Why do Catholics believe in Purgatory and Protestants do not?

[Corpus_Cristi]

Most of protestantism is centered around Luther’s outrageous theology and draws from salvation by faith alone. They don’t believe in purgatory because since there was reference to purgatory in 2 Maccabees, and Luther also didn’t agree with the theology expressed in Tobit, Baruch, Wisdom, 1 Maccabees, Judith, or Sirach, he took those out too. That’s also why protestants know of angels Gabriel and Michael, from the annunciation, the resurrection, and the war in heaven depicted in Revelation, but if you mentioned the archangel Raphael, they’d be in the dark. That’ because there’s reference to Raphael in Tobit. These three angels are the only one’s that we know of that are named, and all of there names have God’s name in them: El. God was invoked by this name when contracted to form words, such as alleluia. Here are the meanings:

Michael:He who is like God
Gabrielrotection of God
Raphael:The healing power of God

Vita in Christo!

 

[Funky_Cedars]

Calvin:

…The Alexandrian canon was written in Greek, (barring a miracle) Jesus couldn’t have even read it!..

sorry about your Jesus, dude. mine could have read greek, latin, cantonese, english, hyroglyphics (sic) and more [and could have spelled them all, too.] He would have been able to read more languages than the character data in star trek: next generation. all and any of this would have been possible for Daddy’s Boy had it been in the least bit nessary; cause my Jesus is God!
thanks for listening, love and peace, terry

 

[jimmy]

RedGolum:

I imagine you think that many non Catholics believe that since they have “faith” then nothing more is required of them. That they can sin as much as they want, and they are not in danger of hell.
Would you believe that one of the misconceptions that many non Catholics have of the RCC is that you can do what ever you want, just go to the priest and get a penance?
In reality, what Christians must do is have faith, have genuine repentance (know that their sin is wrong and make an effort to not sin again), and to show God’s love through their actions.

I do believe that many no-catholics believe that all they need is faith and they do not need love to be saved. I have heard some of them argue that. I am not saying all of them believe this but many of them do. I agree that you must be genuinely repentant and that you must have faith but you must also do what you can to imitate Christ in all ways.

 

[Fr_Ambrose]

jimmy:

How can you sit there and lie about what your church teaches? You certainly do beleive in Purgatory, why else would you pray for the dead?

Pretty sharp words, accusing me of lying. Let me say again what I have said before. I do not know one bishop, one priest or one layperson in the Orthodox Church who believes in purgatory. Period. The dispute over purgatory was one of the major topics at the failed Reunion Council of Florence in the 16th century. Grab a few websites on that Council and also Saint Mark of Ephesus and read up on the Orthodox rejection of purgatory.

You may not call it Purgatory, but it is the same thing. Here is an article by St. John Maximovitch, an Orthodox Saint, to prove it.

orthodox.net/articles/life-after-death-john-maximovitch.html

The weird opinion about the toll houses is firstly, nothing to do with purgatory since the former constitute a process which is supposed to be all over in a matter of days whereas purgatory goes on until the end of time, and secondly, it is not a part of the Orthodox faith but is largely propounded by a small stream of Russians who may well have been influenced by the RC doctrine of purgatory. It falls into a category of minor theology known as “theologoumena” - which could be translated as “personal theological opinions.” Things like, do animals go to heaven, come into the same category. You can believe it or you can reject it. It’s not important.

 

[jimmy]

Fr Ambrose:

Pretty sharp words, accusing me of lying. Let me say again what I have said before. I do not know one bishop, one priest or one layperson in the Orthodox Church who believes in purgatory. Period. The dispute over purgatorty was one of the major topics at the failed Reunion Council of Florence in the 16th century. Grab a few websites on that Council and also Saint Mark of Ephesus and read up on the Orthodox rejection of purgatory.
You may not call it Purgatory, but it is the same thing. Here is an article by St. John Maximovitch, an Orthodox Saint, to prove it.

orthodox.net/articles/life-after-death-john-maximovitch.html The weird opinion about the toll houses is firstly, nothing to do with purgatory since the former constitute a process which is supposed to be all over in a matter of days whereas purgatory goes on until the end of time, and secondly, it is not a part of the Orthodox faith but is largely propounded by a small stream of Russians who may well have been influenced by the RC doctrine of purgatory. It falls into a category of minor theology known as “theologoumena” - which could be translated as “personal theological opinions.” Things like, do animals go to heaven, come into the same category. You can believe it or you can reject it. It’s not important.

There is no where that says that purgatory goes on till the end of time. That may be the theology of a few theologians but it is not the teaching of the church. If there is no purification of the past souls then why do you pray for the dead? You can not save those in Hell, they are allready damned. And those in Heaven do not need your prayers since they are already saved.

 

[jimmy]

Sorry about the harsh words, but it seems like many Orthodox do not offer all the truth.

My point is that your prayers for the dead do not mean anything unless there is a purification period.

 

[Fr_Ambrose]

jimmy:

Now for the Orthodox Catechism
Now this looks like the Catholic belief of Purgatory. If you want to see it for your self, look under Article 7, page 36, under the first stage. Now I ask again, why do you not tell the truth about your teachings? Why do you pray for the dead?

This is a weird document!

It must have been written a long time ago -probably before 1920- since it refers to no civil marriage exisiting in Serbia and Bulgaria. In other words the document predates Communism.

It starts of by expounding the theory of Substitutionary Atonement (Blood Atonement) as the means by which we were saved. No Orthodox theologican would teach that. This Anselmian theory is strongly disliked by the Orthodox and it is lucky to get a footnote in any Orthodox theological work.

He goes on to talk about Transubstantiation as something normal and accepted in the Orthodox Church - as if the author is completely ignorant of the fact that the teaching of transubstantiation has caused more Orthodox Councils and theologians to have heart attacks than they have had hot dinners. Once again, the theory of Transubstantiation will never get more than a footnote in an book of Orthodox eucharistic theology and it will usually contain negative comments on this Roman teaching.

This is a strange piece of work all round. I wonder if the author was not a Greek Catholic (Uniate) or maybe he used to be a Greek Catholic? Or was educated in Roman Catholic schools?

I see that the catechism is on a Roman Catholic website “ChristusRex” and indeed much of it is not really Orthodox but closer to Catholicism.

I notice that it is also on the website of the “North American Academy of Ecumenists” and carries the warning: "Note, this catechism is not official.

naae.net/docu/docu-other.php

And lastly, it appears on a strange little website called “Axios” in Belize
axios.tk/catechism.html
This seems to be a vagante Orthodox group of two members, and I thought that “Axios” was a homosexual group?

In short, this “catechism” is not at all a reliable exposition of the Orthodox faith. It has a large admixture of Catholic doctrines unacceptable to the Orthodox.

 

[jimmy]

Fr Ambrose:

This is a weird document!

It must have been written a long time ago -probably before 1920- since it refers to no civil marriage exisiting in Serbia and Bulgaria. In other words the document predates Communism.

It starts of by expounding the theory of Substitutionary Atonement (Blood Atonement) as the means by which we were saved. No Orthodox theologican would teach that. This Anselmian theory is strongly disliked by the Orthodox and it is lucky to get a footnote in any Orthodox theological work.

He goes on to talk about Transubstantiation as something normal and accepted in the Orthodox Church - as if the author is completely ignorant of the fact that the teaching of transubstantiation has caused more Orthodox Councils and theologians to have heart attacks than they have had hot dinners. Once again, the theory of Transubstantiation will never get more than a footnote in an book of Orthodox eucharistic theology and it will usually contain negative comments on this Roman teaching.

This is a strange piece of work all round. I wonder if the author was not a Greek Catholic (Uniate) or maybe he used to be a Greek Catholic? Or was educated in Roman Catholic schools?

I see that the catechism is on a Roman Catholic website “ChristusRex” and indeed much of it is not really Orthodox but closer to Catholicism.

I notice that it is also on the website of the “North American Academy of Ecumenists” and carries the warning: "Note, this catechism is not official.

naae.net/docu/docu-other.php

And lastly, it appears on a strange little website called “Axios” in Belize
axios.tk/catechism.html
This seems to be a vagante Orthodox group of two members, and I thought that “Axios” was a homosexual group?

In short, this “catechism” is not at all a reliable exposition of the Orthodox faith. It has a large admixture of Catholic doctrines unacceptable to the Orthodox.

OK if it is not an official catechism then we won’t use it. Could you tell me why you pray for the dead though?

 

[Fr_Ambrose]

jimmy:

Sorry about the harsh words, but it seems like many Orthodox do not offer all the truth.

I don’t think there are any Orthodox ashamed to tell the truth. Certainly I would not be writing on this Forum if I were afraid to tell the truth or to tell only half of it. God forbid!

My point is that your prayers for the dead do not mean anything unless there is a purification period.

Here is an answer from Fr John Matusiak who is the “Question and Answer Priest” on the website of the Orthodox Church in America…

oca.org/pages/orth_chri/Q-and-A_OLD/

"Concerning prayers for the dead, your question, which is more of a statement, seems to be directed at those who teach that after death humans may encounter “purgatory”, an intermediate state in which the “punishment” accorded to sin must be “purged” before one can enter the eternal Kingdom of God. **This teaching, found among the Roman Catholics but completely alien to Orthdox Christianity [which rejects the doctrine of purgatory,[/color] implies that one should pray for the release of the souls of the departed from such punishment and may imply that the departed, of their own will, can freely repent of the sins they committed during this lifetime.

Orthodox Christians pray for the dead so that the Lord will have mercy on their souls, that He will grant them eternal rest “in the bosom of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob,” that He will extend His unfathomable love upon them, and that He will receive them into that state “in which there is neither sickness, nor sighing, nor sorrow, but life everlasting.” Saint Paul clearly teaches that those who have gone before us are still members of the Body of Christ, the Church. And it is the duty of the members of the Church to pray for one another. Just as the living continually beseech God to have mercy on them * and may rightly offer prayers to God on behalf of their living spiritual sisters and brothers as well as request prayers on their own behalf from others * so too we have the duty to pray for all members of the Body of Christ, even those who have departed this life and still “belong to Christ.” One will find that the early Christians, surrounded as they were by death as a result of official persecution on the part of the Roman Empire, took great care to honor the dead, to bury them with great care and reverence -* to the point of offering the Eucharistic celebration on their graves, which is one of the earliest indications of the veneration of their relics! -* and to remember them especially on the anniversary of their deaths which were seen as “birthdays” into eternal life. In asking God to have mercy on the souls of the departed, we also ask God to have mercy on us who are still in this life, and we recognize that we too shall die. All members of the Church, living as well as faithful departed, cry before the throne of God, “Lord, have mercy.”**

 

[jimmy]

Fr Ambrose:

I don’t think there are any Orthodox ashamed to tell the truth. Certainly I would not be writing on this Forum if I were afraid to tell the truth or to tell only half of it. God forbid!

OK then, sorry if I offended you.

Here is an answer from Fr John Matusiak who is the “Question and Answer Priest” on the website of the Orthodox Church in America…

oca.org/pages/orth_chri/Q-and-A_OLD/

"Concerning prayers for the dead, your question, which is more of a statement, seems to be directed at those who teach that after death humans may encounter “purgatory”, an intermediate state in which the “punishment” accorded to sin must be “purged” before one can enter the eternal Kingdom of God. This teaching, found among the Roman Catholics but completely alien to Orthdox Christianity [which rejects the doctrine of purgatory,[/color] implies that one should pray for the release of the souls of the departed from such punishment and may imply that the departed, of their own will, can freely repent of the sins they committed during this lifetime.

What I have been taught by the Catholic Church is that in order to enter into Heaven you must be clean from all sin. If you have venial sin on your soul then you go to Purgatory, if you have mortal sin on your soul you go to Hell. Whether it is an easy process or a suffering process has not been defined by the church. Purgatory is a cleansing state or place or what ever.

Orthodox Christians pray for the dead so that the Lord will have mercy on their souls, that He will grant them eternal rest “in the bosom of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob,” that He will extend His unfathomable love upon them, and that He will receive them into that state “in which there is neither sickness, nor sighing, nor sorrow, but life everlasting.” Saint Paul clearly teaches that those who have gone before us are still members of the Body of Christ, the Church. And it is the duty of the members of the Church to pray for one another. Just as the living continually beseech God to have mercy on them * and may rightly offer prayers to God on behalf of their living spiritual sisters and brothers as well as request prayers on their own behalf from others * so too we have the duty to pray for all members of the Body of Christ, even those who have departed this life and still “belong to Christ.” One will find that the early Christians, surrounded as they were by death as a result of official persecution on the part of the Roman Empire, took great care to honor the dead, to bury them with great care and reverence -* to the point of offering the Eucharistic celebration on their graves, which is one of the earliest indications of the veneration of their relics! -* and to remember them especially on the anniversary of their deaths which were seen as “birthdays” into eternal life. In asking God to have mercy on the souls of the departed, we also ask God to have mercy on us who are still in this life, and we recognize that we too shall die. All members of the Church, living as well as faithful departed, cry before the throne of God, “Lord, have mercy.”

Who are you praying for though? Those in Hell can not use your prayers and those in Heaen do not need them.

So, are you saying that by praying for the dead you can change there destination from Hell to Heaven. This sound pretty absurd.

Or are you saying that you pray for the dead that are already going to Heaven but have unrepented venial sins, so that they may be given the grace and made perfect.

What happens if no one prays for the dead, will the dead go to Hell? Or is prayer for the dead vain.

 

[flameburns623]

Jimmy:

Anglicans also do not believe in Purgatory, and yet they pray for the dead. The Rev. Lefferd MA Haughwout, in “The Ways and Teachings of the Church” cites the 1928 Book of Common prayer, pages 319, 332, 334, and 335 as examples of prayers for the dead, along with the Prayer for the Whole State of Christ’s Church, on pages 74-75. Yet Article XXII expressly denies Purgatory as ‘a thing vainly invented and grounded in no warranty of Scripture’.

You can view the 1928 Book of Common Prayer here:

justus.anglican.org/resources/bcp/1928/BCP_1928.htm

 

[Fr_Ambrose]

jimmy:

OK then, sorry if I offended you.

My apologies also. Old men like me can get polemical

Those in Hell can not use your prayers

Who knows…

Here is a story for you from an old Patericon (these are collected sayings of the monks of old.)

Now, don’t swoop on me…!! I know the theological
pitfalls in this story – but I still like it so much!
It resonates in my old Irish heart.

…With the Sign of the Cross, the old monk Abba
Joseph trapped in his cell a dark and miserable demon
who had come to tempt him. “Release me, Father, and let
me go,” pleaded the demon, “I will not come to tempt you
again”. “I will gladly do that, but on one condition,”
replied the monk. “You must sing for me the song that
you sang before God’s Throne on high, before your fall.”

The demon responded, “You know I cannot do that; it will
cause me cruel torture and suffering. And besides, Father,
no human ear can hear its ineffable sweetness and live,
for you will surely die.” “Then you will have to remain
here in my cell,” said the monk, “and bear with me the
full struggle of repentance.” “Let me go, do not force me
to suffer,” pleaded the demon." “Ah, but then you must
sing to me the song you sang on high before your fall
with Satan.”

So the dark and miserable demon, seeing that there was
no way out, began to sing, haltingly, barely audible
at first, groping for words long forgotten. As he sang,
the darkness which penetrated and surrounded him began
slowly to dissipate. The song grew ever louder and
increasingly stronger, and soon the demon was caught
up in its sweetness, his voice fully lifted up in worship
and praise. Boldly he sang of the power and the honour
and the glory of the Triune God on High, Creator of the
Universe, Master of Heaven and Earth, of all things visible
and invisible. As the song sung on high before all ages
resounded in the fullness of its might, a wondrous and
glorious light penetrated the venerable Abba’s humble cell,
and the walls which had enclosed it were no more. Ineffable
love and joy surged into the very depths of the being
of the radiant and glorious angel, as he ever so gently
stooped down and covered with his wings the lifeless body
of the old hermit who had liberated him from the abyss of hell.
-oOo-

 

[Fr_Ambrose]

…With the Sign of the Cross, the old monk Abba
Joseph trapped in his cell a dark and miserable demon
who had come to tempt him.

Now we all know that it is the common opinion of theologians that the fallen angels have had their eternal fate decided, and have irrevocably chosen for God or against God.

So the theologians certainly have their common opinion but the Saints, always much better theologians, may be at odds with them.

For example, Saint Isaac the Syrian (7th century)wrote:

“What is a merciful heart? It is a heart that burns with love for the whole creation — for men, for birds, for beasts, for demons and for every creature.”

Saint Isaac is not only wonderful and holy. He is also disturbing. I have no answers to this puzzle, but I do cherish the suspicion that our Lord expects us to mull it over a bit. Perhaps He has left us this Saint as a kind of gentle question mark placed over some of our certainties. Not over the essential ones, for Isaac himself is proof of those, but perhaps over others that we - not God - have declared certain.

See the web article
orthodoxeurope.org/theospirit/000013.php
“The Spiritual World of Isaac the Syrian”
by Bishop Hilarion Alfeyev

Hilarion Alfeyev, The Spiritual World of Isaac the Syrian. Cistercian Studies Series, Number 175. Kalamazoo MI and Spencer MA: Cistercian Publications, 2000. Pp. 321.

 

[Fr_Ambrose]

jimmy:

So, are you saying that by praying for the dead you can change there destination from Hell to Heaven. This sound pretty absurd.

Jimmy, I’m Irish and certainly my ancestors in the early days when Christianity was fresh and strong in Ireland thought that they could pray a man out of hell. Now I am not asserting that this would be acceptable theology in our days, for either Church. Maybe the early Irish were wrong. Who can say? Once again, their old belief places a gentle question mark over some of the things that we have declared certain.

Here is something from the Rule of Saint Maelruain, from the holy monastery of Tallaght. It is 8th century:

**"There is nothing which a person does for a soul that has departed that does not help it, both vigil and abstinence, and singing the intercession and frequent blessings. Filii pro mortuis parentibus debent poenitere.

A whole year therefore was Saint Maidoc of Ferns, with all his people, living on water and biscuit so as to ransom the soul of Brandubh, son of Eochaidh, from hell. "

---

**

 

[Churchmouse]

jimmy:

I ask you to go back and read the posts I have posted that show the scriptures that support Purgatory.

jimmy,

The Scriptures you’ve suggested are the same Scriptures posted by every Catholic trying to prove a purgatory, yet I don’t see anything “purgatorial” in any of the verses. Unless you have something new to offer, I suggest you go back and read my post again. Not only do I not see a purgatory in the canonicals, but I don’t see a purgatory in the deuterocanonicals either, such as in 2 Maccabees.

Here are some early writing about it.

“Abercius by name, I am a disciple of the chaste shepherd…He taught me … faithful writings…These words,I, Abercius, standing by, ordered to be inscribed.In truth, I was in the course of my seventy-second year. Let him who understands and believes this pray for Abercius.”
Inscription of Abercius(A.D. 190),in PAT,I:172

This proves that an early Christian asked to be prayed for, nothing more and nothing less. We already know that some within the early Church prayed for the dead (in the sense of “refrigerium interim” [interim refreshment]), but either way, there is no allusion to purgatory in the least.

“And after the exhibition, Tryphaena again receives her. For her daughter Falconilla had died, and said to her in a dream: Mother, thou shaft have this stranger Thecla in my place, in order that she may pray concerning me, and that I may be transferred to the place of the just.”
Acts of Paul and Thecla(A.D. 160),in ANF,VIII:490

Some translations of this apocryphal work say “that she may be translated into a state of happiness” instead of “transferred to the place of the just.” Big difference. To complete the passage it follows:

“When Thecla heard this, she immediately prayed to the Lord, and said: O Lord God of heaven and earth, Jesus Christ, thou Son of the Most High, grant that her daughter Falconilla may live forever.”

That’s the end of it. Nothing said about what happened to Falconilla. Yet, where is the evidence that Falconilla was in a purgatory? Or that she was in a suffering state? *Nowhere! * Tryphaena, a pagan queen, asks the Christian, Thecla, to pray for her dead daughter Falconilla. Note that it is the pagan who assumes prayer can help her daughter. It doesn’t state if the belief was held by Thecla, the Christian, but only that she obeyed and prayed. And what did Thecla pray for? Only that Falconilla “may live forever” and not for her deliverance from a suffering state or realm. In the dream, does Falconilla tell her mother she is suffering in some state? No! And then there is the one most obvious point which is sidestepped continually—it was a dream a woman had about her child.

No one denies that the early Christians prayed for the dead, but the natures of these prayers don’t allude to a belief in purgatory, but rather, “a refreshing”—heavenly happiness. To assume otherwise is just that, an assumption.

continued…

 

[Churchmouse]

“Accordingly the believer, through great discipline, divesting himself of the passions, passes to the mansion which is better than the former one, viz., to the greatest torment, taking with him the characteristic of repentance from the sins he has committed after baptism. He is tortured then still more–not yet or not quite attaining what he sees others to have acquired. Besides, he is also ashamed of his transgressions. The greatest torments, indeed, are assigned to the believer. For God’s righteousness is good, and His goodness is righteous. And though the punishments cease in the course of the completion of the expiation and purification of each one, yet those have very great and permanent grief who are found worthy of the other fold, on account of not being along with those that have been glorified through righteousness.”
Clement of Alexandria, Stromata,6:14(post A.D. 202),in ANF,II:504

Clement was one of the “founding fathers” of the ideologies which eventually led to the concept of purgatory, but nevertheless, it was novel concept influenced by the Hellenistic culture of his day. Jacques Le Goff in his book, “The Birth of Purgatory” states:

“The foundations of the doctrine elaborated by Clement and Origen drew in part on certain ***pagan Greek philosophical and religious traditions *** and in part on their own original reflection on the Bible and on Judeo-Christian eschatology. The two theologians were indebted to ancient Greece for the idea that the chastisement inflicted by the gods is not punishment but rather a means of education and salvation, part of the process of purification. In Plato’s view this chastisement is a boon offered by the gods. Clement and Origen deduce from this the idea that “to punish” is synonymous with “to educate” and that any chastisement by God contributes to man’s salvation” (pgs.52-53).

This was purgatory at its roots, not in its totality, and definitely doesn’t lend to the idea that it was a long-standing tradition of the Church. These men placed the seeds, but it didn’t come to its known form until Augustine.

Peace,
CM

 

[1962Missal]

Churchmouse:

Clement was one of the “founding fathers” of the ideologies which eventually led to the concept of purgatory, but nevertheless, it was novel concept influenced by the Hellenistic culture of his day. Jacques Le Goff in his book, “The Birth of Purgatory” states:

“The foundations of the doctrine elaborated by Clement and Origen drew in part on certain ***pagan Greek philosophical and religious traditions *** and in part on their own original reflection on the Bible and on Judeo-Christian eschatology. The two theologians were indebted to ancient Greece for the idea that the chastisement inflicted by the gods is not punishment but rather a means of education and salvation, part of the process of purification. In Plato’s view this chastisement is a boon offered by the gods. Clement and Origen deduce from this the idea that “to punish” is synonymous with “to educate” and that any chastisement by God contributes to man’s salvation” (pgs.52-53).

This was purgatory at its roots, not in its totality, and definitely doesn’t lend to the idea that it was a long-standing tradition of the Church. These men placed the seeds, but it didn’t come to its known form until Augustine.

Peace,
CM

And is the following passage the product of “certain pagan Greek philosophical and religious traditions”?

5: And have you forgotten the exhortation which addresses you as sons? – “My son, do not regard lightly the discipline of the Lord, nor lose courage when you are punished by him. 6: For the Lord disciplines him whom he loves, and chastises every son whom he receives.” 7: It is for discipline that you have to endure. God is treating you as sons; for what son is there whom his father does not discipline? 8: If you are left without discipline, in which all have participated, then you are illegitimate children and not sons. 9: Besides this, we have had earthly fathers to discipline us and we respected them. Shall we not much more be subject to the Father of spirits and live? 10: For they disciplined us for a short time at their pleasure, but he disciplines us for our good, that we may share his holiness. 11: For the moment all discipline seems painful rather than pleasant; later it yields the peaceful fruit of righteousness to those who have been trained by it. 12: Therefore lift your drooping hands and strengthen your weak knees, 13: and make straight paths for your feet, so that what is lame may not be put out of joint but rather be healed. 14: Strive for peace with all men, and for the holiness without which no one will see the Lord.

Hebrews 12:5-14

Justin

 

[Churchmouse]

jimmy:

I think this is enough for now.

“[T]hat allegory of the Lord which is extremely clear and simple in its meaning, and ought to be from the first understood in its plain and natural sense…Then, again, should you be disposed to apply the term ‘adversary’ to the devil, you are advised by the (Lord’s) injunction, while you are in the way with him,'to make even with him such a compact as may be deemed compatible with the requirements of your true faith. Now the compact you have made respecting him is to renounce him, and his pomp, and his angels. Such is your agreement in this matter. Now the friendly understanding you will have to carry out must arise from your observance of the compact: you must never think of getting back any of the things which you have abjured, and have restored to him, lest he should summon you as a fraudulent man, and a transgressor of your agreement, before God the Judge (for in this light do we read of him, in another passage, as ‘the accuser of the brethren,’ or saints, where reference is made to the actual practice of legal prosecution); and lest this Judge deliver you over to the angel who is to execute the sentence, and he commit you to the prison of hell, out of which there will be no dismissal until the smallest even of your delinquencies be paid off in the period before the resurrection. What can be a more fitting sense than this? What a truer interpretation?”
Tertullian,A Treatise on the Soul,35(A.D. 210),in ANF,III:216

Taking isolated quotes doesn’t do justice to Tertullian. It was his belief that the soul doesn’t go directly to heaven, but rather, the soul would be given a “taste” of their eternal destiny until the resurrection. He does the same here. There are no allusions to a state of suffering, but to “the resurrection” (Note he states, “…until the smallest even of your delinquencies be paid off in the period before the resurrection). Based on Luke 16:22, it was his belief that the righteous will enter “refrigerium interim”, Abraham’s bosom:

“This place, the bosom of Abraham, though not in heaven, and yet above hell, offer the souls of the righteous an interim refreshment (refrigerium interim) until the end of all things brings about the general resurrection and the final reward (Adversus Marcionem 4.34).

For Tertullian it was a matter of restful wait before the Judgment. In Luke 16:25, Lazarus was being “comforted”, the rich man was being “tormented.” Souls in purgatory await there for as long as it takes to compensate for their sins, but in Tertullian’s eschatology, souls remained in Abraham’s bosom until the resurrection.

Peace,
CM

 

[Corpus_Cristi]

rusaved:

Protestants do not believe in purgatory because it goes agsainst everything the Gospel teaches.
The scriptures tell us it is only by Grace we are saved and not of ourselves lest any man shoud boast. We cannot add anything to what he did for us. We cannot pray hard enough, be holy enough, go to church enough, or love enough to please God. If we could Jesus would never have had to die. When we think we can be good enough and earn our way to Heaven we are spitting on the blood of Jesus.
When Jesus died on the cross, he bore our sin once and for all. This was the ultimate sacrifice.

From what you’ve said, you probably don’t know what purgatory is, so I suggest you learn the Catholic faith before you argue against it.

 

[Churchmouse]

1962Missal:

And is the following passage the product of “certain pagan Greek philosophical and religious traditions”?

Hebrews 12:5-14

Justin

Well, taken in context with the rest of the chapter, one things for sure, it isn’t purgatorial, but speaks of how the Father chastens one in this life.

Peace,
CM