It is true that 1 Cor 3:9-15 can be interpreted in different ways than that of the purgatory, like most allegorical passages in the scripture. It also should be noted that the Catholic NAB is produced by most liberal Catholic Bible scholars available in cooperation with the Protestants, -- always a bad idea. A serious Catholic should wholly disregard the "catholic" NAB comments.
The statement I made is that the Purgatory is the primary subject matter of 1 Cor 9-15, because I am confronting the evident Protestant falsehood that there is "no" biblical support for the concept of Purgatory. In that light, I will respond to your post.
The judgment here is at the time of the return of Christ
That is a serious objection as indeed the "day of the Lord" most naturally refers to the Second Coming of Christ and the attendant universal judgment, as opposed to the particular judgment of everyone immediately upon one's death. If one were to conclude from 1 Cor. 3 that upon the last judgment some people will suffer the purgatorial fire, such a believer would be in keeping with the passage. The problem with this interpretation is that it makes the particular judgment a non-event: the believer is saved and ... is made wait till the Second Coming to enter heaven and be with the Lord. While this reading is possible, it is not mandated by the text as it is possible that the manifestation to others is delayed but the purification itslef is immediate.
if any mans works are burned then the believer suffers loss, a negative loss of rewards (Cor. 3:15) — not gain as would be the case if salvific personal purification was the case.
There is both a loss and a gain described in 1 Cor. 3 (vv 8, 15) and in the case of the purgatorial passage according to the Church there is also a loss of the direct passage into sainthood, and a gain of that very sainthood in the end. There is no contradiction between the scripture and the teaching of the Church here.
if anyone defiles the church, as one was doing in the next chapter, then he would be destroyed if he died in that state
Indeed, and one burdened by a grave and unconfessed sin, espacially that of holding the damnable Protestant convictions in order to hurt the Catholic Church, will indeed not be saved even through purgatory, but rather damned forever.
The judgment then of 1Cor. 3:15 is about one's workmanship in building the church, and “Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire,” Rather than these works being personal faults which one must be purified from (and would be counted a joy for losing), and of sins being expiated (atoned, compensated for) through potentially thousands of years of “fire and torments or purifying' punishments,” (Indulgentiarum Doctrina; cp. 1. 1967) so they can enter heaven, instead those being judged are already with the Lord in heaven
Ther is no such distinction as "workmanship in building the church" opposed to "personal faults which one must be purified from". When one commits a sin, that is a sin against the entire Church as well as an individual loss, and when one does penance, that builds him individually and also builds up the Chruch as a whole (Col. 1:24). That the passage is not about the clergy only is seen in "every man's work" being underscored in the passage.
Nowhere does Scripture tell of believers being in a postmortem place of suffering for purifying of faults
In this passage, 1 Cor 3 verses 13 through 15 in particular we see that post-mortem suffering. Your point seems to be that the souls that go through the purgatorial cleansing are with the Lord already, -- which indeed in a way they are -- so you yourself agree that the suffering and loss described in the passage in focus is occuring following the believer's natural death.
the fire is that which consumes the false building material, which is shown to be the manner of converts one built the church with
No, because in 1 Cor 3:9 every believer is said to be such building. It is therefore he himself being burnt in the cleansing fire, not some disembodied "works" or "materials". You are not following the language of the metaphor through.
Greek Orthodox Metropolitan Kallistos Ware acknowledges several schools of thought among the Orthodox on the topic of purification after death. This divergence indicates that the Catholic interpretation of purgatory, more than the concept itself, is what is universally rejected
It is good that you study the Orthodox sources. Any Protestants will go miles toward the Kingdom of Heaven if he converts to the Orthodox Church and obeys her patriarchs in where they are correct and in a few cases where they are ... not in error, but in an attempt to deepen the schism. The truth is that there is much in Western Catholic Church that is peculiar to it and is not shared by the East. In this case, both East and West agree on the essentials, that there is a purification after death of those capable of being purified and thus saved, thanks to the infinite mercy of Christ. The specific Western practices and pieties are not obligatory for the East if they don't have the mind for them.
Good luck with you works based salvation. I use the word luck because it’s obvious you haven’t put your faith in the completed work of Christ.
NAB is produced by most liberal Catholic Bible scholars available in cooperation with the Protestants, -- always a bad idea.
A few liberal Protestants, which still would not be an excuse (ask Aaron), and rather than blame being shifted away from Rome, liberalism is well entrenched in Rome even in high places. I know that the NAB is liberal, but it is an official work of Rome, even the properly stamped officially approved Bible for America, and has been for years, and the note remains even in the latest revision (NABRE). Thus if you resort to negating its comments then you impugn the authority of the very Roman Catholic church which you are defending as the supreme teacher.
A serious Catholic should wholly disregard the "catholic" NAB comments.
And because of such thus we get different answers from RCAs as to just what is official teaching depending on what they want to prove. But 1Cor. 3 is not infallibly interpreted, nor does your interpretation have the required “unanimous consent of the fathers.”
The problem with this interpretation is that it makes the particular judgment a non-event: the believer is saved and ... is made wait till the Second Coming to enter heaven and be with the Lord. While this reading is possible, it is not mandated by the text as it is possible that the manifestation to others is delayed but the purification itslef is immediate.
There is no problem with this substantiated reasoning; the problem is with your premise. The Lord knows those who are His, (2Tim. 2:19) and there is no waiting for getting into Heaven now, which believers are already positionally in, (Eph. 2:6; Phil. 3:20) and the clearest texts speak of them being there after death, as shown, or if the resurrection took place in the 1st century the church would be immediately and forever with the Lord. (1Thes,. 4:17) At the first resurrection (Rev 20:6; cf Jn. 5:29a) they will receive glorified bodes, (1Jn. 3:12; 1Cor. 15:51,52; 1Thes. 4:16) and at which time the judgment in 1Cor. 3 takes place when believers receive the promised rewards. (Rev. 11:18; 1Cor. 4:5; 2Tim. 4:1,8; Mt. 25:31; Rev. 11:18; 22:12)
There is both a loss and a gain described in 1 Cor. 3 (vv 8, 15) and in the case of the purgatorial passage according to the Church there is also a loss of the direct passage into sainthood, and a gain of that very sainthood in the end. There is no contradiction between the scripture and the teaching of the Church here.
A loss and gain aspect does not make it the same, and there certainly is a contradiction, as the loss is not that of a delay into sainthood, which is read into the text (and all believers are called saints: Rm. 1:7; 8:27; 12:13; 15:25,26,31, etc.), and the suffering is that of loss of rewards due to “any man's works” not enduring the fire test, as was demonstrated.
espacially that of holding the damnable Protestant convictions in order to hurt the Catholic Church will..be damned forever.
You must exalt Rome like this, but we consider the source and find that what is damned is your spurious attempts to defend Rome, and that she has become the gates of Hell for many.
There is no such distinction as "workmanship in building the church" opposed to "personal faults which one must be purified from".
I stated that “the loss of rewards in 1Cor. 3 does reflect upon the character of the builder.” Personal faults are manifested in works, just as true faith is manifest by works, and believers are thus judged according to their works as it testifies to their faith or lack thereof. Thus there is a distinction as regards cause and effect, as well as what is burned up which is the flammable works themselves while the precious stones gain a reward. In context, it is manifest that this was ones workmanship in building the church, and the believers were Paul's work, and crown of rejoicing in that day of Christ when the judgment on rewards for believers formally takes place.
When one commits a sin, that is a sin against the entire Church as well as an individual loss, and when one does penance, that builds him individually and also builds up the Chruch as a whole (Col. 1:24). That the passage is not about the clergy only is seen in "every man's work" being underscored in the passage.
I did not restrict it to the clergy, but expressed that believers are building the church directly or indirectly, and which Col. 1:24 supports, as seen in my comments on it above.
>Nowhere does Scripture tell of believers being in a postmortem place of suffering for purifying of faults<
In this passage, 1 Cor 3 verses 13 through 15 in particular we see that post-mortem suffering. Your point seems to be that the souls that go through the purgatorial cleansing are with the Lord already, -- which indeed in a way they are -- so you yourself agree that the suffering and loss described in the passage in focus is occuring following the believer's natural death.
If this was the issue and purgatorial cleansing was defined as i expressed, and awaited the return of the Lord, then there would be no debate, but some basic commonalities do not negate differences, which was what my points addressed
the fire is that which consumes the false building material, which is shown to be the manner of converts one built the church with
No, because in 1 Cor 3:9 every believer is said to be such building. It is therefore he himself being burnt in the cleansing fire, not some disembodied "works" or "materials". You are not following the language of the metaphor through.
It is you who is not following the language of the metaphor correctly, as it is not “buildings,” but “God's building,” and the temple is also collective (“ye” is plural), and it is not every building but the material one builds with that the “fire” reveals. And here you are not following what the fire metaphor does correctly, which is not progressive cleansing one of unwanted personal faults through potentially eons of years, which would reward him with access to glory, but that of revealing what is chaff (wood, hay, stubble), which results in loss of rewards, with one may be saved despite of, if somewhat empty handed.
The Lord does know both who is saved and who is lost before hand, but as the sentencing of the lost is awaits the great white throne judgment, (Rv. 20:11-15) so the giving of rewards awaits the day of Christ, when the Lord gives “reward unto thy servants the prophets, and to the saints, and them that fear thy name, small and great; and shouldest destroy them which destroy the earth.” (Rv. 11:18)
In this case, both East and West agree on the essentials,that there is a purification after death of those capable of being purified and thus saved...
We also believe in the need for purification as a mark of true faith, but we see in Scripture this being dealt with in this life.