by Matthew A. C. Newsome ©2001-2

Not long after I joined the discussion group called Catholic Apologetics, I learned that certain people join groups like this just to rile people's feathers.  Many anti-Catholics see groups like this as an opportunity to "stump the dumb Catholic" and to further spread their anti-Catholic message.  Now, don't get me wrong.  I am not against non-Catholics joining this type of group, asking honest questions, and even participating regularly in the discussion.  What I don't quite get is the fervent anti-Catholic, who thinks he knows all about the faults and weaknesses of Catholicism, joining a group of Catholic apologists and trying to pass along his anti-Catholic rhetoric that even someone with only a basic understanding of Catholic doctrine and history can see through.  Generally, the folks who join a Catholic Apologetics group are not the type of people who can easily fall prey to propaganda such as this.

A woman asked a general question on the list.  Her parish priest had made a comment that, though he could not discount the existence of purgatory, he did seriously doubt it.  She was planning to speak to him about this, but wanted to prepare herself before hand.  So she asked those on the list for information on purgatory.  One of the first replies was from a new subscriber to the list.  We'll call him "Hank."  Here is the major content of his letter:

I like the concept of Purgatory. I believe there's a Purgatory. It's comforting for those of us who realize that we have certain failings and that there is hope that we can attain everlasting life in spite of them.

Purgatory is an invention of the church in the 15th century, 1438... Council of Florence. Prior to that it was just a good idea. Later it became a pretty good business for a lot of folks they sold Purgatory coupons, that is, they would make a deal with old farts that after they died this "Prayer Consortium" would pray for you and get enough indulgences to get you to the big pearly gates. It was a pretty good business, my research indicated that many families made their complete living by contracting for Purgatory indulgent services, even subcontracting for additional employees to cover the required prayers during big a rush, like the plague. This was a different situation than the Pope selling indulgences to build St. Peter's that was another atrocity that we can discuss later. We Catholics are sure clever folks we can find a buck wherever its hidden. ;-)

I would say  your visiting priest is pretty accurate. It's an optional belief and has little to do with a person gaining everlasting life by following the teaching of Jesus. It has no biblical foundation and no one in the Old or New Testament knew anything about it, especially special Jesus, I find that strange that any belief that is practiced by the Catholic Church was unknown by Jesus. I doubt that anyone in the magisterium would fall on their sword for Purgatory, although I could be wrong.

I am proud to say that none on the list, not even non-Catholics, that I am aware of, took Hank very seriously.  We soon learned that he was a flamer.  That is, his only goal in the discussion group seemed to be to get tempers raging, to cause controversy, to get people upset, and then to leave.  He would post a message, like this one about purgatory, and before the well meaning apologists on the list could correct his errors, answer his questions, or refute his accusations, he would post five or ten other messages about hot-button issues such as the Marian doctrines, the papacy, the Ten Commandments, you name it.  He would never respond to any replies made to him, he just brushed them aside and continued on.  Eventually he had to be removed from the list by the moderator.

So why did I save this message of his? Because it encapsulated many of the common misconceptions about Purgatory about as well as anything I have seen, and his views represent what many non-Catholics (not just anti-Catholics) believe.  Messages like Hanks are especially harming because of the way they are written.  Number one, Hank claims to be a Catholic.  Now I do not know enough about him to tell if he really is a Catholic by faith, or just a cultural Catholic, or was raised Catholic and left the church, or is only taking the guise of a Catholic for subversive reasons.  But his views, whatever he claims to be, most certainly do not represent the teaching of the Catholic Church.  Yet remarks like "We Catholics are sure clever folks" serve to identify him as "one of us" or "part of the in crowd."  To the non-Catholic, looking in from the outside, a message like this, purportedly from a Catholic, would only confirm their worst suspicions. Also, he begins his message by saying that he likes the concept of Purgatory, and beyond that, even believes in it!  Yet the rest of his message certainly shows an very unfavorable attitude towards this doctrine.  Like the man abducting the child, he would lure us in with his gentleness and kindness before snatching us away.

Hank suffers from severe misconceptions about Purgatory, and just what Catholics teach regarding it.  It is easy enough for us to examine and expose these myths.

MYTH #1:  Purgatory was invented in 1438 at the Council of Florence.
Yes, the Council of Florence did clearly define what purgatory means, in its Decree of Union.  But did the council invent this doctrine? One of the primary tasks this council undertook was to address many of the differences between the Latin Church in the West and the Greek Church in the East.  These differences included the procession of the Holy Spirit, the type of bread used for the Eucharist, the primacy of the Pope, and teachings about Purgatory (hence the definition of purgatory produced by the council).  Now, the question to be asked is this.  How could the East and West have differing teachings about Purgatory prior to this council if the doctrine was unknown before the council "invented" it?  Also, this council was partly in reaction to the Hussite heretical movement.  One of the teachings of the church they denied was that of purgatory.  Again, how could this heretical group deny a doctrine of the Church that had not yet been invented?  (The same question could be asked about the Albeginses and the Waldensiens).  The truth is that the writings of the early Church Fathers are very clear in teaching the doctrine of purgatory, even if they do not name it by name.  Tertullian said it was a teaching from the Apostles.  Origin upheld this doctrine in his writings, as did St. Cyril of Jerusalem.  The Catholic Encyclopedia cites many early Church Fathers as upholding the doctrine of purgatory, all of which would have to be ignored or disproven if one were to claim that the Church invented this doctrine in 1438.  You can also read excerpts from the Church Fathers in the Catholic Answers article, "The Roots of Purgatory."

MYTH #2:  Indulgences were coupons that would get you "time off" Purgatory.
Indulgences are an issue that confuses Catholics as well as non-Catholics.  Even people with no agenda against the Catholic church, if they have one question to ask, it is about indulgences.  It's something they remember from their high school history classes on the Reformation, but don't really understand.  The reason many anti-Catholics latch on to this topic is because most Catholics themselves don't know what indulgences really are, or what they represent.  So what are indulgences? The Church defines an indulgences as "a remission before God of the temporal punishment due to sins whose guilt has already been forgiven, which the faithful Christian who is duly disposed gains under certain defined conditions through the Church’s help when, as a minister of redemption, she dispenses and applies with authority the treasury of the satisfactions won by Christ and the saints" (Indulgentarium Doctrina 1).

Now what does that mean?  To understand indulgences (and purgatory, for that matter), one must have a basic grasp of sin, forgiveness, accountability and penance.  As Catholics, we believe that God both will forgive us our sins, and hold us accountable for them.  In other words, God expects us to be responsible for our own actions.  Here is an example of what I mean.  Let's say I stop at a traffic light, and you come along behind me and rear end my car.  It was your fault for not braking in time, but I know you did not intend to do my car damage.  I'm a nice guy, so I forgive you.  But I still expect for you to pay to fix my dented bumper.  That is accountability.  In the same way God forgives us of our sins (if we ask Him to), but still holds us accountable.  This is why, after making a confession, the priest assigns us a penance -- as satisfaction for our sin.  It's not enough for us to say "I'm sorry" and not follow it up with action.  That would be insincere and ineffectual.  This is one of the key concepts to grasp if one is to really understand purgatory, and it is Biblical.  In 2 Samuel we can read of King David confessing to Nathan, "I have sinned against the Lord."  Nathan answers him, "The Lord on His part has forgiven your sin:  you shall not die.  But since you have utterly spurned the Lord by this deed, the child born to you must surely die" (2 Sam 12:13-14).  God still required reparation in the form of suffering from David, though his guilt was forgiven.  If one is forgiven, he is not condemned to hell.  But if he leaves this world without performing proper penance, he still has the stain of sin on him, and cannot enter heaven.  Purgatory (the very word means "purification") is a place or state that purges us of the stain of sin before we enter heaven.  It is our final penance.  The Bible is very clear that nothing unpure can enter into heaven (Rev. 21:27).  But who among us can say that we will die completely free from any impurity?  Yet we are forgiven, so we are not condemned to hell.  Something must happen after we die that cleanses our souls before we enter heaven.  Whatever that is, that is purgatory.

What does this have to do with indulgences?  Indulgences were never intended to be "time off" purgatory.  The church has never claimed to know how long purgatory might be (indeed, even whether it is a place or a state), let alone the extent of time a particular soul may be there.  The time attached to indulgences represented penance here on earth.  In the days of the early church, and in the Middle Ages, penances for sins used to be much more severe than they are now.  Sometimes a particular penance could last for years.  The indulgence represented time taken away from earthly penance.  That is it.  Catholic Answers, in their article on indulgences, explains it this way.  A 300 days' indulgence would represent roughly what one would gain from saying a penitent prayer every morning for 300 days.  It did not "shorten your stay" in purgatory by 300 days.  No one here on earth knows how long anyone will be in purgatory, or indeed whether or not they will be there at all.

Nor were indulgences "coupons."  Hank here is under the impression that indulgences could be bought and sold.  He also thinks that this was just a way for the Church to raise money.  His "research" apparently indicated that whole families based their sole living on the sale of indulgences.  His research, as is to be expected, is faulty.  Had he done actual research from reliable sources, he would have discovered that one never could buy indulgences.  The money associated with indulgences, and which created the whole scandal that Luther and others reacted against, was in the giving of alms.  It is a sad historic fact that many families probably did rely on alms given to the poor as their sole source of income -- because they were destitute, not for the reason Hank concludes.  Giving alms to the poor, or to a charitable organization, was one of the many acts one could make to gain an indulgence.  The indulgence itself was never sold, nor is giving money to the poor ever a bad thing.  However, corruption did grow out of this, as it often does when money changes hands.  This is why, to put an end to it once and for all, in 1567 Pope Pius V canceled all grants of indulgences involving financial transactions.  Many other things could be done to gain an indulgence, including making a pilgrimage to a holy site, time spent in prayer, and reading the Sacred Scriptures.

As far as the Pope selling indulgences to build St. Peter's Cathedral is concerned, Hank never did "get into" that later, as he said he would.  Which is another tactic of people seeking to rile Catholics, and throw them off guard.  They present wild accusations, and claim a victory when we cannot refute them.  The trick is that neither could they support their claim if questioned.

MYTH #3:  Purgatory is an "optional belief" for Catholics.
As far as doctrine is concerned, there is no such thing as an "optional" doctrine.  The Council of Trent expressed, "Whereas the Catholic Church, instructed by the Holy Ghost, has from the Sacred Scriptures and the ancient tradition of the Fathers taught in Councils and very recently in this Ecumenical synod that there is a purgatory, and that the souls therein are helped by the suffrages of the faithful, but principally by the acceptable Sacrifice of the Altar; the Holy Synod enjoins on the Bishops that they diligently endeavor to have the sound doctrine of the Fathers in Councils regarding purgatory everywhere taught and preached, held and believed by the faithful."

Anything that is taught from Sacred Scripture or from Sacred Tradition (and purgatory falls into both categories) is considered to be Public Revelation and is to be believed by all the faithful.  The only "optional" beliefs to Catholics are those that come from "private revelation," such as a Marian apparition, which even though approved by the Church does not bind the faithful to belief, or those things on which the Church is silent on, such as whether animals have souls, or if the Creation story is to be taken literally or figuratively.  Purgatory does not fall into any of these categories.  It is a doctrine of the Church, based in Scripture and Apostolic teaching, and is to be held by all the faithful.

MYTH #4:  Purgatory has no Biblical foundation.
Yes, it does.  The most obvious Scriptural reference comes from that body of books that Catholics call "duetero-canonical" and Protestants name "Apocrypha."  Since most people who claim purgatory is not Biblical have conveniently removed the books that deal with purgatory from their Bibles, it becomes harder to argue with them.  Before we can quote anything from these books as authoritative (which they are, since they are inspired Scripture), we must first convince the Protestant that these books should be in the Biblical canon.  As to why the Protestants removed these books from their Old Testament, please see my article on the History of the Bible.

The passage in question here comes from 2 Maccabees 12:44-46, which reads, " . . . for if he were not expecting the fallen to rise again, it would have been useless and foolish to pray for them in death.  But if he did this with a view to the splendid reward that awaits those who had gone to rest in godliness, it was a holy and pious thought.  Thus he made atonement for the dead that they might be freed from sin.."  What are we to make of this passage, that tells us that it is a holy and pious thought to pray for the dead?  Well, if we assume that all of these souls are in heaven, then they have no need of our prayers to aid them.  Indeed, we should ask for their prayers for us.  On the other hand, if these souls are in hell, then they also have no need of our prayers, since they have no hope at all.  Our prayers would be ineffectual.  This means that there must be some other state that exists after death where our prayers can be of benefit, where atonement for sin can be made.  This is purgatory.

2 Maccabees is one of the best proof texts from the Bible.  But since the Reformers threw that book out, and modern day Protestants do not recognize it as inspired, it is important to point out other Biblical references to purgatory.  The fact that the word "purgatory" cannot be found in the Bible cannot be used as proof by the anti-Catholic.  The words "trinity" and "incarnation" are not found in the Bible, yet the concepts that they embody certainly are.  The same is true of purgatory, as an intermediate state of purification.

Look at Matthew 12:32.  Jesus tells us, "And whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come."  By saying this, Jesus implies that some sins will be forgiven in the next world.  Since no sin can be forgiven in Hell, and there is no sin in Heaven, this remission of sin must take place in Purgatory.  These words are the words spoken by Christ, in contrast to our friend Hank, who would tell us that Jesus knew nothing about Purgatory.

There is more evidence to be found in the epistles.  Look at 1 Corinthians 3:15.  "But if someone's work is burned up, that one will suffer loss; the person will be saved, but only as through fire."  Like the verse quoted above, this cannot refer to Hell, where no one is saved.  Nor can it refer to Heaven, where no one suffers.  It refers to some other state where the soul will suffer in order to gain heaven.  This is Purgatory, the purification.

More evidence comes from Peter's letters.  In 1 Peter 3:18-20 he speaks of Christ being put to death in the flesh and rising in the spirit.  He tells us that Christ "went to preach to the spirits in prison, who had once been disobedient . . ."  Then later in 1 Peter 4:6, he writes, "For this is why the gospel was preached even to the dead that, though condemned in the flesh in human estimation, they might live in the spirit in the estimation of God."  What is the prison for dead spirits who were disobedient, yet were saved by Christ?  It is not Hell, for no one is saved from Hell.  It isn't the "limbo of the Fathers" that some people believe that righteous souls of the Old Testament waited until Christ opened the gates of heaven.  This prison was for disobedient spirits, not righteous ones.  Peter is telling us that there exists a temporary state where disobedient souls can be saved.  At the very least, this proves that there exists a third state after death that is neither heaven nor hell.  This is the Catholic doctrine of purgatory.

Apart from these texts, there also is evidence from the New Testament that the Apostles themselves prayed for the dead, like in 2 Maccabees.  In 2 Timothy 1:16-18, it says, "May the Lord grant mercy to the family of Onesiphorus because he often gave me new heart and was not ashamed of my chains . . . May the Lord grant him to find mercy from the Lord on that day."  St. Paul is here praying for his dead friend, which only makes sense if he can be aided by prayer.  The same can be said of 1 Corinthians 15:29-30, where Paul is arguing for the resurrection of the body.  He mentioned the practice of being baptized for the dead (without approving or condemning it).  "If the dead are not raised at all, then why are they having themselves baptized for them?"  Again, being baptized for the benefit of the dead can do them no good unless there is an intermediate state of purification.

Our friend Hank may not agree with the Catholic interpretation of these passages of Scripture, but neither can he claim, as he does, that it has no Biblical foundation, and was unknown to any in the Old or New Testament.  At the very least, these passages prove that there exists a state or place after death that is neither heaven nor hell.  Some third state must exist.

Like anything else that we study from Scripture, this cannot be taken in isolation.  We must carefully examine the implications, and their relation to other parts of Scripture.  In this case, it is very important for us to examine what the Scripture teaches us about sin.  Scripture is very explicit in distinguishing between mortal sin (that is, a deadly sin, that brings death to the soul) and venial sin (that which only wounds, but does not kill, the soul).  This is spelled out for us in 1 John 5:16-17.  James 1:14-15 also tells us that "each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desire.  Then desire conceives and brings forth sin, and when sin reaches maturity it gives birth to death."  St. James here is also making a distinction between beginning sin and mature sin, which brings death.

If you die in a state of unforgiven deadly sin, then the death of your soul (that is, the separation from God) is eternal.  But what if you die with only venial sins against you?  What if your soul is wounded, but not dead?  This must be an important question, or else John and James would not have made this distinction.  We know that nothing unclean will enter heaven (Rev. 21:27).  We know that unless we are holy we will not see the Lord (Heb 12:14).  So if we are not damned, then something must occur to purify and cleanse us.  Taken together with our knowledge regarding this middle state after death, we have Purgatory.

Purgatory does not refute the Lord's forgiveness.  Only forgiven souls make it to Purgatory.  Purgatory does not refute the salvific work of Christ.  Only those destined for heaven, the "saved" souls, enter Purgatory.  Purgatory is Biblical.  Purgatory is a shining example of God's ultimate mercy.  It is a chance for those of us who so often fall short of the holiness of God to make final reparation for our sins, to prepare ourselves for the Beatific vision that we hope will be ours one day in Heaven.