTLE of CLEMENT to the CORINTHIANS
The SECOND EPISTLE of CLEMENT to the CORINTHIANS
The GENERAL EPISTLE OF BARNABAS
The EPISTLE of IGNATIUS to the EPHESIANS
The EPISTLE of IGNATIUS to the MAGNESIANS
The EPISTLE of IGNATIUS to the TRALLIANS
The EPISTLE of IGNATIUS to the ROMANS
The EPISTLE of IGNATIUS to the PHILADELPHIANS
The EPISTLE of IGNATIUS to the SMYRNAEANS
The EPISTLE of IGNATIUS to POLYCARP
The EPISTLE of POLYCARP to the PHILIPPIANS
HERMAS
The First Book of HERMAS (or VISIONS)
The Second Book of HERMAS (or COMMANDS)
LETTERS OF HEROD AND PILATE
THE LOST GOSPEL ACCORDING TO PETER
THE GOSPEL of PETER - LAST
The EPISTLE of IGNATIUS to the PHILIPPIANS
The MARTYRDOM of IGNATIUS
The MARTYRDOM of POLYCARP
TERTULLIAN on SPECTICALS
TERTULLIAN on PRAYER
TERTULLIAN on PATIENCE
TERTULLIAN on MARTYRS
The Report of Pilate to Caesar

List originally cited here.

Glad to hear that, Red. It seemed at first that you were saying that as a Catholic who attended an all boys Catholic high school you were well catechized. I’m glad to hear that you realize now that you have much to learn about the RCC.

God used pharoah to accomplish his will also but I’m not going to bow down and worship him.

God first, institution second.