![\"\"](\"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/572\/2019\/11\/Purgatory3.jpg\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
The Right Reverend Bishop \u201cDr.\u201d [???<\/a>] James White wrote a post dated 26 August 2009, entitled, \u201cPurgatory and Indulgences, Alive and Still Heretical.\u201d<\/a> This is my reply. The good bishop\u2019s words will be in blue<\/span>.<\/p>\n *****<\/p>\n You wonder, at times, how it is that those who listen regularly to Roman Catholic apologists do not notice the wide range of differences between them on important matters of theology and practice. . . .\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n [I]n modern Romanism in America it is common to hear a Westernized, softened view of purgatory. You see, there is no escaping the fact that Roman Catholics of the past viewed purgatory as a\u00a0time<\/i>\u00a0of suffering and purification. The fact that indulgences were measured in \u201cdays\u201d is not just some odd measuring system, as Tim Staples has suggested. This is obvious due to the fact that despite all the historical controversy over the \u201cSabbatine privilege\u201d and the Carmelite Order, for many years people believed, and practiced, a belief in indulgences that included Mary descending into purgatory to release the person who died wearing the scapular on \u201cSaturday.\u201d Whatever else you do with that, it\u2019s hard to get to \u201cSaturday\u201d without the passage of time. The modern \u201cit\u2019s not really a place, and there\u2019s no time there, it\u2019s just a state of mind\u201d type of thinking flies in the face of everything we know of the beliefs of the leaders of the Roman Church in the past. It relies upon the ignorance of the audience who allow today\u2019s speakers to mediate their knowledge of church history to them, chewed up and predigested.<\/span><\/p>\n Well, many Catholics talked about time in purgatory in the past, and others didn\u2019t; and some did in a much more nuanced, sophisticated theological \/ philosophical way that White (true to form) doesn\u2019t take into account. We don\u2019t see him citing any Catholic theologians. That would be nice and at least some semblance of scholarship, wouldn\u2019t it (notwithstanding his<\/span> fake doctorate degree<\/a>)?<\/p>\n People have talked about time in purgatory mostly, I strongly suspect, simply because the notion of being outside of time or somehow part of a timeless eternity is extremely difficult to grasp<\/em>. We have the same problem in referring to eternal existence in heaven and hell. It\u2019s very difficult for us to conceive of a non-sequential, atemporal existence at all, because we have never experienced<\/em> it. We\u2019re like fish in water: where the water is time. We can\u2019t imagine any other existence or scenario. <\/span><\/p>\n It\u2019s also true that the doctrine of purgatory has developed, just as all doctrines do, and so our understanding has become more complex, as time goes on; and this includes more thinking about time, place, condition, and so forth.<\/span><\/p>\n But it is false<\/em><\/strong> to assert, as White did, that<\/span> \u201cThe modern \u2018it\u2019s not really a place, and there\u2019s no time there, it\u2019s just a state of mind\u2019 type of thinking flies in the face of everything we know of the beliefs of the leaders of the Roman Church in the past.\u201d First of all, I think even White would agree that Catholics<\/em> hold that souls do not have bodies<\/em> in purgatory. And if one has no body, he or she or it cannot (technically) be said to be in a place<\/em>. So even thinking about it this<\/em> far (which isn\u2019t much), we have a vivid sense that the discussion is far more complex than White makes out. <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n A non-material spirit can only be said to be in a \u201cplace\u201d in a non-literal, metaphorical sense (this is true also of, for example, angels). Therefore, since the Church has always held that the souls in purgatory are without bodies, then this<\/em> state of affairs (\u201cplace\u201d not being literally applicable) was always the case as well. <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n How is that<\/em> for supposedly relying \u201cupon the ignorance of the audience\u201d<\/span>? It looks to me like White is the ignorant one here: to miss such a basic and fundamental category distinction and factor. No one need merely take my<\/em> word for it. St. Thomas Aquinas (no dummy) stated this over 700 years ago:<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n Incorporeal things are not in place after a manner known and familiar to us, in which way we say that bodies are properly in place; but they are in place after a manner befitting spiritual substances, a manner that cannot be fully manifest to us. (Summa Theologiae<\/em>, Supplement, Q69, a1, reply 1<\/a>)<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n That takes care of the issue of place<\/em>. So how about time<\/em>? If it is<\/em> present in purgatory, it\u2019s in a sense very different from what we know and understand. Thus,\u00a0Fr. Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange (1877-1964), a very eminent theologian, commented:<\/span><\/p>\n Purgatory is not measured by solar time, but by eviternity and discontinuous time. Discontinuous time . . . is composed of successive spiritual instants, and each of these instants may correspond to ten, twenty, thirty, sixty hours of our solar time . . . (Life Everlasting & the Immensity of the Soul: A Theological Treatise on the Four Last Things Death, Judgment, Heaven, Hell<\/i><\/a>, Rockford, Illinois: TAN Books, 1991 [originally 1952], 177)<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n Eviternity, so St. Thomas Aquinas teaches, \u201cdiffers from time, and from eternity, as the mean between them both\u201d (Summa Theologiae<\/em>, <\/span>I, q10, a5<\/a>). So whatever is meant by \u201ctime\u201d in reference to purgatory (closely examined in a philosophical way), it is clearly very, very different from how we earthbound creatures presently understand it. <\/span><\/p>\n And this is no new \u201cmodern\u201d \/ Johnny-come-lately notion, as White vainly imagines and charges. He\u2019s simply blowing hot air and knows very little of what he is talking about. He\u2019s out to sea. And this is very common with him when he tries to refute any aspect of Catholicism with which he disagrees. So what does he do? He projects and makes out that we\u2019re<\/em> the dumbbells and biblical ignoramuses.<\/span><\/p>\n The fact remains that the Catholic Church has not specifically defined<\/em> whether purgatory is a place or a condition, or both in some sense. This means that Catholics have been free to speculate through the centuries, but there is no firm teaching. Nor does it teach that the \u201cfire\u201d is physical. I would imagine myself that it isn\u2019t<\/em>, since it can\u2019t harm or torment spirits anyway. Thus, this same phrase \u201cplace or condition,\u201d was used, for example, in the\u00a0Catholic Encyclopedia<\/em>\u00a0<\/a>of 1910 (not exactly \u201cmodern\u201d is it?).\u00a0 It\u2019s nothing new. Folks were thinking along those lines over a hundred years ago in that instance, and in the 13th century (Aquinas).<\/span><\/p>\n Next, think through what it means that the punishments due to \u201cvenial\u201d sins\u2014which can keep you out of the presence of God due to your impurity\u2014can be removed through the blasphemous practice of indulgences. There are few things that show the reality of Romanism more than indulgences, that is for certain.<\/span><\/p>\n It\u2019s a completely biblical concept<\/a>, as I have shown. And there are lots of myths about Tetzel and some true abuses of the belief and practice, as I have also addressed, in an article published in Catholic Herald<\/em><\/a>. But I would bet good money that White has never seen<\/em> any biblical argument for indulgences, let alone straightforwardly grappled<\/em> with it. All he can do is mock. I wrote about it in my first book: completed in 1996. And he ends with more empty and idiotic mockery (to which I will not grant the dignity of a response):<\/span><\/p>\n Every noble attempt to make Rome\u2019s gospel look like it is\u00a0just close enough<\/i>\u00a0to slip by the anathemas of Scripture falls to ruin upon the most basic examination of the horrific complex of doctrines that is purgatory and indulgences. That Christ\u2019s atonement does not remove my impurity, but my climbing up stairs on my knees does, is more than enough to close the door on Rome\u2019s gospel, to be certain.<\/span><\/p>\n ***<\/p>\n Related Reading:<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n 25 Bible Passages on Purgatory<\/a>\u00a0[1996]<\/p>\n Is Purgatory a \u201cPlace\u201d or a \u201cCondition\u201d?: Misconceptions From [Eastern Orthodox] Fr. Ambrose About My Opinion (and the Church\u2019s View) \/ Also: Development and Alleged Historical Revisionism<\/a>\u00a0[7-24-05]<\/p>\n Purgatory: Refutation of James White (1 Corinthians 3:10-15)<\/a>\u00a0[3-3-07]<\/p>\n Luther: Purgatory \u201cQuite Plain\u201d in 2 Maccabees<\/a>\u00a0[3-5-09]<\/p>\n 50 Bible Passages on Purgatory & Analogous Processes\u00a0<\/a>[2009]<\/p>\n John Wesley\u2019s Belief in an Intermediate State After Death<\/a>\u00a0[7-13-09]<\/p>\n 50 Biblical Indications That Purgatory is Real<\/a>\u00a0[National Catholic Register<\/em>, 10-24-16]<\/p>\n \u201cArmstrong vs. Geisler\u201d #1: Purgatory (Mt 12:32)<\/a>\u00a0[2-17-17]<\/p>\n \u201cArmstrong vs. Geisler\u201d #2: Purgatory (Lk 23:43)<\/a>\u00a0[2-17-17]<\/p>\n Does Matthew 12:32 Suggest or Disprove Purgatory?<\/a>\u00a0[National Catholic Register<\/em>, 2-26-17]<\/p>\n 25 Descriptive and Clear Bible Passages About Purgatory<\/a>\u00a0[National Catholic Register<\/em>, 5-7-17]<\/p>\n C. S. Lewis Believed in Purgatory & Prayer for the Dead<\/a>\u00a0[6-22-10; rev. 10-8-19]<\/p>\n ***<\/p>\n *<\/p>\n My book royalties from\u00a0three bestsellers in the field<\/a>\u00a0(published in 2003-2007) have been decreasing, as has my overall income, making it increasingly difficult to make ends meet.\u00a0 I provide over 2600 free articles here, for the purpose of your edification and education, and have\u00a0written 50 books<\/a>.\u00a0It\u2019ll literally be a struggle to survive financially until Dec. 2020, when both my wife and I will be receiving Social Security. If you cannot contribute, I ask for your prayers. Thanks! See my\u00a0information on how to donate<\/a>\u00a0(including 100% tax-deductible donations). It\u2019s very simple to contribute to my apostolate via PayPal, if a tax deduction is not needed (my \u201cbusiness name\u201d there is called \u201cCatholic Used Book Service,\u201d from my old bookselling days 17 or so years ago, but send to my email: apologistdave@gmail.com). Another easy way to send and receive money (with a bank account or a mobile phone) is through\u00a0Zelle<\/a>. Again, just send to my e-mail address.\u00a0May God abundantly bless you.<\/p>\n ***<\/p>\nUnfortunately, Money Trees Do Not Exist<\/strong>:<\/span>\u00a0If you have been aided in any way by my work, or think it is valuable and worthwhile, please strongly consider financially supporting it (even $10 \/ month \u2014 a mere 33 cents a day \u2014 would be very helpful). I have been a full-time Catholic apologist since Dec. 2001, and have been writing Christian apologetics since 1981 (see\u00a0my Resume<\/a>).\u00a0My work has been proven (by God\u2019s grace alone) to be fruitful, in terms of changing lives (see the tangible evidences\u00a0from unsolicited \u201ctestimonies\u201d<\/a>).\u00a0I have to pay my bills like all of you: and have a (homeschooling) wife and three children still at home to provide for, and a mortgage to pay.<\/div>\n\n