Purgatory

Objection: Why do Catholics believe in purgatory? Doesn’t that teaching contradict Scripture?

Before discussing this topic, perhaps it would be best to first clear up any misunderstandings that may be present, and only afterwards discuss the scriptural roots of the doctrine.  Often I have discussed the topic of purgatory with others who had erroneous ideas about what Catholics believe concerning it, and on the basis of those mistaken ideas they objected to the teaching. (If their ideas of what Catholic teaching actually was had been accurate, they would have been quite right to object, but in fact, they were mistaken.)  However, when they discover what is actually taught, they usually agree with at least the substance of it.

Thus, for instance, some people believe that Catholics teach purgatory is some sort of “second chance” at Heaven, as if it were the case that if you had not been saved by the time you died, you would have another opportunity after death. That would contradict Hebrews 9:27: “…it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment.” However, “a second chance after death” is not Catholic teaching concerning purgatory. Once you have died, your eternal destiny is sealed. You are going to spend eternity in heaven or hell, and there is no changing which one at that point. As the Catechism of the Catholic Church states (cf. #1021): “Death puts an end to human life as the time open to either accepting or rejecting the divine grace manifested in Christ.” Purgatory is only for those who have accepted the grace of Christ in this life, or, to use the words the Catechism uses in #1030 concerning purgatory, for those “indeed assured of their eternal salvation.”

Again, some people are under the mistaken impression that purgatory is an attempt to “add” to the work of Christ, as if the sacrifice of Christ was somehow insufficient, and that therefore we have to “make up” for its shortcomings, in order to be saved. Needless to say, such a claim, were it actually made, would be totally repugnant to any believing Christian, not to mention nonsensical. (After all, if someone were foolish enough to believe that Christ’s sacrifice was deficient, then who are we to believe that we can succeed where the Son of God Himself “failed”?) Rather, as the Apostle John reminds us: “…he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.” (1 John 2:2). Christ’s sacrifice was more than sufficient. Therefore, there is nothing we need to do, as if Christ’s sacrifice was “not enough”. And the doctrine of purgatory does not, in fact, concern any futile attempts to pretend otherwise. Rather, it is concerned with something completely different.

So if that is not what purgatory is, then what is it exactly? Put in the simplest form, it is the final stage of sanctification. Let me explain a little more.

As we know, when we first become Christians, we are indeed forgiven of all our sins, and enter a new relationship with God as His adopted children, all due to His grace, and not due to any good works we have done. Yet even after we have come to Christ, we still struggle with sin. Concupiscence (i.e. disordered desires and an inclination to sin) are still very much part of our nature. Paul describes such a state in great detail in Romans 7, but any Christian could state the same thing from his own experience. While we may will to follow Christ and repent from sin, we are still often attached to sin to a certain degree. Involuntarily, perhaps, but the attachment is still there. That is, in fact, one way in which we are tempted. We are not simply tempted from without (as Christ was by the devil), but also tempted from within, by concupiscence. If we did not have some residual attachment to sin, then obviously such temptations would not be a struggle for us in any respect. But I very much doubt any Christian would claim that he did not have to struggle against temptations from within himself. In other words, after coming to Christ, while all our sins have been forgiven, our battle with sin still continues. Unfortunately, sometimes we lose such battles and actually sin. We are not completely holy.

Of course, to the extent we do struggle against such involuntary inclinations, then there is no actual sin present. (Sin only occurs when we yield to temptation). But while there is no actual sin, there is still imperfection. We are still not yet completely sanctified, in other words, so as to possess that “holiness, without which no man shall see the Lord.” (Heb 12:14). Notice that verse that I just quoted. Paul was writing to people who were already Christians. And yet he tells them to struggle for “holiness”, a holiness that is in fact necessary to see God, and yet which they do not possess simply because they have entered a relationship with Christ. Basically, Paul indicates that even after becoming Christians, we have not yet been completely sanctified, so as to possess such holiness as he describes. From that verse, it would appear that sanctification is not a one time event, but rather a process that is ongoing. And this fits in well with what we see from other verses of Scripture. While Scripture indicates that in one sense sanctification is something that occurred in the past (cf. 1 Cor 6:11), it also presents it as something that in another sense continues even in the present (cf. 1 Thes 4:3; 5:23)

It goes without saying that this sanctification, this process of “growing in holiness”, until we reach the point we possess the holiness necessary to “see the Lord” (which we do not possess by the mere fact of being Christians, as Paul indicates in Hebrews) is itself all due to the work of Christ. Without the grace merited for us by the shed blood of Christ on the cross, we would not be able to grow in holiness, since there is nothing that we can do good of ourselves. It is only the grace of God working in us that is responsible for bringing about such growth in holiness, just as it is only the grace of God by which we are able to perform good works. “For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure” (Phil 2:13).

So, we see that we need to be completely sanctified in order to enter heaven. Again, Paul indicates that Christians need to (through the grace of God) continue pursuing after holiness, so as to see the Lord. And the book of Revelation also presents the “New Jerusalem” as a place in which nothing impure shall enter (cf. Rev 21:27).

That raises a question: if you were to die this very moment and find yourself at the judgment seat of Christ, would you be able to say, not simply that you were completely forgiven of all your sins, as is to be hoped, but also that you were completely pure, free from all inordinate desires and attachment to sin, and in a state of complete and utter holiness? While a Christian would hopefully be able to say that all of his sins were forgiven, and so he would be saved from Hell, I very much doubt that many Christians would be able to honestly say that they had as yet attained complete holiness, or, in other words, that they were “perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect” (Matt 5:48). Yet, we know that anybody who is in heaven is (by definition) in such a state of holiness.

So if we are not in such a state of complete holiness at the point of death and our personal judgment, but we are in such a state when we enter heaven, then that means that between those two points, some type of change has occurred. (The old saying “God loves you as you are, but He loves you too much to let you stay that way” has a lot more truth in it than many people realize!) God, by his grace, and due to the shed blood of Christ, finishes the process of sanctification He started in this life. And it is this final stage of sanctification (something that most Protestants I have discussed this with would accept as well) that Catholics call “purgatory”.

What does purgatory consist of? We don’t know for sure. We know that purgatory is real and what its purpose is (since it is taught implicitly in Scripture, both by the passages presented above, as well as by some other passages I omitted to quote.) But as for the specifics, that is another matter. For instance, it is a common misunderstanding that the Catholic Church teaches that purgatory is a “place”. But that is not required by Catholic teaching, as Pope Benedict has noted. A Catholic can very easily believe, for instance, that purgatory is an “event” (perhaps even instantaneous), the intensity of which is determined by the extent we still have to be completely sanctified. Since what purgatory precisely consists of is not indicated in divine revelation, it is only a matter of speculation. There is a painful aspect to it (as is to be expected with any such process of detachment; cf. 1 Cor 3:15), but again, the specifics are not clear. But as to the necessity of this final stage of sanctification, that is fairly evident. (Thus, we see that purgatory is taught in Scripture implicitly, and is in that respect like the doctrine of the Trinity, even though neither of them are mentioned under those names.)

Now, there are a couple of other smaller aspects about Catholic teaching on purgatory that might be debated by non-Catholics, but I do not wish to get into those at the moment, so as not to prolong this piece. Suffice it to say, however, that it is not only Catholics who believe in the basics presented above about purgatory, but even most Protestants do; they simply do not call it by that name (at least in my experience). Even then, however, some Protestants have explicitly declared their belief in purgatory. One prominent example would be C.S. Lewis, and with whose words I will end this piece:

Our souls demand Purgatory, don't they? Would it not break the 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 we not reply, 'With submission, sir, and if there is no objection, I'd rather be cleaned first.' 'It may hurt, you know'- 'Even so, sir.' (Letters to Malcom, chapter 20)