J
jim1130
Guest
It might help for you to understand that purgatory is not a place, but a process.
Why won’t the Protestant non-Catholic Christians here, argue with the real Catholic Apologists at CAF?
- Status
H
Hisalone
Guest
Please look at the verses that were posted as eidence FOR purgatory. REad them ask yourself are they about prugatory?Hi Jimmy,
I have a question about the Catholic doctrine of purgatory, which is something of a stumbling block for me. I accept that it’s possible to adduce various Bible verses to support the doctrine. But am I right in asserting that the existence of purgatory wasn’t declared as doctrine in the West until well after the Schism of 1054? The Eastern Orthodox Church insists that purgatory does not exist and that fact is certainly a consideration for an inquirer like me. However, I’m trying to get my mind around the Catholic understanding of purgatory.
It seems to me that purgatory is perhaps best described as a “temporary hell.” It hurts like hell but it won’t last forever, some might say. In Catholic thought, then, purgatory is a place where people are purged – that is, they are punished for the bad things that they did while they lived on earth. When they’re completely purged, they can progress into heaven.
Well, if I’ve got that right, it seems to follow that the best a Catholic can hope for after death – assuming he or she doesn’t get martyred, which I’m led to believe is the only route by which a sane adult Catholic may gain direct entry into heaven at the point of his or her death – is to be sent away by God to suffer for an indeterminate but presumably lengthy time in a temporary hell.
The thing is – assuming I’ve correctly grasped all the implications of the doctrine – this simply doesn’t sound like good news. I guess what I’m struggling with is the fact that Christ didn’t make it crystal–clear that there is this intermediary place after death that most people can count on heading for. The doctrine wasn’t developed until centuries after Christ walked the earth. That doesn’t necessarily make the doctrine wrong. But it does make it rather more difficult to believe. Have you ever had doubts about this doctrine based on the thought process I’ve just outlined? I daresay such a train of thought has occurred to you at one time or another.
Cordially,
Mick
It is another Catholic attempt to read a doctrine into the scripture rather than allow a doctrine to be defined by scripture. Do not be decieved.
C
ckempston
Guest
The Apostles were baptized by the Holy Spirit and Fire, yet they were completely unharmed by the process. It was not a “purgation” as purgatory is supposed to be. They did not suffer.
P
Peter_J
Guest
Hi SSTeacher,
May I refer you to the answer given by Dr. Anthony Dragani:
Purgatory: **Could you please explain the differences among Latin theology concerning the Dogma of Purgatory and that of the various Eastern Churches? **
As a general rule, all Eastern Christians do not use the word “Purgatory.” This includes both Eastern Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Christians. The word “Purgatory” is specific to the Latin tradition, and carries some specific historical baggage that makes Eastern Christians uncomfortable.
In the Medieval West, many popular theologians defined Purgatory as a specific place, where people essentially sat around and suffered. Some theologians went so far as to imply that a literal fire burns those who suffer in Purgatory. It was also popular to tally periods of time that people spent in purgatory for various offences. It is worth noting that contemporary Roman Catholic theology has (thankfully) moved beyond this approach, to a more Patristic understanding of Purgatory.
In the Catholic understanding, only two points are necessary dogma concerning “purgatory”: 1) There is a place of transition/transformation for those en-route to Heaven, and 2) prayer is efficacious for the dead who are in this state.
The Eastern Orthodox and Eastern Catholic Churches agree with the Latin Church fully on both of these points. In practice, we routinely celebrate Divine Liturgies for the dead, and offer numerous prayers on their behalf. We would not do so if we did not agree with the above two dogmatic points.
But again, we do not use the word “Purgatory” for two reasons. First, it is a Latin word first used in the Medieval West, and we use Greek words to describe our theology. Second, the word “Purgatory” still carries specific Medieval baggage that we aren’t comfortable with.
It is noteworthy that my own Byzantine Catholic Church has never been required to use the word Purgatory. Our act of reunion with Rome, “The Treaty of Brest,” which was formally accepted by Pope Clement VIII, does not require us to accept the Western understanding of Purgatory.
Article V of the Treaty of Brest states “We shall not debate about purgatory…” implying that both sides can agree to disagree on the specifics of what the West calls “Purgatory.”
In the East, we tend to have a much more positive view of the transition from death to Heaven. Rather than “Purgatory,” we prefer to call it “the Final Theosis.” This refers to the process of deification, in which the remnants of our humans nature are transformed, and we come to share in the divine life of the Trinity. Rather than seeing this as a place to “sit and suffer,” the Eastern Fathers of the Church described the Final Theosis as being a journey. While this journey can entail hardships, there are also powerful glimpses of joy.
Interestingly, Mother Angelica has repeatedly expressed a very positive understanding of “Purgatory” being a joyful state, rather than a place of suffering. In some ways her description lines up well with the Eastern understanding of the Final Theosis.
Although we do not use the same words, Eastern Orthodox/Catholics and Latin Catholics do essentially believe the same thing on this important point.
east2west.org/doctrine.htm#Purgatory
P
Peter_J
Guest
Excellent advice.
C
ckempston
Guest
I’m sure it does sound like purgatory to most Catholics, because that’s what the Catholic church teaches. Look at the passage in context. What is tested with fire is the “work” of each man, not the man himself. That he will be saved “only as through fire” makes much more sense if taken as a figure of speech, not a literal statement that the person gets burned.
If any man builds on this foundation using gold, silver, costly stones, wood, hay or straw, his work will be shown for what it is, because the Day will bring it to light. It will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test the quality of each man’s work.
C
ckempston
Guest
This passage is about the throne in heaven.
Jesus paid the last penny, did he not?
An “eye for an eye”? Is that what you’re referring to? Jesus tossed that rule out; how is that supposed to support purgatory?
The “Lord, Lord” passage? Again, what does this have to do with purgatory?
Jimmy, if you’d like to make a specific claim about one of these passages, please do so. I know you’d like me to do all the work, look up the passages, provide alternate explanations so you can catch me in some slip-up or misstatement, but I’d really prefer not to do things this way.
Provide a passage, give your interpretation, and lets have a discussion. I’d really rather not argue with links.
H
Hisalone
Guest
Brilliant an expose of the Catholic position.
A
adrift
Guest
C
ckempston
Guest
I think you are seriously misunderstanding this passage. First, in context, it is part of the sermon on the mount, which is all about how to be righteous in this lifetime. Jesus also makes this statement:
For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven.
Nobody can surpass the righteousness of the Pharisees, which was Jesus’ point. To the people listening to Jesus, they would have been thinking, “How is it possible to surpass the righteousness of the PHarisees?” The answer, of course, is that we are declared righteous in God’s sight, through the sacrifice of Jesus Christ, not by our own actions.
Even if we make the penny analogy refer to the afterlife and judgment, we are incapable of paying the last penny; hence, the need for a Savior. The analogy falls apart as soon as it starts if we go with your explanation. The only way to have the last penny paid if you are in jail is for someone else to pay it. Jesus did, and does, make payment on your behalf.
I stand by my statement that Jesus pays all, up to, and including, the last penny.
B
bookgirl32
Guest
And now we’re equating Purgatory to jail, yet another non-Catholic putting words in the Catholic Church’s mouth, thanks. You know what would be respectful? You actually either, one, listening to the Catholics and thinking that, maybe, they know more about their own Church than you do, or two, actually trying to look at some Catholic sources (especially CCC) to find out from the real source. At the very least you could read the last page of posts.
Purgatory has nothing to do with paying any pennies, simply getting cleaned up before going into an immaculate house.
R
Roamin_Xian
Guest
How is it not like jail? Is it more like celebrity rehabilitation (aka, meaning you go for fanfare, but nothing substantive occurs).
C
ckempston
Guest
These types of responses never cease to amaze me. You jump in here with your outrage that anyone would disagree with Catholic doctrine, make blatantly false accusations, and you obviously didn’t read my post or the post of the person I was responding to.
I suggest you do just that, because you would see clearly that **it was a Catholic who first brought up the passage about jail/pennies and made it an analogy about Purgatory, not me. **
I’ll stand by for your apology.
B
bookgirl32
Guest
Jail is a punishment, Purgatory is not. Getting cleaned up is not the same as being punished. Purgatory, in fact, should be a very happy state. You’re on your way to Heaven and nothing is stopping you! The only suffering comes from being close but not being there yet, kind of like Dec. 23rd for little kids. Suffering comes in the waiting, yes, but it is far outshined by the knowledge of what you’re about to experience.
B
bookgirl32
Guest
Will check that out.
B
bookgirl32
Guest
Apology offered, someone else did start it.
C
ckempston
Guest
1498 Through indulgences the faithful can obtain the remission of temporal punishment resulting from sin for themselves and also for the **souls in Purgatory. **
This, from the Catechism, seems to clearly state that those in Purgatory are being punished.
C
ckempston
Guest
Apology accepted. Now I feel kind of bad for going so hard on you.
B
bookgirl32
Guest
You know what? You’re right. In my frustration at a lot of people on this thread comparing Purgaroty to a “mini Hell” I let myself go too far. There is temporal punishment, punishment in not YET being with God, that is involved in Purgatory. So, I, in my frustration, misrepresented my Church.
But I think that you are confused in your understanding of the passage:
In other words, punishment deserved does not indicate the continuing presence of guilt.
Thanks for putting me in my place though
But I think that you are confused in your understanding of the passage:
New Advent Encyclopedia
In other words, punishment deserved does not indicate the continuing presence of guilt.
Thanks for putting me in my place though
C
ckempston
Guest
I appreciate your humility, and hope we can continue an amiable discussion.You know what? You’re right. In my frustration at a lot of people on this thread comparing Purgaroty to a “mini Hell” I let myself go too far. There is temporal punishment, punishment in not YET being with God, that is involved in Purgatory. So, I, in my frustration, misrepresented my Church.
But I think that you are confused in your understanding of the passage:
New Advent Encyclopedia
In other words, punishment deserved does not indicate the continuing presence of guilt.
Thanks for putting me in my place though
I see where you are coming from, but I would refer to what you’re describing as “consequences” instead of punishment. Punishment can certainly be a consequence, but a consequence is not always punishment (if that makes sense). I see consequences as just cause/effect based on natural law rather than divine retribution.
If I am unfaithful to my wife, and a child results, I can be forgiven of the sin, but the consequence of a child being born is there, basically forever.
The problem is, I have a hard time describing what would happen in Purgatory other than calling it punishment. If it’s just a sort of holding pattern before you land in heaven, what goes on there?
- Status