Luther Thought Purgatory was an Open Question?

Beggars All Reformation and Aplogetics ^ | May 04, 2013 | James Swan

[boatbums]

Luther Thought Purgatory was an Open Question?

I came across this link posted on the Catholic Answers Forums: The Hope of Eternal Life. The link is ecumenical in nature, an attempt to smooth over the edges between Roman Catholicism and Lutheranism. This is the excerpt that was posted on CAF:

181. The most explicit discussion of purgatory in the Confessions comes in the 1537 Smalcald Articles, II, 2, which addressed the mass as sacrifice. Besides being itself a violation of the Gospel, the mass as sacrifice "has produced many noxious maggots and the excrement of various idolatries" (§11), the first of which is purgatory. Purgatory, "with all its pomp, requiem Masses, and transactions, is to be regarded as an apparition of the devil for it obscures the chief article..." (§12). Behind Luther's typically extreme language, however, a more nuanced understanding is elaborated. "Concerning the dead we have received neither command nor instruction. For these reasons, it may be best to abandon it [derhalben man es mocht wohl lassen], even if it were neither error nor idolatry" (§12). In a revised version of the article, Luther added a discussion of the authority of Augustine claimed for the doctrine. "When they have given up their purgatorial 'Mass fairs' (something Augustine never dreamed of), then we will discuss with them whether St. Augustine's word, lacking support from Scripture, may be tolerated and whether the dead may be commemorated at the sacrament. It will not do to formulate articles of faith on the basis of the holy Fathers' works or words" (§14f). The existence of purgatory is not dogmatically denied. Rather, 1) the existence of purgatory is not taught by Scripture and thus cannot be binding doctrine, and 2) belief in purgatory is now hopelessly bound up with unacceptable practices. A belief that could be discussed in principle is concretely objectionable because of its associations.

This excerpt is fascinating because it argues Luther believed:

-Purgatory isn't taught in Scripture, but yet may exist.
-Purgatory is only to be avoided because of its associations with "unacceptable practices."
-If these practices were removed, a proper discussion on purgatory could occur.

According to this article here is Luther's view of purgatory: "A belief that could be discussed in principle is concretely objectionable because of its associations." In other words, purgatory, for Luther, was an open question. Get rid of the abuses attached to it, and then it could be discussed.

In regard to the Smalcald Articles, LW states, "Under these circumstances the elector of Saxony instructed Luther in a letter of Dec. 11, 1536, to prepare a statement indicating the articles of faith in which concessions might be made for the sake of peace and the articles in which no concessions could be made."

Here are the two statements from the Smalcald Articles alluded to above. Read them for yourself and see if Luther is willing to make a concession on purgatory for the sake of peace:

Luther states in Article 12:

12 The first is purgatory. They were so occupied with requiem Masses, with vigils, with the weekly, monthly, and yearly celebrations of requiems, with the common week, with All Souls’ Day, and with soul-baths that the Mass was used almost exclusively for the dead although Christ instituted the sacrament for the living alone. Consequently purgatory and all the pomp, services, and business transactions associated with it are to be regarded as nothing else than illusions of the devil, for purgatory, too, is contrary to the fundamental article that Christ alone, and not the work of man, can help souls. Besides, nothing has been commanded or enjoined upon us with reference to the dead. All this may consequently be discarded, apart entirely from the fact that it is error and idolatry.

Luther states in Article 13:

13 The papists here adduce passages from Augustine and some of the Fathers who are said to have written about purgatory. They suppose that we do not understand for what purpose and to what end the authors wrote these passages. St. Augustine (tr-467) does not write that there is a purgatory, nor does he cite any passage of the Scriptures that would constrain him to adopt such an opinion. He leaves it undecided whether or not there is a purgatory and merely mentions that his mother asked that she be remembered at the altar or sacrament. Now, this is nothing but a human opinion of certain individuals and cannot establish an article of faith. That is the prerogative of God alone. 14 But our papists make use of such human opinions to make men believe their shameful, blasphemous, accursed traffic in Masses which are offered for souls in purgatory, etc. They can never demonstrate these things from Augustine. Only when they have abolished their traffic in purgatorial Masses (which St. Augustine never dreamed of) shall we be ready to discuss with them whether statements of St. Augustine are to be accepted when they are without the support of the Scriptures and whether the dead are to be commemorated in the sacrament. 15 It will not do to make articles of faith out of the holy Fathers’ words or works. Otherwise what they ate, how they dressed, and what kind of houses they lived in would have to become articles of faith — as has happened in the case of relics. This means that the Word of God shall establish articles of faith and no one else, not even an angel.

The reading given to these statements by The Hope of Eternal Life downplays the first explicit rejection of purgatory, and sees the real Luther in his willingness to discuss what Augustine meant when "purgatorial masses" are abolished. The problem as I see it, is this reading of the Smalcald Articles isolates these statements from Luther's total written corpus, particularly any writings after the Smalcald Articles.

For instance, in his later sermons on Genesis, Luther states something with similar characteristics to the Smalcald articles. Note particularly the reference to Augustine:

The pope invents four separate places for the dead.The first is the hell of the damned. The second is purgatory, and Thomas Aquinas says that hell is the middle point, so to speak. It is surrounded by purgatory. But around this there is a third circle. It is for unbaptized infants. The fourth circle is the limbo of the fathers. Here the godly dwelt before the resurrection of Christ. These are nothing but dreams and human inventions. Peter and Paul state clearly that the demons move about in the air. With regard to what Paul says see Eph. 2:2, and in 2 Peter 2:4 it is stated that “God did not spare the angels when they sinned but cast them into hell and committed them to pits of nether gloom to be kept until the judgment.” With these statements I rest content, and I do not inquire into things higher than those handed down by the apostles. Of purgatory there is no mention in Holy Scripture; it is a lie of the devil, in order that the papists may have some market days and snares for catching money. The sophists agree with the pope because of Thomas. But Thomas does not concern us. Augustine makes mention of purgatory somewhere, but he speaks very obscurely. Therefore I do not believe that those four separate classes really exist; for Scripture does not speak this way but testifies that the dead saints are gathered to their people, or to those who believe in the Messiah and awaited His coming, just as Adam, together with all his descendants, died in faith in Christ. But how these saints are kept in definite places, we do not know. [Luther, M. (1999, c1966). Vol. 8: Luther's works, vol. 8 : Lectures on Genesis: Chapters 45-50 (J. J. Pelikan, H. C. Oswald and H. T. Lehmann, Ed.). Luther's Works (8:316). Saint Louis: Concordia Publishing House].

Here again Luther explicitly denies purgatory, then mentions the obscurity of Augustine. He then goes on to deny that "four separate classes really exist." In the same volume, Luther refers to "Masses, purgatory, indulgences, and prayers to the dead" as false forms of worship (LW 8:230). Elsewhere in Luther's lectures on Genesis he states,

[P]urgatory is the greatest falsehood, because it is based on ungodliness and unbelief; for they deny that faith saves, and they maintain that satisfaction for sins is the cause of salvation. Therefore he who is in purgatory is in hell itself; for these are his thoughts: “I am a sinner and must render satisfaction for my sins; therefore I shall make a will and shall bequeath a definite amount of money for building churches and for buying prayers and sacrifices for the dead by the monks and priests.” Such people die in a faith in works and have no knowledge of Christ. Indeed, they hate Him. We die in faith in Christ, who died for our sins and rendered satisfaction for us. He is my Bosom, my Paradise, my Comfort, and my Hope. [Luther, M. (1999, c1964). Vol. 4: Luther's works, vol. 4 : Lectures on Genesis: Chapters 21-25 (J. J. Pelikan, H. C. Oswald and H. T. Lehmann, Ed.). Luther's Works (4:315). Saint Louis: Concordia Publishing House].

And here:

The third sphere is that of purgatory, into which neither the damned nor infants enter; it is for those who, while they believe, yet have not rendered satisfaction for their sins. The souls of these are ransomed by means of indulgences. From this source comes the hogwash of indulgences and the entire papistic religion.The fourth place is the limbo of the fathers. They say that Christ descended to this place, broke it open, and set free—not from hell but from the limbo—the fathers who were troubled by the longing and waiting for Christ but were not enduring punishment or torments. With these silly ideas the papists have filled the church and the world. We have overturned all this completely and maintain that unbaptized infants do not have such a sphere. But in what state they are or what becomes of them we commend to the goodness of God. They do not have faith or Baptism; but whether God receives them in an extraordinary manner and gives them faith is not stated in the Word, and we dare not set down anything as certain. To be deprived of the vision of God is hell itself. They admit that they have will and intellect, especially concerning the vision of God and life; but these are falsehoods. And purgatory is the greatest falsehood, because it is based on ungodliness and unbelief; for they deny that faith saves, and they maintain that satisfaction for sins is the cause of salvation. Therefore he who is in purgatory is in hell itself; for these are his thoughts: “I am a sinner and must render satisfaction for my sins; therefore I shall make a will and shall bequeath a definite amount of money for building churches and for buying prayers and sacrifices for the dead by the monks and priests.” Such people die in a faith in works and have no knowledge of Christ. Indeed, they hate Him. We die in faith in Christ, who died for our sins and rendered satisfaction for us. He is my Bosom, my Paradise, my Comfort, and my Hope. [Luther, M. (1999, c1964). Vol. 4: Luther's works, vol. 4 : Lectures on Genesis: Chapters 21-25 (J. J. Pelikan, H. C. Oswald and H. T. Lehmann, Ed.). Luther's Works (4:315). Saint Louis: Concordia Publishing House].

Comments from Luther similar to these could be greatly multiplied, which is why some Lutherans see any affirmation that Luther held purgatory was an "open question" as a lie of the Devil.

[ebb tide]

Like the Blessed Mother at the Annunication?

[dp0622]

Hey that’s a great quote.

[boatbums]

Scripture says of Jesus, "Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men. (Now that he ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth? He that descended is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all things.) (Ephesians 4:8-10)

I believe that Jesus went to the Paradise compartment of Hades (AKA Abraham's Bosom (Luke 16:19-31) and:

He proclaimed to them the mystery of the gospel, and then led them into heaven to dwell with God. The belief is that they were not permitted to enter into the presence of God in heaven until after the atonement. Once that had happened, Jesus, who had died, descended to Abraham's bosom, proclaimed the gospel, and then led its residents into heaven.

So, even though we cannot precisely determine where Jesus was and what He did during those three days, it seems apparent that He presented the gospel message (not to have them get saved) to those in spirit prison and possibly also to those in Abraham's bosom. https://carm.org/where-did-jesus-go-after-he-died-cross

That place doesn't exists anymore since Jesus opened the gates of heaven by His perfect sacrifice. It was NEVER called "purgatory", it was NOT ever seen as a place of cleansing or punishment, but a holding place for the redeemed until Christ came. Why would you think God would still put souls there? Don't you believe that the blood of Jesus Christ cleanses us from ALL sin? Do you think His suffering was not enough?

[ebb tide]

How about St. Joseph and the Angel who appeared to him in a dream?

Aren’t you glad St Joseph heeded the warning?

[aMorePerfectUnion]

Aren’t you glad St Joseph heeded the warning?

This actually happened ebb. It is in Scripture.

The purgatory stuff is made up.

[Mark17]

About as valid as the apparitions you believe and the scapular you wear.

I don’t know any Catholics, who wear the scapular today. Doesn’t mean there aren’t any, just that I don’t know any, personally. I seem to remember that all of us in my grade school, stopped wearing it, when we got into high school, but I don’t remember why, nor do I remember why we wore it in the first place.

[ebb tide]

The Virgin birth of Jesus Christ is also in Scripture. Yet many refuse to accept it.

Do you?

[vladimir998]

No.

I John 5:16-18:

If anyone sees his brother committing a sin that is not a deadly sin, he will ask, and God will give him life for those whose sin is not deadly. There is sin which is deadly; I do not say one is to pray for that. All wrongdoing is sin, but there is sin which is not deadly. We know that anyone born of God does not sin, but He who is born of God keeps him, and the evil one does not touch him.

All sin is sin, but “deadly” sin is mortal while “not deadly” is venial.

[Luircin]

Really?

You expect me to believe that out of context verse completely validates Catholic theology, completely ignoring the statements in Scripture that A: the wages of sin is death, and B: All have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God, and C: That anyone who transgresses one part of the law has transgressed against the entirety of the law.

...while Paul directly saying that you are saved by grace through faith and NOT by works doesn’t validate sola fide.

[Luircin]

Logical Fallacy: ad hominem. Twice over, no less.

Such a sad thing to see people who believe they’re defending the faith resort to that kind of nonsense.

That’s something that NPCs do, and Christians shouldn’t.

[vladimir998]

Protestants struggle to think logically.

“You expect me to believe that out of context verse completely validates Catholic theology,”

1) It’s not out of context at all.

2) It was always known that some sins are more serious than others.

“completely ignoring the statements in Scripture”

I ignored NOTHING in Scripture. You did. You’re doing it now.

“that A: the wages of sin is death,”

Of course the “wages of sin is death” but that doesn’t mean every sin is in itself mortal. All sin leads to spiritual death, but some sins are inherently mortal.

“and B: All have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God,”

The fact that all have sinned doesn’t mean all sins are the same in severity. Also, clearly not all of have sinned. Does an infant of a month old who dies of crib death have to worry about actual sins? No, of course not. This in itself helps demonstrate a fact: You are just as likely to think “all” means truly “all” when it can’t as you are to think that “wages of sin is death” means all sins are equally severe. Both understandings are MISUNDERSTANDINGS and logic errors on your part.

“and C: That anyone who transgresses one part of the law has transgressed against the entirety of the law.”

This isn’t about the 613 laws of the Old Testament. Do you - even for a single moment - really believe wearing linen and woolen blends is a sin? That was the law. You do know that right?

So you’re honestly claiming stealing a 29 cent Bic disposable pen from an office is just as evil, just as sinful, as raping a child and murdering that child? Can you really be that off base? https://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2005/january/19.65.html
https://billygraham.org/answer/are-all-sins-the-same-in-gods-eyes/

Even serious sins appear to have some that are more serious than others: John 19:11 - “For this reason the one who handed me over to you has the greater sin.”

In passages that speak of greater degrees of punishment, it becomes obvious that there are varying levels of sinfulness. Evil people can become even worse (2 Tim. 3:13).

And, not surprisingly, there will be more punishment for some than others (Matthew 11:20ff; Luke 12:47-48; Hebrews 10:28-29; James 3:1; 2 Peter 2:20-21).

Numbers 15:27-31 even makes clear that there are unwitting sinful actions. This can only mean objective sins committed by people who did not know or fully understand that they were doing wrong.

And the Lord’s warning in Matthew 18:6 makes no sense if all sins are equal.

“...while Paul directly saying that you are saved by grace through faith and NOT by works doesn’t validate sola fide.”

Nothing validates sola fide. And Paul condemns works of the law - the old, Jewish, Mosaic law. He never condemns the works of God started in us which we cooperate with in the “obedience of faith”.

[vladimir998]

I made no ad hominem attacks at all.

I wanted to see if something is still true here, and it is.

Hence, the post was deleted.

The anti-Catholics have to be helped after all.

[boatbums]

I don’t know any Catholics, who wear the scapular today. Doesn’t mean there aren’t any, just that I don’t know any, personally. I seem to remember that all of us in my grade school, stopped wearing it, when we got into high school, but I don’t remember why, nor do I remember why we wore it in the first place.

It's the "Get Out of Purgatory on Saturdays" ticket. ;o)

[boatbums]

The Virgin birth of Jesus Christ is also in Scripture. Yet many refuse to accept it. Do you?

I absolutely accept the virgin birth of Jesus Christ. Not only was it an Old Testament Messianic prophecy it was affirmed by the Holy Spirit in numerous places of Scripture.

[boatbums]

Surprising how often RCs throw out verses they think prove their assertions when it is patently obvious they haven't a clue of the context! The verses used, for example, where they propose the idea a "venial" vs. "mortal" sins is validated. The context is about praying for fellow believers:

Question: "What is the sin unto death?"

Answer: First John 5:16 is one of the most difficult verses in the New Testament to interpret. “If anyone sees his brother commit a sin that does not lead to death, he should pray and God will give him life. I refer to those whose sin does not lead to death. There is a sin that leads to death. I am not saying that he should pray about that.” Of all the interpretations out there, none seem to answer all the questions concerning this verse.

The best interpretation may be found by comparing this verse to what happened to Ananias and Sapphira in Acts 5:1–10 (see also 1 Corinthians 11:30). The “sin unto death” is willful, continuous, unrepentant sin. God has called His children to holiness (1 Peter 1:16), and God corrects them when they sin. We are not “punished” for our sin in the sense of losing salvation or being eternally separated from God, yet we are disciplined. “The Lord disciplines the one he loves, and he chastens everyone he accepts as his son” (Hebrews 12:6).

First John 5:16 says there comes a point when God can no longer allow a believer to continue in unrepentant sin. When that point is reached, God may decide to take the life of the stubbornly sinful believer. The “death” is physical death. God at times purifies His church by removing those who deliberately disobey Him. The apostle John makes a distinction between the “sin that leads to death” and the “sin that does not lead to death.” Not all sin in the church is dealt with the same way because not all sin rises to the level of the “sin that leads to death.”

In Acts 5:1–10 and 1 Corinthians 11:28–32, God dealt with intentional, calculated sin in the church by taking the physical life of the sinner. This is perhaps also what Paul meant by “the destruction of the flesh” in 1 Corinthians 5:5. John says that we should pray for Christians who are sinning, and that God will hear our prayers. However, there may come a time when God decides to cut short a believer’s life due to unrepentant sin. Prayers for such an unheeding person will not be effective. God is good and just, and He will eventually make us “a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless” (Ephesians 5:27). To further that end, God chastens His children. May the Lord preserve us from the hard-heartedness that would cause us to commit the “sin unto death.”(https://www.gotquestions.org/sin-unto-death.html)

[Mark17]

It's the "Get Out of Purgatory on Saturdays" ticket. ;o)

Saturdays? What about the other 6 days of the week? One better hope one kicks the crock pot, on Saturday, and not any other day. That was the term my wife used, for kick the bucket. You have to remember English is her 3rd language, so she has an excuse, but I got a good laugh out of it. She also likes the song, "My Dog Might Be a Democrat," by Bryan Lewis.

:-)

[Mark17]

Hey that’s a great quote.

The Ballad of Jim Bridger, by Johnny Horton.

[dp0622]

Will have to look it up. In fact I’ll do that now :)

[Mark17]

I agree with you assessment of those "difficult" verses. I believe the sin unto death, refers to physical death, not the spiritual death of the soul. If a true believer wants to engage in continuous, unrepentant sin, they might be short for the world. I don't believe Ananias and Sapphira lost their salvation, but they surely kicked the crock pot, I mean, kick the bucket. If you want to live a long life, then behave.

:-)