Purgatory and the Immaculate Conception

[elahmine]

I know there are a wide range of beliefs and ideas about purgatory and the immaculate conception in Anglicanism. So I'm curious as to what people in the STR think about these ideas.

 

[cajunhillbilly]

How about the option I am not sure, and am still researching these issue?

 

[Albion]

I'm quite comfortable with the (Anglican) Articles of Religion which describe Purgatory as "grounded upon no warrant of Scripture...." The Immaculate Conception is often described among Anglicans as a "pious opinion," meaning that it has no warrant in Scripture either, but may be held by members of the church because it is merely a guess concerning the condition of the Virgin Mary and does not deal with the process by which salvation comes to anyone. I don't see any reason to believe in it.

 

[cajunhillbilly]

I would say I have grave doubts about Purgatory as defined by the Church of Rome. But there has to be some type of purgation after death to remove the sin remaining in us to fit us for heaven. What that consists of I do not know.

 

[PaladinValer]

Neither.

The Immaculate Conception of the Theotokos is rife with theological problems, one of them is that it depends on a proclamation of a Pope instead of counciliarism.

Purgatory goes along with the idea of the Treasury of Merits, which is also terrible theology. Aspects of it are fine and are Biblical, and the way Benedict XVI proclaimed it is fine, but the historic understanding of that idea is also rife with theological problems asides the one mentioned earlier.

 

[LewsTherin]

Neither. I believe there may be something like purgatory, but not the purgatory defined by the RC Church.

 

[LuxMundi]

I believe in neither

 

[cajunhillbilly]

Neither. I believe there may be something like purgatory, but not the purgatory defined by the RC Church.

I agree

 

[Albion]

I believe there may be something like purgatory, but not the purgatory defined by the RC Church.

In which case it would not be Purgatory.

 

[elahmine]

How about the option I am not sure, and am still researching these issue?

Sorry, I thought about that after I posted the poll.

 

[MKJ]

In which case it would not be Purgatory.

I wouldn't say that necessarily. There is a long tradition of Christians talking about such a state before the Roman Church added its particular objectionable aspects to it, and that is what a lot odf people mean when they talk about Purgatory. Even C.S. Lewis who was a pretty middle of the road Anglican was happy to say he believed in Purgatory in that sense.

And to make it more confusing, a lot of modern Catholics don't include the more objectionable aspects either.

 

[Albion]

I wouldn't say that necessarily. There is a long tradition of Christians talking about such a state before the Roman Church added its particular objectionable aspects to it, and that is what a lot of people mean when they talk about Purgatory.

I'm sure that they use the slang of calling something that isn't Purgatory "Purgatory," but "Purgatory" has a definite meaning. The Roman Catholic Church invented it and defined it just as Frank Baum created the Emerald City and Oz.

If you believe, for example, in Narnia but not Oz, you don't say that you believe in your own version of Oz.

IOW, a different kind of intermediate state in the afterlife? Sure, but your own version of Purgatory that isn't actually Purgatory? No. That would not be another Purgatory, just something else that shares some of Purgatory's characteristics.

 

[LewsTherin]

In which case it would not be Purgatory.

Yep. That's why I said "like purgatory", it wouldn't be purgatory.

 

[ebia]

The way Spe Salvi describes purgatory is fine. More "traditional" views are severely problematic in several ways. How does that fit on the poll?

Immaculate conception only makes sense within a framework I don't share.

 

[Albion]

Yep. That's why I said "like purgatory", it wouldn't be purgatory.

Right. I appreciated that part of your statement when I read it, although it seemed as though you took it back in the final part of that sentence. What you say here clarifies that. In any case, I wasn't taking issue with you, just adding a footnote.

 

[LewsTherin]

Right. I appreciated that part of your statement when I read it, although it seemed as though you took it back in the final part of that sentence. What you say here clarifies that. In any case, I wasn't taking issue with you, just adding a footnote.

Yeah, that's cool. I was mainly just stating I'm open to the idea of some temporal state of existence after death, I don't believe in purgatory but I don't necessarily believe we go straight to heaven or hell either. No issue perceived.

 

[Albion]

Yeah, that's cool. I was mainly just stating I'm open to the idea of some temporal state of existence after death, I don't believe in purgatory but I don't necessarily believe we go straight to heaven or hell either. No issue perceived.

Very good, but now let's push that idea a little bit further. A pleasant, or inoffensive, transitional zone is what most people want when they talk about something like "Purgatory but not RC Purgatory." There are two questions I have with that.

1) all the Biblical hints of anything that could be like Purgatory in even primitive form speak of fire, so how can we justify an alternate "Purgatory" that is just a celestial mudroom, as they say?

2) Why do those who are inclined to believe in something between heaven and hell think (because they often say it) that we need to be purged or purified before going to heaven? Isn't Christ giving his life on the Cross good enough?

 

[LewsTherin]

Very good, but now let's push that idea a little bit further. A pleasant, or inoffensive, transitional zone is what most people want when they talk about something like "Purgatory but not RC Purgatory." There are two questions I have with that.

1) all the Biblical hints of anything that could be like Purgatory in even primitive form speak of fire, so how can we justify an alternate "Purgatory" that is just a celestial mudroom, as they say?

2) Why do those who are inclined to believe in something between heaven and hell think (because they often say it) that we need to be purged or purified before going to heaven? Isn't Christ giving his life on the Cross good enough?

To be honest, I haven't really given it much thought beyond what I already said. I don't believe in RC purgatory, and I don't believe there has to be something else like it (a temporary state before heaven or whatever), I'm just not totally opposed to the idea.

 

[Albion]

To be honest, I haven't really given it much thought beyond what I already said. I don't believe in RC purgatory, and I don't believe there has to be something else like it (a temporary state before heaven or whatever), I'm just not totally opposed to the idea.

You're probably very much typical of Anglicans in that case. I just draw back at the idea that there needs to be some such intermediate zone or state of being. I can't think of a reason for there to be any such, but I don't rule out being surprised when I get to the afterlife.

 

[seeking_perfection]

You're probably very much typical of Anglicans in that case. I just draw back at the idea that there needs to be some such intermediate zone or state of being. I can't think of a reason for there to be any such, but I don't rule out being surprised when I get to the afterlife.

I would argue in favour of some kind of intermediate state due to the fact that for most people, the process of sanctification has not reached its end by the time of death. Sure, we are justified and guaranteed a seat in heaven (eventually) but we are not yet made perfect. I cannot imagine heaven as a place where the christians I have met all live together. It would be far from perfect. I believe an intermediate state is there to purify us and complete the work of sanctification, allowing only what is perfect into heaven.