An Anglican Priest

"Protestant and Reformed according to the principles of the ancient Catholic Church." Bishop John Cosin (d. 1672)

My Photo
Name:
Location: United States

Friday, September 29, 2006


Purgatory? Is there an Anglican position?

XXII. Of Purgatory.The Romish Doctrine concerning Purgatory. . .is a fond thing, vainly invented, and grounded upon no warranty of Scripture, but rather repugnant to the Word of God.

Often, when in debate or discussion with other Christians, it is posited that Anglicans believe in “Purgatory.” I often reply “Why do you think that?” The answer usually is “Because you pray for the dead.” Indeed, we do pray for the dead, and we believe the dead pray for and with us—but does this mean that we follow the peculiar teaching of the Church of Rome on this matter? The answer is, based on historical and dogmatic theology, an emphatic “no,” but one that often demands explanation to both Anglicans and those outside of the Anglican tradition.
The equation of Purgatory with the Intermediate State (in the Anglican teaching, the state in which the souls of all of the faithful departed exist before the Resurrection of the dead) is an erroneous one, especially since the Roman Church elaborates upon both Purgatory and the Intermediate State (in this line of thinking, occupied when “the souls” pass out of Purgatory before the Resurrection, translating their status from that of mere “souls” into true “saints,” and thus necessitating the feast day of All Souls along with that of All Saints); to adopt the Roman terms while attempting an Anglican description usually results in linguistic confusion and theological consternation (See Bishop N.T. Wright’s For All the Saints ). Indeed, in that the Roman teaching is clearly rejected in the East, such a teaching can in no wise be held as a “Catholic” doctrine proper. When we read Eastern Orthodox texts on such issues there are often narrow variances of opinion than those found in the West and far less elaboration. This from Father Pomazansky’s Orthodox Dogmatic Theology:

"Concerning the state of the soul after the Particular Judgment, the Orthodox Church teaches thus: “We believe that the souls of the dead are in a state of blessedness or torment according to their deeds. After being separated from the body, they immediately pass over either to joy or into sorrow and grief, however, they do not feel either complete blessedness or complete torment. For complete blessedness or complete torment each one receives after the General Resurrection, when the soul is reunited with the body in which it lived in virtue or in vice (The Epistle of the Eastern Patriarchs on the Orthodox Faith, paragraph 18). Thus the Orthodox Church distinguishes two different conditions after the Particular Judgment: one for the righteous, another for sinners; in other words, paradise and hell. The Church does not recognize the Roman Catholic teaching of three conditions: 1) blessedness, 2) purgatory, and 3) gehenna (hell). The very name “gehenna” the Fathers of the Church usually refer to the condition after the Last judgment, when both death and hell will be cast into the “lake of fire” (Rev. 20:15)."

Here it would seem difficult to apply the “Purgatory” label as many moderns wish to use it. When we look at other Anglican dogmatic texts, such as Browne’s Exposition on the Thirty-Nine Articles, or The Christian Faith by C.B. Moss we are confronted with differing views on these issues within a narrow range of opinion, seeming closer to the Orthodox teaching than to the Roman.

Few Anglican authors and even fewer Orthodox authors use the term or designation “Intermediate State” to denote a place of pain, suffering, or retribution for sin. However, the Roman Catholic tradition, and some Anglo-Catholics modeling their views after it, emphasizes the pain and satisfaction that are required of the sinner for the sins of his life. How are we to keep this line of thinking in concert with the Comfortable Words (all from the Holy Scriptures) of the Anglican Eucharist, in which we are assured from Scripture that Christ is the propitiation for our sins? Indeed, how are we to read such a view of purgation (in which a satisfaction of pain is required) in light of the Anglican Eucharist’s canon that states Christ is the “full, perfect, and sufficient sacrifice, oblation, and satisfaction, for the sins of the whole world”? N.T Wright summarizes the issue when he says in For All the Saints:

"I cannot stress sufficiently that if we raise the question of punishment for sin, this is something that has already been dealt with on the cross of Jesus. Of course, there have been crude and unbiblical versions of the doctrine of the atonement, and many have rightly reacted against the idea of a vengeful God determined to punish someone and being satisfied by taking it out on his own son. But this is to mistake caricature for biblical doctrine. Paul says, in his most central and careful statement, not that God punished Jesus, but that God 'condemned sin in the flesh' of Jesus (Romans 8.3). Here the instincts of the Reformers, if not always their exact expressions, were spot on. The idea that Christians need to suffer punishment for their sins in a post-mortem purgatory, or anywhere else, reveals a straightforward failure to grasp the very heart of what was achieved on the cross." p 30

We should view any period of “purgation” (if we are even to employ the term, perhaps “growth” or “purification” would be better terms) in the Intermediate State as the 1549 English and 1928 American Prayer Books put it; as simply a period of “continual growth” in God’s “love and service,” a view I have heard espoused by Lutherans, Anglicans, Orthodox, and Baptists alike (a Baptist New Testament professor of mine from Westminster Seminary described it in this manner). This way of thinking of the Intermediate State puts to rest notions of satisfaction for sin and places the emphasis on the inexhaustible nature and love of God; it also eliminates any notion of the ahistorical and theologically incoherent idea of an “Anglican doctrine of Purgatory.”

I include the Eastern Orthodox position to show that the notion of Purgatory as found in Roman teachings is not found in the East, and therefore cannot as such be labeled as “Catholic,” unless we take the Roman doctrine to be the measure of the terminology. Indeed, the classical Anglican position on prayers for the departed bears a greater resemblance to Orthodoxy than it does to the medieval concepts of the Church of Rome. As Meyendorff (1979) recounts in Byzantine Theology:

"The debate between Greeks and Latins (on the question of Purgatory). . . showed a radical difference in perspective. While the Latins took for granted their legalistic approach to divine justice—which, according to them, requires a retribution for every sinful act—the Greeks interpreted sin less in terms of the acts committed than in terms of a moral and spiritual disease which was to be healed by divine forbearance and love. The Latins also emphasized the idea of an individual judgment by God of each soul, a judgment which distributes the souls in three categories: the just, the wicked, and those in a middle category—who need to be “purified” by fire. The Greeks, meanwhile, without denying a particular judgment after death or agreeing on the existence of the three categories, maintained that neither the just nor the wicked will attain their final state of either bliss or condemnation before the last day. Both sides agreed that prayers for the departed are necessary and helpful. . .even the just need them;. . .in particular. . .the Eucharistic canon of Chrysostom’s liturgy. . .offers the “bloodless sacrifice” for “patriarchs, prophets, apostles, and every righteous spirit made perfect in faith,” even for the Virgin Mary herself." p 220-221

So here even the state of the most blessed is to be viewed
". . .not as a legal and static justification, but as a never-ending ascent, into which the entire communion of saints—the Church in heaven and the Church on earth—has been initiated in Christ. In the communion of the Body of Christ, all members of the Church, living or dead, are interdependent and united by ties of love and mutual concern; thus the prayers of the Church on earth and the intercession of the saints in heaven can effectively help all sinners, i.e., all men, to get closer to God." p 221

This view of growth during the Intermediate State as a “never-ending ascent” is expressed, as was mentioned above, in the Anglican Eucharists of the 1549 English and 1928 American Prayer Books. The emphasis is not on penance, nor on pain, nor satisfaction for sins (which Christ has already paid) but on growth “in the knowledge and the love of God” of those who have “died in thy faith and fear.” This emphasis is the Body of Christ as the Communion of Saints, who all continue in their walk with God before the Resurrection, is taught in the American Prayer Book—but it goes no further than this measured theology and it is accepted by and differentiated from Purgatory by Reformed minded Anglicans. Litton’s Introduction to Dogmatic Theology, a text that places Anglican theology firmly in the Reformed (Calvinist) school of thought, summarizes the difference between the Roman concept of Purgatory and the traditional doctrine of the Intermediate State shared by most Christians not in the Roman Communion (notice the similarity to Meyendorff’s logic):

"The Romish doctrine of purgatory must not be confounded with the belief of spiritual progress in the intermediate state, against which no objection from reason or Scripture can be urged. . . .But the doctrine of the Roman schools is of a different character. It is forensic in nature, and implies the payment of debt not fully discharged in this life. "

As noted above, in Orthodox theology, the prayers for the faithful departed are even offered for the Virgin Mary (assuming that she too is increasing in grace and the knowledge and presence of God and being conformed to His image—theosis). Therefore, praying for the faithful departed—as expressed in the 1928 American Prayer Book—is a truly “Catholic” doctrine and can be held by Anglicans, as is praying with them in the worship of the Church: “Therefore with Angels and Archangels and with all the company of heaven, we laud and magnify thy glorious Name. . .” We pray for the faithful departed in their growth in love and knowledge of God’s love as well as with them in the thanksgiving of the Sacrament of Christ’s Body and Blood.

16 Comments:

Blogger Anglican Parish Priest said...

You wrote: "...the notion of Purgatory as found in Roman teachings is not found in the East, and therefore cannot as such be labeled as “Catholic,” unless we take the Roman doctrine to be the measure of the terminology..."

Precisely. Very well stated. Why should Rome, acting unilaterally, be permitted to define what is catholic?

You have effortlessly set forth the Anglican Position...1928 BCP...Browne...Moss...Litton...Wright...Good Stuff!

I can't help but ask about the rest of Article XXII, however: are you going to take on "Pardons, Worshipping and Adoration, as well of Images as of Relics, and also Invocation of Saints", next?

11:05 PM  
Blogger Mark said...

A superb treatment of Art.XXII and the licit practice of praying in love for the saints in light; with whom we are made one body in Christ, in the Holy Mysteries.

-Mark

1:50 AM  
Blogger Death Bredon said...

Just a few thoughts:

Though Pomazansky presents the "particluar judgment" as Orthodox dogma, as do many Orthodox 'dogmatists,' it is not. Rather, the particular-judgement theory is a widely-held pious opinion, but it is not dogma--a required belief.

Some Orthodox, including many pious monks, believe that the intermediate state involves a much more fluid or temporary judgement, which can be still be changed by the will of the person in question. In other words, the intermediate state is a place for a last chance -- to either perserve in the course of santification, to accpet Christ if never given a fair option before, or to reject God's love. In this view, our prayers can act like "cheerleading" -- for want of a better metaphor -- for a person and encourage him and support him down the home strech, to speak metaphorically again.

Personally, I think this later theory is not inconsistent with Scripture, and it seems to best explain the actual, ancient liturgical practises of the Church. On the other hand, the particular-judgment theory seems to raise as many questions as it answers.

8:18 AM  
Blogger An Anglican Cleric said...

Parish Priest,

More to come on those other issues as well that you mentioned. I didn't want to make the post too long. However, the Roman doctrine of the invocation of the saints is tied to the question of purgatory, so perhaps it might have been wise to address the two together.

AC+

10:20 AM  
Blogger Pseudo-Iamblichus said...

Good stuff. I even put a link on my blog to this post so that more people can read it. Your blog is a great source of information, elegantly crafted and well thought-out. Keep up the good work.

10:46 AM  
Blogger An Anglican Cleric said...

Thanks you very much for the kind words. Much appreciated.

11:15 AM  
Blogger An Anglican Cleric said...

Death,

I included Pomazansky and Meyendorff because they seemed representative of the consensus of what I've read from Eastern Orthodox authors in this area. I know there are other views out there (such as the seemingly peculiar notion of the toll houses). In essence I attempted to present the venn diagram of overlap between western and eastern Church teaching--and this does not seem to include Purgatory or the toll houses. I do believe that the prayers of others can alter our reward at the Last Day, and as to our course of either being among the "faithful" or the "unfaithful" after our death, many Orthodox that I've read seem to agree with the western authors that this designation is made before death. I know there are variances of opinion. My only point here is to present the evidence that Purgatory is rejected in the East and by the Anglicans for near identical reasons.

11:17 AM  
Blogger An Anglican Cleric said...

Already, through Pseudo-Iamblichus's site, someone has made the error I sought to address, that being confusing the Intermediate State with Purgatory proper. In my rejecting of Purgatory the reader thinks I have rejected the Intermediate State, growth in the Intermediate State, and prayers for the faithful departed--none of which I have done.

I have to ask, non-rhetorically, was I unclear?

12:10 PM  
Blogger Anglican Parish Priest said...

AC, I would say the person didn't even read your post. People do that.

7:14 PM  
Blogger J. Gordon Anderson said...

One of the other problems with the Romish doctrine of purgatory is its relation to the treasury of merits, and so on. From an Anglican perspective, as none of that can be proven from the Scriptures, it is wrong to make a huge dogmatic system out of it. Scripture is clear on an intermediate state of some sort, that state being the type believed by the Orthodox and Anglicans. But the whole notion of purgation, and how it relates to the treasury of merits and indulgences, is highly problematic for us.

8:21 AM  
Blogger An Anglican Cleric said...

JGA+

Very true--I did not even make mention of the notion in the Middle Ages that indulgences were tied to the doctrine of Purgatory as a place from which the souls would spring when a coin in the coffer would cling. The Church of Rome still makes official mention of years being "taken off" of the souls in Purgatory is specific prayers are said or actions taken by those here on earth. This goes back to a question of the Reformation, perhaps still true today: if the Pope could free all of the souls in Purgatory by issuing some manner of indulgence, why could that not be done? If 1000 years can be taken off, why not take off every year?

DH+

8:50 AM  
Blogger Father Chad said...

Fantastic post - thank you so very much for your continuing splendid contributions to a thoroughly orthodox Anglican understanding of systematic theology. God bless you!

1:45 PM  
Blogger Death Bredon said...

AC,

Even in its openess to a diveristy of pious opinions, the Eastern Church shows its congruency with Anglicanism on the intermeditate state. So, I agree that your invocation of the Eastn is well taken when examining Latin prugation.

Boy, that toll-house stuff is a bit frightening, especially among the uberOrthos that consider it de regiour dogma! As far as I know, almost to a man, canonical Orthodox Bishops and scholars barely tolerate the idea, if that, as a very speculative at best.

10:37 PM  
Blogger Paul Thompson said...

You use one of the 39 Articles to show that Anglicans don't believe in Purgatory, and THEN you say that Anglicans pray to and for the dead, and that they pray for us? What about the rest of that Article? "The Romish Doctrine of Purgatory, Pardons, Worshipping and Adoration, as well of Images as of Relics, and also Invocation of Saints is a fond thing, vainly invented, and grounded upon no warranty of Scripture, but rather repugnant to the Word of God." So, purgatory, adoration of relics and images, AND the INVOCATION OF THE SAINTS is a fond thing and VAINLY INVENTED and repugnant to Scripture.

7:40 PM  
Blogger An Anglican Cleric said...

Paul,

Anglicans do pray for the FAITHFUL departed, those departed "in thy faith and fear"--this is in the 1549 and 1928 English and 1928 American Prayer Books.

I did not say that Anglicans pray to the saints. I address this in another post and do not endorse it. Here is what I said (again basing my statements on the Prayer Books and the writings of Anglican theologians firmly in the Reformed theological camp):

Therefore, praying FOR the faithful departed—as expressed in the 1928 American Prayer Book (and 1549 and 1928 English books)—is a truly “Catholic” (universal) doctrine and can be held by Anglicans, as is praying WITH them in the worship of the Church (and here I quote something in all historic Anglican eucharistic rites):

“Therefore with Angels and Archangels and with all the company of heaven, we laud and magnify thy glorious Name. . .”

We pray FOR the faithful departed in their growth in love and knowledge of God’s love as well as WITH them in the thanksgiving of the Sacrament of Christ’s Body and Blood. This is all. Praying for the faithful departed does NOT support a belief in Purgatory. This is why I quoted an Anglican theologian with no Roman sympathies whatsoever, Litton:
He summarizes the difference between the Roman concept of Purgatory and the traditional doctrine of the Intermediate State shared by most Christians not in the Roman Communion (notice the similarity to Meyendorff’s logic):

"The Romish doctrine of purgatory must not be confounded with the belief of spiritual progress in the intermediate state, against which no objection from reason or Scripture can be urged. . . .But the doctrine of the Roman schools is of a different character. It is forensic in nature, and implies the payment of debt not fully discharged in this life. "

I quote an Orthodox theologian earlier to stress the distinction between their position and the Roman position, not to endorse the invocation of the saints as such (as I state: "I include the Eastern Orthodox position to show that the notion of Purgatory as found in Roman teachings is not found in the East, and therefore cannot as such be labeled as “Catholic,” unless we take the Roman doctrine to be the measure of the terminology").

AC+

8:28 PM  
Blogger Paul Thompson said...

Thanks for the clarification. I appreciate it.

7:39 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Continuing Anglican BlogRing

Next

Random

List