This article is in response to someone asking about the subject. Also, incidentally, I have yet to come across a person or an article that argues against Purgatory that actually knows what it is. To be blunt, it seems many don’t know what they are on about. And the ones that try to explain Purgatory aren’t particularly good either. Perhaps I will fail too but this is my attempt.
Although I want to keep this as short as possible, short answers can be intellectually and emotionally dissatisfying. So, I will attempt at least the semblance of thoroughness without writing an encyclopedia, breaking this up into five (5) parts. I will avoid the scriptural approach in this first part, reserving this for subsequent parts.
1. Definition of Purgatory
It is necessary to provide a definition or a description, else the discussion will go in circles. Purgatory can be defined as the following:
The balance of temporal remission of sin due to an individual at the time of death who has accepted Jesus Christ as the Savior.
It should be noted that:
“temporal remission of sin” is paying the temporal price or punishment due to sin.
“penance” can be defined as “temporal remission of sin”; in other words, Purgatory is the remaining amount of penance due to the individual at death.
“temporal” is that which is related to “time”—that is, this lifetime—so “temporal remission of sin” is required due to our sins in this lifetime.
there are (potential) complexities associated with “death” since judgement follows but for the sake of brevity of this section, the definition is kept simple.
the temporal is by nature finite, not to be confused for nor exclude the infinite.
since the temporal is finite, Purgatory is not eternal and it is not a third alternative to Heaven and Hell—it is for those who have accepted Christ as Savior (and therefore the forgiveness of sins) but have a remaining temporal debt to settle.
Purgatory is not directly related to Salvation, at least not in terms of God’s initiative and action in saving us, or our choice to accept or reject Salvation—it is for those who already have accepted Christ as Savior and will go to Heaven so, in that regard, Purgatory can be considered as part of the process.
Purgatory is not forgiveness since one has to accept Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of sins, and forgiveness does not always imply total remission of the temporal price or punishment due to sin.
since Purgatory is the “balance of” the temporal price or punishment due to sin, it is possible that an individual does not require Purgatory if they do not have any remaining.
good works and prayers can benefit oneself and others, including the souls in Purgatory who can pray for you (“Communion of Saints”).
This article series discusses the above points so if one is satisfied with the above, then there is no need to keep reading.
2. The Need for Christ
The teaching of Purgatory can cause confusion. After all, if Jesus really died for the sins of humanity, then why is Purgatory necessary?
The above question is deliberately loaded and vague just to prove the point that the issue is not simple. However, it is actually not that complicated. The complications are a result of inappropriate simplifications that some people make. In order to understand Purgatory, we need to first examine the need for Christ (or something like Christ) in regards to achieving Salvation.
Assumption 1: God exists and must be infinitely good; that is, He has infinite good attributes to an infinitely perfect degree, which includes being just, merciful etc. And if God is good, then there is an objective moral standard that we as the created are subject to.
Assumption 2: Justice can be simply described as “rewarding good and punishing evil”. And in order to administer justice justly (properly), everything must be consistently accounted for. It’s not justice when, for example, a judge ignores evidence or attributes more or less value to evidence than is appropriate.
Assumption 3: We have free will and, given the above two assumptions, are therefore personally responsible for our actions.
Assumption 4: Humanity is fallen. The doctrine of the Fall is not exactly popular to moderns. Granted, I wasn’t there to record it so I can’t prove it directly but there is a simpler way: examine oneself and look around. It is obvious given the moral and physical evils present.
Given the above, how does the infinitely good God respond?
Option 1: Summary Condemnation. It would not be entirely unjust for God to condemn our first parents to Hell right there and then, and that would be the end of it. However, that was not the case. Humanity continues to exist.
Option 2: Ongoing Summary Condemnation. Humanity continues to exist and inherits (the effects of) original sin. Hence, humanity can be described as “fallen”. God could automatically condemn everyone just for that. That is a valid reason but this view is limited and therefore is unjust. We are guilty of our own personal sins, but no one asks to be born and we are not responsible for the condition that we inherit. This does not make the problem less real but justice demands all aspects be accounted for. Both Option 1 and Option 2 are over-simplistic.
Option 3: Ignore It. God can simply ignore sin as if nothing happened. This is indifference, which is unjust. True justice accounts for everything.
Option 4: Waive It. If God is merciful, then forgiveness is a possibility. God could, figuratively, wave His hand and say, “Dude, don’t worry about it. It’s fine.” But this is merely another version of indifference. Whether this is even mercy is arguable since mercy cannot truly be “merciful” without acknowledgement of what true justice is.
Option 5: Justice and Mercy. God’s mercy and justice must both be satisfied without excluding or compromising each other. If salvation is to be possible, then there must be forgiveness and reparation. Justice demands that the price be paid somehow.
Also, the issue of said price is more complicated than it first seems. The price for any wrongdoing, assuming it is to be just, should be proportional to the offending act and its consequences. The consequences include the offense suffered by the offended party. Therefore, if God is infinitely good, then it follows that any wrongdoing causes God infinite offense and this demands an infinite price.
Human beings could suffer Hell eternally but this is something a forgiving God is trying to provide a way to avoid. Also, Hell for an individual is particular to that individual. If humanity is to be saved, whether individually or collectively, then a substitutional sacrifice is required.
A valid substitutional sacrifice must ultimately be in comparable form and innocent, capable of satisfying the infinite price for all of humanity’s sins (of all types).
Since humanity is the offending party and the object to be saved, the substitutional sacrifice must be in human form. But human beings are no longer innocent and by nature are finite, so no one can pay it as a substitution. (And if, hypothetically, human beings were infinite by grace, said grace was lost as a consequence of the Fall anyway.)
Only a being who is innocent and of infinite capability can pay the infinite price. In other words, only God can pay it. But God is obviously not human, so if God pays it, then He must pay it in human form.
In conclusion, if God is just and merciful, then something like Christ is necessary to save humanity. Whether Jesus is Christ is another discussion, but for the remainder of this article series it is assumed that Jesus Christ is truly the Christ. (And to be blunt, the list of candidates isn’t long.)
3. Temporal Merit and Demerit
Since Christ is the only one who can pay the infinite price due to sin by His infinite merits, He is necessary and indispensable for Salvation.
This is why Christians say things like “All sin deserves Hell” and the Church teaches that Salvation is only possible through Christ.
The above being true does not exclude our actions having temporal merit or demerit, depending on whether it is good or bad. There is the distinction between the infinite merits of Christ and the temporal (finite) merits of man. In case one is confused as to why the infinite simply does not override the finite, think of it in qualitative rather than quantitative terms—that is, value and not amount.
Temporal merit and demerit are attached to what we do in this lifetime. It is commonsense and all one needs to do is look around. But if one needs proof, then consider the below. If not, then skip to the next section.
Example 1: Suppose you agreed with an employer to work and get paid by the hour. You agree it will be 10 hours of work and indeed you end up doing 10 hours of work. But then you only receive 8 hours’ worth of pay. Would you complain about the missing 2 hours’ of pay?
Example 2: Someone drives into your car and it is truly their fault. Do you expect them to pay for damages?
Example 3: You smoke three packs a day and then you get cancer.
I would be surprised if anyone answered in the negative to Example 1 and Example 2 and dismissed Example 3 as nothing.
Objection 1: Example 1 and Example 2 are merely things we do.
Reply A: It’s as if the argument goes something like “It’s merely what we do, so it doesn’t count”. Well, it is temporal—that is, during this lifetime—so it is related to “what we do”. And it doesn’t count because…?
Reply B: Granted, these two examples are of positive law. Positive law is something that we formulate and do, so it is arbitrary to the extent that it is our doing. It is “posited”. Our pathetic attempt of a justice system is one example but it is not limited to that. It can be your mother giving you funny looks when you don’t do as taught. In any case, whether it is legislation or unspoken norms is irrelevant. It comes from our inherent sense of justice (even if it is imperfect) and we have a “voice” (conscience) telling us to do what is right. Ultimately, said sense of justice and conscience can only come from God. If what we do truly doesn’t count, then why should there be any of that?
Reply C: People can say what we do don’t count except I have yet to meet anyone who acts consistent to that. At least it counts if and when it bothers them (Example 1 and Example 2), so they are either delusional and/or idiots and/or hypocrites.
Objection 2: As for Example 3, that’s just how nature works.
Reply: Yes, that is an example of natural law. It is as if the laws of nature impose something on us. How is putting up with that accounted for? (Natural law is more than the physical laws of nature but that is another discussion.)
Whether it is positive law or natural law, our efforts when doing something (including putting up with something) must be accounted for somehow. If it does not count, then why do anything?
Objection 3: We should do what is right just because it’s the principle.
Reply: By citing a principle, it means there is a moral standard and therefore obligation. It implies that one cares whether those obligations are met or not. Otherwise, it’s comparable to “It counts but then it sorta doesn’t.”
Objection 4: It counts during this lifetime but then it doesn’t matter once you die.
Reply A: That is comparable to “It counts when it suits me, and doesn’t count when it doesn’t suit me.” How convenient.
Reply B: This can also be comparable to the sentiment of “It’s nice if you do it, but it doesn’t matter in the end.” This is similar to the next objection. See below.
Reply C: The argument is another way of saying that it’s acceptable to hold things against each in this lifetime but that God ultimately does not hold anything against us. Right. If that’s the case, then how dare any of us hold anything against each other when God ultimately doesn’t?
Objection 5: God the Father judges us through His Son Jesus Christ.
Reply A: The statement can be true but that doesn’t make it an argument since it does not actually address the issue of temporal merit and demerit.
Reply B: Even if the statement is an argument, it’s so vague that it is unhelpful. It is as if the argument is “As long as we accept Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior, then what we do doesn’t matter”. This is simply another form of “It counts when it suits me, and doesn’t count when it doesn’t suit me.”
Reply C: The statement presupposes that one has accepted Jesus Christ as the Savior. It begs the question. Either way, if God the Father judges us through His Son Jesus Christ, then how does the Son judge us? People can pretend to run away from justice, but that doesn’t mean it makes sense.
Objection 6: As long as one does their best, God will make up for the rest.
Reply: If by “make up for the rest” means helping us out, then I personally believe this statement to be generally true. I think that God often does that even when we don’t do our best, just because He is kind. But that is not a valid argument against temporal merit and demerit. It actually confirms it. “As long as one does X” presupposes a standard or expectation. Even if God helps us out, whether one satisfies X or not has to be accounted for.
Objection 7: Christ is the only one who can pay the infinite price due to sin by His infinite merits, so He is necessary and indispensable for Salvation. No matter how much temporal (finite) merit one accumulates by doing good things, it does not gain one Heaven.
Reply A: It is true that temporal merits on its own cannot attain forgiveness and Salvation. But that does not mean there is no such thing as temporal merit. An object’s insufficiency does not imply its non-existence. I want to make bread and I only have flour. Obviously, I cannot make bread with merely flour but it is inaccurate to state that I have nothing.
Reply B: Also, an object’s insufficiency does not imply it is unnecessary. Flour alone cannot make bread but it is nonsensical to state or imply that flour is therefore unnecessary in breadmaking.
Reply C: In addition, to state that an object is insufficient presupposes that the object counts. How does one know they don’t have enough money in their wallet or purse? Because one has either flipped through it and at least approximated the amount or they did so as they placed the money into it.
Reply D: In addition to the above, the more flour one has, the more bread one can potentially make if the other necessary ingredients can be obtained.
In short, people generally act like what we do matter and somehow counts, at least when it bothers them.
4. The Possibility of Purgatory
A – Bad actions have infinite demerit.
B – Bad actions have temporal (finite) demerit.
C – Good actions have temporal (finite) merit.
D – Good actions have infinite merit only under certain conditions.
Only Jesus Christ can obtain forgiveness by paying for A, therefore He is necessary and indispensable in Salvation. This, however, does not exclude B and C. Purgatory is for those who have already accepted Christ and will (eventually) enter Heaven, so it is the temporal that is the issue; that is, B must somehow be balanced by C.
Also, C can and needs to be D—that is, our temporal (finite) merit can and needs to gain infinite value—through Christ. (How this can be effected is another discussion but the short answer is by the Sacraments that Christ instituted.)
It is true that the word “Purgatory” is not found in Scripture but that is a very weak argument against it since it is the concept that matters. After all, the word “Trinity” is not found in Scripture either.
Purgatory is sometimes described as a process of “purification”. This is correct enough but it is vague. This is why I use economic terms. It may be crude but it does illustrate justice. (Even Jesus used economic terms in the Gospels.)
The idea is simple. Suppose, in temporal terms, one did 10 “units” of bad things. If possible, one should directly address the problem and rectify it. Often, that is impossible or impractical.* But by doing 10 units of good or at least making the effort will restore the balance in economic terms. If those 10 units of bad things puts one at –10, then 10 units of good effort will bring one back up to 0. And if after that one just happens to get hit by a car and suffers 5 units of pain and inconvenience, then that would put one at +5 assuming they bear it well. It is the effort or “suffering” that matters.
As mentioned before, only Christ can pay for the infinite price so only He can deal with the infinite aspects attached to those 10 (temporal) units of bad things (and all other units of bad things). Nevertheless, the temporal (finite) demerit cannot be ignored. Throughout one’s life, this balance is dynamic, an ongoing aggregate like a +/– sports stat. Imagine a graph where the plot goes up every time one does something good and down every time one does something bad.
Suppose one accepts Christ as Lord and Savior but is in the negative (<0) at the time of their death. God is just and justice demands everything be accounted for. On the one hand, He has his own word to account for. According to His promise, if one accepts Him as Savior, then one will be forgiven and saved (go to Heaven). On the other hand, if He expects us to behave justly in this life, if we are permitted to suffer in this life, then all that has to be accounted for as well.
So, if such a person is condemned just because they are in the negative, then God is going against His own word—it’s as if He is being vindictive. If, however, God simply lets this person go straight to Heaven, then He is being soft as this is comparable to “It counts but then it sorta doesn’t” (Objection 3) or “It’s nice if you do it, but it doesn’t matter in the end” (Objection 4).
The only consistently just option is a process where this person suffers the balance of the temporal debt before they enter Heaven as promised. Can this process be instantaneous? I think it can be but Scripture suggests that possibility is not to be assumed. The point is that the temporal debt has to be settled, whether one suffers “instantaneously” at a particular intensity or for a longer period at a relatively lower intensity.
So, it is not a case of accept Christ and it doesn’t matter what you do this life, nor is it earn your way in to Heaven on your own without Christ. Both are necessary for different reasons.
The idea of Purgatory is simple if one accepts the reality of temporal (finite) merit and demerit. One doesn’t need Scripture to prove it but I will nonetheless try to address it in the next three parts.
I repeat: I use economic terms as a crude method to illustrate the concept. If one strictly sticks to economics, it can follow that anyone who needs to go to Purgatory eventually enters Heaven at 0 and therefore receives no reward beyond getting in. That is over-simplistic since settling a debt based on the general aggregate does not logically exclude reward based on each and every specific act.
*And on that note, it is possible that the sentence of Purgatory be based on the price due to specific acts in addition to considering the aggregate. What if one had a reasonable opportunity to directly address a specific sin during this lifetime but did something else instead? The alternative may have value but, in a way, said sin remains and there is the additional fault of avoiding the issue. Even if repentant, there may be a price remaining that needs to be addressed.
I finish this part with one final argument, another form of the above. It is a question that a child in Sunday school may ask since children can have a very strong sense of justice:
What happens to the bad guy who has been bad all his life but then converts on his deathbed? Does he go straight to Heaven as well? Why should he?
The child asks not because he/she doubts the mercy of Christ. The child is trying to reconcile this with his/her own experiences, as if to say, “This guy has been a scumbag for most of his life and has gotten away with it. Now he converts in his final 30 seconds whilst I get yelled at by my parents for next to nothing (especially if they’re overbearing Asian parents) and everyone who accepts Jesus automatically goes straight to Heaven because…?”
Those who ask this question have obviously found something not quite right with the equation. And they are not wrong.
To answer the child with a dismissive statement that pretends to be a logical answer (even if it happens to be vaguely true) like “That’s just the way it is” or “God works in mysterious ways” will suggest one thing to the child: that most adults and authority figures are full retards.
Click here for Part II.
Be sure to subscribe to our mailing list so you get each new Opinyun that comes out!