Chapter 6: The Church's Authority in Doctrine

ARTICLE XXII

OF PURGATORY^[1]

The Romish doctrine concerning Purgatory, Pardons, Worshipping and Adoration as well of Images as of Reliques, 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.

The significant term for understanding the intention of this Article is the word ‘Romish’. It is possible to see behind beliefs and practices like Purgatory, the Worshipping and Adoration of Images and Relics, and the Invocation of Saints some ideas which are harmless and helpful enough; but as developed in Romanism they have been fatally corrupted. And the most potent cause of this corruption has been a wrong conception of merit. According to the doctrine of Purgatory a distinction is to be drawn between mortal and venial sins: the reward of the former is everlasting torment, and lies outside the scope of the doctrine; it is with the punishment due to less serious offences, that Purgatory deals. The Council of Trent affirmed that after the pardon of eternal punishment there still remains ‘a guilt of temporal punishment to be paid for either in this world, or in the future in purgatory’.^[2] We have already seen^[3] that the Final Judgement is everywhere in the New Testament associated with Christ’s return ‘in glory’^[4] when the dead shall rise to be judged.^[5] This suggests an intermediate state of existence between death and resurrection. Our Lord said to the dying thief ‘Today shalt thou be with Me in Paradise’, but we have His own assertion that during the period between His death and resurrection He had not returned to heaven: ‘I am not yet ascended unto the Father’, He said to Mary Magdalene,^[6] and St. Peter believed that at death He went and preached to ‘the spirits in prison’.^[7] Paradise cannot therefore be a synonym for Heaven. St. Paul did not regard death as severing the union between Christ and the Christian,^[8] but as the entrance into a fuller union with Him.^[9] But he regarded the soul, when separated by death from the body, as in some sense ‘unclothed’ and waiting for the resurrection body ‘our habitation which is from heaven’.^[10] The Christian waits for a Saviour from heaven ‘Who shall fashion anew the body of our humiliation, that it may be conformed to the body of His glory.’^[11] But this clearly refers not to the moment of our death, but to the Appearing of Christ. The award of ‘the crown of righteousness’ is associated, too, with the Appearance; not with death.^[12] And the putting on of immortality and final defeat of death is also assigned to the general resurrection at the last day.^[13] Despite difficulties of interpretation in some cases, Scripture suggests that the faithful departed are still awaiting the attainment of their full bliss. There is a belief in an intermediate state of existence between death and Heaven. That belief is expressed also in the Collect in the 1662 Burial Office – still widely in use in the Anglican Communion: ‘We meekly beseech Thee, O Father, to raise us from the death of sin unto the life of righteousness; that when we shall depart this life, we may rest in Him, as our hope is this our brother doth; and that, at the general resurrection in the last day, we may be found acceptable in Thy sight; and receive that blessing which Thy well‑beloved Son shall then pronounce to all that love and fear Thee, saying, Come, ye blessed children of My Father, receive the Kingdom, prepared for you from the beginning of the world’. Note the marked distinction between ‘rest in Him’^[14] the immediate lot of the (presumedly) faithful departed, and the ‘receive the kingdom’ to be pronounced only ‘at the general resurrection in the last day’.

Belief in an Intermediate State between death and Judgement, which is a fundamental presupposition of the doctrine of Purgatory, is part of Christianity’s legacy from Judaism. For instance, in the Parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus^[15] our Lord uses a familiar Jewish conception of the next life, according to which there is a division of souls; some are ‘comforted’, others are in ‘a place of torment’, and the ‘gulf’ between them is impassable. The passage on Christ’s preaching to ‘the spirits in prison’ may have a similar background.^[16] These Jewish elements in the New Testament are all the support that can be derived from it for the doctrine of Purgatory.

^[1]Composed as one of the Forty-two Articles (1553) by the English Reformers, but possibly had been derived partially from the Smalcaldic Article of 1537 which refers to the same errors as ‘not grounded on Scripture’ and ‘most pernicious’. The word ‘perniciose’ was in the 1553 Article but was omitted in 1563. The opening words, ‘The Romish doctrine’, were substituted in 1563 for the original ‘The doctrine of School Authors’ in the 1553 version.

^[2]Session vi, Canon 30. The only Scripture passages cited by Fr. Bertrand Conway are Num. 20:12; 2 Sam. 12:13 f.; Wisdom 7:25; Isa. 25:8; Hab. 1:13; Rev. 21:7; 2 Maccabees 12:43-46; Mtt. 11:32; 1 Cor. 3:11-15, but none of these passages really supports the Roman doctrine.

^[3]Article IV, p. 24 above.

^[4]Mtt. 25:31-46.

^[5]Acts 10:42; 1 Thess. 4:14-17.

^[6]Jn. 20:17.

^[7]1 Pet. 3:19; cf. Article III. p. 16.

^[8]1 Thess. 4:13-16.

^[9]2 Cor. 5:6-8; Phil. 1:23.

^[10]2 Cor. 5:1-4, (R. V.).

^[11]Phil. 3:20 f., (R. V.).

^[12]2 Tim. 4:6-8.

^[13]1 Cor. 15:51 ff.; Heb. 9:28.

^[14]Cp. Rev. 14:13, ‘rest from their labours’.

^[15]Lk. 16:19-31.

^[16]1 Pet. 3:18.


	The Church's Authority in Doctrine
PREVIOUS 110 NEXT
Title Contents Preface Introduction Chapter 1 Chapter 2 Chapter 3 Chapter 4 Chapter 5 Chapter 6 Chapter 7 Chapter 8 Chapter 9 Chapter 10 Appendix A Appendix B Appendix C Site Search: powered by FreeFind Copyright & Credit	ARTICLE XXII OF PURGATORY^[1] The Romish doctrine concerning Purgatory, Pardons, Worshipping and Adoration as well of Images as of Reliques, 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. The significant term for understanding the intention of this Article is the word ‘Romish’. It is possible to see behind beliefs and practices like Purgatory, the Worshipping and Adoration of Images and Relics, and the Invocation of Saints some ideas which are harmless and helpful enough; but as developed in Romanism they have been fatally corrupted. And the most potent cause of this corruption has been a wrong conception of merit. According to the doctrine of Purgatory a distinction is to be drawn between mortal and venial sins: the reward of the former is everlasting torment, and lies outside the scope of the doctrine; it is with the punishment due to less serious offences, that Purgatory deals. The Council of Trent affirmed that after the pardon of eternal punishment there still remains ‘a guilt of temporal punishment to be paid for either in this world, or in the future in purgatory’.^[2] We have already seen^[3] that the Final Judgement is everywhere in the New Testament associated with Christ’s return ‘in glory’^[4] when the dead shall rise to be judged.^[5] This suggests an intermediate state of existence between death and resurrection. Our Lord said to the dying thief ‘Today shalt thou be with Me in Paradise’, but we have His own assertion that during the period between His death and resurrection He had not returned to heaven: ‘I am not yet ascended unto the Father’, He said to Mary Magdalene,^[6] and St. Peter believed that at death He went and preached to ‘the spirits in prison’.^[7] Paradise cannot therefore be a synonym for Heaven. St. Paul did not regard death as severing the union between Christ and the Christian,^[8] but as the entrance into a fuller union with Him.^[9] But he regarded the soul, when separated by death from the body, as in some sense ‘unclothed’ and waiting for the resurrection body ‘our habitation which is from heaven’.^[10] The Christian waits for a Saviour from heaven ‘Who shall fashion anew the body of our humiliation, that it may be conformed to the body of His glory.’^[11] But this clearly refers not to the moment of our death, but to the Appearing of Christ. The award of ‘the crown of righteousness’ is associated, too, with the Appearance; not with death.^[12] And the putting on of immortality and final defeat of death is also assigned to the general resurrection at the last day.^[13] Despite difficulties of interpretation in some cases, Scripture suggests that the faithful departed are still awaiting the attainment of their full bliss. There is a belief in an intermediate state of existence between death and Heaven. That belief is expressed also in the Collect in the 1662 Burial Office – still widely in use in the Anglican Communion: ‘We meekly beseech Thee, O Father, to raise us from the death of sin unto the life of righteousness; that when we shall depart this life, we may rest in Him, as our hope is this our brother doth; and that, at the general resurrection in the last day, we may be found acceptable in Thy sight; and receive that blessing which Thy well‑beloved Son shall then pronounce to all that love and fear Thee, saying, Come, ye blessed children of My Father, receive the Kingdom, prepared for you from the beginning of the world’. Note the marked distinction between ‘rest in Him’^[14] the immediate lot of the (presumedly) faithful departed, and the ‘receive the kingdom’ to be pronounced only ‘at the general resurrection in the last day’. Belief in an Intermediate State between death and Judgement, which is a fundamental presupposition of the doctrine of Purgatory, is part of Christianity’s legacy from Judaism. For instance, in the Parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus^[15] our Lord uses a familiar Jewish conception of the next life, according to which there is a division of souls; some are ‘comforted’, others are in ‘a place of torment’, and the ‘gulf’ between them is impassable. The passage on Christ’s preaching to ‘the spirits in prison’ may have a similar background.^[16] These Jewish elements in the New Testament are all the support that can be derived from it for the doctrine of Purgatory. ^[1]Composed as one of the Forty-two Articles (1553) by the English Reformers, but possibly had been derived partially from the Smalcaldic Article of 1537 which refers to the same errors as ‘not grounded on Scripture’ and ‘most pernicious’. The word ‘perniciose’ was in the 1553 Article but was omitted in 1563. The opening words, ‘The Romish doctrine’, were substituted in 1563 for the original ‘The doctrine of School Authors’ in the 1553 version. ^[2]Session vi, Canon 30. The only Scripture passages cited by Fr. Bertrand Conway are Num. 20:12; 2 Sam. 12:13 f.; Wisdom 7:25; Isa. 25:8; Hab. 1:13; Rev. 21:7; 2 Maccabees 12:43-46; Mtt. 11:32; 1 Cor. 3:11-15, but none of these passages really supports the Roman doctrine. ^[3]Article IV, p. 24 above. ^[4]Mtt. 25:31-46. ^[5]Acts 10:42; 1 Thess. 4:14-17. ^[6]Jn. 20:17. ^[7]1 Pet. 3:19; cf. Article III. p. 16. ^[8]1 Thess. 4:13-16. ^[9]2 Cor. 5:6-8; Phil. 1:23. ^[10]2 Cor. 5:1-4, (R. V.). ^[11]Phil. 3:20 f., (R. V.). ^[12]2 Tim. 4:6-8. ^[13]1 Cor. 15:51 ff.; Heb. 9:28. ^[14]Cp. Rev. 14:13, ‘rest from their labours’. ^[15]Lk. 16:19-31. ^[16]1 Pet. 3:18.
PREVIOUS 110 NEXT