Round number only. Using the 3 councils: Rome (382), Hippos (393), and Carthage (397) I thought 400 would suffice.
Here is a partial list: Abercius: 190, The Martyrdom of Perpetua and Felicity 202, Tertullian 211, Cyprian 253, Cyril 350, Gregory of Nyssa 382, Chrysostom 392, Augustine 411. Research will expose many more. All these wrote of helping the suffering of those who have past on. These are explicit references to a purging after death.
Nope. I chose 393 for brevity. Also, I wanted to have a start date for our SS friends so I chose 400 AD.
The bible canon is not the discussion here. As I said I chose the date for brevity and to accommodate our SS friends. You are missing the point. Are you trying to derail the main point of my challenge?
So to review:
1. Before 400 AD: Church Fathers write extensively about purging/suffering after death and what the living can do to ease the purging/suffering. All this writing happens before the Bible Canon is established by the 3 Councils noted above.
2. The Bible Canon is settled by the 3 Councils noted above. The Bible contains explicit references to purging/paying debt after death.
3. After 400 AD: Church Fathers continue to write about the need for purging after death.
So, between 400 and 1500, where is the any evidence that anyone rejected what the Church Fathers taught and what the Bible teaches? The Church Fathers and the Bible are in agreement. And the Universal Church accepted the idea of purging after death all the way up to the year 1500 (and up until present day).
So, where is there any evidence of disagreement within the Church about the need for purging after death prior to 1,500?
To answer your last questions first, no because one cannot argue against a doctrine that did not exist yet. And I agree, let us not address canon issues here though I would be delighted to discuss them in the future. All scripture quotations are from the NASB the Brenton translation of the Septuagint (LXX)
“The Church gives the name Purgatory to this final purification of the elect, which is entirely different from the punishment of the damned. 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: As for certain lesser faults, we must believe that, before Final Judgement, there is a purifying fire” (
The Catechism of the Catholic Church paragraph 1031)
I included in my response the relevant section of the most recent Catechism of the Catholic Church. This definition I will demonstrate is not found in the pages of Scripture nor in the Church fathers you have citied.
I do not think that you have read the sources you have cited. For one, Abercius is a gravestone inscription that is requesting prayers for himself. The text we have says nothing about a suffering or purging of sin in the afterlife. My issue isn’t with prayers for the dead rather it is the doctrine of purgatory.
Please cite orthodox sources only. This is a Montanist work or at the very least the editor is Montanist. Citing heretical and heterodox sources lessens your credibility
I believe the citation you are using is from
The Crown Chapter 3. Again, this is asking for prayers for the departed on the anniversary of their passing. Again, no mention of a purging of sin after death.
Cyprian is an interesting study. The relevant passage is from his 51st epistle 20th paragraph. The epistle is laying out his defense of dealing more mildly with the lapsed Christians who buckled under persecution and his opposition to Novationism. Here Cyprian begins the paragraph with a series of comparisons of which one mentions a purgation by fire. The context is how does the church allow the re-admission of the lapsed (lapsi) and the apostate without denigrating the martyrs. It is not a discussion of soteriology.
Cyril of Jerusalem in Mystagogic is describing prayers for the dead, but also specifically mentions the propitiatory sacrifice of Christ as their saving mechanism, not purging by fire expiating punishment due sin.
I own a multi-volume work of Chrysostom and I cannot find anything resembling even by a stretch a reference to purging or purification by fire. Could you provide a citation? Any of the sorting conventions of his works will do. I see that he mentions the practice of praying for the dead but nothing about purging or purification by fire.
Gregory of Nyssa only text I can find where he comes close is his catechism chapter 35. He mentions fire and water as being purifying but the greater context is in a discussion of baptism. Again, no reference to a state after death where purging fire is used to expiate punishment for sin.
Which brings us to Augustine. Of the fathers you have mentioned only Augustine teaches something that can be described as purgatory however he is unsettled in the matter. He is most unsettled in the Enchiridion of Faith Hope and Charity. In City of God he is much more direct on purgatorial fire but as you know that puts us into the 400’s.
If the fathers wrote extensively on the purgation or purging by fire as defined by Rome I quoted above, then you have failed to demonstrate your case. Furthermore, you failed to cite specific writings of the fathers you did cite (orthodox ones at least). Simply citing names does not demonstrate that the teaching of purgatory is found in their writings.
You also stated that the Bible teaches purgatory. This too is false. You did not provide citation so once again I have done your homework for you
2 Maccabees 12:39-45 (This text is disputed canon but I have included it because I know it is referenced as a proof text by Rome).
2Ma 12:38 So Judas gathered his host, and came into the city of Odollam, And when the seventh day came, they purified themselves, as the custom was, and kept the sabbath in the same place.
2Ma 12:39 And upon the day following, as the use had been, Judas and his company came to take up the bodies of them that were slain, and to bury them with their kinsmen in their fathers' graves.
2Ma 12:40 Now under the coats of every one that was slain they found things consecrated to the idols of the Jamnites, which is forbidden the Jews by the law. Then every man saw that this was the cause wherefore they were slain.
2Ma 12:41 All men therefore praising the Lord, the righteous Judge, who had opened the things that were hid,
2Ma 12:42 Betook themselves unto prayer, and besought him that the sin committed might wholly be put out of remembrance. Besides, that noble Judas exhorted the people to keep themselves from sin, forsomuch as they saw before their eyes the things that came to pass for the sins of those that were slain.
2Ma 12:43 And when he had made a gathering throughout the company to the sum of two thousand drachms of silver, he sent it to Jerusalem to offer a sin offering, doing therein very well and honestly, in that he was mindful of the resurrection:
2Ma 12:44 For if he had not hoped that they that were slain should have risen again, it had been superfluous and vain to pray for the dead.
2Ma 12:45 And also in that he perceived that there was great favor laid up for those that died godly, it was an holy and good thought. Whereupon he made a reconciliation for the dead, that they might be delivered from sin. (Brenton LXX)
You will notice the men slain were guilty of Idolatry which is why they were slain in the first place. As far as I know idolatry is still considered mortal sin by Rome, so this makes the above passage so troubling when it is shoehorned into service for the cause of purgatory.
The next passage I offer here cited is Matt 12:32. Here is the relevant passage:
Mat 12:32 "Whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man, it shall be forgiven him; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit, it shall not be forgiven him, either in this age or in the
age to come. (NASB)
At first reading it appears that the text suggests sins can be forgiven the age to come. However, this issue is easily cleared up as the parallel passage is Mar 3:28-29:
Mar 3:28 "Truly I say to you, all sins shall be forgiven the sons of men, and whatever blasphemies they utter;
Mar 3:29 but whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness, but is guilty of an eternal sin"—
Mark clears up the confusion by the statement “Eternal sin”. And that is the point Matthew is making; such sin is eternally unforgivable. Once reading pits one section of one gospel against another and the other makes harmony between the said passages.
Lastly, are perhaps the best biblical evidence that is marshaled in defense of purgatory is that of 1 Cor chapter 3.
Divisions in the Church
1Co 3:1 And I, brethren, could not speak to you as to spiritual men, but as to men of flesh, as to infants in Christ.
1Co 3:2 I gave you milk to drink, not solid food; for you were not yet able
to receive it. Indeed, even now you are not yet able,
1Co 3:3 for you are still fleshly. For since there is jealousy and strife among you, are you not fleshly, and are you not walking like mere men?
1Co 3:4 For when one says, "I am of Paul," and another, "I am of Apollos," are you not
mere men?
1Co 3:5 What then is Apollos? And what is Paul? Servants through whom you believed, even as the Lord gave
opportunity to each one.
1Co 3:6 I planted, Apollos watered, but God was causing the growth.
1Co 3:7 So then neither the one who plants nor the one who waters is anything, but God who causes the growth.
1Co 3:8 Now he who plants and he who waters are one; but each will receive his own reward according to his own labor.
1Co 3:9 For we are God's fellow workers; you are God's field, God's building.
1Co 3:10 According to the grace of God which was given to me, like a wise master builder I laid a foundation, and another is building on it. But each man must be careful how he builds on it.
1Co 3:11 For no man can lay a foundation other than the one which is laid, which is Jesus Christ.
1Co 3:12 Now if any man builds on the foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, straw,
1Co 3:13 each man's work will become evident; for the day will show it because it is
to be revealed with fire, and the fire itself will test the quality of each man's work.
1Co 3:14 If any man's work which he has built on it remains, he will receive a reward.
1Co 3:15 If any man's work is burned up, he will suffer loss; but he himself will be saved, yet so as through fire.
1Co 3:16 Do you not know that you are a temple of God and
that the Spirit of God dwells in you?
1Co 3:17 If any man destroys the temple of God, God will destroy him, for the temple of God is holy, and that is what you are.
1Co 3:18 Let no man deceive himself. If any man among you thinks that he is wise in this age, he must become foolish, so that he may become wise.
1Co 3:19 For the wisdom of this world is foolishness before God. For it is written, "
He is THE ONE WHO CATCHES THE WISE IN THEIR CRAFTINESS";
1Co 3:20 and again, "THE LORD KNOWS THE REASONINGS of the wise, THAT THEY ARE USELESS."
1Co 3:21 So then let no one boast in men. For all things belong to you,
1Co 3:22 whether Paul or Apollos or Cephas or the world or life or death or things present or things to come; all things belong to you,
1Co 3:23 and you belong to Christ; and Christ belongs to God. (NASB)
It appears at first glance it appears this may be speaking of purgatory. However, let us apply the three basic rules of biblical interpretation
1. Context
2. Context
3. Context
The immediate context per the preceding verses is that Paul planted the church (V.6) and Apollos watered. Any man refers to those who are teachers and leaders in the church building upon said foundation. Their work is tested, not purified as gold and silver are already pure and those being tested are church leaders. The any man in v 12 and each man in v 13 are still referring to church leaders. There is no cause to believe that the referent has changed since v 11.
The problem you are going to keep running into with this and other issues is that because the early church did not teach the doctrines that Rome teaches now one must anachronistically read modern Roman teaching back into the writings of the fathers and into scripture. So, any reference of praying for the dead is then shoehorned into Rome’s teaching of purgatory. It then ignores the context or what the Fathers where really teaching for the sake of patristic proof texting.
So, let’s turn to see what scripture has to say about the matter. It is still the earliest source of what the early church believed and taught.
Joh 5:24 "Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life.
If there was an intermediate state wouldn’t the LORD said something about it?
Col 2:13 When you were dead in your transgressions and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He made you alive together with Him, having forgiven us all our transgressions,
Col 2:14 having canceled out the certificate of debt consisting of decrees against us, which was hostile to us; and He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross.
Col 2:15 When He had disarmed the rulers and authorities, He made a public display of them, having triumphed over them through Him.
He canceled out the debt owed from us. That’s the Good News, right?
Or this
Heb 1:3 And He is the radiance of His glory and the exact representation of His nature, and upholds all things by the word of His power. When He had made purification of sins, He sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high,
Heb 1:4 having become as much better than the angels, as He has inherited a more excellent name than they.
Or this
1Jn 1:9 If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
Or lastly (for brevity. . . ok feel free to poke fun at me here).
Heb 10:14 For by one offering He has perfected for all time those who are sanctified.
Who does the sanctifying? He, that is Christ.
In conclusion neither Scripture nor the Fathers to year 400 teach what you assert. In fact, the definition I gave at the outset is in fact honest in its development. I do not mean that prior to the council of Florence no one believed in purgatory but rather it was systematized. It has been asserted by some that purgatory is an effect of Greek philosophy influencing the Church. I don’t know if that is true, but it is clear to me and that something external began to have an influence and purgatory was just one of those resulting developments. I agree, Rome has an ancient pedigree. I for one am thankful for her witness over the centuries on key doctrines such as the Holy Trinity, resisting the endless theologizing of the East and so on. My issue while Rome is indeed ancient, she’s not ancient enough. Point to one person present at the Council of Nicaea that believed in purgatory. You won’t find it because it didn’t exist as a doctrine yet. There in lies Rome’s greatest weakness. Everyone of the delegates at the council of Nicaea would be today condemned as heretics by Rome. That is why I cannot accept Rome’s pronouncements ex cathedra or otherwise. It would have been better for you to take the position that you believe in the development hypothesis like Cardinal Newman that attempt to use the fathers. Ultimate it would still be incorrect but at least its somewhat defensible.
x
