What's your interpretation of Genesis 1:2?

Faith & Science Conversation
42

The problem here is that folks are confusing the “doctrine” with the theological interpretations of the doctrine, not themselves doctrinal but speculative, some of which were once popular in preceding eras but no longer are.

Catholics believe that while doctrine doesn’t change, it does “develop” as we progress in understanding of the deposit of Faith with the ages, under the aegis of the Holy Spirit. We’re not bound to yesterday’s interpretation of a dogma, only the essence of the dogma that is divinely inspired but also expressed in the language of a preceding period in time and might require further reflection.

St. Catherine of Genoa lived in the fifteenth century, prior to the Protestant Reformation. Her doctrine of purgatory is older than any Protestant denomination.

It’s not exactly a modern innovation that I’m presenting.

In terms of Catholic/Orthodox ecumenical discussion, very much so. We are beginning again to influence each others’ theologies more and more, certainly in terms of Catholic appreciation for Eastern theology.

43

I also took a look at the Baltimore Catechism #3, which is relatively recent and online.

Q. 1386. Since God loves the souls in Purgatory, why does He punish them?

A. Though God loves the souls in Purgatory, He punishes them because His holiness requires that nothing defiled may enter heaven and His justice requires that everyone be punished or rewarded according to what he deserves.

1 Like
44

Consider these paragraphs on purgatory from Pope Benedict XVI’s 2007 encyclical Spe Salvi:

45. This early Jewish idea of an intermediate state includes the view that these souls are not simply in a sort of temporary custody…There is also the idea that this state can involve purification and healing which mature the soul for communion with God.

The early Church took up these concepts, and in the Western Church they gradually developed into the doctrine of Purgatory. We do not need to examine here the complex historical paths of this development; it is enough to ask what it actually means.

With death, our life-choice becomes definitive, our life stands before the judge. Our choice, which in the course of an entire life takes on a certain shape, can have a variety of forms. There can be people who have totally destroyed their desire for truth and readiness to love, people for whom everything has become a lie, people who have lived for hatred and have suppressed all love within themselves… On the other hand there can be people who are utterly pure, completely permeated by God, and thus fully open to their neighbours people for whom communion with God even now gives direction to their entire being and whose journey towards God only brings to fulfilment what they already are.

46. Yet we know from experience that neither case is normal in human life. For the great majority of people – we may suppose – there remains in the depths of their being an ultimate interior openness to truth, to love, to God. In the concrete choices of life, however, it is covered over by ever new compromises with evil much filth covers purity, but the thirst for purity remains and it still constantly re-emerges from all that is base and remains present in the soul.

What happens to such individuals when they appear before the Judge? Will all the impurity they have amassed through life suddenly cease to matter? What else might occur?

The fire which both burns and saves is Christ himself, the Judge and Saviour. The encounter with him is the decisive act of judgement. Before his gaze all falsehood melts away. This encounter with him, as it burns us, transforms and frees us, allowing us to become truly ourselves. All that we build during our lives can prove to be mere straw, pure bluster, and it collapses. Yet in the pain of this encounter, when the impurity and sickness of our lives become evident to us, there lies salvation. His gaze, the touch of his heart heals us through an undeniably painful transformation “as through fire”. But it is a blessed pain, in which the holy power of his love sears through us like a flame, enabling us to become totally ourselves and thus totally of God.

In this way the inter-relation between justice and grace also becomes clear: the way we live our lives is not immaterial, but our defilement does not stain us for ever if we have at least continued to reach out towards Christ, towards truth and towards love. Indeed, it has already been burned away through Christ’s Passion. At the moment of judgement we experience and we absorb the overwhelming power of his love over all the evil in the world and in ourselves. The pain of love becomes our salvation and our joy.

It is clear that we cannot calculate the “duration” of this transforming burning in terms of the chronological measurements of this world. The transforming “moment” of this encounter eludes earthly time-reckoning it is the heart’s time, it is the time of “passage” to communion with God in the Body of Christ.

That’s a contemporary and indeed magisterial (authoritative) statement regarding our conception of purgatory.

45

The Baltimore Catechism is pre-Vatican II, some of its versions being as old as the 1880s and all of them being directly based on Robert Bellarmine’s 1614 catechism.

Not exactly what I would personally regard as being “recent” :slight_smile:

I quoted from a papal encyclical above, published in 2007, which is very recent indeed by comparison.

46

@beaglelady it would also be worth having a read at Pope John Paul II’s general audience address on purgatory.

Consider in particular the paragraph where the late Pontiff states: “Purification must be complete, and indeed this is precisely what is meant by the Church’s teaching on purgatory. The term does not indicate a place, but a condition of existence. Those who, after death, exist in a state of purification, are already in the love of Christ”:

https://w2.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/audiences/1999/documents/hf_jp-ii_aud_04081999.html

JOHN PAUL II

GENERAL AUDIENCE

Wednesday 4 August 1999

_ _

1. As we have seen in the previous two catecheses, on the basis of the definitive option for or against God, the human being finds he faces one of these alternatives: either to live with the Lord in eternal beatitude, or to remain far from his presence.

For those who find themselves in a condition of being open to God, but still imperfectly, the journey towards full beatitude requires a purification, which the faith of the Church illustrates in the doctrine of ‘Purgatory’ (cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, n. 1030-1032).

2. In Sacred Scripture, we can grasp certain elements that help us to understand the meaning of this doctrine, even if it is not formally described. They express the belief that we cannot approach God without undergoing some kind of purification.

According to Old Testament religious law, what is destined for God must be perfect. As a result, physical integrity is also specifically required for the realities which come into contact with God at the sacrificial level such as, for example, sacrificial animals (cf. Lv 22:22) or at the institutional level, as in the case of priests or ministers of worship (cf. Lv 21:17-23). Total dedication to the God of the Covenant, along the lines of the great teachings found in Deuteronomy (cf. 6:5), and which must correspond to this physical integrity, is required of individuals and society as a whole (cf. 1 Kgs 8:61). It is a matter of loving God with all one’s being, with purity of heart and the witness of deeds (cf. ibid., 10:12f.)

The need for integrity obviously becomes necessary after death, for entering into perfect and complete communion with God. Those who do not possess this integrity must undergo purification. This is suggested by a text of St Paul. The Apostle speaks of the value of each person’s work which will be revealed on the day of judgement and says: ‘If the work which any man has built on the foundation [which is Christ] survives, he will receive a reward. If any man’s work is burned up, he will suffer loss, though he himself will be saved, but only as through fire’ (1 Cor 3:14-15).

3. At times, to reach a state of perfect integrity a person’s intercession or mediation is needed. For example, Moses obtains pardon for the people with a prayer in which he recalls the saving work done by God in the past, and prays for God’s fidelity to the oath made to his ancestors (cf. Ex 32:30, 11-13). The figure of the Servant of the Lord, outlined in the Book of Isaiah, is also portrayed by his role of intercession and expiation for many; at the end of his suffering he ‘will see the light’ and ‘will justify many’, bearing their iniquities (cf. Is 52:13-53, 12, especially vv. 53:11).

Psalm 51 can be considered, according to the perspective of the Old Testament, as a synthesis of the process of reintegration: the sinner confesses and recognizes his guilt (v. 3), asking insistently to be purified or ‘cleansed’ (vv. 2, 9, 10, 17) so as to proclaim the divine praise (v. 15).

4. In the New Testament Christ is presented as the intercessor who assumes the functions of high priest on the day of expiation (cf. Heb 5:7; 7:25). But in him the priesthood is presented in a new and definitive form. He enters the heavenly shrine once and for all, to intercede with God on our behalf (cf. Heb 9:23-26, especially, v. 24). He is both priest and ‘victim of expiation’ for the sins of the whole world (cf. 1 Jn 2:2).

Jesus, as the great intercessor who atones for us, will fully reveal himself at the end of our life when he will express himself with the offer of mercy, but also with the inevitable judgement for those who refuse the Father’s love and forgiveness.

This offer of mercy does not exclude the duty to present ourselves to God, pure and whole, rich in that love which Paul calls a ‘[bond] of perfect harmony’ (Col 3:14).

5. In following the Gospel exhortation to be perfect like the heavenly Father (cf. Mt 5:48) during our earthly life, we are called to grow in love, to be sound and flawless before God the Father ‘at the coming of our Lord Jesus with all his saints’ (1 Thes 3:12f.). Moreover, we are invited to ‘cleanse ourselves from every defilement of body and spirit’ (2 Cor 7:1; cf. 1 Jn 3:3), because the encounter with God requires absolute purity.

Every trace of attachment to evil must be eliminated, every imperfection of the soul corrected. Purification must be complete, and indeed this is precisely what is meant by the Church’s teaching on purgatory. The term does not indicate a place, but a condition of existence. Those who, after death, exist in a state of purification, are already in the love of Christ who removes from them the remnants of imperfection (cf. Ecumenical Council of Florence, Decretum pro Graecis: DS 1304; Ecumenical Council of Trent, Decretum de iustificatione: DS 1580; Decretum de purgatorio: DS 1820).

6. One last important aspect which the Church’s tradition has always pointed out should be reproposed today: the dimension of ‘communio’. Those, in fact, who find themselves in the state of purification are united both with the blessed who already enjoy the fullness of eternal life, and with us on this earth on our way towards the Father’s house (cf. CCC, n. 1032).

Just as in their earthly life believers are united in the one Mystical Body, so after death those who live in a state of purification experience the same ecclesial solidarity which works through prayer, prayers for suffrage and love for their other brothers and sisters in the faith. Purification is lived in the essential bond created between those who live in this world and those who enjoy eternal beatitude.

* * * * *

_Dear Brothers and Sisters, _

_Following our catechesis on the reality of heaven and hell, today we consider “Purgatory”, the process of purification for those who die in the love of God but who are not completely imbued with that love. _
Sacred Scripture teaches us that we must be purified if we are to enter into perfect and complete union with God. Jesus Christ, who became the perfect expiation for our sins and took upon himself the punishment that was our due, brings us God’s mercy and love. But before we enter into God’s Kingdom every trace of sin within us must be eliminated, every imperfection in our soul must be corrected. This is exactly what takes place in Purgatory. Those who live in this state of purification after death are not separated from God but are immersed in the love of Christ. Neither are they separated from the saints in heaven - who already enjoy the fullness of eternal life - nor from us on earth - who continue on our pilgrim journey to the Father’s house. We all remain united in the Mystical Body of Christ, and we can therefore offer up prayers and good works on behalf of our brothers and sisters in Purgatory.

47

Ecclesia semper mutandis.

48

“Ecclesia semper mutandis”.

Quite.

Lumen Gentium, the dogmatic constitution on the church from the reforming Second Vatican Council, acknowledged the need for the Church to be aware of its sojourning nature here on earth: “While Christ, holy, innocent and undefiled knew nothing of sin, but came to expiate only the sins of the people, the Church, embracing in its bosom sinners, at the same time holy and always in need of being purified, always follows the way of penance and renewal ".

See also this Vatican document from 2000:

http://www.vatican.va/jubilee_2000/magazine/documents/ju_mag_01051997_p-49_en.html

For John Paul II, in preparing the Church for the transition from the second to the third millennium, the Council outlined an itinerary which seems to have all the characteristics of a profound change, indeed, of a real turning-point in the history of Christianity. A “new Advent”, as the Pope foresaw, already writing this in his first encyclical, Redemptor Hominis.

In fact the great work of renewal began from there, from the Council. From there came a “new” image of the Church, focused on the mystery of Christ, and with a clearer awareness of her own nature and mission. A Church as “communion”, the “People of God”, marked by the fundamental equality of all the baptized. A Church renewed in her prayer, in her methods and pastoral structures, in her relations with other Christian Churches and other religions.

And, above all, a Church which was open to dialogue with the world: no longer seen aprioristically as an enemy, but recognizing the legitimate autonomy of earthly realities, rediscovering the natural solidarity that binds her to the human race. And this openness - the Pope recalled in Tertio Millennio Adveniente - was “an evangelical response to recent changes in the world, including the profoundly disturbing experiences of the Twentieth Century, a century scarred by the First and Second World Wars, by the experience of concentration camps and by horrendous massacres. All these events demonstrate most vividly that the world needs purification; it needs to be converted”.

And the Church was the first to give the example. Through the Council she discovered anew that fundamental element of her nature - “at one and the same time holy and ever in need of purification”, “Ecclesia semper reformanda, Ecclesia semper purificanda” - which since the time of the Counter-Reformation, since the Council of Trent, because of historical circumstances had too often been sacrificed in an apologetic attitude.

Thus it was the beginning of a profound change in the life of the Church and, at the same time, the start of a self-critical examination of past events.

49

So the writers of the Baltimore catechism either lied or didn’t know the faith very well. (This is beginning to sound like the LDS church) Where is the new catechism?

1 Like
50

Do you have official talks or statements, such as ARCIC - The Anglican Roman Catholic International Commission, with official reports released, or is this just a matter of internet discussion boards?

51

With respect but where did I say the framers of that old catechism “lied or didn’t know the faith very well”? As for the LDS, I have always found them to be very thoroughly upstanding people so I take that comparative comment as a backhanded compliment. :wink:

Contrary to what many people outside the faith appear to believe, the Catholic Church has defined very little about the doctrine of Purgatory. All we know is that many, or even most, people will probably experience it after death; that it purifies and perfects us, preparing us for God’s presence; that there is remorse and reflection over one’s attachments to certain sins in life, which is painful to have to face; that the souls in purgatory are not separated from the love of God and that the prayers and good works of Christians here on earth offer succor to those going through the process of purification. Other than a few such defined parameters, practically everything else is questionable and up for discussion about the doctrine.

I explained to the contrary how the Baltimore Catechism relied upon one particular, very dated [1614] (and speculative but not unorthodox) interpretation, among many competing theories, of the purgatorial state post-mortem. I don’t share it and neither did the past few popes, or for that matter many prominent theologians today. It isn’t “in vogue” so to speak, nor do I believe it ever will be again given how times have changed and it doesn’t fit with the development of the doctrine, as it is now set forth by the Magisterium in the relevant papal documents. Its for the dustbin of ecclesiastical history, whereas St. Catherine’s (and for that matter the more Eastern Catholic-influenced interpretations) is now prevalent in a refined state in the papal magisterium, with Pope Benedict XVI even delivering a full address on the topic of her explanations regarding purgatory in 2011 and having referenced her in his 2007 encyclical. Not Bellarmime or the Baltimore Catechism based upon his earlier tome.

There are doctrinal elements which any framework for conceiving of “purgatory” must comply with to be considered “not heretical”, a bare minimum (as with any other dogmas/doctrines, which we call “the deposit of faith”). These, so-called “de fide” articles of beliefs, must be given an assent of faith by all practicing Catholics. I’ve already told you what these requirements are, by allusion: such that even the Eastern Orthodox ‘intermediate state’, certainly as outlined in the Confession of Dositheus, passes muster and satisfies the bare necessities for doctrinal purity in this regard.

Beyond this, Catholic theologians are free to speculate and sometimes different speculative interpretations become predominant in a given time period, only to be displaced later by others unless the Magisterium explicitly prohibits this. There is no harm in this, the dogmatic truth stays constant while the understanding of the doctrine validly develops; often through debates, controversies and discussions over time.

In my Church, the general rule of thumb was enunciated by Pope St. John XXIII in his 1959 encyclical Ad Petri Cathedram:

https://www.ewtn.com/library/encyc/i23petri.htm

Encyclical of Pope John XXIII On Truth, Unity and Peace, In A Spirit of Charity, promulgated on 29 June 1959

69. The Catholic Church teaches the necessity of believing firmly and faithfully all that God has revealed. This revelation is contained in sacred scripture and in the oral and written tradition that has come down through the centuries from the apostolic age and finds expression in the ordinances and definitions of the popes and legitimate Ecumenical Councils…

71. The Catholic Church, of course, leaves many questions open to the discussion of theologians. She does this to the extent that matters are not absolutely certain. Far from jeopardizing the Church’s unity, this can actually pave the way for its attainment. For discussion can lead to fuller and deeper understanding of religious truths; when one idea strikes against another, there may be a spark.[25]

72. But the common saying, expressed in various ways and attributed to various authors, must be recalled with approval: in essentials, unity; in doubtful matters, liberty; in all things, charity…All men, then, should be joined in mutual and just regard for one another’s opinions.

It seems yet again that you take issue with the most recent papal pronouncements respecting purgatory, which are partly inspired by the (very influential) interpretation of St. Catherine of Genoa from the fifteenth - very early sixteenth century (1473 - 1510 to be exact), predating Bellarmine’s 1614 catechism which the Baltimore catechism is based upon actually, by more than a hundred years.

That’s fine but it is what it is IMHO.

You are entitled to your opinion and I am entitled to mine, just like Catherine of Genoa and Robert Bellarmine (along with their followers) were entitled to their divergent interpretations of purgatory back in the sixteenth century. Neither interpretation was unorthodox, neither one was defined as dogma but both were approved by the Church as having nothing contrary to faith and morals.

That being said, there is also the expectation that one will give a degree of assent to the teachings of the Pope, out of respect for his office, even when he is not speaking ex cathedra and de fide.

"This religious submission of mind and will must be shown in a special way to the authentic magisterium of the Roman Pontiff, even when he is not speaking ex cathedra; that is, it must be shown in such a way that his supreme magisterium is acknowledged with reverence, the judgments made by him are sincerely adhered to, according to his manifest mind and will.”

~Dogmatic Constitution on the Church #25

Now Lumen Gentium, the Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, is one of the principal documents of the Second Vatican Council.

So I am doing this with regard to the most recent papal pronouncements on purgatory, particularly the 2007 encyclical (it being the most recent and authoritative) since the Holy Fathers have “stuck their necks” out on the issue so to speak, even though there is much remaining up for charitable disagreement.

52

I’ve asked my Swedish friend (a convert to Catholicism) about catechisms. And I might ask other Catholics as I find time.

But It’s beginning to sound like nobody has any idea about what purgatory really is. There are only statements by this or that pope or saint or others. And I wonder why it is in the catechism at all. It’s certainly not in the Bible. And if it’s not in the Bible, and undefined by the Roman Catholic church, you can hardly come to an agreement with the Eastern Orthodox.

1 Like
53

@beaglelady I’ve tried my best to explain the doctrine. I don’t think the essence of it is particularly hard to grasp: a state of cleansing after death but before beatitude in heaven, for those who are saved but imperfectly purified, not yet pure enough at the time of their death to “see God”, in which the prayers and good works of Christians on earth can prove efficacious in God leading souls from that state to the fullness of joy in heaven. It’s simple.

Over and above the essentials, yes - there can be valid differences of opinion in my Church regarding this state (as on a range of other matters). What’s wrong with that?

We all know what function purgatory serves, and its an important one for Catholics, everything else is secondary. As our guiding motto stated above by Pope John XXIII goes: in essentials, unity; in doubtful matters, liberty; in all things, charity.

Not everything needs to be strictly defined down to minutiae, on pain of heresy.

The official catechism of the Catholic Church was published in 1992. It can be found easily online and is regarded as “a sure norm for teaching the faith”.

Here is its entry on purgatory (which I referenced earlier on):

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p123a12.htm

II. THE FINAL PURIFICATION, OR PURGATORY

1030 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.

1031 The Church gives the name Purgatory to this final purification of the elect, which is entirely different from the punishment of the damned.606 The Church formulated her doctrine of faith on Purgatory especially at the Councils of Florence and Trent. The tradition of the Church, by reference to certain texts of Scripture, speaks of a cleansing fire:607

1032 This teaching is also based on the practice of prayer for the dead, already mentioned in Sacred Scripture: "Therefore [Judas Maccabeus] made atonement for the dead, that they might be delivered from their sin."609 From the beginning the Church has honored the memory of the dead and offered prayers in suffrage for them, above all the Eucharistic sacrifice, so that, thus purified, they may attain the beatific vision of God.610 The Church also commends almsgiving, indulgences, and works of penance undertaken on behalf of the dead:

Let us help and commemorate them. If Job’s sons were purified by their father’s sacrifice, why would we doubt that our offerings for the dead bring them some consolation? Let us not hesitate to help those who have died and to offer our prayers for them.611

54

You left out the parts about fire, indulgences, etc. Besides, it is my opinion that there is no sin that the blood of Jesus cannot cover.

55

@beaglelady,

The Mormons would agree with you. So in their theology, instead of Heaven, Hell and Purgatory, Mormons have identified three levels of Heaven, the worst of which is so wonderful, they fear people would kill themselves if they knew it to be so.

Most people don’t realize Mormons are “Universalists” (as opposed to Jehovah’s Witnesses, say).

56

No, Mormons also have Outer Darkness, which is a hell, for Satan and the “sons of perdition” (Mormons who leave the faith).

btw, they also believe that Jesus and Satan were brothers!!

57

@beaglelady:

They do?!? I thought I knew 99.9% of the Mormon secrets!

The relationship between Jesus and Satan is understandable, given their metaphysics. They think all divine beings were once humans. And nothing elevates one’s spiritual status more than having a few billion descendants!

1 Like
58

I think we need a footnote on the “Outer Darkness” reference! You will be relieved to know that the future occupants of “Outer Darkness” have already been selected! And I guess you and I are not amongst them!

“Outer Darkness is the permanent location of Satan and his followers and the Sons of Perdition, who are not redeemed by the Atonement of Jesus Christ.”

“Satan and his followers are beings of spirit who were denied bodies and cast out of heaven during pre-mortal existence (see Plan of Salvation).”

https://www.mormonwiki.com/Outer_Darkness

1 Like
59

This topic was automatically closed 6 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.