Is Purgatory real?

[Basil the Great]

I am probably one of the few Protestants that believes in some sort of Intermediate State. However, I do not like the term Purgatory, as it has a lot of questionable connotations connected to it. Traditionally the Catholic Church seems to have taught that Purgatory is a place of punishment and some have even used the term burning, perhaps akin to what Hell is often described like. I tend to think that the Intermediate State is perhaps more like going to school and learning to see what we did wrong and thus hopefully feeling sorry for all our sins. I think the Eastern Orthodox are more on track than the Catholics when it comes to the Intermediate State. Their teaching about the Intermediate State is much less defined than the Catholic Purgatory. The EOC certainly prays for the dead, but they do not pretend to know exactly how said prayers might benefit the deceased. I also like the Jewish view of the afterlife regarding this matter. I have read where at least some Jewish scholars have taught that at most souls might have to spend a year in an Intermediate State before moving on to Heaven. The view of some that certain souls might have to spend decades or even longer in Purgatory before moving on to Heaven does seem a bit harsh.

The bottom line is that we really do not know. Only God knows the truth. Will everyone go to Heaven or Hell immediately upon death or will many or even most souls bound for Heaven have to spend some time in an Intermediate State before moving on to Paradise? It would be wonderful to think that we go to Heaven instantly upon our death and I certainly hope that this is the case. However, I fully expect that at least some Christians will have to spend a while in an Intermediate State, especially those who have been guilty of repeated serious sins, like adultery, spousal abuse, etc.

 

[BNR32FAN]

And your post shows that you don't understand what Purgatory is.

Purgatory is about sanctification; not justification. Words mean things. When non-Catholics entirely miss the point of Purgatory with the reasoning used in your post, they handily demonstrate that they don't understand the purpose of Purgatory.

Purgatory is about forgiveness of sin after death. The verses I quoted say that we are already cleansed of all sin and we stand before God holy and blameless without a single fault. Also the teaching of purgatory claims that we cannot enter heaven until after we are purified of our sin and Paul say that we can enter the most holy place now. He makes absolutely no mention of purgatory or a purification after death. You would think if he did in fact teach purgatory he wouldn't say these things about sinners who haven't gone thru purgatory yet.

 

[BNR32FAN]

I am probably one of the few Protestants that believes in some sort of Intermediate State. However, I do not like the term Purgatory, as it has a lot of questionable connotations connected to it. Traditionally the Catholic Church seems to have taught that Purgatory is a place of punishment and some have even used the term burning, perhaps akin to what Hell is often described like. I tend to think that the Intermediate State is perhaps more like going to school and learning to see what we did wrong and thus hopefully feeling sorry for all our sins. I think the Eastern Orthodox are more on track than the Catholics when it comes to the Intermediate State. Their teaching about the Intermediate State is much less defined than the Catholic Purgatory. The EOC certainly prays for the dead, but they do not pretend to know exactly how said prayers might benefit the deceased. I also like the Jewish view of the afterlife regarding this matter. I have read where at least some Jewish scholars have taught that at most souls might have to spend a year in an Intermediate State before moving on to Heaven. The view of some that certain souls might have to spend decades or even longer in Purgatory before moving on to Heaven does seem a bit harsh.

The bottom line is that we really do not know. Only God knows the truth. Will everyone go to Heaven or Hell immediately upon death or will many or even most souls bound for Heaven have to spend some time in an Intermediate State before moving on to Paradise? It would be wonderful to think that we go to Heaven instantly upon our death and I certainly hope that this is the case. However, I fully expect that at least some Christians will have to spend a while in an Intermediate State, especially those who have been guilty of repeated serious sins, like adultery, spousal abuse, etc.

The verses I quoted show that Paul is teaching that we are already sanctified when we have faith in Jesus. He wrote that we are reconciled, made right with God, and we stand before Him holy and blameless without reproach and we can enter the most holy place. Hence the vail was torn. He wrote this to sinners not to people who had already gone thru purgatory. This would contradict the catholic understanding of 1 Corinthians 3:15.

 

[thecolorsblend]

Purgatory is about forgiveness of sin after death.

It's about sanctification. It isn't a second chance or some such silliness. In Purgatory, the penitent is purged, he is sanctified. That must happen at some point because this mortal must put on immortality.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Perhaps you should read what the catholic catechism has to say about purgatory and learn about your own religion.

1031. "The Church gives the name Purgatory to this final purification of the elect, which is entirely different from the punishment of the damned. [Cf. Council of Florence (1439): DS 1304; Council of Trent (1563): DS 1820; (1547): 1580; see also Benedict XII, Benedictus Deus (1336): DS 1000.] The Church formulated her doctrine of faith on Purgatory especially at the Councils of Florence and Trent. The tradition of the Church, by reference to certain texts of Scripture, speaks of a cleansing fire. [Cf. 1 Cor 3:15; 1 Pet 1:7.] As for certain lesser faults, we must believe that, before the Final Judgment, there is a purifying fire. He who is truth says that whoever utters blasphemy against the Holy Spirit will be pardoned neither in this age nor in the age to come. From this sentence we understand that certain offenses can be forgiven in this age, but certain others in the age to come. [St. Gregory the Great, Dial. 4, 39: PL 77, 396; cf. Mt 12:32-36.]"

Certain offenses can be forgiven in this age but others in the age to come. Not that this is correct because Jesus never said that. He said you won't be forgiven in this world or the world to come. The catholic church is making an assumption. Jesus never said anything about forgiveness of sin after death.

 

[thecolorsblend]

I'm actually quite clear on the teachings of my Church. That section of the catechism explains the Church's understanding of the nature of the afterlife and the forgiveness of sins. Their reasoning is pretty clearly spelled out in that passage that you quoted.

From a purely practical standpoint, there would have to be some kind of forgiveness available in the afterlife. One reason for that is that it stands to reason that many people might, for example, die suddenly before they have an opportunity to seek forgiveness for something. It wouldn't seem logical for otherwise faithful, obedient Christians to be condemned due to circumstances utterly outside of their control.

To rise above the weeds though, 1030-1032 of the catechism speak directly to the purification I mentioned before. So again, the purpose of Purgatory is sanctification; not justification.

Also, the fact that Our Lord doesn't explicitly speak to a particular in sacred scripture hardly invalidates that idea. There are many subjects He is not recorded as having discussed. So I don't accept this as a reasonable objection to the doctrine of Purgatory.

I will say, however, that I think terminology is playing a role in the confusion many people have about Purgatory. I suspect that if the Church had used the term Purgation to describe the final process of purification, the doctrine might be more palatable to some.

 

[GoldenKingGaze]

Nah it aint real.

Purgatory is not necessarily the name, nor is there one place.

 

[GoldenKingGaze]

I will just get to the point: Is Purgatory real? Didn't Christ already pay for our sins (taking the punishment for us) when He died in the Cross? Aren't we covered in the blood of the lamb? This life on Earth is a waiting place for us; why go to another waiting place? Aren't we made clean by accepting His death?

Jesus said that those who know what to say but do not say it will be beaten with many lashes.
Luk 12:47 "The servant who knows what his master wants him to do, but does not get himself ready and do it, will be punished with a heavy whipping.
Luk 12:48 But the servant who does not know what his master wants, and yet does something for which he deserves a whipping, will be punished with a light whipping. Much is required from the person to whom much is given; much more is required from the person to whom much more is given. GNB

 

[BNR32FAN]

I'm actually quite clear on the teachings of my Church. That section of the catechism explains the Church's understanding of the nature of the afterlife and the forgiveness of sins. Their reasoning is pretty clearly spelled out in that passage that you quoted.

From a purely practical standpoint, there would have to be some kind of forgiveness available in the afterlife. One reason for that is that it stands to reason that many people might, for example, die suddenly before they have an opportunity to seek forgiveness for something. It wouldn't seem logical for otherwise faithful, obedient Christians to be condemned due to circumstances utterly outside of their control.

To rise above the weeds though, 1030-1032 of the catechism speak directly to the purification I mentioned before. So again, the purpose of Purgatory is sanctification; not justification.

Also, the fact that Our Lord doesn't explicitly speak to a particular in sacred scripture hardly invalidates that idea. There are many subjects He is not recorded as having discussed. So I don't accept this as a reasonable objection to the doctrine of Purgatory.

I will say, however, that I think terminology is playing a role in the confusion many people have about Purgatory. I suspect that if the Church had used the term Purgation to describe the final process of purification, the doctrine might be more palatable to some.

My entire point from the beginning is that there are no sins to be forgiven in the afterlife. That is what Paul and the author of Hebrews is saying. The catechism says sins can be forgiven in the afterlife and Paul says we are holy and blameless without a single fault as we stand before God. We can enter the most holy place. How do you not see that this is a contradiction? How are we holy and blameless as we stand before God WITHOUT A SINGLE FAULT and able to enter the most holy place if we still have sins that must be removed? God said when our sins are forgiven He will remember them no more. So temporal punishment is also a contradiction because Paul says we are forgiven by having faith in Jesus. Past tense already happened. The doctrine of purgatory was formulated during a terrible time for the catholic church. When there was much corruption and selling of indulgences and also during the inquisitions. It was these men who formulated the doctrine of purgatory at the councils of Florence and Trent. We're these men guided by the Holy Spirit when they gave the church the authority to torture and execute nonbelievers for 724 years? Sanctioned by 100 popes during that period. Jesus warned us to beware of false prophets who are really vicious wolves disguised as sheep. He said you can identify them by their actions. These were the major reasons for the reformation because the oral traditions were corrupted beyond recognition. Given the nature of the men who formulated the doctrine of purgatory I believe it was instituted for nothing more than to solicit more indulgences to satisfy their greed and lust for wealth. Also the same reason they were forcing catholicism on nonbelievers.

 

[chevyontheriver]

My entire point from the beginning is that there are no sins to be forgiven in the afterlife.

Yup. That's your point. I give you that. You have been very consistent.

That is what Paul and the author of Hebrews is saying.

I think you simplified a tiny bit there. This IS the same Paul who also said, among other interesting things, "work out your salvation in fear and trembling".

Paul says we are holy and blameless without a single fault as we stand before God. We can enter the most holy place. How do you not see that this is a contradiction? How are we holy and blameless as we stand before God WITHOUT A SINGLE FAULT and able to enter the most holy place if we still have sins that must be removed?

That is the question. You believe you are ready to go, right now, as you are right now, to stand in front of God all pure and sinless without a single fault and tell God how pure and sinless and holy you are. Most other people know their faults, and how they are not pure and sinless. We hope and pray that God will purge out our bad habits, our bad thoughts, our inclinations not to love purely, our imperfect virtues, our inabilities to focus in prayer for more than 30 seconds, our love of money and possessions, and all of the other inordinate desires of our impure hearts. For all of these, purgatory is God's blessing to us, for otherwise we know we are unfit to stand anywhere near God.

God said when our sins are forgiven He will remember them no more. So temporal punishment is also a contradiction because Paul says we are forgiven by having faith in Jesus. Past tense already happened.

But it's not about forgiven and confessed sins. It's about, first, the consequences of those sins, and not the guilt of those sins. Consequences and guilt are two very different things. If you do the crime you have the guilt of doing the crime, and you have created bad consequences by having done the crime. You can be forgiven, but there can still be damage that someone is hurt by. The damage needs reparation to restore the damage done. If you deny that then we really are speaking different languages.

The doctrine of purgatory was formulated during a terrible time for the catholic church. When there was much corruption and selling of indulgences and also during the inquisitions. It was these men who formulated the doctrine of purgatory at the councils of Florence and Trent. We're these men guided by the Holy Spirit when they gave the church the authority to torture and execute nonbelievers for 724 years? Sanctioned by 100 popes during that period. Jesus warned us to beware of false prophets who are really vicious wolves disguised as sheep. He said you can identify them by their actions. These were the major reasons for the reformation because the oral traditions were corrupted beyond recognition. Given the nature of the men who formulated the doctrine of purgatory I believe it was instituted for nothing more than to solicit more indulgences to satisfy their greed and lust for wealth. Also the same reason they were forcing catholicism on nonbelievers.

You do need to learn some history of the Church. You have conflated and confused over a thousand years of history in the above paragraph. You probably don't know this but the doctrine of purgatory is substantially complete in St. Augustine's writing by 400 AD. And that there is plenty of early Church evidence for prayers for the dead who sleep in Christ. And that the selling of indulgences was something condemned by Catholics when it happened, including by that (ever so evil) council of Trent. And that the Council of Florence was to discuss agreed upon items between Orthodox and Catholics, one of them being our common understanding of prayers for the dead. You may hate the Catholic Church, but at least get your history in order and don't perpetuate such mythology.

 

[thecolorsblend]

My entire point from the beginning is that there are no sins to be forgiven in the afterlife. That is what Paul and the author of Hebrews is saying. The catechism says sins can be forgiven in the afterlife and Paul says we are holy and blameless without a single fault as we stand before God. We can enter the most holy place. How do you not see that this is a contradiction? How are we holy and blameless as we stand before God WITHOUT A SINGLE FAULT and able to enter the most holy place if we still have sins that must be removed? God said when our sins are forgiven He will remember them no more. So temporal punishment is also a contradiction because Paul says we are forgiven by having faith in Jesus. Past tense already happened. The doctrine of purgatory was formulated during a terrible time for the catholic church. When there was much corruption and selling of indulgences and also during the inquisitions. It was these men who formulated the doctrine of purgatory at the councils of Florence and Trent. We're these men guided by the Holy Spirit when they gave the church the authority to torture and execute nonbelievers for 724 years? Sanctioned by 100 popes during that period. Jesus warned us to beware of false prophets who are really vicious wolves disguised as sheep. He said you can identify them by their actions. These were the major reasons for the reformation because the oral traditions were corrupted beyond recognition. Given the nature of the men who formulated the doctrine of purgatory I believe it was instituted for nothing more than to solicit more indulgences to satisfy their greed and lust for wealth. Also the same reason they were forcing catholicism on nonbelievers.

You've fired off a lot of inaccurate information and fake history there. My friend chevyontheriver has addressed the broad points of your post.

As for me, to dig down on one particular issue, Purgatory was understood doctrine long before either of the councils you mention. One specific quote I remembered off the top of my head was...

"If a man distinguish in himself what is peculiarly human from that which is irrational, and if he be on the watch for a life of greater urbanity for himself, in this present life he will purify himself of any evil contracted, overcoming the irrational by reason. If he has inclined to the irrational pressure of the passions, using for the passions the cooperating hide of things irrational, he may afterward in a quite different manner be very much interested in what is better, when, after his departure out of the body, he gains knowledge of the difference between virtue and vice and finds that he is not able to partake of divinity until he has been purged of the filthy contagion in his soul by the purifying fire."

That, in a nutshell, is Purgatory.

To rise above the weeds a little bit, I should say that I doubt believing in Purgatory will somehow benefit me in the afterlife and I also don't think rejecting it will harm you. Though I reserve the right to be wrong on both of those counts. Still, the relevant issue, as I see it, is that there was broad consensus on this doctrine before either of the councils you mention and possibly even before the advent of Christianity. People whom I consider to be smarter than me suspect the ancient jews (or at least some of them) had some notion of Purgatory themselves.

Either way you slice it though, this is very old doctrine... which raises the question of why so much of the early Church believed in it if it's heretical in some way.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Yup. That's your point. I give you that. You have been very consistent.

I think you simplified a tiny bit there. This IS the same Paul who also said, among other interesting things, "work out your salvation in fear and trembling".

That is the question. You believe you are ready to go, right now, as you are right now, to stand in front of God all pure and sinless without a single fault and tell God how pure and sinless and holy you are. Most other people know their faults, and how they are not pure and sinless. We hope and pray that God will purge out our bad habits, our bad thoughts, our inclinations not to love purely, our imperfect virtues, our inabilities to focus in prayer for more than 30 seconds, our love of money and possessions, and all of the other inordinate desires of our impure hearts. For all of these, purgatory is God's blessing to us, for otherwise we know we are unfit to stand anywhere near God.

But it's not about forgiven and confessed sins. It's about, first, the consequences of those sins, and not the guilt of those sins. Consequences and guilt are two very different things. If you do the crime you have the guilt of doing the crime, and you have created bad consequences by having done the crime. You can be forgiven, but there can still be damage that someone is hurt by. The damage needs reparation to restore the damage done. If you deny that then we really are speaking different languages.

You do need to learn some history of the Church. You have conflated and confused over a thousand years of history in the above paragraph. You probably don't know this but the doctrine of purgatory is substantially complete in St. Augustine's writing by 400 AD. And that there is plenty of early Church evidence for prayers for the dead who sleep in Christ. And that the selling of indulgences was something condemned by Catholics when it happened, including by that (ever so evil) council of Trent. And that the Council of Florence was to discuss agreed upon items between Orthodox and Catholics, one of them being our common understanding of prayers for the dead. You may hate the Catholic Church, but at least get your history in order and don't perpetuate such mythology.

Please understand I do know that I sinner and I am not worthy of God's grace or Jesus' sacrifice. Please don't confuse me as someone who thinks they are righteous. I am more like the tax collector mentioned in Luke 18:9. But I do completely believe that Jesus sacrificed Himself to save me and He paid the price in full. I'm also fully convinced that God has said that He will not remember our sins. I absolutely do not hate catholics. I post here because I truly believe they are misled & I want to help my brothers & sisters. I know I'm my last post it probably seemed attacking. Some things are just had to say politely. I'm not familiar with St Augustine's writings concerning purgatory. I do know that the catechism specifically says that the doctrine of purgatory was especially formulated at the councils of Florence and Trent. Which both of those councils did take place during a very dark time for the catholic church. Both the inquisitions and the selling of indulgences took place during the time when both of those councils were convened. The catholic church sold indulgences for the remission of sin in return for prayers for people who were in purgatory. The prayers were to Mary asking for her intercession to have people removed from purgatory before their sins had been paid for. Now seeing that indulgences were being abused during that time and the doctrine of purgatory being formulated in that same time raises a question as to the motives of the men who formulated the doctrine. Then there's the scriptures used to support the doctrine of purgatory. They are completely out of the context that is being discussed. For example 1 Corinthians 3:11-15. If you read the parable by itself it looks like it is possibly mentioning something like purgatory but when you read verses 1-10 and examine what Paul is discussing and why he uses that parable you can see that he is talking about how each person is given their own task by God and how our works are tested and rewarded in heaven. It is our works that are tested by fire not the builder. Then there's Matthew 12:32. Now this is really mind blowing to me how they concluded that there must be forgiveness of sin in the world to come when Jesus said if someone sins against the Holy Spirit they will not be forgiven in this world or the world to come. They are assuming. Jesus never said there is forgiveness in the world to come. In fact He said the exact opposite. The thing that really worries me so much about the teaching of purgatory is it suggests that Jesus' sacrifice didn't pay for all our sins. That His sacrifice was insufficient for us to be fully cleansed of sin. It scares me to think that people will not be fully putting their faith only in Jesus as the atonement for their sins. They will be expecting to pay for some of them theirselves. Did Jesus sacrifice Himself to cleanse some of our sins? Where does it ever say that in the bible? Jesus paid for all our sins and God has promised not to remember those sins. So there is no need for temporal punishment because God has forgotten them. Purgatory also contradicts the meaning of grace. The definition of grace is a free and unmerited favor of God. Free means we don't pay for it. Unmerited means we can't earn it. It is a free gift from God to those who have faith in Jesus Christ. We definitely don't deserve it and suffering in purgatory still doesn't justify our sins. The wages of sin is death not suffering. Can you please explain your interpretation of Colossians 1:22 , 1 Corinthians 6:11, and Hebrews 10:17-20?

 

[BNR32FAN]

You've fired off a lot of inaccurate information and fake history there. My friend chevyontheriver has addressed the broad points of your post.

As for me, to dig down on one particular issue, Purgatory was understood doctrine long before either of the councils you mention. One specific quote I remembered off the top of my head was...

That, in a nutshell, is Purgatory.

To rise above the weeds a little bit, I should say that I doubt believing in Purgatory will somehow benefit me in the afterlife and I also don't think rejecting it will harm you. Though I reserve the right to be wrong on both of those counts. Still, the relevant issue, as I see it, is that there was broad consensus on this doctrine before either of the councils you mention and possibly even before the advent of Christianity. People whom I consider to be smarter than me suspect the ancient jews (or at least some of them) had some notion of Purgatory themselves.

Either way you slice it though, this is very old doctrine... which raises the question of why so much of the early Church believed in it if it's heretical in some way.

It is the catechism that specifically says that the doctrine of purgatory was especially formulated at the councils of Florence and Trent. I already posted the writings directly from the catechism to prove this. The thing that worries me is the teaching of purgatory teaches that Jesus' sacrifice is not the only atonement for sin. So it causes people to not fully trust in Jesus' sacrifice to remove their sins they must suffer and pay the price themselves. That is what scares me about purgatory. Can you please explain to me your interpretation of Colossians 1:22, 1 Corinthians 6:11, and Hebrews 10:17-20? Oh and about the comment you quoted, where is Jesus' role in that scenario?

 

[BNR32FAN]

You've fired off a lot of inaccurate information and fake history there. My friend chevyontheriver has addressed the broad points of your post.

As for me, to dig down on one particular issue, Purgatory was understood doctrine long before either of the councils you mention. One specific quote I remembered off the top of my head was...

That, in a nutshell, is Purgatory.

To rise above the weeds a little bit, I should say that I doubt believing in Purgatory will somehow benefit me in the afterlife and I also don't think rejecting it will harm you. Though I reserve the right to be wrong on both of those counts. Still, the relevant issue, as I see it, is that there was broad consensus on this doctrine before either of the councils you mention and possibly even before the advent of Christianity. People whom I consider to be smarter than me suspect the ancient jews (or at least some of them) had some notion of Purgatory themselves.

Either way you slice it though, this is very old doctrine... which raises the question of why so much of the early Church believed in it if it's heretical in some way.

What fake history are you referring to?

 

[thecolorsblend]

It is the catechism that specifically says that the doctrine of purgatory was especially formulated at the councils of Florence and Trent.

That is not the same as suggesting it was created in either of those councils out of whole cloth.

The thing that worries me is the teaching of purgatory teaches that Jesus' sacrifice is not the only atonement for sin.

And thereby you demonstratr that you still don't understand the purpose of Purgatory.

Can you please explain to me your interpretation of Colossians 1:22, 1 Corinthians 6:11, and Hebrews 10:17-20?

I am not sure what there is to interpret with those passages since they speak quite clearly for themselves.

Oh and about the comment you quoted, where is Jesus' role in that scenario?

I don't know that the Church has ever conjectured upon that. But, as has been explained, the Catholic Church teaches that Purgatory is where one's tendency toward sin is purged from his being. This is assumed to be done through being refined in purifying fire.

I therefore speculate that God is the one controlling the purifying fire. That much is implied by 1 Corinthians 3:11-15, which is one of the usual passages from sacred scripture which we Catholics tend to cite when having these discussions. That is what we believe Purgatory to be. And since we typically cite that passage in conversations about Purgatory, I'll take a wild guess and say that after 20 pages of discussion, I'm not the first one to cite that passage in this thread.

chevyontheriver touched upon this in a previous post. But it seems important to emphasize that the Catholic Church has a pretty nuanced view of sin and the damage done by it. Forgiveness of sins is available by grace alone through faith in Our Lord. However, there's still more to it than that. The damage done by sin, as he says, requires reparation. It's great to seek forgiveness for one's sins. That's what we should all be doing.

But, to use an example, someone being forgiven by God for stealing $1 million from a bank doesn't mean that the thief gets to keep the money. Whether or not God has forgiven the thief for the eternal consequences of stealing $1 million, there are still temporal consequences to consider. And the thief needs to face those consequences. Our Lord already paid the thief's eternal debt on the cross but the thief has to pay his temporal debt to the bank from which he stole the money.

 

[chevyontheriver]

Please understand I do know that I sinner and I am not worthy of God's grace or Jesus' sacrifice. Please don't confuse me as someone who thinks they are righteous. I am more like the tax collector mentioned in Luke 18:9. But I do completely believe that Jesus sacrificed Himself to save me and He paid the price in full. I'm also fully convinced that God has said that He will not remember our sins.

Good to know that you recognize that you are a sinner like me. I too believe that Jesus sacrificed himself to save me, and that he paid the price for my sins, removing the guilt for my sins. And yet there are consequences for sin. Your sins, even though forgiven, have bad consequences for yourself and other people, even forgiven sins. The idea of 'penance' is that we can undo a bit of the consequences, those consequences we caused and the consequences caused by others.

I absolutely do not hate catholics. I post here because I truly believe they are misled & I want to help my brothers & sisters. I know I'm my last post it probably seemed attacking. Some things are just had to say politely.

Sure. In sort of a "some of my best friends are Catholics" kind of way. That's not working for me.

I'm not familiar with St Augustine's writings concerning purgatory.

It would be good for you to become acquainted with Augustine and some of the earlier Church Fathers. You wouldn't have such a disjointed view of the history of the Church if you did.

I do know that the catechism specifically says that the doctrine of purgatory was especially formulated at the councils of Florence and Trent. Which both of those councils did take place during a very dark time for the catholic church. Both the inquisitions and the selling of indulgences took place during the time when both of those councils were convened.

You're not getting here the difference between a council or two creating a formulation of a doctrine and a doctrine being much much older. Look at the recent Nashville Statement. Doctrine related to sexuality was especially formulated by the people who wrote that statement. But the doctrine is ancient. Just as we have been praying for the dead for two millenia. Having a council define something does not mean it was invented then. That's a common mistake.

The catholic church sold indulgences for the remission of sin in return for prayers for people who were in purgatory. The prayers were to Mary asking for her intercession to have people removed from purgatory before their sins had been paid for. Now seeing that indulgences were being abused during that time and the doctrine of purgatory being formulated in that same time raises a question as to the motives of the men who formulated the doctrine.

You know that Johann Tetzel was the guy who decided it was a good idea to sell indulgences. He did this for a few years in Germany before being shot down by Catholics as well as Martin Luther. The sale of indulgences was never widespread, and you would never have known about it if Luther, rightly, had not complained about it. But the sale of indulgences was never in accord with Catholic doctrine. Mary had nothing to do with indulgences either. History matters.

Scripture matters too. And it matters a great deal how we live, for our work will be made manifest. And not all of it will be glorious. Not all of it is fit for the Kingdom. Some of it will have warped us. And then we come knocking on heaven's door, not suitably dressed for the wedding feast.

The thing that really worries me so much about the teaching of purgatory is it suggests that Jesus' sacrifice didn't pay for all our sins. That His sacrifice was insufficient for us to be fully cleansed of sin. It scares me to think that people will not be fully putting their faith only in Jesus as the atonement for their sins. They will be expecting to pay for some of them theirselves. Did Jesus sacrifice Himself to cleanse some of our sins? Where does it ever say that in the bible? Jesus paid for all our sins and God has promised not to remember those sins. So there is no need for temporal punishment because God has forgotten them. Purgatory also contradicts the meaning of grace. The definition of grace is a free and unmerited favor of God. Free means we don't pay for it. Unmerited means we can't earn it. It is a free gift from God to those who have faith in Jesus Christ. We definitely don't deserve it and suffering in purgatory still doesn't justify our sins. The wages of sin is death not suffering.

This is a colossal misunderstanding on your part. Purgatory is not about justification. It is the application of sanctification to those already saved, already justified freely by grace. Our entire sanctification is necessary before we can stand before God without shame. No sinful and unperfected thing can do so. Your sanctification was also purchased by Jesus, to be applied in the here and now or in purgatory. You don't 'earn' your purgation, but you do get to have your bad habits and love of lesser things and your vices purged from you by the fire of God's love. That is only if you are already counted as one of the saved, for purgatory is only of benefit to those who are saved. Then, once your sanctification is entirely completed, you are able to present yourself before God without shame.

Can you please explain your interpretation of Colossians 1:22

Needs to be read in context through at least verse 29. Jesus accomplished something in the past tense that gets applied to us in the present and future. The end result, not the present but the end result, is that we are presentable as holy and blameless and irreproachable. This after we finish being sanctified. Not before.

1 Corinthians 6:11

This is about baptism (washing), which does fully sanctify as well as justify. Those who sin after baptism need to confess their sins and be forgiven them. And their sanctification has suffered a relapse.

and Hebrews 10:17-20?

Very simply, God does not remember sins. But in this universe there still are consequences for sin, even forgiven sin. Somebody has to do something to fix the broken window even if you are forgiven for breaking it. You can fix it, or maybe I can fix it for you. That is what penance is all about. And indirectly what indulgences are all about. The Carmelite sisters up on the hill pray hours and hours a day, not for their own sake, but in reparation for the damage done by your sins and mine. God doesn't remember the sins of someone who seeks forgiveness. And he also provides us with the ability to make reparations for the bad consequences of sins rather than leaving us mired in those bad consequences forever.

 

[chevyontheriver]

It is the catechism that specifically says that the doctrine of purgatory was especially formulated at the councils of Florence and Trent. I already posted the writings directly from the catechism to prove this. The thing that worries me is the teaching of purgatory teaches that Jesus' sacrifice is not the only atonement for sin. So it causes people to not fully trust in Jesus' sacrifice to remove their sins they must suffer and pay the price themselves. That is what scares me about purgatory. Can you please explain to me your interpretation of Colossians 1:22, 1 Corinthians 6:11, and Hebrews 10:17-20? Oh and about the comment you quoted, where is Jesus' role in that scenario?

I hope you are beginning to realize that when a council addresses something it is not because it was 'invented' then, but rather because there is a need to restate and clarify that thing. Purgatory was not invented by the council of Florence. There is pretty abundant evidence of it a full thousand years before the council of Florence. Just like the idea that marriage is between one man and one woman is way older than the Nashville Statement.

And you need not worry about Jesus' sacrifice not being the only atonement for sin. It is. Of course. Because purgatory isn't about salvation. It is about sanctification. And what powers purgatory is the flame of divine love, the very desire of God to see us made pure and holy. It is your opportunity to be made pure and holy, presuming you are already saved.

 

[BNR32FAN]

That is not the same as suggesting it was created in either of those councils out of whole cloth.
And thereby you demonstratr that you still don't understand the purpose of Purgatory.
I am not sure what there is to interpret with those passages since they speak quite clearly for themselves.
I don't know that the Church has ever conjectured upon that. But, as has been explained, the Catholic Church teaches that Purgatory is where one's tendency toward sin is purged from his being. This is assumed to be done through being refined in purifying fire.

I therefore speculate that God is the one controlling the purifying fire. That much is implied by 1 Corinthians 3:11-15, which is one of the usual passages from sacred scripture which we Catholics tend to cite when having these discussions. That is what we believe Purgatory to be. And since we typically cite that passage in conversations about Purgatory, I'll take a wild guess and say that after 20 pages of discussion, I'm not the first one to cite that passage in this thread.

chevyontheriver touched upon this in a previous post. But it seems important to emphasize that the Catholic Church has a pretty nuanced view of sin and the damage done by it. Forgiveness of sins is available by grace alone through faith in Our Lord. However, there's still more to it than that. The damage done by sin, as he says, requires reparation. It's great to seek forgiveness for one's sins. That's what we should all be doing.

But, to use an example, someone being forgiven by God for stealing $1 million from a bank doesn't mean that the thief gets to keep the money. Whether or not God has forgiven the thief for the eternal consequences of stealing $1 million, there are still temporal consequences to consider. And the thief needs to face those consequences. Our Lord already paid the thief's eternal debt on the cross but the thief has to pay his temporal debt to the bank from which he stole the money.

If I'm the bank owner and you stole the money from me then Jesus returned the money can I say I truly forgive you if I say that I'm going to punch you in the face for what you did? That's not forgiveness. That is still holding a grudge. Forgiveness would be me saying go in peace or giving you a hug or inviting you over for dinner. Not seeking vengeance.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Good to know that you recognize that you are a sinner like me. I too believe that Jesus sacrificed himself to save me, and that he paid the price for my sins, removing the guilt for my sins. And yet there are consequences for sin. Your sins, even though forgiven, have bad consequences for yourself and other people, even forgiven sins. The idea of 'penance' is that we can undo a bit of the consequences, those consequences we caused and the consequences caused by others.

Sure. In sort of a "some of my best friends are Catholics" kind of way. That's not working for me.

It would be good for you to become acquainted with Augustine and some of the earlier Church Fathers. You wouldn't have such a disjointed view of the history of the Church if you did.

You're not getting here the difference between a council or two creating a formulation of a doctrine and a doctrine being much much older. Look at the recent Nashville Statement. Doctrine related to sexuality was especially formulated by the people who wrote that statement. But the doctrine is ancient. Just as we have been praying for the dead for two millenia. Having a council define something does not mean it was invented then. That's a common mistake.

You know that Johann Tetzel was the guy who decided it was a good idea to sell indulgences. He did this for a few years in Germany before being shot down by Catholics as well as Martin Luther. The sale of indulgences was never widespread, and you would never have known about it if Luther, rightly, had not complained about it. But the sale of indulgences was never in accord with Catholic doctrine. Mary had nothing to do with indulgences either. History matters.

Scripture matters too. And it matters a great deal how we live, for our work will be made manifest. And not all of it will be glorious. Not all of it is fit for the Kingdom. Some of it will have warped us. And then we come knocking on heaven's door, not suitably dressed for the wedding feast.

This is a colossal misunderstanding on your part. Purgatory is not about justification. It is the application of sanctification to those already saved, already justified freely by grace. Our entire sanctification is necessary before we can stand before God without shame. No sinful and unperfected thing can do so. Your sanctification was also purchased by Jesus, to be applied in the here and now or in purgatory. You don't 'earn' your purgation, but you do get to have your bad habits and love of lesser things and your vices purged from you by the fire of God's love. That is only if you are already counted as one of the saved, for purgatory is only of benefit to those who are saved. Then, once your sanctification is entirely completed, you are able to present yourself before God without shame.

Needs to be read in context through at least verse 29. Jesus accomplished something in the past tense that gets applied to us in the present and future. The end result, not the present but the end result, is that we are presentable as holy and blameless and irreproachable. This after we finish being sanctified. Not before.

This is about baptism (washing), which does fully sanctify as well as justify. Those who sin after baptism need to confess their sins and be forgiven them. And their sanctification has suffered a relapse.

Very simply, God does not remember sins. But in this universe there still are consequences for sin, even forgiven sin. Somebody has to do something to fix the broken window even if you are forgiven for breaking it. You can fix it, or maybe I can fix it for you. That is what penance is all about. And indirectly what indulgences are all about. The Carmelite sisters up on the hill pray hours and hours a day, not for their own sake, but in reparation for the damage done by your sins and mine. God doesn't remember the sins of someone who seeks forgiveness. And he also provides us with the ability to make reparations for the bad consequences of sins rather than leaving us mired in those bad consequences forever.

Thank you you make some very good points but the way I see it according to the bible tells me that Jesus fixed the window. He paid the price and suffered in our place. Once He did that God forgets about our sins. According to the catechism purgatory is about forgiveness of sin. Here is a quote from the catechism regarding purgatory.

As for certain lesser faults, we must believe that, before the Final Judgment, there is a purifying fire. He who is truth says that whoever utters blasphemy against the Holy Spirit will be pardoned neither in this age nor in the age to come. From this sentence we understand that certain offenses can be forgiven in this age, but certain others in the age to come. [St. Gregory the Great, Dial. 4, 39: PL 77, 396; cf. Mt 12:32-36.]

So according to the catechism all of our sins are not forgiven by Jesus' sacrifice. That is not biblical. Also Jesus never said sins will be forgiven in the age to come. He actually said the exact opposite. Saying sins are forgiven in the age to come is an assumption that is not backed by scripture. In my opinion.

 

[chevyontheriver]

If I'm the bank owner and you stole the money from me then Jesus returned the money can I say I truly forgive you if I say that I'm going to punch you in the face for what you did? That's not forgiveness. That is still holding a grudge. Forgiveness would be me saying go in peace or giving you a hug or inviting you over for dinner. Not seeking vengeance.

Wrong scenario. You have it about 180 degrees off from what the scenario was posed to explain.

Try this one on for size. You and some friends are playing ball. You hit the ball and it breaks your neighbor's window. You admit you did it, say you're sorry, and you are forgiven. The window is still broken. You can fix the window yourself or perhaps someone else comes along and offers to fix the window for you. In either case fixing the window has become independent of your forgiven guilt for breaking the window. This is the classic distinction between guilt and consequence in Christian theology. It would be understood by Oriental Orthodox, by Eastern Orthodox, and by Catholics. Also by many legal systems. It's what 'restorative justice' is all about, making right the damage done by a bad act. It is the step beyond catching and convicting and sentencing someone for punishment, which of course is not always very restorative. Purgatory is restorative, at least in terms of setting your soul to have right virtues and dispositions to be able to see God face to face for all eternity.