Why don't Protestants believe in purgatory?

[Abu]

The Logician #194
it was the Catholic Church that would open the door, for money had been used against the poor for the manipulation of religion. Indulgences were listed as time off from purgatory. Luther believed that purgatory was not an actual fact but a place created by the Catholic Church for the gain of money. Catholics believe that Purgatory is a place that a believer goes so he can be purified to enter heaven. Indulgences were sold in the 16th Century of the church to help build St. Peter Basilica in Rome.

In reality it is NOT “the Catholic Church” but some Catholics abusing the system.
**
'Myths about Indulgences**
The Council of Trent instituted severe reforms in the practice of granting indulgences, and, because of prior abuses, “in 1567 Pope Pius V cancelled all grants of indulgences involving any fees or other financial transactions” (Catholic Encyclopedia). This act proved the Church’s seriousness about removing abuses from indulgences.

'One never could “buy” indulgences. The financial scandal surrounding indulgences, the scandal that gave Martin Luther an excuse for his heterodoxy, involved alms – indulgences in which the giving of alms to some charitable fund or foundation was used as the occasion to grant the indulgence. There was no outright selling of indulgences. The Catholic Encyclopaedia states: "t is easy to see how abuses crept in. Among the good works which might be encouraged by being made the condition of an indulgence, almsgiving would naturally hold a conspicuous place. . . . It is well to observe that in these purposes there is nothing essentially evil. To give money to God or to the poor is a praiseworthy act, and, when it is done from right motives, it will surely not go unrewarded." ’
catholic.com/tracts/myths-about-indulgences

 

[JonNC]

it was the Catholic Church that would open the door, for money had been used against the poor for the manipulation of religion. Indulgences were listed as time off from purgatory. Luther believed that purgatory was not an actual fact but a place created by the Catholic Church for the gain of money. Catholics believe that Purgatory is a place that a believer goes so he can be purified to enter heaven. Indulgences were sold in the 16th Century of the church to help build St. Peter Basilica in Rome.

Source, please, where Luther states that he believes Purgatory was made up simply to make money. Luther first opposed the abuse of indulgences, but I am not aware that he made the accusation as you have. In fact, Luther recognizes Augustine’s role in the doctrine:
“When they have given up their purgatorial ‘Mass fairs’ (something Augustine never dreamed of), then we will discuss with them whether St. Augustine’s word, lacking support from Scripture, may be tolerated and whether the dead may be commemorated
at the sacrament. It will not do to formulate articles of faith on the basis of the holy Fathers’ works or words.”
Is it your understanding that St. Augustine had in mind Purgatory as a money making proposition?

Jon

 

[PJM]

They don’t need the money?

If you’re a Christian? WWJD?

I’m grateful for the opportunity to discuss our Faith differences; but don’t have time for post replies like this.

I’m responding because your NEW here on CAF.

God Bless you,

Patrick

 

[PJM]

no one has sold indulgences for centuries.

Oh, really? Old habits die hard.

May God forgive you!

 

[The_Logician]

Forgive me???
Hey!!! I’m not the one getting paid for a mass to be said for the repose of the soul.

 

[twf]

Forgive me???
Hey!!! I’m not the one getting paid for a mass to be said for the repose of the soul.

That’s not at all comparable. That also has nothing to do with indulgences. Indulgences can be gained by any Catholic in a state of grace at any time, according to the prescriptions issued by the Church, either for oneself or for the dead. A mass for the repose of the dead is a different matter. It is customary to pay a token stipend to the priest celebrating the mass for as Scripture says “the worker deserves his wages”, but in my experience this is usually a token amount of $10 or $15 - and not for the mass itself, but for the priest’s upkeep. Priests often make a lot less than Evangelical pastors.
And of course if someone can’t afford a stipend, a mass would not be refused. If you are aware of that happening, details should be forwarded to the local bishop.

 

[Techno2000]

That’s not at all comparable. That also has nothing to do with indulgences. Indulgences can be gained by any Catholic in a state of grace at any time, according to the prescriptions issued by the Church, either for oneself or for the dead. A mass for the repose of the dead is a different matter. It is customary to pay a token stipend to the priest celebrating the mass for as Scripture says “the worker deserves his wages”, but in my experience this is usually a token amount of $10 or $15 - and not for the mass itself, but for the priest’s upkeep. Priests often make a lot less than Evangelical pastors.
And of course if someone can’t afford a stipend, a mass would not be refused. If you are aware of that happening, details should be forwarded to the local bishop.

 

[guanophore]

Right, but it’s not so far fetched that there could be a place in between Heaven and Hell … Right ?

It is more proper to think of it as a “state” rather than a “place”. Like heaven and hell, it exists outside the space/time continuum.

 

[MichaelP3]

I just don’t get it? Who is to say that we are even worthy of entering the kingdom of heaven, with our Perfect Heavenly Father? How dare anyone say and assume that we are going to heaven after we die, how are Protestants so certain? You have to be literally perfect to enter heaven, how are Protestants so sure they don’t need purgatory? Purgatory just makes perfect sense.

Here is a few I would say make sense
Prayer for the dead in Macc : The dead were committing a mortal sin, idolatry, so this means hell in Catholic teaching, why would they pray then

Suffer in Purgatory : I always wondered about this until reading a certain book on Purgatory. It explained that an hour of torment in Purgatory can be like a thousand years of suffering on earth. So If Jesus died for us to be saved by Crucifixion but we would undergo that, I would honestly rather be crucified as well.

Who saves you : The notion of suffering for our own sins is totally unbiblical. It states so many times you can only be saved through Jesus. Saying we need to suffer in purgatory proposes that Jesus made it possible for us to save ourselves.

Orthodox : Have a very different take on this.

Old Judaism : Very different take on this

In short, to me Purgatory takes the entire essence of Christianity away. What was the purpose for the Crucifixion then? With purgatory there is no point in Jesus. It means the sacrifice of a perfect pure being wasn’t enough. We mere humans can actually add to that. We read in the Bible the sacrifice is complete and done. By saying yes Jesus died for our sins but… just nullifies what you just said.

And lastly, before someone tells me its not always suffering, well that is a wordplay that came later on. Since Catholicism mentioned Purgatory later on (No it wasn’t written about at the beginning and it seems like many early fathers then forgot about it or saw it as unimportant) it was all about suffering. Wording was changed later on to make it more abstract.

 

[Vico]

I just don’t get it? Who is to say that we are even worthy of entering the kingdom of heaven, with our Perfect Heavenly Father? How dare anyone say and assume that we are going to heaven after we die, how are Protestants so certain? You have to be literally perfect to enter heaven, how are Protestants so sure they don’t need purgatory? Purgatory just makes perfect sense.

The formal dogma of purgatory was defined by Council of Florence, July 6, 1439. The rejection of the dogma goes hand in hand with the rejection of the teaching authority of the Catholic Church. Even before the formal definition, the doctrine of purgatory was rejected by the Albigenses, Waldenses, and Hussites.

2 Maccabees 12:46: “Thus he made atonement for the dead that they might be freed from sin.”

Matthew 12:32: “And whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven; but whoever speaks against the holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come.”

Revelation 21:27: “…but nothing unclean will enter it, nor anyone who does abominable things or tells lies.”

1 Corinthians 3:11-15: “For other foundation no man can lay, but that which is laid; which is Christ Jesus. Now if any man build upon this foundation, gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay stubble: Every man’s work shall be manifest; for the day of the Lord shall declare it, because it shall be revealed in fire; and the fire shall try every man’s work, of what sort it is. If any man’s work abide, which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. If any man’s work burn, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved, yet so as by fire.”

 

[PJM]

Forgive me???
Hey!!! I’m not the one getting paid for a mass to be said for the repose of the soul.

MY FRIEND, WHAT YOU DON’T KNOW AND ARE TRYING VERY HARD TO AVOID

HINT:
A 5 LETTER WORD BEGINNING WITH “T” ___"H’

Can and WILL hurt you. Playing cutsie with God; not the brightest of ideas

God Bless you,

PJM

 

[PJM]

Here is a few I would say make sense
Prayer for the dead in Macc : The dead were committing a mortal sin, idolatry, so this means hell in Catholic teaching, why would they pray then

Hi Michael,

First we must recognize that Maccabees predates the NT by an extended period of time

In Jewish Laws & Traditions their was NO sense or knowledge of Mortal sin [nor, if memory serves to they hold that “Hell” will be eternal. So your point is mute on that score.

ALSO in order for a Mortal sin [1 John 5:16-17] to exist; 3 Conditions MUST exist:

1 It must be a grave matter [and it was in this case]

2 It must be known before doing it that it would be a MORTAL-sin to do it [NOT present here]

3 Then freely choose to do it anyway [which too was present]
.

Suffer in Purgatory : I always wondered about this until reading a certain book on Purgatory. It explained that an hour of torment in Purgatory can be like a thousand years of suffering on earth. So If Jesus died for us to be saved by Crucifixion but we would undergo that, I would honestly rather be crucified as well

NOT your choice EXCEPT NOT to sin in the 1st place.
Michael ypu may wish to read my prior post on an in-depth discussion of Purgatory?

POST 92,93,94,95 & 96.

Who saves you : The notion of suffering for our own sins is totally unbiblical. It states so many times you can only be saved through Jesus. Saying we need to suffer in purgatory proposes that Jesus made it possible for us to save ourselves

ACTUALLY MICHAEL ONE CAN “ONLY” BE SAVED [GOD’S WAY] THROUGH THE MANNER INSTITUTED BY JESUS [MT. 16; 18-19; John 17:17-20, John 20:19-23 & Mt 28:19-20] Their does exist the Highly Conditional possibility of an act of PERFECT CONTRITION [and nothing less than that]

As for this teaching being unbiblical: IT’S NOT:shrug:

NOT understanding the bible does not negate what the bible [a Catholic Book BTW], teaches: Each of the following pertains to Purgatory even IF you choose to deny same.

Lev.22: 21 “And when any one offers a sacrifice of peace offerings to the LORD, to fulfill a vow or as a freewill offering, from the herd or from the flock, to be accepted it must be perfect; there shall be no blemish in it.

**Rev. 21: 27 **“But nothing unclean shall enter it, nor anyone who practices abomination or falsehood, but only those who are written in the Lamb’s book of life.”

Mt. 5: 26 truly, I say to you, you will never get out till you have paid the last penny.

Matt.5: 48 “You, therefore, must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect.”

**Heb. 2: 10 **For it was fitting that he, for whom and by whom all things exist, in bringing many sons to glory, should make the pioneer of their salvation perfect through suffering.

**1John.3: 2 to 3 **“Beloved, we are God’s children now; it does not yet appear what we shall be, but we know that when he appears we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is. And every one who thus hopes in him purifies himself as he is pure.”

1 Cor. 3: 13-14 “each man’s work will become manifest; for the Day will disclose it, because it will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test what sort of work each one has done if the work which any man has built on the foundation survives, he will receive a reward. If any man’s work is burned up, he will suffer loss, [Purgatory] though he himself will be saved, but only as through fire.

2nd. Cor. 7:1 “Since we have these promises, beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from every defilement of body and spirit, and make holiness perfect in the fear of God

Denial of Purgatory is
NOT God’s way [defies God’s essential fairness and Justice]

Denies man of his inherit “right” bestowed upon him by our Creator-God to use his intellect, mind and freewill to continually PROVE to God that we Know; Love, serve and OBEY Him fully

Exhibits a shallow understanding of God’s very Nature: GOD MUST BE FAIR AND JUST:

God simply cannot treat Protestants [who are in denial] differently from Catholics who are not. TRUTH has to be singular per defined issue; and this issue was LONG defied prior to the reformers denials:shrug: .

Orthodox : Have a very different take on this.

Old Judaism : Very different take on this

END of part 1 of 2: PLEASE see the next post

 

[PJM]

Pt 2 of 2 Continued from above

In short, to me Purgatory takes the entire essence of Christianity away. What was the purpose for the Crucifixion then? With purgatory there is no point in Jesus. It means the sacrifice of a perfect pure being wasn’t enough. We mere humans can actually add to that. We read in the Bible the sacrifice is complete and done. By saying yes Jesus died for our sins but… just nullifies what you just said

Christ Sacrifice on the Cross was to make the POSSIBILITY of salvation: Always conditional & always a PROCESS of man proving to God our desire to be forever united with Him; as is JUST & FAIR. The presumption of OSAS is no more than that; a presumption based on 1. NOT using the entire bible & 2 NOT being able to comprehend what the bible actually is teaching in TOTAL. .

Michael; the sloop of transgressions is very steep indeed. Simply put: Actions have consequences. Good to good; not so “good” to the same and Evil is the reward of evil.

Not accepting
God’s Nature
The Nature of Sin [and its NECESSARY consequences]
Man’s nature and WHY we exist as we do
A innate inability to rightly comprehend the bible
and very-human-Pride that permits all of the above
Are what has to be overcome to grasp Christ truths

Jesus desired that all men be saved [1st Tim. 2:4] BUT HIS WAY; not based on man’s innovations that contradict HIS Truths…It’s impossible, IMPOSSIBLE that God could, would or DID wait more than 1,000 YEARS after His Resurrection for the reformers [in denial] to make know HIS Faith Truths.

When Apostate catholic’s [Luther & Calvin] freely choose to DENY GOD [the reformation is nothing less that that because they were telling GOD that they DID know better; DID know more than God Himself. Denial of the Only Church and God’s only- Faith beliefs is denial of God…[prove provided upon request].

So like a snowball going down a deep grade picks up A-LOT more snow; in that same manner one falsehood quickly and naturally leads to others, which leads to others AND so -on. The FACT that their exist thousands of differing set of “faith-beliefs”; tied into a Holy Spirit restricted right understanding of the bible [the foundation of unbelief] is logical and indisputable evidence of these claims. So is the inability to recognize the truth here.

And lastly, before someone tells me its not always suffering, well that is a wordplay that came later on. Since Catholicism mentioned Purgatory later on (No it wasn’t written about at the beginning and it seems like many early fathers then forgot about it or saw it as unimportant) it was all about suffering. Wording was changed later on to make it more abstract.

Pride driven by a result that you insist upon my friend:shrug:

Pray much and I will pray with you,

PJM.

 

[MichaelP3]

Pt 2 of 2 Continued from above

Christ Sacrifice on the Cross was to make the POSSIBILITY of salvation: Always conditional & always a PROCESS of man proving to God our desire to be forever united with Him; as is JUST & FAIR. The presumption of OSAS is no more than that; a presumption based on 1. NOT using the entire bible & 2 NOT being able to comprehend what the bible actually is teaching in TOTAL. .

Michael; the sloop of transgressions is very steep indeed. Simply put: Actions have consequences. Good to good; not so “good” to the same and Evil is the reward of evil.

Not accepting
God’s Nature
The Nature of Sin [and its NECESSARY consequences]
Man’s nature and WHY we exist as we do
A innate inability to rightly comprehend the bible
and very-human-Pride that permits all of the above
Are what has to be overcome to grasp Christ truths

Jesus desired that all men be saved [1st Tim. 2:4] BUT HIS WAY; not based on man’s innovations that contradict HIS Truths…It’s impossible, IMPOSSIBLE that God could, would or DID wait more than 1,000 YEARS after His Resurrection for the reformers [in denial] to make know HIS Faith Truths.

When Apostate catholic’s [Luther & Calvin] freely choose to DENY GOD [the reformation is nothing less that that because they were telling GOD that they DID know better; DID know more than God Himself. Denial of the Only Church and God’s only- Faith beliefs is denial of God…[prove provided upon request].

So like a snowball going down a deep grade picks up A-LOT more snow; in that same manner one falsehood quickly and naturally leads to others, which leads to others AND so -on. The FACT that their exist thousands of differing set of “faith-beliefs”; tied into a Holy Spirit restricted right understanding of the bible [the foundation of unbelief] is logical and indisputable evidence of these claims. So is the inability to recognize the truth here.

Pride driven by a result that you insist upon my friend:shrug:

Pray much and I will pray with you,

PJM.

Wow what a mouthful. I do appreciate the time that must have gone into this.

Basically I have one question. As I couldn’t make it out through everything which is part of my problem in the first place as the teachings on this sound like a law contract. You know including this with this clause except for this and so on.

If I ask you is Jesus pure, holy and perfect. You would say yes. And I ask you did this pure, holy and perfect God suffer a death on a cross for our sins. You would say yes.

So putting an ant against a whale, what can the and really do, and with us against God it’s so much larger. I feel it comes forth as arrogant for man to feel he can do anything in relation to God.

And yes I know all those verses. It also says call no man your father but there when it is direct Jesus apparently meant it differently. Here when it’s very metaphorically it apparently means without a doubt purgatory.

And oh, you added to my argument when you said Jesus made it possible for us to be saved. So if I suffer for my sins, apparently a lot worse then a crucifixion, but it came from God. Does that make sense. Im not so sure.

And believe me, I’ve been doing a lot of research about various topics the past 2 years. I mean hours and hours. Your post didn’t shed new light. I’m a Protestant who can quote the Catholic Catechism to a very great extent. Yea, I’m bored a lot.

 

[jschwartz]

If God is both loving/merciful and also Just, which God is, than there must be a purgatory. It is interesting that in Judaism, gehenam tends to be more of a purgatory than a place where people are eternally punished. God’s Love ultimately does win at the end of the day, though, but the Hebrew Scriptures talk of the Refiner’s Fire. Before people could meet God in the Temple, they had to purify themselves through water. Vessels plundered from the Midianites had to be either purged by water or fire. In this world, the soul meets God through the sacrament of water, Baptism, and ablutions of holy water remind us of the regenerative power of God’s Love. Similarly, in the afterlife, we must be cleansed before we meet God, and while we’re forgiven of sin through the shed blood of the cross, purgatory is akin to the soul’s baptism at the end of life, after we’ve accumulated much karmic baggage through sin.

Without purgatory, God would be akin to an ogre or tyrant. The Eastern Orthodox Church holds that it is necessary to believe in an intermediate after-death state in which believers are perfected and brought to full divinization, a process of growth rather than of punishment, which some Orthodox have called purgatory.

As an Anglo-Catholic, I do believe firmly in purgatory. John Henry Newman, in his Tract XC of 1841 §6, discussed Article XXII of the 39 articles, which seems to condemn purgatory. He highlighted the fact that it is the “Romish” doctrine of purgatory coupled with indulgences that Article XXII condemns as “repugnant to the Word of God.” The article did not condemn every doctrine of purgatory and it did not condemn prayers for the dead.

John Henry Hobart, third bishop of the Episcopal Church in NY, writes that “Hades (what the Eastern Orthodox call purgatory), or the place of the dead, is represented as a spacious receptacle with gates, through which the dead enter.” The Anglican Catechist elaborates on Hades, stating that it “is an intermediate state between death and the resurrection, in which the soul does not sleep in unconsciousness, but exists in happiness or misery till the resurrection, when it shall be reunited to the body and receive its final reward.” This space is divided into Paradise and Gehenna “but with an impassable gulf between the two”. Souls, with exception of martyrs and saints, remain in Hades until the Final Judgment and “Christians may also improve in holiness after death during the middle state before the final judgment.”

Hobart was a proponent of the High Church/Catholic movement in the church, I should note. The Book of Common Prayer includes prayers for the dead, both that they may be “purged” of “defilements . . . contracted” in their “earthly life” and that they may increase in the “knowledge and love” of God. Sounds no different from the RC position on the subject to me.

 

[twf]

Wow what a mouthful. I do appreciate the time that must have gone into this.

Basically I have one question. As I couldn’t make it out through everything which is part of my problem in the first place as the teachings on this sound like a law contract. You know including this with this clause except for this and so on.

If I ask you is Jesus pure, holy and perfect. You would say yes. And I ask you did this pure, holy and perfect God suffer a death on a cross for our sins. You would say yes.

So putting an ant against a whale, what can the and really do, and with us against God it’s so much larger. I feel it comes forth as arrogant for man to feel he can do anything in relation to God.

And yes I know all those verses. It also says call no man your father but there when it is direct Jesus apparently meant it differently. Here when it’s very metaphorically it apparently means without a doubt purgatory.

And oh, you added to my argument when you said Jesus made it possible for us to be saved. So if I suffer for my sins, apparently a lot worse then a crucifixion, but it came from God. Does that make sense. Im not so sure.

And believe me, I’ve been doing a lot of research about various topics the past 2 years. I mean hours and hours. Your post didn’t shed new light. I’m a Protestant who can quote the Catholic Catechism to a very great extent. Yea, I’m bored a lot.

Michael:
Did you see my earlier posts - such as #182? It was addressed to another poster but I think it sheds light on this topic. Of course we can’t add anything to Christ’s perfect sacrifice, but by “putting on Christ” in baptism we are indeed asked to share in His ministry of reconciliation. Col 1:24 alludes to this powerful. St Paul explicitly says that his sufferings make up what is lacking in the sufferings of Christ! Now Catholics believe like you that Christ’s sufferings were perfect and complete. What then do we make of this? Christ’s salvation, won for us on the cross, must be mediated to each of us in time and space. He could have simply snapped His fingers and applied the merits of the cross to all of us across history in an instant. He chose not too. Even from an evangelical perspective one must DO something - get down, say the sinners prayer… Choose to accept Christ by an act of the will. Christ wills that we participate in His plan of salvation. So St Paul is saying that United to the cross, drawing upon the divine life given to him at baptism and being transformed into the image of Christ, his sufferings help mediate Christ’s gift in the here and now. John 1:12 says that Christ gave believers the POWER to BECOME sons of God. In the parable of the vine in John 15 Christ makes it clear that rooted in Him we can indeed bear fruit that is pleasing to the Father- something impossible apart from him.
Regarding the suffering of purgatory, the popular opinions of one era were never binding doctrine. In one form or another a notion of purgation after death has been around since the beginning (which is why all ancient Christian bodies pray for the dead). The exact nature of this purgation has not always been clear.
Let’s say it is suffering greater than anything on earth. 1) Our Lord wasn’t simply crucified- He bore the full weight of our sins. 2) what would you say about any other suffering experienced by a Christian that seems worse than crucifixion? What about those who are raped, beaten and starved to death for the faith? Why did Christ allow it?

 

[Techno2000]

It is more proper to think of it as a “state” rather than a “place”. Like heaven and hell, it exists outside the space/time continuum.

And if I go and prepare a place** for you, I will come back and take you to be with me that you also may be where I am.**

 

[MichaelP3]

Michael:
Did you see my earlier posts - such as #182? It was addressed to another poster but I think it sheds light on this topic. Of course we can’t add anything to Christ’s perfect sacrifice, but by “putting on Christ” in baptism we are indeed asked to share in His ministry of reconciliation. Col 1:24 alludes to this powerful. St Paul explicitly says that his sufferings make up what is lacking in the sufferings of Christ! Now Catholics believe like you that Christ’s sufferings were perfect and complete. What then do we make of this? Christ’s salvation, won for us on the cross, must be mediated to each of us in time and space. He could have simply snapped His fingers and applied the merits of the cross to all of us across history in an instant. He chose not too. Even from an evangelical perspective one must DO something - get down, say the sinners prayer… Choose to accept Christ by an act of the will. Christ wills that we participate in His plan of salvation. So St Paul is saying that United to the cross, drawing upon the divine life given to him at baptism and being transformed into the image of Christ, his sufferings help mediate Christ’s gift in the here and now. John 1:12 says that Christ gave believers the POWER to BECOME sons of God. In the parable of the vine in John 15 Christ makes it clear that rooted in Him we can indeed bear fruit that is pleasing to the Father- something impossible apart from him.
Regarding the suffering of purgatory, the popular opinions of one era were never binding doctrine. In one form or another a notion of purgation after death has been around since the beginning (which is why all ancient Christian bodies pray for the dead). The exact nature of this purgation has not always been clear.
Let’s say it is suffering greater than anything on earth. 1) Our Lord wasn’t simply crucified- He bore the full weight of our sins. 2) what would you say about any other suffering experienced by a Christian that seems worse than crucifixion? What about those who are raped, beaten and starved to death for the faith? Why did Christ allow it?

I hear what you are saying and I understand how the idea of Purgatory could come into being. I am only here to relate understandings and as the person who started this thread asked how can Protestants not believe in Purgatory, to tell him why someone like me don’t. Honestly believing or not believing in Purgatory would have nothing to do with any of our salvation.

As to the verses you related to me, I can refer you to an equal amount or more that very directly shows that God died, nothing else is needed. Now with nothing obviously we refer to doing actual things. There is a lot of stuff Protestants don’t know and we are allowed and willing to admit it. I personally have no problem saying I dont know but I trust God. “Thy will be done”. For a Catholic this is more difficult. You are not allowed to say you don’t know. Because if you don’t, just hear the church and then you know.

Saying God could have done this or that and all will be okay is an area I wouldn’t go to myself. God does what he does and as a mere human I would rather not question that. I don’t think like God and one day I will understand. But currently I am a mere human and would never presume what God could have done.

Maybe you should look into the book Purgatory by Fr. F.X. Schouppe, S.J. It is such a horror story I can’t see any Catholic having an ounce of happiness in their lives if they believe that. But then again, it changed over the years to possibly be a fraction of a second and then you are in heaven.

And I honestly can’t agree all early believers believed this. The Catholic Church is the ONLY Christian Church with a belief defined in this way.

 

[twf]

I hear what you are saying and I understand how the idea of Purgatory could come into being. I am only here to relate understandings and as the person who started this thread asked how can Protestants not believe in Purgatory, to tell him why someone like me don’t. Honestly believing or not believing in Purgatory would have nothing to do with any of our salvation.

As to the verses you related to me, I can refer you to an equal amount or more that very directly shows that God died, nothing else is needed. Now with nothing obviously we refer to doing actual things. There is a lot of stuff Protestants don’t know and we are allowed and willing to admit it. I personally have no problem saying I dont know but I trust God. “Thy will be done”. For a Catholic this is more difficult. You are not allowed to say you don’t know. Because if you don’t, just hear the church and then you know.

Saying God could have done this or that and all will be okay is an area I wouldn’t go to myself. God does what he does and as a mere human I would rather not question that. I don’t think like God and one day I will understand. But currently I am a mere human and would never presume what God could have done.

Maybe you should look into the book Purgatory by Fr. F.X. Schouppe, S.J. It is such a horror story I can’t see any Catholic having an ounce of happiness in their lives if they believe that. But then again, it changed over the years to possibly be a fraction of a second and then you are in heaven.

And I honestly can’t agree all early believers believed this. The Catholic Church is the ONLY Christian Church with a belief defined in this way.

All apostolic communions (Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, Assyrians…) pray and offer sacrifice (the Eucharist) for the dead. So the notion of helping those who have died through our prayers and offerings is definitely most ancient- and inherited from Judaism. Some Orthodox, especially of the Russian tradition, believe in Toll Houses, which is a sort of suffering after death to overcome sin (though definitely distict from the western concept of purgatory).
Of course CAtholics can say “I don’t know”. The Church only teaches so much. The doctrines I alluded to in my earlier post - particularly our role in the sufferings of Christ - are great mysteries. We can only scratch the surface.

 

[GKC]

All apostolic communions (Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, Assyrians…) pray and offer sacrifice (the Eucharist) for the dead. So the notion of helping those who have died through our prayers and offerings is definitely most ancient- and inherited from Judaism. Some Orthodox, especially of the Russian tradition, believe in Toll Houses, which is a sort of suffering after death to overcome sin (though definitely distict from the western concept of purgatory).
Of course CAtholics can say “I don’t know”. The Church only teaches so much. The doctrines I alluded to in my earlier post - particularly our role in the sufferings of Christ - are great mysteries. We can only scratch the surface.

And selected Anglicans, following the ellipses. Every first Friday, there is a requiem Mass at my parish.