Fundamentalist Purgatory?

W. Robert Aufill in "Purgatory in all but Name" (This Rock, January 1988) seems puzzled that fundamentalists do not accept Purgatory, which, he claims, "even by their own standards should pose no difficulty at all." Aufill's rationale is that "Protestants . . have no objection to the idea that for their sins God sometimes allows Christians to endure both temporal punishments and deprivation of spiritual consolations."

This suggests that, to Aufill, "temporal punishments" and "deprivation of spiritual consolations" in some way are equivalent to purgatory.

Present day Catholic apologetics often present Purgatory as some kind of pleasant experience of holy fire, and the torment so often spoken of in the past is relegated to the unimportant. No longer do they desire to speak of the soul's anguish as atonement for sin is made, nor do they like to emphasize the part others play in the release of the Holy Souls, except to make sure Mass cards are distributed to promote contributions for their release.

This de-emphasizing of Purgatory is evidenced by the fact that the New Catechism devotes merely 5 out of a total of 2865 paragraphs (less than 2/10 of 1%) to Purgatory. St. Peter's Catechism(1972) had 10 out of 669 (1.5%, or 8 times as much) and the Baltimore Catechism had 6 paragraphs that spoke of Purgatory out of 499 (1.2%). But even with this de-emphasis, an honest apologist should take heed to what the few paragraphs in the New Catechism state, and honestly assess if these have any similarity to the "temporal punishments" and "deprivation of spiritual consolations" Aufill attributes to Fundamentalists.

The first paragraph says the souls in purgatory "undergo purification, so as to achieve the holiness necessary to enter the joy of heaven."

Then we are told the Church formulated (put into a systemized statement) her doctrine on Purgatory in the 15th and 16th century. (Apologists are quick to add that "we believed it long before that", but things are not "de fide" (of faith) until so stated by the Church.)

"St." Gregory "the Great" talked of purifying fire before the Final Judgment - but his statement was not ex cathedra and therefore not binding on Catholics.

The New Catechism makes its final appeal to II Maccabees 12:46, "Therefore [Judas Maccabeus] made atonement for the dead, that they might be delivered from their sin." Any indication of purgatory has to be dragged from that text, as there is no explicit statement that Judas was correct in what he said and did, and no hint that these dead were suffering (which is the essence of Purgatory).

Final mention is made of the help those on earth can give the "Holy Souls" - almsgiving, indulgences and works of penance undertaken on behalf of the dead.

There is a judgment seat of Christ, and the verdict given will not be the same to all Christians. There will be those who suffer loss, and who will have real tears in heaven. But the contrast between the Judgment Seat of Christ and Purgatory is infinite.

Loss suffered because of Christ's Judgment Seat is not atoning. St. Peter's Catechism states that all the souls in Purgatory will go to Heaven "when they have atoned for their sins."

Purgatory is necessary if one believes in the Roman Catholic concept of temporal punishment. When mortal sins are absolved through sacramental confession, their still remains a debt that is unpaid. Absolution removes the guilt of sin but not its punishment. This temporal punishment can be lessened by certain devotional and sacrificial works on earth, but the remainder, together with unconfessed venial sins, must be exacted in Purgatory.

Catholic theologians see evangelical denial of Purgatory as a grave theological problem. They say the fundamentalist must believe there are sins for which satisfaction has not and will not be made. This is because they do not understand the infinite work of Christ, Whose sacrifice the Father has termed to satisfy His judicial demands. "He shall look on the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied."

Hebrews 1:3 talks about the purging of sins, and there is no thought of a partial work, for God continues in Hebrews 10:14, "For by one offering he hath perfected forever them that are sanctified." The souls in Heaven are happier than we are, but they are no more sanctified than the meanest saint of God who has been washed in the blood of the Lamb.

CLEANSING IN THE BLOOD OF JESUS

Aufill goes on to say "Protestants deny the existence of purgatory because they say that the only cleansing needed for salvation is the cleansing in the precious Blood of Jesus, poured out on the Cross for sinners. Catholics agree.

Does the blood of Jesus help the Holy Souls in Purgatory? The New Catechism lists four things that help to purify the souls in Purgatory: the Eucharistic (unbloody) sacrifice, almsgiving (unbloody), indulgences (unbloody), works of penance (unbloody).

The Catholic might say that the merits of these things are derived from the bloody sacrifice of Christ on the Cross. But the most important of these, the Eucharist, according to Catholic theology does not derive its efficacy from Calvary; it is Calvary.

While the imagination might be stretched to believe I give alms, say indulgenced prayers and do works of penance only because of the shed blood of Jesus, if they gain absolution they do so as complementary to that work. The Bible tells us the work of God is perfect, no man can add to it (Ecclesiastes 3:14 [not Ecclesiasticus, an Apocryphal book] ).

Aufill's next statement is an absolute non sequitor. "The holy souls in Purgatory are not experiencing a different or additional cleansing, but only the final effects of the one cleansing in the blood of Christ . . ."

This cleansing is either different or it is the same as the cleansing by the precious blood of Jesus Christ. Differences can be defined by quality or quantity. A ton of potatoes is the same as a ton of bricks in one regard - just as a pound of rice is the same as a ton of rice. One supposed similarity does not make something the same; one difference makes it different.

The sacrifice on Calvary was a blood sacrifice, and there has never been and can never be another meritorious blood sacrifice. Anything that derives its efficacy from another action cannot be the same - and yet both the Council of Trent and the New Catechism agree that Holy Souls are aided by the prayers of the faithful. That these prayers are rooted in Calvary is arguable (but not true), but that these prayers supplement Calvary is inescapable.

A supplement can have the same qualities, look the same, smell the same and appear the same as the base it supplements. But it is not the same. Your left shoe may be said to complement your right shoe, and, while they have similarities, they are not the same.

If a lady at a party sees another lady wearing an identical dress, she might say, "We have on the same dress." But that is not true.

The Sacrifice of Calvary is unique; it is infinite; it cannot be supplemented, complemented, re-enacted or continued. Roman Catholicism's abomination is denying the unique Saviourhood of Christ through the one meritorious work that has ever occurred, and that is not repeatable. Helps to the people in Purgatory equal additions to the work of Calvary. God detests them.

Mr. Aufill demonstrates his misunderstanding of the word "justified." He says the souls in Purgatory have already been justified by grace.

To be justified is to be rendered just or innocent. If one is innocent, there is no guilt and therefore no punishment. Purgatory cannot be inhabited by justified men and women, for then God would be unjust by punishing those already rendered innocent.

The Catholic may respond, "Purgatory is not a place of punishment." The truth remains that Catholic theology clearly teaches Purgatory satisfies what they call temporal punishment, which is supposed to remain even after absolution from sins has been received.

Aufill quotes the Westminster Confession, that Christians may "bring temporal judgments upon themselves." Temporal means of or relating to earthly life and has no room for purgatory. Then he comes up with grand Catholic logic.

Aufill writes, "If a justified [declared innocent] believer can suffer these [temporal - relating to earthly life] consequences of sin, then why can't the same believer experience analogous [similar] temporal [relating to earthy life] judgments beyond death . . .?

Then he states that there is no increase of merit in purgatory - no good works of any kind, and yet the people on earth help the "Holy Souls" by participation in Mass (works), giving alms (works), saying prayers (works) and doing penance (works).

The New Catechism says man must "achieve holiness." And yet Aufill still says there is no meriting involved!

Aufill closes with a long quotation from C.S. Lewis, ending with this: "Our souls demand purgatory, don't they? Would it not break my heart if God said to us, `It is true, my son, that your breath smells and your rags drip with mud and slime, but we are charitable here and no one will upbraid you with these things, nor draw away from you. Enter into the joy?' Should not we reply, `With submission, sir, and if there is no objection, I'd rather be cleaned first.'"

Dirty rags that have been cleaned are still rags. The true believer, when ushered into the joy of Heaven, will gladly proclaim:

"Jesus, Thy blood and righteousness my beauty are, my glorious dress;

Midst flaming worlds, in these arrayed, with joy shall I lift up my head.

"Bold shall I stand in Thy great day for who aught to my charge shall lay?

Fully absolved through these I am, from sin and fear, from guilt and shame."

Nicolaus L. Zinzendorf Translated by John Wesley