Purgatory, Indulgences, and the Work of Jesus Christ (Discussion)

The only begotten Son of God . . . "made unto us from God, wisdom, justice, sanctification and redemption" [I Cor. 3], "neither by the blood of goats or of calves, but by His own blood entered once into the holies having obtained eternal redemption" [Heb. 9:12]. "For not with corruptible things as gold or silver, but with the precious blood of His very (Son) as of a lamb unspotted and unstained He has redeemed us" [cf. I Pet. 1:18-19], who innocent, immolated on the altar of the Cross is known to have poured out not a little drop of blood, which however on account of union with the Word would have been sufficient for the redemption of the whole human race, but copiously as a kind of flowing stream, so that "from the soles of His feet even to the top of His Head no soundness was found in Him" [Isa. 1:6]. Therefore, how great a treasure did the good Father acquire from this for the Church militant, so that the mercy of so great an effusion was not rendered useless, vain or superfluous, wishing to lay up treasures for His sons, so that thus the Church is an infinite treasure to men, so that they who use it, become the friends of God [Wisd. 7:14].

Indeed this treasure . . . through blessed Peter, the keeper of the keys of heaven and his successors, his vicars on earth, He has committed to be dispensed for the good of the faithful, both from proper and reasonable causes, now for the whole, now for the partial remission of temporal punishment due to sins, in general as in particular (according as they know to be expedient with God), to be applied mercifully to those who truly repentant have confessed.

Indeed, to the mass of this treasure the merits of the Blessed Mother of God and of all the elect from the first just even to the last, are known to give their help; concerning the consumption or the diminution of this there should be no fear at any time, because of the infinite merits of Christ (as was mentioned before) as well as for the reason that the more are brought to justification by its application, the greater is the increase of the merits themselves. (Pope Clement VI, Bull "Unigenitus Dei Filius", Jan. 25, 1343, in Denzinger-Rahner, trans. Deferrari, The Sources of Catholic Dogma, no. 550-552)

In an indulgence in fact, the Church, making use of its power as minister of the Redemption of Christ, not only prays but by an authoritative intervention dispenses to the faithful suitably disposed the treasury of satisfaction which Christ and the saints won for the remission of temporal punishment.

The aim pursued by ecclesiastical authority in granting indulgences is not only that of helping the faithful to expiate the punishment due sin but also that of urging them to perform works of piety, penitence and charity--particularly those which lead to growth in faith and which favor the common good. (Pope Paul VI, Constitution "Indulgentarium Doctrina", Jan. 1, 1967)

Now one man can satisfy for another, as we have explained above (13, 2). And the saints in whom this super-abundance of satisfactions is found, did not perform their good works for this or that particular person, who needs the remission of his punishment (else he would have received this remission without any indulgence at all), but they performed them for the whole Church in general, even as the Apostle declares that he fills up "those things that are wanting of the sufferings of Christ . . . for His body, which is the Church" to whom he wrote (Col. 1:24). These merits, then, are the common property of the whole Church. Now those things which are the common property of a number are distributed to the various individuals according to the judgment of him who rules them all. Hence, just as one man would obtain the remission of his punishment if another were to satisfy for him, so would he too if another's satisfactions be applied to him by one who has the power to do so. (St. Thomas, Sup. q. 25 a. 1)

He wasn't truly justified until Christ died and rose again.

Paul in Rom. 4 proves that justification by faith always existed, even before the institution of the Law (and if before the law, then after the law too).

3 For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God: and it was reputed to him unto justice. 4 Now to him that worketh, the reward is not reckoned according to grace but according to debt. 5 But to him that worketh not, yet believeth in him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is reputed to justice, according to the purpose of the grace of God. 6 As David also termeth the blessedness of a man to whom God reputeth justice without works: 7 Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven: and whose sins are covered. 8 Blessed is the man to whom the Lord hath not imputed sin. 9 This blessedness then, doth it remain in the circumcision only or in the uncircumcision also? For we say that unto Abraham faith was reputed to justice.

v. 9 shows that Abraham had the blessedness of v. 6-8: as does v. 3 "it was reputed to him unto justice".

Looking at the passage again:

13 And David said to Nathan: I have sinned against the Lord. And Nathan said to David: The Lord also hath taken away thy sin: thou shalt not die. 14 Nevertheless, because thou hast given occasion to the enemies of the Lord to blaspheme, for this thing, the child that is born to thee, shall surely die.

The sin was "taken away" - it was gone. Only justification by faith forgives sins, therefore David was justified, and by Christ, for "it is impossible that with the blood of oxen and goats sin should be taken away" (Heb. 10:4).

Proof: (a) David's sin was taken away, (b) The old sacrifices could never take away sin, therefore: David's sin was forgiven not by the sacrifices, but by Christ: "this man, offering one sacrifice for sins, for ever sitteth on the right hand of God" (Heb. 10:12)

I Cor. 3:10-15 has nothing to say to the issue you are addressing. It is a description of Judgement day.

On the contrary. The text (KJV):

12 Now if any man build upon his foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble,

The foundation is Christ: so this is dealing with a man who is building on the right foundation, one who will be saved.

13 every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is.

His works are the gold, wood, stubble, etc. At the day of judgment, the works will be tried by fire to see of what type they are, that is, gold, wood, etc.

14 If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward.

The fire does not burn the works of gold, silver, or precious stones. For those that are not burned, a reward will be given.

15 If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss : but he himself shall be saved, yet so as by fire.
15 ei tinos to ergon katakaêsetai, zêmiôthêsetai, autos de sôthêsetai, houtôs de hôs dia puros.

But the fire does burn away the works that are flammable. Such men "suffer loss", that is, they are punished. For zemioo, Liddell and Scott give:

I. to cause loss or do damage to any one, tina Plat., etc.:--Pass., megala zêmiôsetai will suffer great losses, Thuc.
II. to fine, amerce, mulct in a sum of money, c. dat. rei, z. tina chiliêisi drachmêisi Hdt.; chrêmasin Thuc.:-- Pass. to be fined or amerced in a thing, c. dat., Plat.; c. acc., tên psuchên zêmiôseai wilt lose thy life, Hdt.
2. generally to punish, id=Hdt., Thuc.

How is he punished? We are given the answer: he is saved, by fire: that is, the fire punishes him and so he is saved after that. In a word, purgatory.

No "intervening state" is mentioned - in the entire NT. Nowhere does the NT state that there weren't cats and dogs numbered among Jesus' disciples. Are we free to infer that there were?

Biblical principles lead us to the conclusion of purgatory; nothing would lead us to infer feline disciples of Jesus.

It says I will come again and receive you to Myself, [in order] that where I am, there you may be also: not "I will come again and receive you to Myself, and where I am, there you will be also", or something similiar. In other words, you are reading into the text that immediately after the reception they go to heaven: it is simply stating the purpose of the reception.

Heaven is named 237 times. Hell/Death/Destruction is named nearly as many.

Only one instance of teaching in the Scriptures is necessary to prove a doctrine, and we have that in 2 Macc 12:42-46. To quote Cardinal Manning:

Nay, more, the Church so honours the written word of God, that it acts upon its lightest word. It is a strange thing to hear men say that such and such doctrines are incredible because so little is said of them in Holy Scripture. Is truth measured by quantity? How many divine words are needed to overcome the unbelief of men? How often must God speak before we obey Him? How many times must He repeat His revelations before we will submit to His divine voice? Does not every spark contain the whole nature of fire? Does not every divine word contain the veracity of God? The Church of God recognizes His voice in every utterance, and honours the divine will revealed in the fewest syllables. (The Temporal Mission of the Holy Ghost)

Perhaps this is one of the author's "imperfect" statements. [see: 2 Maccabees 15:38,39]

38 So these things being done with relation to Nicanor, and from that time the city being possessed by the Hebrews, I also will here make an end of my narration. 39 Which if I have done well, and as it becometh the history, it is what I desired: but if not so perfectly, it must be pardoned me. 40 For as it is hurtful to drink always wine, or always water, but pleasant to use sometimes the one, and sometimes the other: so if the speech be always nicely framed, it will not be grateful to the readers. But here it shall be ended.

Isn't it clear that it's talking about literary ability, and not about doctrinal mistakes?

Is this the best argument for Purgatory? That something "may have" happened?

No, we are discussing the slain soldiers. As you pointed out, the text says "might" - it says that Judas did the right thing, but it doesn't say that it was successful. How could Judas know whether the soldiers had repented or not? He couldn't, so "might".

You would gamble your eternal destiny on "may have". ... What if there is no "second chance" to clean up you life?

There's no 'second chance'. Nor is there a gamble: anyone who gets to purgatory is already saved. Only the justified can go to purgatory. The dispute between us is simply whether justification in the NT, as opposed to the OT, always removes the debt of temporal punishment.

CCC 1022 Each man receives his eternal retribution in his immortal soul at the very moment of his death, in a particular judgment that refers his life to Christ: either entrance into the blessedness of heaven-through a purification or immediately,--or immediate and everlasting damnation.

Note that there are only two options: heaven or hell, depending on whether one's life was referred to Christ or not.

I don't know about you, but I have a hard time keeping my thought's straight in posts dealing with multiple arguments. I always feel like none of them truly get the attention they deserve.

With your permission, may I suggest that we deal with one issue at a time.

As to Abraham, Romans 4 does indeed say that Abraham was justified by faith. I have been imprecise in my terminology. What I was referring to was the fact that Abraham was not perfected and did not receive the promise until Christ was raised. As my proof of this I offer the following:

Heb 11

"By faith Abraham obeyed when he was called to go out to a place that he was to receive as an inheritance. And he went out, not knowing where he was going. By faith he went to live in the land of promise, as in a foreign land, living in tents with Isaac and Jacob, heirs with him of the same promise. For he was looking forward to the city that has foundations, whose designer and builder is God...

...And all these, though commended through their faith, did not receive what was promised, since God had provided something better for us, that apart from us they should not be made perfect."

We see from the above that Abraham was looking forward to the promise of perfection but he did not (and could not) receive it with out the fulfillment of the blessings promised to the Church age.

As a follow up proof, Jesus in the NT describes Lazarus as being in Abraham's Bosom. I believe we both know this was a paradisaical place of rest - but it was not the Heaven in which God dwells. Abraham, righteous as he was, was not allowed into God's presence before he partook of the cleansing accomplished by Jesus death on the cross.

I believe my point in this illustration was that the NT saints (i.e. believers) have a salvation that is different in quality than that which was available to those under the old covenant. The Old Testament can not always be an accurate guide as to how God handles matters under the New Covenant.

"Here's one. Paul lays out two possibilities, at home or away..."

Yes, but in 2 Timothy Paul lays out a third possiblity. Consider:

"1:16 May the Lord grant mercy to the household of Onesiph'orus, for he often refreshed me; he was not ashamed of my chains, 1:17 but when he arrived in Rome he searched for me eagerly and found me-- 1:18 may the Lord grant him to find mercy from the Lord on that Day--and you well know all the service he rendered at Ephesus."

Now, clearly Onesiph'orus has died. And, just as clearly, Paul is praying the Lord show him mercy.

Now, if we are either, 'home or away,' as classical Protestant theology holds, then why is Paul praying for a dead man? Certainly, under Protestant theology, such prayers can have no effect? Either Onesiph'orus is with the Lord -or he isn't! Paul's prayer for him, however, illustrates a third possiblity -the possiblity Onesiph'orus is somewhere where he could still need and, more importantly, use God's mercy, i.e. Purgatory.

Under Protestant theology, one must conclude St. Paul, here, is violating what we Catholics hold is the Second Commandment, taking the Lord's name in vain. Essentially, if Protestants are right, then St. Paul, here, is making a HUGE theological error calling on God to show mercy to a dead man. Moreover, we must conclude the Holy Spirit somehow slipped up and did not immediately provide us with a correction to this error on Paul's part.

With the Catholic conception of Purgatory, however, Paul's words here make total sense.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.