Tag Archives: ecumenism

Purgatory Pickle

There is a very common misunderstanding among Evangelicals regarding purgatory.
This
Earnestly Contending (which, for reasons unknown has no commenting capability) post
,
a quote from Charles Spurgeon, represents well.

“But shall I tell you who the gentlemen are who generally raise objections to the glorious privilege of assurance? There are, first of all, the adherents of the Pope of Rome. Of course, the Papist does not like full assurance. And why? The Pope and his priest would have a lean larder if full assurance were well preached. Only conceive my brethren, if the Roman Catholic could get the full assurance of salvation, surely the Cardinals would hardly find money enough to buy their red hats. For where were purgatory then? Purgatory is an impossibility, if full assurance be possible. If a man knows himself to be saved, then he is not to be troubled with a silly fear about waiting in the intermediate state, to be purified with fire, before he can enter into heaven. Purgatory is only acceptable to those poor trembling souls who know of no sure salvation here, and are glad of this deceptive hope of a salvation to be wrought in the world to come. Purgatory being thus builded upon a lying imposition — on the fears of ignorant consciences, becomes what brave old Hugh Latimer used to call it, ‘Purgatory Pick-purse,’ to the poor sinner, and ‘Purgatory Fillpurse’ to the vagabond priest. Once let full assurance be given to all Christian men — first make the Romanist a Christian, and then let him be fully assured of his interest in Christ, and away goes purgatory, and there will never be a soul found to tremble at it any more.” – Charles H. Spurgeon; from a sermon on Sunday, April 28th, 1861(emphasis mine)

There is no salvation to be wrought after death, in purgatory or elsewhere. Even if Catholics believed in full assurance, they could believe in purgatory. Purgatory is not a destination, but a lay-over. Only those who are saved experience purgation, i.e cleansing. Nothing imperfect can enter the presense of God in heaven. Humans are certainly far from perfect. By the end of our lives, we have accumulated spiritual scar tissue that sin produces. Also, even the most saintly of individuals is not entirely conformed to Christ and His commands at death. Therefore, all stain of sin and its waste products must be purged from us before we enter the beatific vision.

UPDATE: Steve, a faithful reader, has provided some Scripture to support the need purgation.

“As you go with your accuser before the magistrate, make an effort to settle with him on the way, lest he drag you to the judge, and the judge hand you over to the officer, and the officer put you in prison. I tell you, you will never get out till you have paid the very last copper.” – Luke 21:58-59

“According to the grace of God given to me, like a skilled master builder I laid a foundation, and another man is building upon it. Let each man take care how he builds upon it. For no other foundation can any one lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ. Now if any one builds on the foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, straw — each man’s work will become manifest; for the Day will disclose it, because it will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test what sort of work each one has done. If the work which any man has built on the foundation survives, he will receive a reward. If any man’s work is burned up, he will suffer loss, though he himself will be saved, but only as through fire.” – 1 Corinthians 3:10-15

“And I am sure that he who began a good work in you will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ.” – Philippians 1:6

“But nothing unclean shall enter [heaven], nor any one who practices abomination or falsehood, but only those who are written in the Lamb’s book of life.” – Revelation 21:27

Catholic Anwers has an excellent defense of purgatorian doctrine that readers might enjoy. Apologist Mark Shea (a former Evangelical) wrote one, too. C.S. Lewis, a Protestant author and a favorite of mine, tossed in his two cents as well.

A Season For All Men

"The Teutonic word Lent, which we employ to denote the forty days’ fast preceding Easter, originally meant no more than the spring season. Still it has been used from the Anglo-Saxon period to translate the more significant Latin term quadragesima (French carême, Italian quaresima, Spanish cuaresma), meaning the ‘forty days’, or more literally the ‘fortieth day’. This in turn imitated the Greek name for Lent, tessarakoste (fortieth), a word formed on the analogy of Pentecost (pentekoste), which last was in use for the Jewish festival before New Testament times. This etymology, as we shall see, is of some little importance in explaining the early developments of the Easter fast." – Catholic Encyclopedia

Lent starts early this year. Ash Wednesday is February 9. That’s just two weeks away. Are you planning on performing any acts of penance? Being a Catholic convert from fairly high-church Lutheranism, I don’t know much about "low-church" Protestant observances of Lent or lack thereof. I’d like very much to know how non-Catholics, particularly Evangelicals and liberals/progressives, observe Lent.

If you are a Protestant (of any flavor), I have a mission for you, should you choose to accept it (queue Mission Impossible music). I’d like to know how you, your church, and/or your denomination observe (or don’t observe) Ash Wednesday and Lent. If you don’t have a blog, please consider leaving a comment to tell me what Lent means to you. If you do have a blog, please consider writing a post about what Lent means to you. Trackback this post and I’ll write a carnival-like post to tie the entries together. Also, please promote this meme on your blog. Thanks in advance. 🙂

Catholic Church Teaching Universalism?

I'm discovering more and more that the Catholic Church has some serious PR problems. This Earnestly Contending post is representative of the many Protestant (mostly Evangelical) gross misunderstandings of Catholic teachings and teaching authority that I've encountered. My responses are drawn from comments I made at Weapons of Warfare. Continue reading

Saved/Judged as the Body?

Michael Gallaugher, of Christian Conservative, asks the following question.

Nearly all people of faith believe their fate before God will depend largely upon our individual lives. However, some people believe the judgement awaiting us in the next life will not only be weighed against our lives as individuals, but the fruit of the broader culture we take part in shaping as well. I’m curious to get your reaction to the latter belief.

To which I responded:

The Catholic Church teaches that there will be both a particular
judgement
and a last judgement.
We also believe that the faithful are not only saved as individual souls, but also
as the Mystical Body of
Christ
.

This was not well-received by the Protestant commenters. I’m not sure if they really oppose the Church’s views or oppose them because they are “Romish” views. Could any of Protestant readers clarify this for me? Would any of my Catholic readers be able/willing to help me defend the Church?

The Myth of Catholic and Orthodox Tradition?

Cameron Porter, of Earnestly Contending, posts the following quote (apparently a favorite of his).

"Furthermore, that the body of tradition is not of divine origin nor apostolic is proven by the fact that some traditions contradict others. The church fathers repeatedly contradict one another. When a Roman Catholic priest is ordained he solemnly vows to interpret the Scriptures only according to 'the unanimous consent' of the fathers. But such 'unanimous consent' is purely a myth. The fact is they scarcely agree on any doctrine. They contradict each other, and even contradict themselves as they change their minds and affirm what they previously had denied. Augustine, the greatest of the fathers, in his later life wrote a special book in which he set forth his Retractions. Some of the fathers of the second century held that Christ would return shortly and that he would personally reign in Jerusalem for a thousand years. But two of the best known scholars of the early church, Origen (185-254) and Augustine (354-430) wrote against that view. The early fathers condemned the use of images in worship, while later ones approve such use. The early church almost unanimously advocated the reading and free use of the Scriptures, while later ones restricted such reading and use. Gregory the Great, bishop of Rome and the greatest of the early bishops, denounced the assumption of the title of Universal Bishop as anti-Christian. But later Popes even to the present have been very insistent of using that and similar titles which assert universal authority. Where, then, is the universal tradition and unanimous consent of the fathers to papal doctrine?"

– Loraine Boettner, Roman Catholicism (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1962), pp. 78-79

Thoughts?