The Fire of God's Mercy and Grace

I have gone from a Protestant who was very certain that no such state as Purgatory existed to one on the verge of conversion who ardently believes in its existence and sincerely hopes for it. What changed me? What considerations made me alter my views?

It hit me one night as I was thinking about the subject—we really need Purgatory or something like it. Why? Because (as Protestants never tire of saying) “none of us are perfect.” None of us has reached the level of maturity that is the “the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ” (Ephesians 4:13)or the “be ye perfect as your Father in Heaven is perfect” level (Matthew 5:48). And factually speaking most of us will one day die in that same condition.

Purgatory is simply the state of preparation for those who are going to enter Heaven but have not grown up fully into Christ. They need some work and this is the place where that final work is done.

I thought about people I have known who were good, godly people but they still had major flaws. They loved God with all their hearts but there were glaring failures that they never overcame. One I am thinking of was racist. That is only one example of the kinds of things that can be a part of a person’s makeup that he/she has not worked through at the time of death.

Do we seriously suggest that God will cast everyone into hell for one sin? I have been bothered by that question. Did I really believe that God would reject a person who on his or her deathbed did some minor sin (venial if you prefer). I could not reconcile that with the loving, merciful God that I knew. Then it became clear: Purgatory is God’s love and mercy in action.

The question arises: what about the Bible? Do you have any verses that speak of purgatory? If you mean do they use that word, the answer is “no.” But no one would throw out a belief because of lack of a specific theological term in Scripture (think of the words “Trinity” and for most Protestants “rapture”). Are there any verses that offer, even in kernel form, any hope of a third place? I believe so.

First, Matthew 12:31-32 “(31) Therefore I tell you, people will be forgiven for every sin and blasphemy, but blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven. (32) 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.” This passage about the “unpardonable sin” offers an interesting point: there is the implication here that some sins can be forgiven in the age to come. Elsewise, the addition of this phrase is useless. IF there is no forgiveness of any kind in the next age, the fact that blasphemy against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven would be moot because no sin would be forgiven.

A second Scriptural passage, 1 Corinthians 3:12-15 “(12) Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble; (13) Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is. (14) If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. (15) If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.” This passage again offers us some insight in noting that there will be a fire that burns up the works of men that are built upon the wrong foundation. This judgment does not end in condemnation but in eternal salvation for the person although their works have been burned up.

While there are other verses that could be presented, these are sufficient to confirm the idea of cleansing after death as a Scriptural concept. There were other things that influenced my thinking about this subject also.

As I mentioned in the last post, the concept of praying for the departed (attested strongly in early church writings) convinced me that some place was needed for those departed for whom the church prayed and offered Masses to be in which prayer was needful.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church does not teach that purgatory is a second chance escape from Hell and that prayers can avail to snatch anyone from Hell once they have entered—this is a common Protestant misconception. CCC 1030 says, “All who die in God's grace and friendship, but still imperfectly purified, are indeed assured of their eternal salvation; but after death they undergo purification, so as to achieve the holiness necessary to enter the joy of heaven.”

The power and comfort offered by the Church’s true teaching is wonderful: (a) God has made provisions for those who are imperfectly purified at the time of death; (b) Those in purgatory are assured of their eternal salvation; and, (c) God gives them purification so that they can enter the joys of heaven.

No one knows the hour of his or her death with certainty. It could come suddenly or take months. The thought that one could sin (even a “small” sin, then drop dead, and go to eternal damnation because of it, is not comforting. It, in fact, is scary and offers the majority of us little hope of making it to eternal life. Most folks I know who believe that way have so minimized sin that only really big things (and the things that other people do) are really considered sins anyway.

When one realizes the truth about sin and its pervasiveness in the human population, it is a fearful thing to have to think of facing God. The fact that God has graciously provided for those who die, although imperfectly purified, to enter His eternal glory brings great comfort to someone like me who knows he will need that gracious provision. I can say now, “Thank God for Purgatory and the mercy and grace that caused God to provide it for us His unworthy and imperfect servants.”

My Journey

If you have read my blog, I hope you have understood it as a journey. I have for many years been on a spiritual quest; I have for a long time had the nagging feeling that there was something more than I had ever experienced. Please understand, I have had many Pentecostal experiences but even in that I always sensed that something was missing. I could not put my finger on it nor could I explain it. It was something that lingered in the back of my mind and at odd times emerged to occupy the center of my attention.

For the last few years, I have felt comfortable that my journey would end in Eastern Orthodoxy. I was prepared to make that leap. But there were some things (which I hated to admit to myself) that bothered me about Orthodoxy: (a) blatant lack of unity; (b) exclusivism; (c) ethnocentricity; (d) majoring on some very minor points; and, (e) competition between the various groups of Orthodox.

These things were very obvious to anyone who looks. Then, some other things began to surface—things that took me a while to see and longer to grasp. Two things that shook me the most: (a) the teaching authority and (b) praying for the dead.

The teaching authority issue started nagging at me when I realized Orthodoxy has no authoritative voice to speak to the issues of modern life. Let us suppose that some new thing comes out that is only tangentially related to the past, Orthodoxy has no way to speak to it. Sure, a plethora of bishops, archbishops, and even Patriarchs can offer their opinions but that is all they can do.

Since they believe that the unity of the whole church is required to convoke another Ecumenical Council, (like the seven they recognize) and since that has not and most likely will not happen, they have no mechanism to speak to the issues of today with authority.

The Orthodox teach and believe the infallibility of the Church in theory but it is since the 1054 A.D. split nothing but a theory; it has no method by which to operate. If a new heresy were to spring up, the Orthodox have no method to authoritatively combat it.

I have a great deal of difficulty with a theoretically infallible church that has no practical method to make infallible pronouncements. Does it seem reasonable that the Lord Jesus would build His church, invest them with infallibility by the Holy Spirit, and then leave them without a way to express that infallible authority for the last 1000 years? That certainly seems very ill conceived and almost cruel.

It also struck me that having an infallible Bible is useless unless one has an infallible interpreter of said Bible. No matter how right, good, and errorless one’s Bible is, he or she can certainly interpret it in the most fallible ways. The Orthodox offer the voice of the Fathers and the Tradition but what does one do when the Fathers disagree or are inconsistent and the Tradition is vague?

My other new difficulty with Orthodoxy came up when I was reading about praying for the dead and thinking about the Roman doctrine of purgatory. As a potential Orthodox convert, I accepted praying for the dead (see my earlier blog on the subject). Then I started to think about why the Orthodox prayed for the dead. They deny purgatory. So why do they pray for the departed? If there is no intermediate state and only Heaven and Hell are possibilities, then why would one pray for those who had fallen asleep? If they are in Heaven, they do not need our prayers (and in fact we need theirs) and if they are in Hell, our prayers will not be of any use to them.

There are many other Biblical arguments in favor of purgatory, which I will not get into, but this one thought was enough to make me give the doctrine a serious look. Prayer for the dead presupposes an intermediate state in which those prayers can be of some use OR prayers for the dead are just a pious piece of uselessness. The testimony of the Early Church Fathers is unanimous that these prayers are useful, thus, there has to be a third choice.

Once I read and studied the Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC) and understood what it really says about purgatory, I had no trouble accepting it. Then when I understood the problem of authority as outlined above and understood the Papacy, I had no trouble accepting it. For Protestants who think they know what papal infallibility means, I suggest that they read the CCC and the limits placed on it. Suffice it to say at this point that this idea is probably one of the least understood Catholic distinctives.

In case you have not garnered from what I have said, I am now convinced of the truth of the Roman Catholic Church. I believe and confess that it is the Church that Christ founded and that it is the pillar and ground of truth (I Timothy 3:15). Now believing that and being certain of it, I must be obedient and submit to the Lord’s Church or be eternally damned for “Anyone, then, who knows the right thing to do and fails to do it, commits sin” (James 4:17 NRSV).

Another Crusade

I received a call from a frantic woman not too long ago. She was extremely upset by some information that had been passed on to her from some internet source. She was all up in arms and ready to “raise Cain” (not Herman Cain) about the fact that the Obamas had decreed that there would be no religious ornaments on the White House “Holiday Tree” this year. She wanted to do something to let the White House know that we are still a Christian nation.

The above scenario is an all-too frequent occurrence. Someone gets a hold of a piece of “information” (that is an attempt to be nice about it), gets all fired up, and charges into battle. The Problem: the cause du jour is FALSE. This fact is easily confirmed by a number of sources (for example, http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/c/christmas-ornaments-white-house.htm or http://www.snopes.com/politics/christmas/ornaments.asp or http://urbanlegends.about.com/od/barackobama/a/white_house_christmas_ornaments.htm?r=facebook).

I never cease to be amazed at the Christians who are ready for a crusade—anxious to saddle up and joust with the windmill of the day. It doesn’t seem to matter that the majority of the causes are false or that some of those that are true are useless—“we’ve just got to do something about this!”

I can vividly remember the Proctor and Gamble flap. We were told to boycott the company because they supported the Church of Satan. Then there was the movies about Jesus as a homosexual which we needed to sign the petition to stop. Then, of course, who can forget the evil machinations of Madalyn Murray O'Hair as she tried to get religious programming outlawed. Amazingly, she carried on this campaign for quite some time after her decease.

My frustration with all of this stems from several things:

1. There is little or no effort made to verify the stories. If one receives it in an email, obviously it must be true! It makes Christians look gullible and naïve because anything that plays in to the “us-them” paranoia complex is readily accepted without the slightest bit of evidence.

2. Many hours and much money is expended on these crusades which could be used much more profitably on almost anything else.

3. In reality, what possible difference does it make whether the White House Christmas tree is called a holiday tree or if it is decorated with non-religious ornaments? Who really cares? There are much more important things for Christians to be concerned over than a tree (which by some accounts is only a pagan carryover anyway).

The idea of choosing our battles carefully has been eclipsed by the desire to mount a crusade. In these kinds of battles winning the battle will lead to losing the war. People will not be influenced for the good nor convinced of the reality of God by someone protesting and petitioning about a Christmas tree.

Oddly enough, as the Urban Legends article points out, there was some censorship of religious ornaments at the White House but it was under the Bush Administration. Nobody was fussing, petitioning or protesting back then. That sure makes it look politically motivated! Or is it OK for a Republican to do it but not OK if a Democrat does the same thing? The “good Christian” Bush not allowing religious ornaments does not fit into the conspiracy theory. It only works when the “Socialist, Islamic” Obama does it.

Those kinds of double standards and disingenuous dealings are unacceptable for Christians. One cannot promote the Truth by using a lie. One cannot encourage right by doing wrong.