Purgatory

[Valletta]

Luther did not have a "new religion", he had the same religion but purged of some deviations.

Oh, BTW, up until the nineteenth century every "Luther Bible" printed had the same books St. Jerome translated into Latin. When Luther mentioned he thought some books shouldn't be in it, he was indulging in something a lot of theologians did right up until Rome's Council of Trent.

Luther's new religion contained a hodge podge of radical ideas, not all original, for example, that the Bible is the only source of faith was something pushed by William of Ockham back in the 1300s, apparently influenced by an Arab theologian who had taught the Quran was the only source of faith. The three leaders of the Protestant reformation all had their own ideas on the Eucharist, Luther was just one of the three with his own idea.

As to the Protestant version of the Bible, while it is true that all 73 books were contained in the bindings (but in a separate section) up until the 1800s they were not firsty dropped from consideration as Holy Scripture by Protestants in the 1800s. Luther and Protestants afterward rejected those books as being part of Holy Scripture. The Deuterocanonicals were only included because Protestants considered them of historical value. But of course keeping a book that implied the existence of purgatory obviously did not go over well in some Protestant circles and so totally removing them from within the binding is understandable.

 

[Valletta]

Even Rome, though, has clarified that purgatory is not to be thought of as a place but as a process, one that can't be measured in years but in intensity.

The Catholic Church teaches that purgatory can be a place or a state.

 

[Roymond]

Luther's new religion contained a hodge podge of radical ideas, not all original, for example, that the Bible is the only source of faith was something pushed by William of Ockham back in the 1300s, apparently influenced by an Arab theologian who had taught the Quran was the only source of faith. The three leaders of the Protestant reformation all had their own ideas on the Eucharist, Luther was just one of the three with his own idea.

Again, Luther had no "new religion", he upheld the catholic faith but purged it of deviations from the ancient church.

"Three leaders of the Protestant reformation"? Do you mean Martin Luther, Phillip Melanchthon, and Johannes Bugenhagen? They were in agreement on the Eucharist, standing on the position of the ancient church.

Luther did not hold that "the Bible is the only source of faith" -- that was the radicals.

Luther had no new ideas on the Eucharist, he held to the position of the early church: it is what Jesus' words plainly say, and that's the end of it.

As to the Protestant version of the Bible, while it is true that all 73 books were contained in the bindings (but in a separate section) up until the 1800s they were not firsty dropped from consideration as Holy Scripture by Protestants in the 1800s. Luther and Protestants afterward rejected those books as being part of Holy Scripture. The Deuterocanonicals were only included because Protestants considered them of historical value. But of course keeping a book that implied the existence of purgatory obviously did not go over well in some Protestant circles and so totally removing them from within the binding is understandable.

If you read the theological works of the second generation of Lutheran theologians you will find that they quoted freely from all seventy-three books, plainly considering them all to be scripture. Yes, some Lutherans followed St. Jerome and called the Deuterocanonical books the "Apocrypha", but that was and is a personal opinion: Lutheran theology does not define the canon other than to observe that the New Testament also has a primary canon and a secondary, as was recognized by the ancient church.

 

[chevyontheriver]

Tertullian mentions it before Augustine.

Tertullian's contribution was putting into words in Latin the concept of a difference between the guilt of sin needing to be removed and the reparation needed to undo the effect of a sin. My hunch was that this distinction was amorphous in Greek, and that he finally spelled it out in Latin. It seems sensible now to some people and absolutely foreign to others. Sin makes you guilty before God AND sin damages the community of all people and all things, including one's self. One needs to deal with the guilt of sin. One also needs in some measure to make reparation for the damage done by sin. Those are two very different things, the guilt for sin and the debt of reparation for sin, the absolution and the penance.

Some people do lots of reparations, even more than their share. Others do less. As a community of faith these can be shared around. Thus indulgences. And those who have a deficit of reparations will be saved, if their guilt is taken by the savior, but they may need polishing and purification after they die before they may see the magnificence of the Divine presence. Thus purgatory.

Those who object, and say Jesus paid it all, they don't see what Tertullian was getting at by separating the guilt for a sin from the penalty (=poena) that a sin creates in the warp and woof of creation and which needs to be repaired. Of course Jesus is involved in that repair, but through us and our works of reparation for ourselves or for others.

 

[chevyontheriver]

duplicate

 

[Roymond]

Again, Luther didn't have any "new religion". That is a lie that was propagated by Roman 'apologists'.

Luther did not hold that "the Bible is the only source of faith" -- that was the radicals.

"Three leaders of the Protestant Reformation" -- Do you mean Luther, Phillip Melanchthon, and Johannes Bugenhagen?

Luther had no new ideas on the Eucharist, he held to the position of the early church: it is what Jesus' words plainly say, and that's the end of it.



If you read the theological works of the second generation of Lutheran theologians you will find that they quoted freely from all seventy-three books, plainly considering them all to be scripture. Yes, some Lutherans followed St. Jerome and called the Deuterocanonical books the "Apocrypha", but that was and is a personal opinion: Lutheran theology does not define the canon other than to observe that the New Testament also has a primary canon and a secondary, as was recognized by the ancient church.

 

[chevyontheriver]

"Three leaders of the Protestant Reformation" -- Do you mean Luther, Phillip Melanchthon, and Johannes Bugenhagen?

That's usually Luther, Calvin, and Zwingli, or for the last one maybe Bucer, Bullinger, Beza, Knox, Cranmer, or Henry or even someone else depending on your preferences.

 

[chevyontheriver]

"Three leaders of the Protestant Reformation" -- Do you mean Luther, Phillip Melanchthon, and Johannes Bugenhagen?

Sorry but I just noticed this was a Lutheran forum. If anything offends you I can remove it.

 

[FaithT]

The Catholic Church teaches that purgatory can be a place or a state.

What does “a state” even mean?

 

[Valletta]

What does “a state” even mean?

The Bible does not specify what the purging fire entails, so we don't know. It may be a place, it may not.
It is my understanding that if it is not a place then it is what happens to us, and believe "state" means what happens to us. The bottom line is we don't know, much like we know very little about what Heaven is.