PURGATORY

Last week we learned that Scripture and Tradition are two sources for our faith. We mentioned several arguments from Scripture:

1. that not everything Jesus said and did is recorded in Scripture (Jn 21:25) and

2. that Sacred Tradition is to be followed alongside Sacred Scripture (2Thess 2:15)

Those who hold Scriptura Sola will tell us that the word “Purgatory” is not in Scripture. We should be quick to agree with them but then add, “…neither are the words ‘Trinity’ and ‘Incarnation,’ yet those doctrines are really taught in Scripture and you, too, believe in them.”

There is the Bible’s recognition of prayers for the dead: “It is a holy and wholesome thought to pray for the dead, that they might be loosed from their sins.” (2 Macc. 12:46) During the persecutions of the first three centuries the early Christians wrote prayers for the dead on the walls of the catacombs. St. Monica in the fourth century asked her son, Augustine, to remember her soul in his Masses.

Why purgatory? To be cleansed! “Nothing unclean shall enter heaven” (Rev. 21: 27)

In Purgatory love of self is purified and transformed into love of God.

If God is ALL JUST, how can he judge fairly after death a person like Mother Theresa who spent her life doing good for others and another person like a serial killer who did much evil in his life? The Catholic answer is Purgatory which requires more purification of the serial killer (presuming he is not in hell) before he is eligible for heaven. Our answer saves and reconciles the JUSTICE OF GOD.

Here’ an interesting discussion in 1769 between James Boswell and Samuel Johnson: Boswell: “And what do you think, Sir, of purgatory, as believed by the Roman Catholicks?” Johnson: “Why, Sir, it is a very harmless doctrine. They are of the opinion that the generality of mankind are neither so obstinately wicked as to deserve everlasting punishment, nor so good as to merit being admitted into the society of blessed spirits; and therefore that God is graciously pleased to allow a middle state, where they may be purified by certain degrees of suffering. You see, Sir, there is nothing unreasonable in this.” Boswell: “But then, Sir, their Masses for the dead?” Johnson: Why, Sir, if it be at once established that there are souls in purgatory, it is as proper to pray for them, as for our brethren of mankind who are yet in this life.”

(Sources: A tract by Catholic Answers and The New Question Box by John J. Dietzen.)

Question 3. The consecration of the Eucharist:

a. Can be performed by a Catholic priest or by a priest of an Eastern Orthodox Church.

b. Can be performed by a Catholic priest only if he celebrates Mass with at least two witnesses.

c. Can be performed by Catholic priest and Anglican priests so long as they have the proper intention and pronounce the correct words of consecration.

d. Can be performed by deacons and specially commissioned lay persons in emergency situations.

e. None of the above.

Question 4. A Mass is invalid

a. If fewer than half the people present hold hands during the Our Father.

b. If the priest omits the opening sign of the cross and the Nicene Creed.

c. If the priest celebrates Mass while he is in the state of mortal sin.

d. If the priest ad libs any part of the canon.

e. None of the above.

The answers and be found below.

Question 3 answers:

a. Correct, because the Eastern Orthodox churches have the seven sacraments and therefore a real priesthood. It takes a real priest to confect the Real Presence.

b. Wrong, because a priest may celebrate Mass by himself. The validity of the Mass does not depend on the presence of witnesses. (If you chose this answer, perhaps you are confusing here the validity of a marriage, which normally requires two witnesses.)

c. Wrong, because Anglican orders are not valid. Out of courtesy we call Anglican Ministers “Father,” but Pope Leo XIII definitely determined in 1896 that Anglican orders long ago became defective. This means Anglican priests are technically Christian laymen. Since they aren’t priests, their having the proper intention and their pronouncing the correct word of consecration is immaterial.

d. Wrong, because deacons have only partial priestly orders and lay people have no priestly orders; you nee full priestly orders to consecrate the Eucharist.

e. Wrong, because 3.a. is correct.

Questions 4 answers:

a. Wrong. That’s silly.

b. Wrong, even though it is illicit for a priest to omit the opening sign of the cross or, when specified by the rubrics, the creed, such omission does not make the Mass invalid.

c. Wrong, because the efficacy of any sacrament does not depend on the holiness of the minister. If so, we never could tell if absolution “took” in the confessional or if a Mass were validly said, since we can’t see inside the priest’s soul. Sacraments work through their own power, given by Christ, not through the virtuousness of the priest.

d. Wrong, but close. If the pries ad libs the word of consecration, he may end up with an invalid Mass. If he ad libs other parts of the canon, he acts illicitly and perhaps sinfully, but the Mass does not become invalid.

e. Correct, because all the other possible answers are wrong.