If you read Paul’s words in 1 Cor 3 and 1 Tim in the wooden way that you do (as does Nigel above in the comments) then you run into heresy – namely soul sleep and/or false views about the Last Day and the beatific vision.

The eschatological “Day” of Paul is not restricted to the “Last Day” but encompasses human death and the “intermediate state.”

Take a look at my responses to Nigel in the comments above where I try to make a case for this.

The 1 Cor 3 passage is obviously key if one would like to find anything related to Purgatory in Paul… but one would need to ask whether one’s interpretation of it fits with the rest of Paul’s theology. I still need to work on this. Anyhow few if any exegetes would see Purgatory in 1 Cor 3. Yes, exegetes are usually Protestant or Protestant-minded, we need to take that into account. But sound methods of exegesis teach us to think historically and critically and not read medieval or reformational systematic theology anachronistically into Paul. I think of Fr. Prat SJ wrting before Vatican II, a very sound Catholic scholar. He (like Raymond Brown later) finds support for a principle of Purgatory here (sins that are dealt with in a way different from eternal punishment) but he says the fire cannot be the fire of Purgatory, for it tries, while the fire of Purgatory doesn’t try but purifies. Rather this is the fire of the last judgment. And what about the Day… if death partakes in the Day, then the outcome should be identical, but it isn’t for those that go to Purgatory, because the last judgment won’t send them to Purgatory.

Furthermore, what is tried and burned and judged here are the works during one’s whole life (if not the works of ministers of the gospel alone, you didn’t deal with that, the context talks about apostles), the basis on which one would suffer purgatory is thus very different, it is not “if you have temporal punishments from mortal sins already forgiven in confession” or “venial sins that you didn’t do penance for”.

As for temporal punishments, I find the arguments from the OT lacking for several reasons: 1) they are all this side of death, concrete things in this life, whereas the temporal punishments awaiting us in purgatory are vague spiritual punishments that we can only guess about 2) baptism removes all temporal punishments due to sin according to Trent and Catholic theology, but death and suffering and birthpangs aren’t removed by baptism, so those examples are not talking about the same kind of temporal punishment we need to prove 3) this brings us to the whole covenantal issue of what the New is like, how can we assume some examples from David’s life apply to what happens in a New Covenant sacrament of confession for the remission of post-baptismal sins… it’s a new life and a different story. One would need arguments from the NT.

About martyrdom – what if one has a lot of temporal punishments left but yet dies a martyr? Isn’t it unfair that they go straight to heaven even though not fully sanctified? Same goes for dying baptized infants.

The LXX stuff was good, thanks! Only a couple of weeks ago did we finally get a Finnish Bible with the deuterocanonicals published! Also, the points on Tertullian and Origen were helpful.

Last challenge: If Paul prays for a dead man in 2 Tim 1, then we need to assume soul sleep, because he is praying he’ll find mercy on the Day. According to the 14th century Pope he should’ve already found mercy or gone to hell or otherwise be in Purgatory, in which case it’d be silly to pray for mercy on the Day because it’d be certain already that he will find mercy on that Day. The only solution would be to assume he’s soul sleeping until the judgment is pronounced on the last day. Or do you have a better solution? I guess you’ll say something about the timelessness of the Day and death’s participation in it, but you need to account for the actual time difference between people’s deaths and the end of the world and also the fact that people go to purgatory in the particular judgment but not in the final one.

Thanks once again for replies.

Fundamental to what we have been speaking is the nature of the Judgement Day itself. Do you see it as a day of declaration or as some sort of refinery process?

Surely the language of 1 C0rinthians 3 v13 is about what will be revealed.

“each man’s work will become evident; for the day will show it, because it is to be revealed with fire; and the fire itself will test the quality of each man’s work”

For Paul in this passage, the reference to fire is the idea of testing. It is not the process of refining that Paul has in view, (though the picture of fire might refer to times of testing in that sense in other parts of the Bible).

What Paul has in view here is fire which reveals.

You and others might find this interesting – Origen and Saint Augustine interpret 1 Cor 3 as pertaining to the intermediate state. Origen interprets 1 Cor 3 as happening at death (”when the soul shall be separated from the body”), not at the general judgment.

“For if on the foundation of Christ you have built not only gold and silver and precious stones; but also wood and hay and stubble, what do you expect when the soul shall be separated from the body? Would you enter into heaven with your wood and hay and stubble and thus defile the kingdom of God; or on account of these hindrances would you remain without and receive no reward for your gold and silver and precious stones; neither is this just. It remains then that you be committed to the fire which will burn the light materials; for our God to those who can comprehend heavenly things is called a cleansing fire. But this fire consumes not the creature, but what the creature has himself built, wood, and hay and stubble. It is manifest that the fire destroys the wood of our transgressions and then returns to us the reward of our great works.”

Origen, Homilies on Jeremias, PG 13:445, 448.

Saint Augustine also interprets 1 Cor 3 as pertaining to particular judgment and the intermediate state in the opening of his book On Faith and Works 1, 1.

I also appreciate the correspondence.

First, I am in 100% agreement with you that “Day” here and in other passages by Paul refers the judgment day on which Christ will judge the living and the dead.

Second, I am very sympathetic to your interpretation of the 1 Cor 3 passage.

Having said those two things, let me explain why I can’t see how your conclusion (that 1 Cor 3 has nothing to do with postmortem purgation) jives with the rest of Paul’s epistles.

Here’s the 1 Cor 3 passage in question (for anyone just now joining in on this debate):

[10] According to the grace of God given to me, like a skilled master builder I laid a foundation, and another man is building upon it. Let each man take care how he builds upon it.
[11] For no other foundation can any one lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ.
[12] Now if any one builds on the foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, straw –
[13] each man’s work will become manifest; for the Day will disclose it, because it will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test what sort of work each one has done.
[14] If the work which any man has built on the foundation survives, he will receive a reward.
[15] If any man’s work is burned up, he will suffer loss, though he himself will be saved, but only as through fire.

My claim is that “the Day” is Paul’s word for the final day of judgment at the end of time. Nevertheless, the death of every Christian is eschatological and participates in that last Day in a particular way (I’m saying both/and not either/or). The Catholic Church defines the “Four Last Things” as “Death, Judgment, Heaven, Hell.” Note how “death” is one of the four eschatological items. Also note how “purgatory” is not on the list.

The particular judgment of a Christian happens at death and will be later confirmed at the final judgment and the resurrection of the body.

So here’s my argument: Although Paul mentions “the Day” in 1 Cor 3, everything else in the context points to individual, particular judgment. Consequently, it is irresponsible to read “the Day” in the most literally possible sense so as to exclude an interpretation that also encompasses the intermediate state.

The context of 1 Cor 3 speaks of the judgment of an individual person and verse 14 refers to “reward”. If we read this as literally as you do, Nigel, then we would also conclude that there is no judgment at death, but that personal judgment is reserved to “that Day” and that Christians don’t receive their reward after death but must wait till “that Day.” Yet, both of these conclusions are false. Therefore, the original proposition that this fiery ordeal is also reserved to “that Day” must also be rejected.

Nigel, I’m pretty sure that you won’t accept my explanation. I can understand why.

However, I think that you super-strict reading of “the Day” in 1 Cor 3 would require you to accept two troublesome doctrines:

1) You must deny the eschatological character of Christian death (you’ve avoided this question twice and seem to imply it in your last comment).

2) You must deny that there is a particular judgment at death. Moreover, you must deny that reward is received at the particular judgment before the general judgment.

The great irony about the Catholic position is that the Catholic Church has dogmatized that we should be so dogmatic as you are with regard to the eschaton. You’re strict reading of 1 Cor 3 approximates the Jehovah’s Witness “soul-sleep” position. That’s probably saying it way too strongly, but can you see how I beginning to read you in that way?

Thanks once again for your reply.

I am not denying that the eschatological, in a sense, “reaches into history”. However, there is sufficient clarity to know when this is not the case.
In particular, what I am saying is that 1 Corinthians 3v13 gives no grounds for saying that purgatory exists. It is forcing too much into the words. The interpretation that fits best with 1 Corinthians 1vv7-8 and 1 Corinthians 5v8 is that it is referring to the Day when all will appear before God.

Thanks again

Nigel

I think that what we come to is a difference in interpretation based on elements outside the scope of soteriology. Wouldn’t you agree?

Also, do you think that the death of a Christian is an eschatological event?

I cite a dogmatic decision of 14th century Pope so that you and others know that this is not “Taylor Marshall’s pet theory,” but the judgment of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church of of our Lord Jesus Christ. And for that reason, the Pope’s statement does in fact convince me because the Holy Church is my mother and teacher.

Thanks once more for your reply.

It is not so much my “strict interpretation” of “the Day”, but simply the most reasonable in all the circumstances. In fact the reference you give in 2 Timothy 4v8 mentions the “appearing” of Christ. This surely should be understood in terms of the bodily appearing of Jesus Christ. That is the day of reward.

The Apostle Paul (in 2 Corinthians 4) seems to distinguish the intermediate from the final state–to such a degree that he desires one above the other.

I do mean this respectfully, but why would you quote from a 14th century pope to back up an interpretation? Is that to convince me or you?

Thanks

I would only warn that in the Sacred Scriptures, the final resurrection and its power is not limited temporally to the final eschaton. For example, the Catholic tradition speaks of a “first resurrection” and a “second resurrection” (cf. Rev 20:5-6). The former takes place in relation to the particular judgment of each SOUL, whereas the latter is general BODILY resurrection. We would agree that the bodily resurrection is the ultimate reference point (as Wright demonstrates over and again in Resurrection of the Son of God), but the death of a Christian is an eschatological event. The Christian funeral liturgies (east and west) testify to this belief.

Saint Paul speaks of his own personal death in the context of the “that Day” (2 Tim 4:8) and thus fills it with eschatological meaning. If you want to hold to your strict interpretation of “that Day” then you would have to hold that Paul has yet to receive his reward (as indicated in 2 Tim 4:8) and will only receive on the final resurrection day. This view was condemned by Pope Benedict XII in 1336 in his Benedictus Deus, which states that the elect see the beatific vision of God’s essence as their reward before the final judgment and that this perfect beatitude does not require the bodily resurrection (which of course will come about and is the final telos of human salvation).

This shouldn’t be cause for any bewilderment. Wouldn’t you agree that the death of a Christian and the intermediate state is “escahtological”?

in Christ,
Taylor