In this episode Trent responds to Gavin Ortlund’s recent video Purgatory: A Protestant Perspective and it’s claims about what the Church fathers really believed regarding purgatory and the afterlife.
Welcome to the Council of Trent podcast, a production of Catholic Answers.
Trent Horn:
Hey everyone. In today’s episode, I’m going to respond to Dr. Gavin Ortlund’s recent video, Purgatory, a Protestant Perspective. The majority of his original video is on how purgatory is represented in the church fathers. And, I’m going to focus on that part of his video because Dr. Ortlund makes a case that many Protestants don’t normally make, which is that references to purgatory, he claims, are actually rare in the church fathers, and that Catholics have been misinterpreting their writings in order to support the doctrine of purgatory, and it’s not actually well supported in the fathers. That’s what he claims.
Trent Horn:
Before I respond though, two things. One, I’m getting over a cold. So, sorry about my voice. And, two, I really like Dr. Ortlund. I think he’s wrong about a fair number of things, but I think he’s charitable. He tries very hard to represent Catholic doctrine fairly. So, this makes engaging him a pleasant experience. He’s also said he’s willing to publicly dialogue with me on issues that divide Catholics and Protestants. So, he might make a response to this video. If he does, I’m happy to dialogue more with him about it. I’ll certainly take him up on the offer to have a dialogue. Might have to wait until spring summer of 2022, because I already have about or five dialogues or debates scheduled for the next year. But, it is something I would really look forward to, to sit across the table and chat with him.
Trent Horn:
All right. So, let’s jump right into my response to Dr. Gavin Ortlund’s video, Purgatory, a Protestant Perspective.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
Sometimes, Catholic apologists claim that everyone believed in purgatory for all 2000 thousand years of church history, or almost everybody. They’ll claim this is pretty universal throughout the church fathers. It goes back to the beginning of church history and you see it everywhere. And, a lot of times, Protestants aren’t engaging on a question like this. So, many times, Protestants just don’t know how to respond to that. Sometimes, Protestants can be swayed by that and think, “Gosh, if everybody believed in this, who am I to go in the other direction?”
Trent Horn:
The phrase everybody believed in purgatory for 2000 years is problematic because that depends on what you mean by the word purgatory. For example, consider a few other doctrines. Did Christians believe in original sin for 2000 years? Well, I would say yes, even though there is a development in the idea of what original sin is. Different views of it between the East and the Western church. And, it doesn’t become explicit until the time of Augustine. But, it’s a developed doctrine that goes back to the apostles.
Trent Horn:
Or, consider the Trinity. Christians believed in the Trinity for 2000 years. But, the earliest church fathers don’t have Trinitarian theological terms. The term Trinity wasn’t even used till the end of the second century. So, the early fathers on the Trinity are going to have imprecise and very basic definitions of it. But, that does not count against the fact that the core elements of the Trinity were present going all the way back through the church fathers. Even when Eastern and Western Christians disagree over parts of the Trinity, like the filioque, the core element of the doctrine is still there.
Trent Horn:
And, I would say the same thing is true of purgatory. East and West might differ on secondary details, how to describe it. But, the core essence of purgatory, that there is a postmortem purification of sin after death, is something you can trace all the way back through the church fathers, back to the apostles, and even before that. Finally, the claim that everybody believed in X or that many church fathers believed in X, it doesn’t mean you’ll find every single church father talking about purgatory, for example. Or, any doctrine. Because, not every father wrote about every doctrine. We don’t have all of their writings, for example. But, that doesn’t mean that purgatory or any other Catholic doctrine doesn’t have that historical pedigree. All right. So, let’s go back to Dr Ortlund’s presentation.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
Well, I’ve poured an enormous amount of energy into researching this. I’m really excited about this video, to share it with you all. Probably, more excited about this video than any other video I’ve done thus far. And, I’m going to be sharing what I’ve discovered. I’m not aware that this is already out there in the discussion. So, I have lots of passages that I hope could fill a gap in terms of people’s understanding of this issue.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
And, I just hope this will help people. It’s going to be a longer video. But, if you stick with me to the end, here’s what you’ll get out of it. By the end of it, you’ll have an overview of how the church’s view of what happens to a Christian when that Christian dies, how the church’s view of that has developed and changed over 2000 years and how incredibly complicated and diverse the church’s thought about this is. So, you’ll be positioned to respond to those claims when people say everyone believed in purgatory. You’ll be able to interact with that.
Trent Horn:
Once again, keep in mind that we need a solid definition of purgatory in order to assess how ancient that doctrine is and how it’s developed over time. So, here is how the Catechism describes the doctrine of purgatory. All who die in God’s grace and friendship, but still imperfectly purified, are indeed assured of their eternal salvation. But, after death, they undergo purification so as to achieve the holiness necessary to enter the joy of Heaven. The church gives the name purgatory to this final purification of the elect.
Trent Horn:
Notice that the catechism does not describe how we are purified after death or how long this process takes. St. Paul talks about being changed in the twinkling of an eye. So, the process of purification, it may be a temporal process that we aren’t familiar with in this life. This also helps explain how some fathers described purification happening at the final judgment instead of immediately after our own deaths. So, they might differ from us on when postmortem purification happens, but not that postmortem purification happens. The Catechism also doesn’t talk about punishment. It talks about purification. But, I’ll mention that a little bit later. What is being asserted is just that after death, some Christians are purified in order to achieve the holiness necessary to enter into Heaven.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
Three quick caveats before I dive right in. Number one is I’m going to be speaking about a Protestant perspective. I do recognize I don’t speak on behalf of all Protestants. There have been Protestants, historically, as well as today, who have believed in some conception of purgatory. And then, among Protestants who reject purgatory, which is by far the majority, not everyone would put it exactly the same. So, I’m not speaking for everyone. I’m just going to be trying to explain and give an overview of the mainstream Protestant concerns and arguments. So, I recognize this isn’t representative of every Protestant, but it’s the mainstream Protestant position.
Trent Horn:
That’s correct. But, you may find what other Protestants have said about purgatory to be really interesting. I know I do. CS Lewis rejected what he considered to be the Catholic formulation of purgatory, especially the idea of punishment for sin. But, he did see merit in the idea of believers being purified after death. Our souls demand purgatory, don’t they? Would it not break the heart if God said to us, it is true, my son, that your breath smells and your rags drip with mud and slime. But, we are charitable here and no one will upbraid you with these things nor draw away from you. Enter into the joy.” Should we not reply with submission, sir? And, if there is no objection, I’d rather be cleaned first. It may hurt. Even so, sir.
Trent Horn:
The modern Protestant scholar, Jerry Walls has written works that are critical of Catholicism. But, he has a book called Purgatory, the Logic of Total Transformation that defends a Protestant view of the doctrine that you may consider worth reading. But, for now, I’ll let Dr Ortlund spend some time laying some groundwork for our engagement on this doctrine.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
Already, we can just ward off some of the most common misunderstandings. Purgatory is not hell, first of all. It’s not like you’re in hell first, and then you go to Heaven or something like that. It’s a completely different kind of punishment than hell. Second of all, purgatory is not a second chance at salvation. Okay? The people who go to purgatory are already saved. Third of all, purgatory is not necessarily a place. Some people have thought of it like that. Dante has depicted it like that. But, that’s not necessary to think of it like that.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
Recent popes have clarified it’s more of a condition of existence. So, we just want to be aware of that and be careful not to think of it as just like that. Just like a geographical location or something like that. And, fourth, the fire of purgatory, that’s consistent language, purgatorial fire, this is not necessarily literal fire, so that it has been and understood like that at times. But, it’s not necessary to see it like that. Most people probably wouldn’t see it as literal fire today.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
So, with that, let me encourage Protestants to enter into this with an open mind. Try not to dismiss this idea too quickly as though it’s such a crazy idea. But, I do want us to work through the evidence and see if there are good reasons to support it. And, specifically, with the view to this claim of the idea that it’s universal or nearly universal throughout church history.
Trent Horn:
This is great. It’s very helpful to engage a critic who gets Catholic doctrine correct, and then explains what his particular problems are with it. So, let’s jump ahead now to some of the witnesses in church history Dr. Ortlund is going to cite. By the way, I do jump ahead in some parts of my reply, because I want to address Dr. Ortlund’s key arguments. You can click the link below if you want to watch his entire video. But, I think the parts that I cover here are the most important elements that Catholics will disagree with in his presentation.
Trent Horn:
So, in the next section, Dr. Ortlund summarizes many of the controversies surrounding purgatory, like the sale of indulgences and how the doctrine of purgatory intertwines with other doctrines related to salvation. So, that’s why the reformers had a difficult time with it. Dr. Ortlund then talks about popular piety, pious practices, that would create distortions in the doctrine of purgatory. And, how both sides of the debate need to avoid relying on these distortions when critiquing each other’s theological systems.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
These historical practices are not the same as official Catholic teaching after Trent, particularly, okay. We have to distinguish street level practice from official teaching because I feel deeply burdened at how over and over this happens with Protestants. People hear… They look at the street level practice of megachurch or whatever, and they see that and they think that’s Protestantism, and that’s unfair. And, I’m frequently pushing back against that. So, I want to be clear to do that here.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
The Council of Trent did condemn vain curiosities, superstitions, filthy lucre and scandals with respect to purgatory. Okay. So, the Catholic church recognized some of these abuses and condemned them. At the same time, it’s not wrong to talk about the history. We need to know what’s the context in which the disputes about purgatory arose. And, the Protestant concern would be that while Trent condemned some of the worst abuses, the prohibitions were not sufficient.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
They didn’t go far enough. Some Protestants would say just because they’re too vague, whereas the affirmations of Trent are often very specific. But, the most important point is this. The Council of Trent still affirms a vision of purgatory that touches on the essence of what salvation is and what we’re supposed to do here on earth as the church. What does it mean to get saved? And, how do you follow Jesus on this earth? Purgatory is interwoven with those things. This topic is as practical and as important as it can get. So, for example, Trent approves of quote, the intercessions of the living faithful, namely the sacrifices of Masses, prayers, alms, and other works of piety, which are customarily done for other departed faithful, according to the institutions of the Church. And then, in the Catechism, there’s an affirmation of alms giving, indulgences and works of penance to help those in purgatory. And, you can see that in the Council of Florence earlier on, in many other places as well.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
So, the point we have to see is this. Purgatory functions in this larger system that includes indulgences and penances and so forth. And, we have to appreciate that larger context. I’m not trying to criticize that yet. I’m just trying to help us get an accurate picture of what we’re talking about and what the Protestant concerns were in historical context. Because, today, people will often try to make purgatory sound reasonable by just putting it like this. “Hey, look, you’re not going to be perfect, probably, when you die. You have to get made perfect before you go into Heaven. And, that process of getting made perfect is going to hurt.” And, people think, “Well, that sounds reasonable.” But, that really isn’t accurate because purgatory in Roman Catholic theology has so much more going on with it.
Trent Horn:
I would be careful here because any summary of a doctrine is going to leave out other details that need to be filled in. Consider the doctrine of the incarnation. Did Christians believe in the incarnation for 2000 years? Well, one answer is, yeah. Jesus is true God and true man. But, Christian theology, to borrow a phrase from Dr. Ortlund has so much more going on with it than just this formulation. Was Jesus always divine? Or, did he become divine? Does Jesus have a human soul? Does he have a human will? Those aspects of the doctrine of the incarnation had to be understood and defined at later councils. Likewise, we can find early references to the essence of purgatory that would be further expanded upon by medieval, scholastic theologians, philosophers and other church councils.
Trent Horn:
So, our main concern is with the essence of purgatory. Do some believers experience an unpleasant purification after death in order to make them capable of receiving Heaven. If that is true, then we can debate whether we can help Christians in that position, such as through our prayers or offering a Mass for them. And, all of these other secondary details. Well, before we get to those details, like offering Masses for the souls in purgatory, we have to figure out if purgatory exists first.
Trent Horn:
Similar to the incarnation or the Trinity, we can’t figure out our differences about the filioque, unless we agree that the Trinity is correct doctrine. So, we need to see is the essence of purgatory go back through the church fathers. This is especially true because Dr. Ortlund presents an alternative to purgatory or immediate entry into Heaven for all saved Christians. That’s his alternative. So, as we go through the fathers and these other witnesses, ask yourself this. Do any of these ancient Christian witnesses, do they propose a vision of the afterlife similar to Dr. Ortlund’s, that every Christian is immediately united with Christ after death? Now, they might have different understandings of how purgatory works, but they all agree purgatory does work. And, they would reject Dr. Ortlund’s alternative proposal.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
First of all, the sufferings of purgatory are not just for cleansing from sin. They are for paying for sin. So, this is understood and, again, trying to be very accurate and fair and careful. This is understood not as eternal punishment, but as temporal punishment. So, the claim is Christ’s death was sufficient for our sins, to pay for our sins, but it delivers us from eternal punishment. But, we still have temporal punishments, potentially, that we have to endure in this life and in the next.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
Now, whether you accept that distinction or not between temporal punishment and eternal punishment, the point is the suffering of purgatory is not merely cleansing and medicinal. The suffering of purgatory is punitive and expiratory. Punitive means it delivers punishment and expiratory means it affects atonement, or it extinguishes guilt. Here’s how it’s put at Vatican two. Quote, the truth has been divinely revealed that sins are followed by punishments. God’s holiness and justice inflict them. Sins must expiated. This may be done on this earth, through the sorrows, misery and trials of this life, and above all through death. Otherwise, the expiation must be made in the next life through fire and torments or purifying punishments.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
So, you can see there, even in the very language, it’s called purifying punishments. And, you can also see this in how Roman Catholic theologians, during the counter reformation, defended purgatory. The whole discussion is just how the sufferings of purgatory are expiatory and punitive, not whether they are okay.
Trent Horn:
The church’s theology has developed over time in understanding the nature of this punishment. For example, one theological view is that the process of purification itself after death, that process is identical to the temporal punishment we receive for our sins. In other words, the purification is the punishment. Now, temporal is key here. Only Christ can make up for the eternal effects of our sins. He’s the only one who can take away eternal punishment. But, we can make up for the limited effects of our sins in this life.
Trent Horn:
Now, I’m not going to offer an exhaustive defense of that claim in this video, since our focus is just on the question, is the doctrine of purgatory present throughout church history? So, I’m not going to go into that in detail. But, I think it’s important to focus, to understand, how understanding punishment and purification has developed. So, let’s consider the claim that the punishment in purgatory just is the process of purification.
Trent Horn:
Imagine I tell my kids, “Don’t play in the mud outside. We’re about to eat dinner and I don’t want you tracking a bunch of mud and dirt into the house.” And then, my kids act like kids and they get themselves all muddy. So, what do I do? Well, I tell them, “All right, get in front of the garden hose outside, and I’m going to spray you off.” This has two purposes. Number one, my children are made pure. They’re fit to enter into my kingdom. Or, because nothing unclean will enter here. They’re purified. But, number two, the cold, high pressure tap water is a fitting punishment for disobeying me. A natural consequence of their disobedience. Now, keep in mind, this isn’t a perfect analogy. Nothing is for God and the afterlife. But, I believe it is a serviceable one.
Trent Horn:
To make an analogy, consider the doctrine of Hell. You can see in church history before the modern age, Christian authors don’t pull any punches about what Hell is like. Fire, brimstone, ironic, horrifying punishments. When you get to the modern age, theologians tend to describe hell more as the state of being isolated from God. And, they tend to treat the biblical descriptions more metaphorically. They say that Hell isn’t a place where people are arbitrarily punished by different means. But, that Hell is more the condition of being separated from God.
Trent Horn:
I think many Protestants might describe Hell this way. Even though Protestants, a few centuries ago might be more or explicit, grim or horrifying in their descriptions. But, they would still agree in the doctrine of Hell, even if it’s been expressed in Protestantism in different ways. Much the same way, Catholics believe in purgatory, even if the nature of that postmortem purification has been described in different ways by different authors over time. They all agree on the nature of postmortem or after death purification from sin.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
Similarly, Eastern Orthodox Christians generally acknowledge some kind of intermediate state after death, before final judgment for purification and for growth into divinization. And, they affirm praying for the dead. And, leave wiggle room for how different people will word or understand that precisely. I’m not trying to overly define that. I’m just saying that there’s that general idea. But, they sharply distinguish this from the idea of purgatory in its Roman Catholic soteriological context.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
So, they’ll often link the rejection, and Calvin in the Institute says same thing, the rejection of purgatory and the rejection of indulgences go together. So, for example, according to the Greek Orthodox archdiocese of America, quote, the Orthodox church does not believe in purgatory, a place of purging. That is, the intermediate state after death, in which the souls of the saved, those who have not received temporal punishment for their sins, are purified of all taint, preparatory to entering into Heaven where every soul is perfect and fit to see God.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
Also, the Orthodox Church does not believe in indulgences as remissions from purgatory punishment. Both purgatory and indulgences are inter correlated theories unwitnessed in the Bible or in the ancient church. And, when they were enforced and applied, they brought about evil practices at the expense of the prevailing truths of the church. If Almighty God in his merciful, loving kindness, changes the dreadful situation of the sinner, it is unknown to the church of Christ. The church lived for 1500 years, without such a theory.
Trent Horn:
The point on the Orthodox is important to me because in church history, you’ll see different articulations of purgatory. Sometimes different names to describe it even, in the east and the west. But, both of these groups would reject the traditional Protestant denial of postmortem purification as being unbiblical and unhistorical. Here’s how Eastern Orthodox metropolitan, Kallistos Ware, describes the current state of orthodoxy on the question of purgatory.
Trent Horn:
He writes, “Orthodox are convinced that Christians here on earth have a duty to pray for the departed. And, they are confident that the dead are helped by such prayers. But, precisely in what way do our prayers help the dead? What exactly is the condition of souls in the period between death and the resurrection of the body at the last day. Here, Orthodox teaching is not in entirely clear and has varied somewhat at different times. In the 17th century, a number of Orthodox writers, most notably Peter of Mogila and Dositheos in his confession upheld the Roman Catholic doctrine of purgatory, or something very close to it.” End quote.
Trent Horn:
Now, this is evident in the 1672 Orthodox Synod of Jerusalem. And, it said the following about purgatory, very close to the Catholic view. “The souls of the departed are either at rest or in torment, according to their conduct in life. But, their condition will not be perfect till the resurrection of the body. The souls of those who die in a state of penitence without having brought forth fruits of repentance or satisfactions, depart into Hades. And, there, they must suffer the punishment for their sins. But, they may be delivered by the prayers of the priests and the alms, or giving to the poor, of their kindred. Especially, by the unbloody sacrifice of the mass, which individuals offer for their departed relatives, and which the Catholic and apostolic church daily offers for all alike. The liberation from this intervening state of purification will take place before the resurrection and the general judgment. But, the time is unknown.” End quote.
Trent Horn:
In another word, Kallistos Ware says this. “It is true that Orthodox theologians usually express reservations about the doctrine of purgatory as developed in medieval and post medieval Roman Catholic teaching. But, at the same time, most of them allow for some sort of purging or purification after death. Catholic and Orthodox views on the middle state after death are less sharply opposed than appears at first.” Finally, here’s how the Orthodox priest, Fr. Josiah Trenham, describes purgatory in a talk that he gave on Catholicism.
Fr. Josiah Trenham:
The concept that you die and, bing, you’re on a cloud and everything’s wonderful, is complete nonsense. It’s as big as nonsense as purgatory is. We have 40 day memorials for a reason. Because, the process of moving from this life to the next life is not instantaneous, nor is it easy unless you’re the Virgin Mary. Departing. There’s lots of references about wanting to depart, to be with Christ, but how that process happens, the church has information about that’s not revealed to us in the New Testament.
Trent Horn:
Once again, I would say the view of the afterlife that is devoid of any purification, and it’s just immediate entry into Heaven for all Christians, which will be Dr. Ortlund’s view, is not historical. And, the Orthodox would agree with me on that assessment. Dr. Ortlund then goes on to say why Protestants like Luther, Calvin, and others, rejected purgatory. And, that they’re open to praying for the dead, but not other stuff that might go along with it, like Masses offered on behalf of the dead. Though, I don’t think most Protestants, modern Protestants, would even go that far. But, in any case, let’s get to the historical witnesses Dr. Ortlund covers.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
And, I’m going to put up a definition of the word accretion at the start here. Because, if you’ve been following my videos at all, you’re probably familiar with this word. According to Marian Webster, basically it means the process of growth or enlargement by a gradual buildup. Now, you’ll be familiar with this because many of my criticisms of aspects of non Protestant theology and other traditions, such as Roman Catholicism, are proposing that these things are accretions.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
I’ve made that proposal with respect to some of the Marian dogmas, for example. That is, the things that slowly build up along the way throughout church history, but that don’t authentically relate back to the apostolic deposit in the first century. And, it probably won’t be a surprise that I’m going to argue that purgatory is that. It’s an accretion. And, that’s actually one way of defining Protestantism. People often have a caricature as though it’s this idea of a new church starting off in the 16th century. Not at all.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
Protestantism is nothing other than the attempt to remove accretions. It is nothing other than the attempt to reform the ancient church. The one true church of Jesus Christ in line with Holy Scripture. And so, I’ve often argued that Protestantism is more lower case C Catholic, and it is better positioned to retain and cultivate catholicity by its very nature. And, I can say more about that some other time. I might do just a really short five minute overview of why I’m Protestant, trying to push against some of the caricatures of Protestantism that many people have.
Trent Horn:
I think by accretion, Dr. Ortlund is thinking of a kind of theological barnacle. Like how when you go boating, these little barnacles, they’ll attach to the hull of your boat. And, they don’t belong there. They’re not a part of the boat. So, you need to scrape them off. So, I think what Dr Ortlund wants to do is scrape off these doctrines of men, you might say, that have built up over time on the boat, the ark, the church that God originally intended.
Trent Horn:
Of course, I would reject the label of accretion when applied to something like the doctrine of purgatory. And, instead talk about development. Doctrine develops over time. And, in some cases of that development, we see that language is helpful and that language becomes more authoritative. And, in other cases, we see language describing doctrine is not helpful. And so, it just remains theological speculation. This should help us understand the development in purgatory, the doctrine of purgatory, over time in church history, so that when you strip away accretions, like popular pious legends about purgatory, when you strip them away, you’re not left with Dr. Ortlund’s view of immediate entry into Heaven for all believers. And, that will be clear as we examine the writings of the church fathers.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
I’m going to suggest purgatory is an accretion, but let me start by acknowledging the strength of the Catholic claim against me from church history. It is true, first of all, that the practice of praying for the dead is extremely common and extremely early. Second of all, one can also find wide usage of the language of cleansing, postmortem fire throughout church history. So, postmortem, meaning after you die, cleansing fire after you die. You can find that language a lot. And, it comes in relatively early on. At the same time, Catholic apologists often overstate the case here by ignoring all of the countervailing evidence. And then, second of all, by taking anything that sounds remotely like purgatory, any kind of language of cleansing fire, and glossing over all the differences and acting as though there’s this one singular idea that goes back to the beginning.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
And so, for example, if you Google church father’s purgatory, you can find website after website just amassing these patristic quotes that are purported to be in favor of purgatory. But, actually, if you read these quotes in context and you read them in light of what the author meant, what the church father meant, you see there’s an enormous variety of different ideas out there.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
So, I want to share my research with you. I want to walk through this, and I want to show you how, number one, praying for the dead and believing in purgatory are two distinct things that do not stand or fall together. We’ll come back to that a couple times. I want to show you how common is the tradition early on, and then continuing on in the East for some time of the belief that immediately upon death, the soul of a believer goes straight to Heaven to be with Christ. And, thirdly, I want to show you how complicated this development is of this idea of purgatory and how there’s not just one idea going on. What you have is so many different competing ideas that gradually slowly start to coalesce into a singular idea.
Trent Horn:
As we’ll see, it is correct that you can find in the patristic literature, prayer for all people after death. Those in Heaven, those being purified and even those in Hell. While it is the case that some prayer directed to the deceased was not meant to help them in purgatory, it doesn’t mean there were no prayers intended for that purpose. We can especially glean that from requests for prayer that are made by people before they’ve died. Like the requests for prayers that Bishop Abercius had inscribed on his tombstone in the year AD 167. That he’s seeking for prayer on his behalf, presumably to help him. So, prayer for the dead, it does make sense in many cases, if there is an intermediate state where the dead have a burden or they undergo some kind of trial. Now, Dr. Ortlund will bring up prayer to the dead later. So, I’ll save more of my comments on the nature of praying for the dead until that time.
Trent Horn:
Dr. Ortlund’s first issue with purgatory and the church fathers is that you can find references to purging or purifying fire very early in church history. But, he claims this is not necessarily a description of the classic doctrine of purgatory. But, remember just because an early Christian writer maybe held a minority view about how postmortem or post death purification works, they did not deny the concept of postmortem purification itself, including the idea that purification is tied up with punishment because of sin. So, to repeat what I said earlier, some of the fathers may have disagreed about how purgatory worked, but they all agreed purgatory did work.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
So, starting in here, among the earliest witnesses, I would propose in terms of the language, the earliest to speak of a cleansing fire in the afterlife would be Clement of Alexandria, and then his pupil, Origin. All over his biblical commentary’s, Origin will speak of a cleansing fire, purgatorial fire, the cleansing fire of Gehenna, and so forth. And, sometimes, we forget how massively influential Origin was. Because, he was so controversial, we forget how brilliant he was and how, especially in the immediate aftermath of his life, how significant and the influential he was.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
And so, then you’ll find various statements about cleansing fire in Lactantius and in Ambrose and in Jerome, and then in Augustine. And then, from Augustine through the influence of Gregory Great, that goes into the medieval era. As so much theology does of the medieval West, it’s Augustine through Gregory. But, when Origin speaks of purgatorial fire, he’s conceiving-
PART 1 OF 5 ENDS [00:34:04]
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
When Origen speaks of purgatorial fire, he’s conceiving of this as the destiny of every human being, not just imperfectly, purified Christians. He’s a universalist who thinks that everyone might be saved. He’s read differently. Some people think he believes that even the demons will go through the purgatorial fires. Satan himself will eventually be saved. Though I think it’s probably unlikely he believed that, but that’s contested. But when he’s speaking of this, it’s for every single person, and he has no awareness, to my knowledge, anywhere of our prayers or anything we do influencing those undergoing purgatorial cleansing in the afterlife.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
But yet you’ll still find, if you type in church father’s purgatory, you’ll go to these sites and find quotes from Origen included as though this were in line with purgatory and the differences in Origen’s thought and what purgatory is, are glossed over in that. And you can see how misleading that. That’s just one example of how the complexity is glossed over in a lot of the presentation of the evidence.
Trent Horn:
This would still be the essence of purgatory. Those who are not fit for heaven are made fit for heaven after death through purification. In his commentary on the Gospel of Luke, here is what Origen says. “If anyone desires to pass over to paradise after departing this life, and needs cleansing, Christ will baptize him in this river of fire,” he mentions earlier, “and send him across to the place he longs for. But whoever does not have the sign of earlier baptisms,” the unbaptized, “him Christ will not baptize in the fiery bath.” The only difference is that Origen seems to be affirming. Though, as Dr. Ortland notes, it’s not totally clear. Origen seems to be affirming that all people are purified of their sins in some way before they’re admitted into heaven. But even that’s not the case. Origen says that some people don’t need the fiery bath if they’re holy enough.
Trent Horn:
But if this is the case, Origen, he just gets it wrong about who goes to purgatory, but not the concept itself. And he certainly doesn’t affirm Dr. Ortland’s view of an immediate entry into heaven for everyone, for all Christians. Scholar Jacques [Lejoff 00:36:18] says something interesting though, about Origen’s view on the purifying fire of the afterlife. This is what he writes in his book The Birth of Purgatory. ” Though horribly painful, this punishment is not incompatible with Origen’s optimism. The more drastic the punishment, the more certain the salvation. In Origen’s thought, there is a feeling for the redemptive value of suffering that we do not encounter until the end of the Middle Ages, in the 15th century.”
Trent Horn:
Finally, most scholarly books that claim purgatory was invented. They’ll say that Origen was one of the inventors. They clearly link Origen with this doctrine. At this point, I’m really surprised that Dr. Ortland doesn’t discuss the witness of Clement of Alexandria, a church father who lived between the years 150 and 215. Late second, early third century.
Trent Horn:
Now he does mention Clement of Alexandria along with Origen, but Dr. Ortland never discusses what Clement of Alexandria actually had to say about purgatory. Because this is a very early church father who clearly endorses the doctrine of purgatory. Here is what Clement writes. Okay. Here we go. “Accordingly, the believer, through great discipline, divesting himself of the passions, passes to the mansion, which is better than the former one,” IE, his place in heaven, “to the greatest torment, taking with him the characteristic of repentance from the sins he has committed after baptism. He is tortured then still more. Not yet, or not quite, attaining what he sees others to have acquired. Besides, he is also ashamed of his transgressions. The greatest torments, indeed, are assigned to the believer. For God’s righteousness is good, and his goodness is righteous. And though the punishments cease in the course of the completion of the expiration and purification of each one, yet those have very great and permanent grief who are found worthy of the other fold, on account of not being along with those that have been glorified through righteousness.”
Trent Horn:
Here we have an early third century, maybe late second century, witness to the essential elements of purgatory that some believers will experience purifying punishment in the afterlife because of their sins, to make them fit for heaven. This is a conclusion that many Protestant scholars have also arrived at concerning Clement. For example, Carl Olson is a Protestant who has done great work refuting Calvinism. This is what he writes about Clement of Alexandria on the doctrine of purgatory. He writes, “Clement conceived of two types of sinners, incorrigible ones, and those who can be corrected. The incorrigible sinner needs punishment, whereas the latter type of sinner can benefit from learning. Clement imagined an afterlife where the incorrigible was destroyed by fire. While the correctable sinner experienced a fire that sanctifies and does not consume.”
Trent Horn:
Isabella Morera says Clement of Alexandria, “argued that the soul would be purged in the afterlife by two types of fires, the educational fire that corrected the corrigible, and the punitive fire that devoured the incorrigible.”
Trent Horn:
Jerry Walls, who I mentioned earlier, he defends a Protestant version of purgatory. He summarizes Lejoff’s scholarship in the book The Birth of Purgatory. And Walls writes the following. “The two fathers of the church, who have been called the founders of purgatory,” one’s an ecclesial writer, not a father, “are both Greek theologians. Namely, Clement of Alexandria and Origen.” Origen’s ecclesial writer, not a church father. But Wall says that this is ironic given that purgatory is considered primarily a Western Latin doctrine of the church. But its roots, and I would say its first explicit witnesses, are two Eastern writers.
Trent Horn:
Finally, father Brian Daley is a patristic scholar Dr. Ortland will speak highly of here in the next section. Father Daley says this regarding Clement of Alexandria. “In this consistent interpretation of all punishment, including punishment after death, as purification rather than retribution, Clement can be considered the first Christian exponent of the doctrine of purgatorial eschatological suffering.”
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
Let me start with Cyprian, because he’s another third century, so very early on figure who’s often mis-cited as a proponent of purgatory. People will quote a statement in his Letter 51 that references purgatorial fire. But if you read it in context, he’s not talking about the afterlife. He’s talking about the penitential discipline of the church in this life. Not something postmortem for the individual. You can see what Cyprian thinks will, so that’s another one of those quotes. You’ll find that quote from Letter 51 on these websites, and it’s misleading people.
Trent Horn:
This explanation of Cyprian’s writings can actually be found in a few 19th century works that are critical of Catholicism. For example, one Anglican bishop replied to John Henry Cardinal Newman by saying this. “Cyprian, in one instance, used words which might be taken in favor of purgatory, but which are more commonly understood of the severity of ancient penance.’ Now, some modern scholars also take this view, but not all of them. It’s defended, for example, I think the earliest modern defender I found was Pierre Jay in his 1960 article, written in French, Saint Cyprien la doctrine du purgatoire. Hope I pronounced that right. But not all scholars hold this view. Chase [Machen 00:42:14], in his dissertation on the concept of purgatory in England writes this. “Cyprian seems to indicate a third place, other than heaven or hell, in which the recently deceased repose themselves. He also seems to indicate that while in this location, their sins might be purged away with some form of fire.
Trent Horn:
Now, before I share some other scholarly opinion on Cyprian related to this matter, let’s just read the passage in question. But knowing first, before we read it, the context. Cyprian is writing about those who would say that people who fell away from the faith, what are called the lapsee, they can’t be readmitted to the sacraments. These people say that if you do that, if you readmit people who fell away from the faith, people can just fall away all the time. They’ll leave the faith and just come back to confession whenever they feel like it. It’ll create moral laxity, or you’re not going to care anymore. But Cyprian disagrees.
Trent Horn:
Here’s what he says. “For two adulterers, even a time of repentance is granted by us. And peace is given. Yet virginity is not therefor deficient in the church, nor does the glorious design of continents languish through the sins of others. It is one thing to stand for pardon, another thing to attain glory. It is one thing when cast into prison, not to go out thence until one has paid the uttermost farthing,” which is a coin, “another thing at once to receive the wages of faith and courage. It is one thing, tortured by long suffering for sins, to be cleansed and long purged by fire, another to have purged all sins by suffering. It is one thing, in fine, to be in suspense till the sentence of God at the day of judgment. Another to be at once crown by the Lord.”
Trent Horn:
Notice, at the end, Cyprian compares the different faiths of two groups, the imperfect lapsed who fell away and came back, who will be saved, and the holy unlapsed, those who never fell away, who will also be saved. He says, let’s repeat. “It is one thing when cast into prison not to go out thence until one has paid the uttermost farthing. Another thing at once to receive the wages of faith and courage.”
Trent Horn:
Not going out until you’ve paid the last farthing, that is a reference to Matthew Chapter 5:25-26, where Jesus says this. “Make friends quickly with your accuser while you are going with him to court, lest your accuser hand you over to the judge, and the judge to the guard, and you be put in prison. Truly. I say to you, you will never get out till you have paid the last penny.” Now, many Catholics have seen this as a reference to purgatory. And when we get to Cyril of Alexandria, you’ll see this again in Luke’s gospel, that he comments on this particular teaching of Jesus. “But if all believers immediately enter into heaven to be with Christ,” Dr. Ortland’s view, “regardless of their personal holiness, then what are they waiting in suspense for? It doesn’t make sense.”
Trent Horn:
Theologian Andreas Merck says this in his article Before the Birth of Purgatory. He says that Cyprian is saying that martyrdom is still better than being a lapsed Catholic who comes back, because the lapsed have to be purified. Here’s what Merck writes. “The logic is obvious. Martyrdom is definitely more attractive than apostasy. In contrast to the martyr who is rewarded very soon, the lapsee has to put up with severe discomfort, not just the process of penitence in church. Which, compared to martyrdom, appears rather insignificant. But appalling suffering after death, purification through fire. Purgatory. This Cyprian seems to regard purgatory as some ed continuation of penance. The penitential discipline of the church, therefore, provides the model for purgatory.”
Trent Horn:
That’s why even though the church readmits those who fall away, it is far better when you’re in that opportunity to deny the faith, it’s far better to choose martyrdom, seeing what will happen if you deny Christ in that situation. I think all of the shows that what Cyprian says here makes more sense under a framework of postmortem purification. Though I will say, also, the idea that you have to do penance at all in any form after you’ve sinned, that is completely removed from the theology that Dr. Ortland is suggesting, which so far we haven’t seen in any of these texts.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
What Cyprian actually believes about the afterlife, what happens to a Christian when they die, you can find in many passages. A good example is in his 11th treatise to Fortunatus. At the very end of it, section 13, he’s talking about how since Paul went to heaven, Paul can give us true comfort when he says that the sufferings of the present time are not worth being compared to the glory that is coming. And he continues. “Who then does not, with all his powers, labor to attain to such a glory, that he may become the friend of God, that he at once rejoice with Christ. That after earthly tortures and punishments, he may receive divine rewards. What a dignity it is, and what a security, to go gladly from hence to depart gloriously in the midst of affliction and tribulations. In a moment to close the eyes with which men in the world are looked upon, and at once to open them to look upon God and Christ. Of such a blessed departure, how great is the swiftness? You shall be suddenly taken away from earth to be placed in the heavenly kingdoms.”
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
Here’s how Eleazar Gonzalez puts it in his study on this. Quote, “Cyprian is clearly referring to the immediate presence of the deceased in heaven with God. It must be conceded the passages in the general context of martyrdom. However, Daley is probably correct that Cyprian is also referring to the experience of all the righteous dead. This view is supported by the fact that the specific requirements for the immediate entry into paradise upon death, as specified by Cyprian, are not martyrdom. But rather an unspoiled faith and unharmed virtue of mind.”
Trent Horn:
I appreciate that. Dr. Ortland includes the note that Dr. Gonzalez makes. Because, in the passage, it is very clear that Cyprian is comparing martyrs to soldiers. He’s talking about soldiers rejoicing and returning home from battle. The same thing as true of martyrs. Here’s what it says after this passage. “If persecution should fall upon such a soldier of God, his virtue, prompt for battle, will not be able to be overcome. Or if his call should come to him before, his faith shall not be without reward. Seeing it was prepared for martyrdom without loss of time, the reward is rendered by the judgment of God. In persecution, the warfare. In peace, the purity of conscience is crown.”
Trent Horn:
They sought immediate entry into heaven because they’re martyrs or would-be martyrs. Also, we shouldn’t fall into the trap of thinking that every Christian goes to purgatory. That’s not true. The church has always held that martyrs go straight to heaven, and also people who die unattached to sin, that you can achieve saintly holiness in this life. So, whether they’re martyrs or virtuous, holy Christians, they go to be with Christ immediately. Some go to be with Christ immediately, others are purified after death because they still have an attachment to sin. Dr. Ortland will do this a lot, references to some Christians, immediately entering into heaven, does not prove every single Christian does that.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
There’s other passages like this in his On Mortality. In chapter 22 he’s talking about how if we have faith in Christ, we will reign forever in Christ. And he locates that as starting right upon death. Quote, “As to the fact that meanwhile we die, we pass by death to immortality. Nor can eternal life seed unless it has befallen us to depart from here. This is not an end but a passage, and the journey of time being traversed, a crossing over to eternity. We would not hasten to better things. Who would not pray to be more quickly changed and reformed to the image of Christ, and to the dignity of heavenly grace? He who is to come to the abode of Christ, to the glory of the heavenly kingdom, ought not to grieve and mourn. But rather, in accordance with the promise of the Lord, in accordance with faith and the truth, to rejoice in this departure and translation.”
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
There’s many other passages to this effect. For example, in his Epistle 55, and I could give a few others. There’s even, in his To Dimitrianus, chapter 25, he says, “This life is the only shot you have at repentance because there is no satisfaction for sins in the next life.” I’m going to say that Cyprian is representative of the early Christian view, and I’ll document that in a second, that for the Christian to die, is a happy thing that sends you straight to heaven to be with Jesus.
Trent Horn:
First saying we only have this life to repent and accept God’s offer of salvation. That doesn’t contradict the existence of a purgatorial state. Because the traditional doctrine of purgatory holds that the process of purification is only for believers. As Dr. Ortland said, “Purgatory is not a second chance to get into heaven.” Second, Cyprian’s teaching on reigning with Christ. That’s meant to be an uplifting exhortation to people who were scared of dying in the midst of a plague. Even today, you’ll hear priests talk about not fearing death, because we’ll go to be with Christ. But they don’t add an asterisk and say, every time they mention death and our reward in heaven, “Oh, and by the way, you’ll probably go to purgatory first.” Sometimes they mention purgatory. But many times we talk about going to heaven. We don’t mention purgatory but we still believe even it, so we cannot infer the absence of a reference to purgatory in the fathers, to the same thing as a denial of purgatory.
Trent Horn:
Finally, one modern view of purgatory can help bridge the gap between the traditional understanding of going to be with Christ after death, and of being purified of sin after death. That would be the view that the fire of purgatory that purifies us is Christ himself, so we do go to meet Christ after death and he purifies us. Pope Benedict the 16th talked about this, and he said it was necessary to develop our understanding of purgatory because the excessive focus on penance in the Middle Ages had taken away the Easter joy that Christians should have when contemplating death.
Trent Horn:
He offers one of these developments in his encyclical [Latin 00:53:17], which this thought actually goes back to many ancient Eastern views about how God’s fiery love reaches everyone equally, but it affects people unequally based on how they are disposed to God. He writes, “Some recent theologians are of the opinion that the fire which both burns and saves, is Christ himself. The judge and savior. The encounter with him is the decisive act of judgment. Before his gaze, all falsehood melts away. His, Christ’s gaze. The touch of his heart heals us through an undeniably painful transformation, as through fire. But it is a blessed pain, in which the holy power of his love sears through us like a flame. Enabling us to become totally ourselves and thus totally of God.”
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
Okay. You find all over the language of rest and triumph and so forth, associated with a believer’s death. You can see this early on among the apostolic fathers. It’s not crystal clear. There’s not a lot of evidence we’re getting, but you can see Clement, for example, first epistle of Clement, late first century, talking about Paul and Peter as departing to the place of glory, to the holy place. You see the same language among the apostolic fathers for Polycarp as having attained the crown of immortality. Someone could say, “Well, of course them because they’re martyrs, so they’re going to go to heaven.” But you also have Justin Martyr in his first apology, chapter 14, speaking of all of those who live by the precepts of Christ as having the joyful hope of a reward from God.
Trent Horn:
I find it a little odd that Dr. Ortland introduces evidence from Clement and Polycarp, only to then immediately dismiss it. It seems clear to me that these are accounts of martyrs immediately entering into heaven, so that provides no evidence against the doctrine of purgatory because we’d expect martyrs to go straight to heaven. As for Justin Martyr, he writes, in the first part of his apology, about Christians loving their enemies. Okay. But I don’t see how this is evidence against purgatory. Justin is not saying anything about there being no purification after death. He doesn’t say every Christian is immediately brought into God’s presence in heaven upon their death. Once again, there is no contradiction in believing that some people are purified after death, and that Christians as a whole have a joyful reward of heaven waiting for them after they die. Some are just purified and some aren’t. But everybody has that reward that is waiting for them.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
Philip Schaff has documented how the tomb inscriptions, what they had in that ante-Nicene period, that first period of church history, and he talks about them as having a prevailingly cheerful tone because regularly the language for deceased believers is in peace, or living with Christ, or in God, and language like this on the tombs. Yes, they were being prayed. I’ll come back to that. But, the consistent expectation early on seems to be when a believer dies they go to be with Christ in heaven. I’m not aware of anything in that initial stage among the apostolic fathers first century, early second century, that is any diversity on that.
Trent Horn:
Most Catholic headstones and tombstones today, they say rest in peace, be with God. Most Catholics will have that written on a headstone, even though they and their family believe in purgatory. The fact that someone may be purified after death does not mean that they don’t have a certain peace that comes with knowing they can never lose their salvation since they died in God’s friendship. In his book The Early Church in the Light of the Monuments, a study in Christian archeology, Arthur Barnes puts it this way. This is what he writes. “We should hardly expect to find in a cemetery, such as are the ancient Roman catacombs, any clear statement of belief in the pains of purgatory. There can be no doubt as to the belief of modern Catholics on that subject. And yet a visit to a Catholic cemetery of the present time, and a study of epitaphs inscribed on the graves, will hardly supply us even with an illusion to the subject of purgatory.
Trent Horn:
“The thoughts of the living with regard to the dead express themselves in two ways. They realize that the dead have need of their prayers, so they arrange masses to be said, and prayers to be offered, on their behalf.” These are the ancient Roman catacombs’ epitaphs. “But they remember also that although for a time suffering may be needed by the souls of the dead in order that they made thus attain greater happiness. Yet those souls are already in peace, that the trial is over, and the goal attained, and that therefore words of joy and of hope are most appropriate upon their last resting places.”
Trent Horn:
Second, I looked at the epitaphs that Schaff describes in his work that Dr. Ortland cites, I noticed a commonality among some of those that spoke of people, Christians, resting in peace. Let me read them to you. Here’s a few of them.
Trent Horn:
To pastor, a good and innocent son, who lived four years, five months, and 26 days.
Trent Horn:
Saint Basila, we [Christentius 00:58:48] and Messina, commend to thee our daughter, [Cressentina 00:58:51], who lived 10 months.
Trent Horn:
[Matronata 00:58:55] Matrona, who lived a year and 52 days. Pray for thy parents.
Trent Horn:
[Anatolius 00:59:01] made this for his well-deserving son who lived seven years, seven months, and 20 days. May they spirit rest well in God. Pray for thy sister.
Trent Horn:
To [Polinus 00:59:13], a neophyte in peace, who lived eight years.
Trent Horn:
These are children, and even infants, who we would not expect them to need purification after. They don’t have to be purified. However, they’re still considered capable of praying for us. Now, other epitaphs, they do have the ages and titles of adults. But it’s in these where we find requests for refreshment of the soul. We don’t find those requests for children, neophytes, people described as virgins when they died. I’ll talk about what refreshment for the soul means a little bit later. But this does not deny the reality of postmortem purification.
Trent Horn:
Presumably, those other people, however, they don’t need refreshment, like neophytes, children, because they’ve immediately gone to heaven. They were children, they’re recently baptized, or they lived a life of committed holiness, like maintaining of our virginity their whole life. This could be different in other inscriptions because the Schaff collection is pretty dated, but I find it to be an interesting observation. Otherwise, these epitaphs, they don’t provide any evidence against the doctrine of purgatory. They provide evidence instead, that departed Christians, people believed that they can help us because they’re aware of our trials. We can ask them to pray for us, and we can help them because we know of the trials they may undergo in being purified and being prepared for heaven. Once again, I want to underscore this point because it’s so important, these ancient epitaphs, just because they don’t mention purgatory, says nothing about whether those people believed in purgatory. Because modern Catholic tombstones don’t mention purgatory, and modern Catholics believe in purgatory. So it’s just not a very good argument.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
Now it does get interesting as you get into the late second century. Another supposed early proponent of purgatory that I’m going to show is not a proponent of purgatory, is Tertullian. Tertullian is one of a number of figures who does believe in some kind of postmortem waiting place. Now, by the way, I told you it’s complicated. This is going to get so fascinating and so interesting and so complicated. I know we’re already 40 minutes in and I still got a lot more to go, but I hope you’re with me, because it’s so interesting seeing how this develops. It’s so relevant, you know?
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
The postmodern place that Tertullian talks about, and I’ll try to just make the main points and keep it moving here, is not purgatory. It’s called the bosom of Abraham. Which, this is how he calls it, this is the language from Luke 16:22 where there’s the poor righteous man in the parable with Lazarus who’s taken to the side of Abraham. In this tradition of thought, Abraham’s bosom is understood to be a division of Hades. Hades is the realm of the dead where everybody goes to await the final resurrection. The bosom of Abraham is the happy part of Hades. You’re waiting there, but it’s a happy be place of refreshment and rest and consolation and comfort and triumph and victory and joy and blessedness and so forth. You see that in Tertullian. You see this in Inrenaeus. Irenaeus is less clear on it, but it’s very clear in Hippolytus.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
For example, if you want to look this up a bit, Tertullian’s On the Soul, chapters 55 to 58. He says, “every soul goes to Hades, but those who are righteous in Hades,” it’s a place of consolation and blessedness. In other writings, and he’s against Marciani. He calls it an interim refreshment between death and the resurrection. You’re refreshed there if you’re righteous.
Trent Horn:
Notice that we still aren’t getting early historical evidence for the alternative view Dr. Ortland proposes? Which is that all believers are immediately united to Christ after death. Instead, Tertullian describes souls being in a resting place, where they’re affected in a variety of ways. In chapter 58 of On the Soul, Tertullian references Matthew 5:26. Remember this? “Make friends quickly with your accuser while you’re going with him to court, less your accuser hand you over to the judge, and the judge to the guard, and you be put in prison. Truly, I say to you, you will never get out till you have paid the last penny.” Now, Tertullian is disputing a Gnostic heretic named Carpocrates, who said the prison that Christ was speaking about in this passage is the human body, so the soul needs to be freed from the body.
Trent Horn:
Tertullian rejects this a neo-platonic view. He says, no, the body’s not the prison. The prison is a place for the soul after death. Here’s what he says. “It is therefore quite in-keeping with this order of things that that part of our nature, our soul, should be the first to have the recompense and reward to which they are due on account of its priority. In short, in as much as we understand the prison pointed out in the gospel to be Hades, in Matthew 5:25, and as we also interpret the uttermost farthing, the coin we must pay, to mean the very smallest offense, which has to be recompensed before the resurrection. No one will hesitate to believe that the soul undergoes, in Hades, some compensatory discipline without prejudice to the full process of the resurrection, when the recompense will be administered through the flesh besides.”
Trent Horn:
Scholar Andreas Merck says this about Tertullian’s dispute with the heretic Marcion. And there he cites Luke 12:58-59. That’s the parallel passage to Matthew 5:26, talking about paying the last penny, or the last might, the last coin, to get out of prison. This is what Merck writes. “Tertullian interprets the prison as the other world. And the very last might as even smallest misconduct a person has to atone for in the other world. Here we see Tertullian’s version of purgatory. God may forgive guilt out of mercy, but he does not free mankind from the punishment for their sins. Penitents cannot escape this punishment. Yet, it can be mitigated by the livings, intercessions, and offering of the mass. Tertullian, and the Latin tradition as such, seem to regard purgatory as a place of punishment mainly.”
Trent Horn:
What’s interesting is that Pope Benedict the 16th, references Tertullian, and shows how the doctrine of purgatory has developed beyond Tertullian’s early understanding of it. This is what he wrote as Cardinal Ratzinger in his book Eschatology. “Purgatory is not, as Tertullian thought, some kind of super-worldly concentration camp, where one is forced to undergo punishments in a more or less arbitrary fashion. Rather, it is the inwardly necessary process of transformation in which a person becomes capable of Christ, capable of God, or capable of full unity, being fully united with Christ in God.”
Trent Horn:
Tertullian also mentions the practice of making offerings for the dead. These are long-held traditions that he references. They’re not novelties. He cites a specific example of a widow who, quote, “prays for her husband’s soul and requests refreshment,” in Latin, refrigeria, “for him meanwhile, and fellowship with him in the first resurrection.” She offers her sacrifice on the anniversaries of his falling asleep. Now, some Protestant apologists claim that prayers for refreshment, like the one Tertullian describes, it’s only asking God to increase the happiness of the saved. But that goes beyond what we can confidently say about this term.
Trent Horn:
Gonzalez says, quote, “the meaning of the term is quite vague, and it is largely unknown in the classical Latin literature.” One clue to the meaning of refreshment, or at least the idea of refreshment, can be found in an apocryphal work, the passion of saints Perpetua and Felicity, which records the martyrdom of Saint Perpetua. It was probably written by her, though another editor compiled the work after her death. So, in one part of the passion of Saint Perpetua, Perpetua prays for her dead brother Dinocrites. He died at the age of seven. She then has a vision of him. She writes, “For him, I had made my prayer. And between him and me, there was a large interval so that neither of us could approach to the other. And moreover, in the same place where Dinocites was, there was a pool full of water, having its brink higher than was the stature of the boy. Democrities raised himself up as if to drink. I was grieved that although that pool held water, still, on account of the height to brink, he could not drink. And I was upset and-”
PART 2 OF 5 ENDS [01:08:04]
Trent Horn:
… drink, he could not drink. I was upset and knew that my brother was in suffering, but I trusted that my prayer would bring help to his suffering. Then, on the day in which we remained in fetters, in chains, guarded, this was shown to me.
Trent Horn:
I saw that, that place which I had formally observed to be in gloom was now bright, and denocraties with a clean body while Clad was finding refreshment. Where there had been a wound, I saw a scar. That pool which I had before seen, I saw now with its margin lowered even to the boy’s naval.
Trent Horn:
One drew water from the pool incessantly and upon its brink, was a goblet filled with water and denocraties drew near and began to drink from it and the goblet did not fail. When he was satisfied, he went away from the water to play joyously after the manner of children. I awoke.
Trent Horn:
Then I understood that he was translated from the place of punishment. Other scholars have noted that this provides evidence for the antiquity of the doctrine of purgatory, even if it’s expressed in different ways.
Trent Horn:
Jan Bremmer in his study of the Acts of Paul and Thecla, which I’ll discuss that other work shortly. He agrees with Jacques Le Goff the author of The Birth of Purgatory another book on purgatory. In saying this episode is the prayer request for the dead made in the Acts of Paul and Thecla. I quote “In both cases, we can see the early contours of purgatory.”
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
Irenaeus and against Heresies 5.31.1 talks about how basically he says, because Jesus was buried and then raised, Christians have to go to Hades and then, but he doesn’t say it’s a place of torment. It’s not purgatory, it’s just a waiting place.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
He just calls it an invisible place, allotted to them by God where you’re just anticipating the final resurrection. You’re waiting for that. Let me read you the clear description of this. It’s a longer passage, but it’s so interesting.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
It’s by Hippolytus of Rome, who’s often dated to the late second century or early third century, although sometimes that’s disputed. This is from the very beginning of his against Plato and the cause of the universe. I’m going to read this, just try to imagine what this looks like.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
He says the very beginning of it he says, “But now we must speak of Hades in which the souls, both of the righteous and the unrighteous are detained.” He goes on to describe this as a place of darkness under the earth, a guardhouse station, but it’s happy for the righteous and unhappy for the unrighteous.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
Quote “For to this locality, there is one descent at the gate where of we believe an arch angel is stationed with a host. And when those who are conducted by the angels appointed unto the souls have passed through this gate, they do not proceed on one and the same way.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
But the righteous being conducted in the light towards the right, are being hymned by the angels stationed at the place are brought to a locality full of light. And they’re the righteous from the beginning dwell not ruled by necessity, but enjoying always the contemplation of the blessings, which are in their view and delighting themselves with the expectation of others ever knew.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
And deeming those things better than these and that place brings no toils to them. There is neither fierce heat nor cold nor thorn, but the face of the fathers and the righteous is seen to be always smiling as they wait for their rest and eternal revival in heaven, which succeed this location. We call it by the name Abraham’s bosom.”
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
He goes on a great deal about that. This broad idea that the righteous go to Hades so that everybody goes to Hades at death, but it’s basically anticipatory of what you will get after the final resurrection.
Trent Horn:
First, Irenaeus’s anti gnostic message, it actually cuts against the point Dr. Ortlund is making. The Lutheran theologian Hans Schwartz writes in the Protestant collection, Christian Dogmatics in volume two of Christian Dogmatics.
Trent Horn:
He writes this, he writes that Irenaeus’s statement contains the concept of an abode or purgatory, in which the souls of the dead remains until the universal resurrection. Irenaeus wanted to reject the gnostic idea that at the end of this earthly life, the soul immediately ascends to its heavenly abode.
Trent Horn:
It was important for the early fathers to assert that there was no rectilinear or no straight line ascent to God. At this time in church history, we see that gnostic heretics, they’re the ones who are saying that the soul it’s imprisoned in the body, the body’s not important. We want to get the soul to heaven as fast as possible.
Trent Horn:
Faithful Christians they push back against this claim, even though they do acknowledge that you can immediately enter into heaven in special cases like with the martyrs. So Irenaeus though doesn’t agree with the gnostics, and his statement about all this, it doesn’t tell us anything good or bad about the waiting period for the soul.
Trent Horn:
It’s not useful as evidence for or against purgatory. However, it does count against their being an early witness for Dr. Ortlund’s view, that all Christians enjoy immediate access to heaven after death. It certainly counts against that view.
Trent Horn:
Second, we should be careful with these early writers. We don’t want to conflate Hades or the underworld with purgatory itself, as if that they were identical terms or not. Instead, they seem to believe in a unique topography of the underworld. You have Hades the underworld, there’s more pleasant areas, less pleasant areas.
Trent Horn:
The less pleasant areas are reserved for people who commit worse sins and thus suffer more punishment during this interval after death. In her study of Purgatory in Late Antiquity, Isabel Moreira says this, “The relationship of purgatory’s fire to this waiting place remained unclear, even in those later works.”
Trent Horn:
Now it’s true there’s some ambiguity related to the geography of the afterlife at this stage in Christian thought. But we can see evidence of the belief that some parts of the afterlife are not pleasant, because one is sinned and the prayers made by the living can help the dead in those places.
Trent Horn:
The apocryphal acts of Paul and Thecla that I mentioned earlier, it’s been dated to around AD160. It describes how a Virgin named Thecla is taken in by a queen named Tryphaena. This queen has a dream about her deceased daughter.
Trent Horn:
The daughter is named Phalconilia or Phalconila. She tells her mother, the queen mother, you shall have this stranger Thecla in my place, in order that she may pray concerning me and that I may be transferred to the place of the just. This is the queen’s dead daughter, telling her in a dream bring in Thecla so she can pray for me.
Trent Horn:
The modern scholar Corinazonfa for makes the following observation in the anthology published by Brill, Other Worlds and Their Relation to This World: Early Jewish and Ancient Christian Traditions. Quote, “The acts of Paul and Thecla is one of the earliest Christian witnesses, attesting to the emergence of what is to become the purgatory.”
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
It becomes a very common view. It rumbles on in the East certain trajectories of the Eastern tradition. That even after the official acceptance of purgatory in the West, in the medieval era, this is one of the views that’s proposed as one of the alternatives to that.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
Marinis’s book Death and the Afterlife in Byzantium, narrates how Mark Eugenicus who is a 15th century Bishop of Ephesus, argues that both the righteous and the unrighteous enter into this intermediate state after death. They’re just awaiting their rewards or their punishments.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
He says basically, no one suffer. So much in reaction, there’s so much resistance in the East to the Western conception of purgatory that for him, the unrighteous aren’t really even undergoing any punishments.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
Here’s how Marinis pus it. He says, “And while sinners agonize over their fate and suffer from the memory of their sins, they are not subjected to external punishments.” Interestingly Eugenicus emits any mention of the provisional judgment, fearing perhaps that it may appear too similar to the purgatory of his Western colleagues.
Trent Horn:
When Dr. Ortlund says Mark of Ephesus, believe the unrighteous dead do not suffer, or they don’t undergo any punishments he’s incorrect. However, the scholar that he quotes, who says that Mark did not believe that the unrighteous underwent external punishments like being subject to fire, the scholar he quoted is right about that.
Trent Horn:
But that doesn’t mean that for Mark of Ephesus, there were no internal punishments in the afterlife, because of unrepented sin. Mark denies the existence of purgatorial fire similar to other Eastern Orthodox. That’s not a part of the teaching of purgatory anyways, that the church is defined, but Mark of Ephesus does say the following in one of his homilies, this is what he writes.
Trent Horn:
But if souls have departed this life in faith and love, while nevertheless carrying away with themselves certain faults, whether small ones over which they have not repented at all or great ones, for which even though they have repented over them, they did not undertake to show fruits of repentance, such souls we believe must be cleansed from this kind of sins.
Trent Horn:
But not by means of some purgatorial fire or a definite punishment in some place. For this as we have said has not at all been handed down to us. The church didn’t define this either. But some must be cleansed in the very departure from the body, thanks only to fear.
Trent Horn:
As St. Gregory the dialogist literally shows, while others must be cleansed after the departure from the body, either while remaining in the same earthly place before they come to worship God and are honored with the law of the blessed. Or if their sins were more serious and bind them for a longer duration, they are kept in Hades.
Trent Horn:
But not in order to remain forever in fire and torment, but as it were in prison and confinement under guard. All such ones we affirm are helped by the prayers and literacies performed for them, with the cooperation of the divine goodness and love for mankind.
Trent Horn:
St. Mark of Ephesus offering late medieval Eastern Orthodox view in his history of the early Orthodox church, Steven Morris writes the following. In his response to the Latins about purgatory, Mark wrote that the punishments of the dead was internal, not external.
Trent Horn:
The dead suffered from sadness, conscious shame and remorse, as well as their uncertainty about their future. According to Mark, even the biblical descriptions of eternal fire and worms and hell were to be taken as allegories, rather than as descriptions of external punishments and suffering.
Trent Horn:
What we see here is that Mark of Ephesus is someone who believes that all of God’s punishments are brought about through the internal torment of the soul, rather than any external power, like a purgatorial fire. This would mean punishment of the soul of the saved person for unrepented sins would have that same character for Mark of Ephesus.
Trent Horn:
This is what he writes. Therefore, we see no necessity whatever, for any other punishment or for a cleansing fire. For some are cleansed by fear while others are devoured by the nodding of conscience with more torment than any fire. Still, others are cleansed only the very terror before the divine glory and the uncertainty as to what the future will be.
Trent Horn:
This is much more tormenting and punishing than anything else, experience itself shows. While this supports the scholarly citation Dr. Ortlund mentioned, it does not support his oversimplification of Mark of Ephesus’s views on the matter, and many other Eastern Orthodox at that time even now.
Trent Horn:
It shows there was not a wide division between Catholics and Orthodox on purgatory, may disagree on the how and the specifics, but they all agree on postmortem purification because of unrepented sin.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
Already hopefully you’re already seeing just how preposterous this idea is when people claim, everybody believed in purgatory, when in fact there were huge massive divisions over this issue. One of the emphasis of Marinis’s book is just how incredibly diverse the patristic testimonies are on this topic.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
You can see this at the Council of Florence in the 15th century, where there’s this an attempt at reunion between the Roman Catholic church and the Eastern Orthodox. One of the main points of dispute in the deliberations, is purgatory along with the Fele Oak way and the papacy.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
This is one of the dividing lines between East and West. During the deliberations, the Roman Catholic theologians go first and recount their view of purgatory and the Eastern Orthodox respond. I’ll put up on the screen an article you can read online that summarizes those proceedings if you’re interested.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
But essentially, the Eastern Orthodox representatives were saying that our fathers, the Greek fathers didn’t believe in this with the exception of Gregory of Nyssa. His views were controversial because like Origin, he appears, most people read him as a universalist as saying, this purgatorial fires for everybody and Origin’s views were very controversial at that time.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
Basically the Orthodox representatives are saying no, this is not the Eastern tradition. Whether they’re right or wrong, they were making that claim. Again, saying everybody believed in purgatory is just massively wrong, massively wrong. This was a dividing issue within the church.
Trent Horn:
What was disputed at the Council of Florence between Catholics and Orthodox, was not postmortem purification itself, but specific elements of the Western doctrine of purgatory. Whether purgatory is a specific place or whether there’s a purgatorial fire that literally exists.
Trent Horn:
This is noted in the very article from St. Vladimir’s Theological Quarterly that Dr. Ortlund cited in his video. This is what it says. The Greeks have not found among any of their doctors, a belief in temporary expiration accomplished by fire after this life.
Trent Horn:
Concerning the patristic text, which the Latins offer in support of their position, none of the Greeks contest the view of Daimaceous, Epiphanius and John Damascene, that the prayers of the church aid the departed in the remission of certain sins.
Trent Horn:
Even in the East, from Clement of Alexandria, through Mark of Ephesus and beyond even to today, we have Orthodox belief in postmortem purification from sin, that results in suffering.
Trent Horn:
It’s not pleasant, even if we might disagree with Eastern Orthodox about the language we would use to describe this postmortem purification. I agree that the blanket phrase, everybody believed in purgatory, it can be problematic because the word purgatory can mean different things to different people.
Trent Horn:
However, a lot of the disputes between the Western and the Eastern church, they often come down to whether certain semantic differences can be overcome. That don’t necessarily reflect these insurmountable unfixable, theological divisions.
Trent Horn:
Sometimes you could just leave them alone and let each group sort it out as they see fit on matters of doctrine the church has not defined. For example, in 1596, the reunion treaty of Brest, brought the Orthodox Ruthenian church back into communion with the Catholic church.
Trent Horn:
Article five of that treaty simply says this, we shall not debate about purgatory. A lot of the problems between the East and the West on this issue, they dealt with things like the Latin name purgatory, or the nature of a postmortem punishment being extrinsic or external to the soul, rather than being internal. Or the Western medieval calculations on how many days certain sinners might have spent in purgatory.
Trent Horn:
These disputes have helped Catholics to see what is and is not essential to the doctrine of purgatory. For example, describing indulgences as sparing someone a certain number of days of penance, is no longer done because it was confusing to people.
Trent Horn:
Here’s how my colleague Catholic apologist Jimmy Akin how he explains it. This is a notion Dr. Ortlund mentioned earlier in the video days one might spend in purgatory and indulgences. Here’s how Jimmy describes the change and talking about this.
Trent Horn:
The number of days that were attached to indulgences were not understood as shortening time in purgatory, but as easing the purification after death, by an amount analogous to the shortening of an earthly penitential period by the number of days indicated.
Trent Horn:
But because some people were confused by thinking purgatory was shortened by a set number of days with an indulgence, the church abolished the day figures attached to indulgences, specifically to eliminate this confusion.
Trent Horn:
It wasn’t about literal days, it was about reducing punishment and purgatory equal to days on earth. Jimmy then says that medieval theologians, they believe that time passed differently in the afterlife.
Trent Horn:
He says, “Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger no theological liberal writes that purgatory may involve existential rather than temporal duration. It’s in his book Eschatology. It maybe someone’s experiences, but experiences in a moment rather than something one endures over time.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
You’ll find Lactantius an early figure after Origin, who talks about a divine fire on the judgment day, that will restore everything that it consumes, really interesting. But he depicts everybody as passing through this and it happens at the end of history at the judgment day, not at an individual person’s death.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
He insists that everybody goes through it, but it’s only painful for those whose evil deeds outweigh their good deeds. He says, “Everyone else will not be harmed by it, because they will have in them something of God which repels and rejects the power of the flame.”
Trent Horn:
Notice we still don’t have immediate unification with Christ for every believer Dr. Ortlund’s view. We have purification and the effects of God’s judgment upon believers. But this description we’ve heard can make it sound like Lactantius was a universalist, even though he does not see the fire as something that restores everyone to God universalism.
Trent Horn:
Instead, for Lactantius the fire only does this to help the damned be tortured forever. Here’s what he writes, because they have committed sins in their bodies, they will again be clothed with flesh that they may make atonement in their bodies.
Trent Horn:
Yet it will not be that flesh with which God clothed man like this our earthly body, but indestructible and abiding forever. That it may be able to hold out against tortures and everlasting fire. The same divine fire therefore with one in the same force and power, will both burn the wicked and will form them again. And will replace as much as it shall consume of their bodies and will supply itself with eternal nourishment.
Trent Horn:
The fire of the judgment will restore people’s bodies, so they can continue to exist in hell forever if they are not saved. But this fire also afflicts people who will ultimately go to heaven. Lactantius writes the following, but when he shall have judged the righteous, he will also try them with fire.
Trent Horn:
Then they who sins shall exceed either in weight or in number shall be scorched by the fire and burnt. But they whom full justice and maturity of virtue has imbued will not perceive that fire, for they have something of God in themselves, which repels and rejects the violence of the flame.
Trent Horn:
So great is the force of innocence, that the flame shrinks from it without doing harm, which has received from God this power that it burns the wicked and is under the command of the righteous. Nor however, let anyone imagine that souls are immediately judged after death.
Trent Horn:
Notice that the fire causes pain for the righteous, the saved who have sinned a certain amount, but it doesn’t cause pain for people who are full of justice and virtue, which is consistent with Catholic teaching on purgatory.
Trent Horn:
If someone dies in a state of holiness unattached from sin, they won’t go to purgatory. It’s important to keep in mind though, that the fathers are not in errant. Lactantius he denies the particular judgment, which is true. We will be judged immediately after death and then at the final resurrection.
Trent Horn:
They’re not inherent. They propose purgatory in its effects in different ways. But so far, I haven’t seen any of them. None of them propose the immediate entry into heaven for all believers that Dr. Ortlund proposes in place of purgatory.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
Ambrose uses this language of purgatorial fire in all kinds of ways. I’m just going to summarize what Daley says about Ambrose. This is a great book if you’re wanting to get a snapshot of patristic views of eschatology.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
Daley was a professor at the University of Notre Dame, wonderful patristic scholar. This is the textbook that gives you just a handbook, just goes through the father, just gives you an overview. I would’ve yielded Ambrose as a proponent of purgatory before getting into it.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
The things Daley showed me is just how it’s complicated. He’s got some passages that sound like that, but he’s got others. Again, the tendency is to oversimplify what was actually incredibly diverse at this time.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
I’ll just read what Daley says. He says Ambrose has no consistent theory however, about what the Christian may expect at death. In one passage, he puts forward the theory that after death souls remain in storehouses until the resurrection.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
Yet even there, they anticipate it psychologically, the suffering or glory that awaits them in their recognition of what surely lies ahead. Other passages suggest that the soul remains in suspense after death, unaware of the outcome of the judgment until the resurrection. Or that punishment experienced before the judgment, is simply the lack of positive consolation.
Trent Horn:
What’s interesting is what Father Daley says after the excerpt that Dr. Ortlund shares. He writes whatever the fate of the ordinary person, Ambrose follows the tradition of foreseeing an immediate entry in attitude for outstanding saints. Not only for martyrs, but for patriarchs, prophets and apostles.
Trent Horn:
Notice that immediate entry into heaven is not for every believer, but only for the most virtuous, or those purged from sin in this life. This leaves Christians who have many sins needing purification as Ambrose would describe by fire.
Trent Horn:
Father Daley writes the following for the sinful human being, this means conversion through purification. Like Gregory of Nyssa, Ambrose sees this purifying process as having to take place after death, if it is not taken place in life. My conclusion is that Father Daley, he’s talking about Ambrose’s views on the resurrection of the body in heaven and hell.
Trent Horn:
Those views are not consistent, not about purgatory that’s, especially the case because Ambrose, he does talk about salvation being achieved by fire. Father Daley quotes it in his own book. Here’s what he writes.
Trent Horn:
Father Daley writes in his homily on Psalm 36, Ambrose tries to reconcile these varying interpretations of fiery judgment and punishment after death, by suggesting that everyone must experience this fire to some degree.
Trent Horn:
If the Lord is going to save his servants, we’ll be saved by faith. But nevertheless saved through fire. Even if we are not burned up still, we shall be burned. Those who do not deserve salvation however, will remain in the fire as scripture teaches possibly forever.
Trent Horn:
I would also mention a testimony from the late fourth century of a writer named Ambrosiaster. Ambrosiaster these writings were often falsely attributed to Ambrose, because they sound a lot like Ambrose.
Trent Horn:
In fact, Ambrosiaster in Latin, it means would be Ambrose. This is what Ambrosiaster writes on 1st Corinthians 3:15 which says the last judgment. If any man’s work is burned up, he will suffer loss. Though he himself will be saved, but only as through fire. That’s 1st Corinthians 3:15.
Trent Horn:
Here’s what Ambrosiaster writes, to suffer loss is to endure reproof for what person, when subjected to punishment does not lose something thereby yet the person himself may be saved. His living soul will not perish in the same way that his erroneous ideas will.
Trent Horn:
Even so however, he may suffer punishments of fire. He will be saved only by being purified through fire. Le Goff in Birth of Purgatory writes this. Ambrosiaster is the author of the first real exegesis at 1st Corinthians three versus 10 through 15.
Trent Horn:
He distinguishes three categories, the saints and the righteous who will go directly to heaven at the time of the resurrection. The ungodly apostate, infidels, and atheists, who will go directly into the fiery torments of hell. And the ordinary Christians, who those sinners will first pay their debt and for a time be purified by fire, but then go to paradise because they had faith.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
Another figure that picks up on Origin’s language is Jerome, but he uses the language of the fire exclusively for hell. He is very clear that he thinks the punishments of the wicked and the rewards of the righteous happen immediately upon death.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
Jerome’s view is that at Easter, when Christ rose from the dead, everything changed so that the souls of the faithful will no longer go to Hades, but now go to Christ in heaven, and he’ll speak of deceased believers now reigning with Christ and so forth.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
You get a lot of diversity. You also have a lot of speculation and openness. One of the things that’s been so fascinating to discover is that even Augustine who’s often held to be a key representative witness for purgatory, his views are actually very complicated and open handed.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
In his incarinion here’s how he puts it and note the speculative feel of his language. He says, “And it is not impossible that something of the same kind may take place even after this life. It is a matter that may be inquired into and either ascertained or left doubtful, whether some believers shall pass through a kind of purgatorial fire and in proportion, as they have loved with more or less devotion, the goods that perish be less or more quickly delivered from it.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
It’s complicated with Augustine. Certainly, he’s not dogmatic about this. He is leaving it open exactly how much is this going to happen? How certain are we? And so forth. Then there’s other views floating around. Honestly, we could just go on and on.
Trent Horn:
I don’t see how Dr. Ortlund can reach this conclusion about St. Jerome, given what Jerome says regarding the fire that is mentioned in first Corinthians 3;15. In Jerome’s rebuke of the heretic Jovinian, this is what he writes.
Trent Horn:
If the man whose work is burnt and is to suffer the loss of his labor, while he himself is saved yet not without proof of fire. It follows that if a man’s work remains, which he has built upon the foundation, he will be saved without probation by fire.
Trent Horn:
Consequently, a difference is established between one degree of salvation and another. Notice that St Jerome says there will be different kinds of salvation for different people. For some of them, this will involve a trial by fire, because of their inferior or evil works.
Trent Horn:
I also don’t agree with Dr. Ortlund, that Augustine is as speculative about purgatory as he claims. In Augustine’s work. The City of God, Augustine writes of those who suffer temporary punishments after death, all are not doomed to those everlasting pains, which are to follow that judgment.
Trent Horn:
Augustine also speaks of some who will quote “Not only be saved from eternal punishments, but shall not even suffer purgatorial torments after death,” which of course implies. Some people will suffer purgatorial punishments after death.
Trent Horn:
In these passages, Augustine specifically uses the Latin phrases, penn a purgariae purgatory punishments and penna temporarie temporary punishments. These become widespread in later medieval discussions of the doctrine of purgatory, these Latin terms.
Trent Horn:
Augustine also believed that the prayers of people on earth could alleviate these punishments after death. This is evident in the following prayer for his own mother St. Monica recorded in the confession. Augustine writes forgive her oh Lord, forgive her. I beseech you enter not into judgment with her. Let your mercy be exalted above your justice.
Trent Horn:
Remember St. Monica was the faithful Christian who prayed for Augustine’s conversion. This isn’t a prayer for mercy upon a non believer, but a prayer for mercy related to punishment for a believer.
Trent Horn:
Jerry Wall says in his Protestant defensive purgatory, that Augustine quote “Further developed his views not only on eternal hell, but also on purgatorial punishment. One of the principles Augustine laid down in his perhaps earlier commentary on Psalm 37, was widely cited in subsequent discussion, says Augustine writes.
Trent Horn:
Although, some will be saved by fire, this fire will be more terrible than anything that a man can suffer in this life. But what about the passage from the Encoridian? It does sound very hesitant about purgatory. It says and it is not impossible that something of the same kind may take place even after this life.
Trent Horn:
It is a matter that may be inquired into, and either ascertained or left doubtful, whether some believers shall pass through a purgatorial fire. Augustine, it seems he’s doubting purgatory. I don’t think so. Look at section 109 of the Encoridian.
Trent Horn:
Augustine talks about what happens to souls after death, but before the final judgment. This is what he writes. During the time moreover, which intervenes between a man’s death and the final resurrection, the soul dwells in a hidden retreat, where it enjoys rest or suffers affliction just in proportion to the merit it earned by the life, which it led on earth.
Trent Horn:
Nor can it be denied that the souls of the dead are benefited by the piety of their living friends, who offer the sacrifice of the mediator or give arms in the church on their behalf. When then sacrifices, either of the altar or of arms are offered on behalf of all the baptized dead they are thank offerings for the very good.
Trent Horn:
They are propitiatory offerings that take takeaway sin, for the not very bad. In the case of the very bad, even though they do not assist the dead, there are a species of consolation to the living. Where they are profitable, their benefit consists either in obtaining a full remission of sins, or at least in making the condemnation more tolerable.” End quote.
Trent Horn:
This is purgatory. That’s the doctrine purgatory right there. The more hesitant passage in the Encoridian, it’s probably a doubt about whether purgatory involves fire, literal fire.
Trent Horn:
Or more likely it’s a carryover from the previous chapter, where Augustine believes someone might be purified in this life. If he loves things more than God, those things that he loves will be destroyed and that will purify him. This is what Augustine writes.
Trent Horn:
Even the latter prefers to lose these things, rather than to lose Christ. Since he does not desert Christ out of fear of losing them, though he is grieved when he does lose them, he is saved.
Trent Horn:
But it is so as by fire, because the grief for what he loved and has lost burns him, but it does not subvert nor consume him, for he is protected by his immovable and incorruptible foundation.
Trent Horn:
Augustine is saying you might be purified in this life by having things you love more than God be burned up, and that’ll burn up eye of you and purify you. That maybe you’ll have that purification …
PART 3 OF 5 ENDS [01:42:04]
Trent Horn:
Had a view and purify you, that maybe you’ll have that purification. Then Augustine says, “And it is not impossible that something of the same kind may take place even after this life. It is a matter that may be inquired into and either ascertained or left doubtful whether some believers shall pass through a kind of purgatorial fire and in proportion, as they have loved with more or less devotion, the goods that perish be less or more quickly delivered from it.”
Trent Horn:
So here, he’s just wondering, Augustine is hesitant about what purgatory may be like. He’s not hesitant about the idea of purgatory itself, he very clearly does say that in multiple passages in City of God, and also even in the Enchiridion. Now Jacques Le Goff, however, in his book, Birth of Purgatory, he is very confident in connecting Saint Augustine to the doctrine of purgatory. So Le Goff says this about Augustine. He, “Gave a very strict definition of purgatorial fire. It would apply to a small number of sinners. Second, it would be very painful. And third, it would be a sort of temporary hell.”
Trent Horn:
Augustine, despite his doubts. And hesitations did acknowledge the existence of purgatorial fire. In this too he made an important contribution to the prehistory of purgatory. So I would say it makes more sense, way more sense to place Augustine on a developmental trajectory towards the classic doctrine of purgatory. And he affirms many of its central elements. We see that in City of God and the Enchridion. I don’t think we should read into his qualifications about the doctrine that it was purely speculative during this time.
Trent Horn:
Isabella Morera even says, “It is pretty clear that many of Augustine’s contemporaries thought that the pain of the soul’s experience in the world must be connected in some way to its experiences of pain in the afterlife and ultimately to its fate.” It was probably what most people dedicated to philosophy and religion believed. And we see an explicit witness in purgatory, a century later in the writings of Pope Gregory the Great. He connects the fire in first Corinthians 3:15 to purgatory.
Trent Horn:
So while Augustine might have been more hesitant, Gregory is more forthright. And this is what he writes, Pope Gregory the Great, “We must believe that before the day of judgment, there is a purgatory fire for certain small sins. Because our savior said that, ‘He which speak blasphemy against the holy spirit, that it shall not be forgiven him neither in this world, nor in the world to come.’ Out of which sentence we learn that some sins are forgiven in this world and some other may be pardoned in the next.”
Trent Horn:
So Pope Gregory the Great took from this saying of Jesus that if there are sins that will not be forgiven in this world or in the world to come like blasphemy against the holy spirit, then it follows that there are sins forgiven in this world and sins that could be forgiven in the next world. That was Pope Gregory the Great’s interpretation of that passage and he saw it as supporting the doctrine of purgatory.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
And I’ll just mention one other sort of example. If you go to the fourth century, Syriac fathers, Ephrem and Aphrahat. They depict Christians who die as sleeping until the final resurrection. In fact, everybody who dies, sleeps till the final resurrection and they don’t really have any capacity for activity or experience, but he describes, Aphrahat, at least, Ephrem doesn’t. Aphrahat describes that sleep as either a happy sleep or a disturbed sleep.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
It’s so interesting. Here’s how he puts it, “For the servant for whom his Lord is preparing stripes and bonds while he is sleeping.” Now, keep in mind, this sleeping is between your death and the final resurrection, “desires not to awake for he knows that when the dawn shall have come and he shall awake, his Lord will scourge and bind him. But the good servant to whom his Lord has promised gifts looks expectantly for the time when dawn shall come and he shall receive presence from his Lord. And even though he is soundly sleeping, in his dream, he sees something like what his Lord is about to give him whatsoever he is promised him and he rejoices in his dream and exults and is gladdened.”
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
And he goes on and on and he’s saying basically and he compares later on the sleep of the wicked between their death and the final judgment as like when you sleep, but you have a fever and you’re tossing and turning. It’s so interesting. You have agitated sleep whereas the righteous are soundly snoring. You know, they have a happy sleep. They’re sleeping happily, again, because they’re anticipating.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
So what this does for us is first of all, in addition to showing how complicated and how diverse the thought of the early church was about what happens to the Christian when they die. It also cautions us for making a straight association between praying for the dead and purgatory, because something like Aphrahat’s view, you can totally understand. And everybody believes in praying for the dead, but not because they’re in purgatory. So-
Trent Horn:
What’s interesting with the Syriac Christians like Ephrem is that they believed in soul sleep and they had a different understanding of anthropology. One author says that they had a trichotomy of man where body, soul, and spirit. Spirit’s the divine principle that comes from God, or like the part of the holy spirit. Now in paragraph 367 of the catechism, it says, man is body and soul, okay? Not body, soul, and spirit. You’re body and soul.
Trent Horn:
But these Eastern Syriac authors, they didn’t think that the human soul went to be with God at death. The spirit went to God. The soul was in a state of slumber and it slept until the final judgment. Which soul sleep’s something we don’t believe now. But writers in this tradition like Ephrem of Odessa, he did believe in postmortem purification. And the problem here is that when you try to use an argument from silence against Ephrem, which is what Dr Ortland is doing, trying to say, “Well, Ephrem didn’t believe in purgatory because he doesn’t mention it in this text over here.”
Trent Horn:
Arguments from silence don’t work if you can find a clear counter example where the writer does mention the thing they’re allegedly silent about. I give a hat tip to fellow Catholic apologist, William Albrecht by the way, who pointed out this reference in Ephrem to purgatory because here Ephrem is commenting on a story in second Maccabees where Judas, the Maccabee find soldiers who were killed in battle and they had idolatrous amulets on them.
Trent Horn:
This is what it says in second Maccabees chapter 12, “He also took a up a collection, man by man to the amount of 2000 drachmas of silver and sent it to Jerusalem, to provide for a sin offering. In doing this, he acted very well and honorably taking account of the resurrection. For if he were not expecting that those who had fallen would rise again, it would’ve been superfluous and foolish to pray for the dead. But if he was looking to the splendid reward that is laid up for those who fall asleep in godliness, it was a holy and pious thought. Therefore, he made atonement for the dead that they might be delivered from their sin.”
Trent Horn:
It’s a reference from an old Testament book, the Deuterocanonical books that talk about Jewish belief prior to Christ in postmortem purification. And here’s what Ephrem the Syrian says about this episode, “If also the sons of Mattathias who celebrated their feasts in figure only could cleanse those from guilt by their offerings who fell in battle. How much more shall the priests of Christ aid the dead by their oblations and prayers.” So once again, we see here a clear reference to prayer in the case made by priests to remit sins after death. So this explicit reference to postmortem purification prayer for the dead it trumps any argument from silence to the contrary.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
Let me just establish that point with two examples. I want to give two examples that make it crystal clear that the reason people prayed for the dead was certainly not because they always thought they were in purgatory or in any kind of torment. So the first example is from Ambrose’s his sermon on the death of emperor Theodosius in 395. Theodosius is one of the good guys. He opposed the Arians. Ambrose loves Theodosius and he is going on and on listen to how he describes Theodosius throughout his eulogy, “Theodosius now at peace rejoices that he has been snatched away from the cares of this world. Theodosius hastened to enter upon this rest and to go into the city of Jerusalem. Thus freed from an uncertain struggle Theodosius of august memory now enjoys perpetual light and lasting tranquility, and in return for what he did in his body, he rejoices in the fruits of a divine reward.”
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
I can keep quoting statements like this. After all that he prays for him. Listen to what he prays for, “Give perfect rest to thy servant, Theodosius, that rest, which though has prepared for thy saints I have loved. And so I accompany him to the land of the living and I will not abandon him until by my tears and prayers I shall lead the man wither his merit summon unto the holy mountain of God, where there is eternal life.”
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
He’s saying I’m going to lead him into eternal life by my prayers. Then right after that, he says this. In fact, that that quote is often used on those same websites, proving the fathers all believe in purgatory, okay, look what he says right next, “Theodosius, then, abides in the light and glories in the assembly of the saints. There he now embraces Gratian that was another deceased Christian who no longer grieves for his wounds, for his found and Avenger. Although he was snatched away prematurely by an unworthy death, he possesses rest for his soul.” So it’s false that you only pray for the dead if you think they’re in purgatory. Theodosius does not sound like he’s in torment. And this is very common in these patristic eulogies.
Trent Horn:
One thing I want to point out here is that we should be careful about interpreting doctrine from eulogies. I gave a eulogy once for a good friend of mine who died when she was 19 years old, I was about 24. It was a very emotional experience. And it’s common in eulogies to presume the deceased are in heaven, which we shouldn’t do that since we don’t have that knowledge. But in the moment it’s emotional. It’s understandable if that kind of thing happens. You shouldn’t say it, but it does happen. Or it’s understandable you might say things that aren’t as rigorous theologically.
Trent Horn:
That doesn’t mean every patristic eulogy is, is worthless by any means. It just means we need to be cautious about making an argument from silence on these particular sources. And there’s a lot of things that go into eulogies. The scholar Sharon Mogan has a dissertation entitled Mourning The Dead In Christian Late Antiquity. And she notes how these funeral orations like Ambrose would give, they’re patterned after Roman eulogies, but they have Christian adaptations.
Trent Horn:
So for example, when Ambrose gave a eulogy for emperor Valentinian the second, he criticizes, people for falling into excessive grief for wailing uncontrollably, and he’s reminding them about the hope they have in the resurrection. Don’t get into these crying and wailing fits that are common at Roman funerals. I’d also add something, father Daley notes in his evaluation of Ambrose. He writes, “Whatever the fate of the ordinary person, Ambrose follows the tradition of foreseeing an immediate entry into beatitude for outstanding saints, not only for martyrs, but for patriarchs, prophets and apostles. Even a devout Christian emperor will share after death. The peace of God’s eternal Sabbath in the land of the living. The lack of a consistent eschatological theory does not prevent Ambrose, the preacher from holding out to the faithful powerful images of Christian hope.”
Trent Horn:
So notice father Daley recognizes that in a context like a funeral oration for a famous Christian emperor, you’re going to find rhetorical statements that lift people’s spirits more than present a kind of systematic theology. Ambrose, he’s not going to bog down people with disputes about the interim state or how long it’s going to last. He wants to give them hope in the resurrection. There’s also a political element here that Christian civil leaders they’re treated in a way similar to Christian religious leaders like the apostles and prophets. So Le Goff says, “Given what we know about the relations between Ambrose and Theodosius, we can hardly avoid mentioning the political background to Ambrose’s remarks.”
Trent Horn:
So all of these factors really complicate the argument from silence. Dr. Ortland tries to get out of by saying, “Well, Ambrose, doesn’t mention purgatory in this funeral oration. So some people, everybody goes to heaven.” Well, no, some people, and there’s going to be specific cases. And Christian and emperors are part of those outstanding cases, not part of the general cases. And the argument from silence, it doesn’t work when you have the passage I mentioned earlier where Ambrose specifically talks about being saved through fire. All right.
Trent Horn:
So as though, to Dr. Ortland’s point about praying for the dead, it’s true that the liturgy includes prayers for all of the dead, for anyone who has fallen asleep in Christ. And this would include those who have presumably gone to heaven, even if we aren’t totally certain that they’ve gone to heaven. That doesn’t mean there aren’t other contexts though, where it makes the most sense to conclude that the prayers being offered for the dead in that context are to help them with a trial that they’re undergoing after death. All right.
Trent Horn:
So that’s why, that’s why we should compare what we read about in eulogies. We should compare that with the actual liturgical prayers for the dead, because those prayers they’re more formalized and they discuss specific reasons we pray for the dead. And that includes things in line with the doctrine of purgatory, like the remission of sin or purification. And especially in a Catholic context, this can be overlooked from a Protestant perspective because the primary place to pray for the dead was not individual prayer or even the prayer and eulogy. It was the prayers that were offered in the liturgy as part of the sacrifice. One divine liturgy from the year 350 says this, “on behalf of all the departed, of whom also this is the commemoration after the mentioning of their names, sanctify these souls for you know them all. Sanctify all who have fallen asleep in the Lord and count them all among the ranks of your saints and give them a place and abode in your kingdom.”
Trent Horn:
So playing praying for them to receive that place not that they all immediately go there. Saint Epiphanias was writing around the year 375 and he’s answering objections to prayers for the deceased and liturgy. And he quotes or summarizes a heretic named Aerias, not Arius, A-E-R-I-U-S of Sabast. And that heretic said, “Why do you mention the names of the dead after their deaths?” Like in the liturgy, “If the living praise or has given alms, how will this benefit the dead?”
Trent Horn:
Saint Epiphanias responds to him by saying this around the time of St Ambrose, “then as to naming the dead, what could be more helpful? What could be more opportune or wonderful than that the living believe that the departed are alive and have not ceased to be, but exist and live with the Lord and that the most sacred doctrine should declare that there is hope for those who pray for their brethren as though they were off on a journey. And even though the prayer we offer for them cannot root out all their faults, how could it, since we often slip in this world, inadvertently and deliberately, it is still useful as an indication of something more perfect.”
Trent Horn:
Other translations render this passage in this way, “Useful too, is the prayer fashioned on their behalf. Even if it does not force back the whole of guilty charges laid to them, it is useful also because in this world we often stumble, either voluntarily or involuntarily. And thus it is a reminder to do better. For we commemorate both righteous and sinners. Though we pray for sinners, for God’s mercy and for the righteous, the fathers, the patriarchs prophets, apostles, evangelists, martyrs, and confessors, for bishops and anchorites and the whole band of saints.”
Trent Horn:
So we see Epiphanias affirming that prayer is offered for people who we generally assume are in heaven, but prayer is also offered for the dead as a way to help a particular group of them with their faults or guilty charges that have been leveled against them. Even if it can’t remit or make up for all of their faults. Finally, from the same time period, we have saint Cyril of Jerusalem writing about the subject of praying for the dead in his catechetical lectures. And he explains not only praying for the dead, but why we pray for them.
Trent Horn:
So this is what he writes, “For, I know that many say, ‘what is a soul profited, which departs from this world, either with sins or without sins, if it be commemorated in the prayer?’ For if a king were to banish certain, someone who had given him offense, and then those who belong to them should weave a crown and offer it to him on behalf of those under punishment, would he not grant a remission of their penalties? In the same way, we, when we offer to him, God, our supplications, for those who have fallen asleep, though, they be sinners, weave no crown, but offer up Christ sacrificed for our sins, propitiating our merciful God for them as well as for ourselves.”
Trent Horn:
So I think that while we have some cases where the reason for praying for the dead may not be clear. We have other cases where it is clear that the reason prayer for the dead is being undertaken is to do with postmortem purification or postmortem or after death, remission of sins or punishment, due to sins.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
Here’s another one, this is really interesting and I hope you’re not getting bored as you’re watching this because I got a little more to go still. I got to talk about Gregory of Nazianzus here and then I want to talk about John Chrysostum. But then we’re starting to land the plane and move on to scripture. So hang with me a little longer, because this is really important and nobody’s talking about these passages. I really don’t know anybody. Who’s bringing this up. So here’s another example, Gregory of Nazianzus, oration seven, his younger brother, Caesarius has died. He’s doing the eulogy. He makes it very plain throughout the eulogy that Caesarius is in heaven. He’s been saved. He talks about in 7.4 how, when he is referencing their parents living pious lives, he talks about how Christians die. And he uses the language for this of being translated to the realms above.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
He talks about how the holy spirit has transformed the body or the soul of Caesarius. And at the end of the sermon, he speaks of Caesarius. After speaking of in various ways as saved. He says, listen to this, “And now for you,” that’s Caesarius, “sacred and holy soul we pray for an entrance into heaven. May you enjoy such repose as the bosom of Abraham affords.” By the way here and in other orations, Gregory will use the phrase bosom of Abraham for heaven. So again, I told you this was complicated. Not all the terminology is used in the same way, “such repose as the bosom of Abraham affords, may you behold the choir of angels and the glories and splendors of sainted men.”
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
Now someone could say, okay, he’s just praying for Caesarius to eventually experience that after he gets out of purgatory, but throughout the sermon, he regularly speaks of Caesarius has already gotten there. And more than that, he turns that into a consolation and hope for every current living Christian, this is the regular contrast. Here on earth we’re in turmoil. But then after we are received by God into heaven, quote, “I believe the words of the wise that every fair and God beloved soul, when, set free from the bonds of the body, it departs hence at one enjoys a sense and perception of the blessings, which await it inasmuch as that, which darkened it has been purged away or laid aside. I know not how else to term it and feels a wondrous pleasure and exaltation and goes rejoicing to meet its Lord. Having escaped, as it were, from the grievous poison of life here and shaken off the fetters, which bound it.” And he goes on and on about the resurrection of the body after that.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
Now some people find it significant that the word purged is here, but you could just translate that and I’ll put up the two Greek words there as he’s saying, “as having been cleansed or cast off, I don’t know how to put it.” So he is just using those two words in the past tense to describe what we leave off when we leave this life. When you leave life here, that when you leave the body and your soul goes to the wondrous pleasure and exaltation and rejoicing meets the Lord. And that’s the consistent contrast and he ends the whole eulogy saying basically setting up this contrast between the toil here and the joy of going to heaven and saying after our toil here, receive us into your presence in a prayer.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
So this is the common idea in the east I’m going to say it, not universal. You’ll find, Basil talk in a very generic term about kind of a waiting place, but he doesn’t really say anything about it. But the common idea, if not universal, is at death the soul is carried up. Sometimes you get all these strange variations. Sometimes you get this idea of toll houses where this is the idea that the angels are escorting the soul of the deceased Christian up to God but they have to pass through these toll houses where demons are hurling accusations and trying to drag them down, back down to hell. And that kind of thing. It’s fascinating, but this common idea throughout the east in the Patristic era is that at death, your soul goes to heaven.
Trent Horn:
Versus toll houses are pretty wild. There’s an interesting notion in Eastern theology. Second, obviously, if someone dies in a state of grace or they die not in a state of mortal sin, their soul goes to heaven. So we shouldn’t let that fact take away from what evidences these sources offer for postmortem purification. We should also keep in mind that the references to the bosom of Abraham, they show up in later Eastern writers as being a special place for the dead that prayers made by the living can help the dead reach.
Trent Horn:
For example, there’s a late fifth century writer, pseudo-Dionysus the Areopagite, and he writes, “The divine hesiarch or hierarch says the prayer over the deceased. The prayer beseeches the divine goodness to forgive the deceased all the sins he has committed through human frailty and to establish him in the region of the living in the bosom of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, where there is no sickness, sorrow or sighing.”
Trent Horn:
But I think we need to dive deeper into what are called the Cappadocian fathers. Those would be St Basil the great or St. Basil Caesarea. His brother St. Gregory of Nyssa and their friends St. Gregory Nazianzus also called St. Gregory the Theologian. Now there is some debate about whether these fathers taught universalism or that the teaching that everybody goes to heaven. That’s a topic for a separate episode. If they did teach that, then all that would show is that they were mistaken about who is purified after death. They still would’ve believed that there was a mechanism for postmortem purification. So we would still have purgatory. We would just recognize that there is a development in the doctrine and understanding who exactly goes there. But as I said, that’s not entire clear. It’s something I might address in a future episode.
Trent Horn:
So in fact, another argument is that Gregory is only tentatively defending a very minority view that was present in the east and he’s raising it almost like a devil’s advocate. A good book on the subject I would recommend is the Devil’s Redemption, A New History And Interpretation Of Christian Universalism. That really shows how reports of universalism being widespread in the Eastern church or the Eastern fathers, that that’s really grossly overstated. As I said, topic for a separate video. So Gregory of Nyssa says this, “whether by forethought here or by purgation here after our soul becomes free from any emotional connection with the brute creation. There will be nothing to impede its contemplation of the beautiful.” So purification of sin after death.
Trent Horn:
Likewise St Basil, he doesn’t just talk about a waiting place. In his homily on Psalm chapter seven, verse two, he says this, “I think that the sincere athletes of God who have sufficiently contended with invisible enemies throughout their whole life, after they have escaped all their pursuits and having come to life’s end, they will be examined by the leader of the age so that if they are discovered to have wounds from the struggles or some blemishes or vestiges of sin, they should be detained. And if they are found invulnerable and without blemish, as unconquered and as free individuals, they should rest in Christ.”So not everyone directly goes to heaven. Some are detained because they have blemishes or sin.
Trent Horn:
Finally, here’s what Gregory of Nazianzus writes about the third century in anti-Pope Novation, the Greeks call him Novatus. Now Gregory criticizes Novation for not accepting people who cried and were truly repentant of their sins. He said that people who praise notation for doing this, they’re kind of self-righteous jerks. He writes, “Let none of you, even though he has much confidence in himself dare to say, touch me not for I am pure. Who is so pure as I, give us too a share in your brightness. But perhaps we’re not convincing you then we will weep for you. Let these men,” the lapsed Christians, the Novations wouldn’t accept back into the church, “Let these men then, if they will, follow our way, which is Christ’s way. But if they will not let them go their own, perhaps in it, they will be baptized with fire in that last baptism, which is more painful and longer, which devourers wood like grass.”
Trent Horn:
And of course, this is a reference to the fire that devours, grass, hay, all the other things in first Corinthians chapter three. And he says, “It consumes the stubble of every evil.” So I’d say the argument that the Cappadocian fathers did not believe in postmortem purification, it simply doesn’t succeed. It says that people who die with sins and blemishes, they are impeded from entering into heaven, or they are purified with fire with a baptism of fire. They don’t all directly just go to heaven.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
Okay. Here’s another example from a fifth century, unknown Antiochan writer from Syria, “But after the departure from the body, a separation of the just from the unjust immediately takes place. For, they are conducted by angels, into places worthy of them. The souls of the just are conducted to paradise in the company and sight of angels, the vision of the savior Christ, according to what is said, ‘being absent from the body and present with the Lord.’ But the souls of the wicked are conducted to the regions of hell and kept in places worthy of them until the day of resurrection and retribution.”
Trent Horn:
This passage actually comes from a work that was falsely attributed to the second century church father, Justin Martyr. It’s really from the fourth century, so it’s called pseudo-Justin. And I don’t really care what pseudo and thinks because he’s very problematic on key issues like Christology, he’s not a father, he’s not even like an ecclesial writer. In fact, it’s been claimed Theodore of Cyrus, whose writings against Cyril of Alexandria were condemned at the second council of Constantinople that Theodore, this condemned author is the real author of pseudo-Justin. But in any case, as I say, he is not a father. I wouldn’t even call him an ecclesial writer. So what he says is not as helpful for understanding how this doctrine develops.
Trent Horn:
Well, what’s interesting about pseudo-Justin is that he seems to make a similar misquote that many Protestants make regarding purgatory and second Corinthians 5:8. They often misquote the passage this way, “To be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord.” But that’s not what the Bible verse says. Paul actually writes in second Corinthians 5:6 through 10. “So we are always of good courage. We know that while we are at home in the body, we are away from the Lord, for we walk by faith, not by sight. We are of good courage and we would rather be away from the body and at home with the Lord. So whether we are at home or away, we make it our aim to please him. For, we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ so that each one may receive good or evil, according to what he has done in the body.”
Trent Horn:
Now, when I used to work in an office, instead of working at home, I would sometimes wish that… I would hope to rather be away from the office than at home with my family. But that didn’t mean that I instantaneously got home when I left the office, I had a short commute. So in any case, and so this shows what Paul’s saying is that we can’t say, “Yeah, you would rather be with the Lord, be absent from the body. I would rather be with the Lord.” But that’s not saying that there is no intermediary state where in fact, we are going to be immediately with Jesus in bliss, because Paul himself says that we must go and appear before the judgment seat of Christ. So the misquotation here in this passage and second Corinthians, it, it does not support evidence against the doctrine of purgatory.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
Here’s another example from Cyril of Alexandria in his commentary on John 19, where he is talking about the phrase, “Jesus gave up his spirit” and he’s saying, “What does that mean? Why doesn’t it say that Jesus just died? What does it mean to give up your spirit?” And he says, “Well, that’s a hope that we all have when we die.” And he says, “For, I think we ought to believe that for this belief, there is much ground that the souls of saints, when they quit, their earthly bodies are by the bountiful mercy of God, almost as it were, consigned into the hands of a most loving father. And do not, as some infidels have pretended haunt their sepulchers waiting for funeral libations, nor yet are they like the souls of sinful men conveyed to the place of endless torment.”
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
That is to hell, “Rather do they hasten into the hands of the father of all by the new way, which are savior or Christ has prepared for us for he consigned his soul into the hands of his father, that we also, making it our anchor and being firmly rooted and grounded in this belief, might entertain the bright hope that when we undergo the death of the body, we shall be in God’s hands, yay, in a far better condition than when we were in the flesh.” And he continues on just a bit and then he says, “that’s why Paul says in Philippians one, it’s better to depart and go and be with Christ.”
Trent Horn:
When it comes to Cyril of Alexandria, he doesn’t reference the idea of purgatory or explicitly reject it. He just talks about the soul going into the Father’s hands instead of other places, he says the souls of the saints quote, “Do not, as some infidels have ended haunt their sepulchers” or their tombs, “waiting for funeral libations, nor yet are they like the souls of sinful men conveyed to the place of endless torment. That is to hell rather do they hasten into the hands of the Father of all.” So he’s not talking about purgatory. He’s just saying the souls of the saints don’t stick around with the tomb and they don’t go to hell.
Trent Horn:
But this argument from silence, it doesn’t work because Cyril of Alexandria does reference a purgatorial state in his commentary on Luke 12. Here, he’s commenting on the parallel passage to Matthew 5:26. That’s when we talked about earlier about getting out of prison, you won’t get out until you paid the last penny. Here’s what Cyril writes, “Now, perhaps it may be imagined that the sense of this passage is difficult to comprehend. But it will become very easy if we examine the metaphor by what takes place among ourselves. For, let there be supposed,” he says, “someone who has brought a charge against you before one of those in authority and has pointed you out to those whose office it is to carry the accused into court and is causing you to be taken thither.
Trent Horn:
“While therefore,” he says, “you are still with him on the way that is before you have come to the judge, give diligence, that is, weary not in using all your earnestness, that you may be delivered from him for otherwise, he will give you up to the judge. And then when you have been proved to be indebted to him, you will be delivered to the exact doors. To those that is whose office is to exact the money, and they will cast you into prison and make you pay the.”
Trent Horn:
“And they will cast you into prison and make you pay the last mite,” or a coin. “Now, all of us…” Now, he makes a connection. “Now all of us without exception upon earth are guilty of offenses. He who has a suit against us and accuses us is the wicked Satan, for he is the enemy and the exactor, while therefore we are in the way, that is, we have yet… We have arrived at the termination of our life here on earth, let us deliver ourselves from him. Let us do away with the offenses of which we have been guilty. Let us close his mouth. Let us seize upon the grace that is by Christ, which frees us from all debt and penalty and delivers us from fear and torment, lest if our impurity be not cleansed away. So we don’t settle our accounts, our sins, if it’s not cleansed away before we die, we be carried before the judge and given over to the exactors. That is, the tormentors from whose cruelty no man can escape. Yea rather who will exact vengeance for every fault, whether it be great or small.”
Trent Horn:
Now it’s interesting to compare this to what John Calvin… The Protestant reformer, John Calvin said about this parable. He wrote, “if in this passage, the judge signifies God; the accuser, the devil; the guard, the angel; the prison, purgatory; I shall willingly yield to them” on its meaning related to purgatory. Well, Calvin didn’t think that. But Cyril of Alexandria, that’s the allegory. That’s the analogy. That’s what he thought. And it’s reasonable for us to hold that view, to say that that’s what he thought that this passage in Matthew 5 and Luke 12, it is an allegory, a parable, to help us on understand about the judgment that happens after death, that you need to pay your account, settle your sins before you die with the grace Christ has given us, because if you don’t do that before you die, you’ll be handed over to the judge to be held to account, and then you’ll have to pay for them after death.
Trent Horn:
It’s very clear here in Cyril, in his commentary on this. Finally, some Protestants use passage Cyril is talking about in Philippians to argue against purgatory. So I want to add some context to that. So, Paul is talking to the Philippians about his desire to serve Christ on Earth and how that conflicts with his desire to be with Christ in Heaven. He writes, “my desire is to depart and be with Christ, for that is far better, but to remain in the flesh is more necessary on your account.” But Paul never says this union with Christ would take place immediately after death or that it wouldn’t involve purification.
Trent Horn:
To make a comparison, in 2 Corinthians 5:2, Paul says that our future resurrection bodies, that we long to put on our heavenly dwelling, that we would rather have our future resurrection bodies. But Paul also says in 1 Corinthians 15, we won’t get our future resurrection bodies until an unspecified time in the future. So that means if there is an interval after death, between death and when we get our resurrection bodies, when our bodies will be perfected, then it’s reasonable to assume that there is an interval after death to the time when our souls will be perfected.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
Now, one last figure. I know I just went through a lot. One last figure: John Chrysostom. Oh man, I have spent so much time… This is another one where you’ll find John Chrysostom listed on these same websites as though he believes in purgatory, just because… In fact, the Roman Catholic catechism quotes, John Chrysostom as believing in its section on purgatory, but just like so many other quotes, when you read them in context, you realize that’s not what John is talking about. He’s not talking about praying for people in purgatory. I’m going to prove to you, I think, that John is very clear in consistency with many of these other patristic witnesses that when you die, you go straight to Heaven. John believes in praying for everybody. All people are to be prayed for, including the damned. Let me give examples, because he believes you can alleviate the suffering of the damned through your prayers, which is not something that any Roman Catholic Christian that I know of believes.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
In fact, I’ve never heard… I’ve only ever heard Catholic Christians deny that we should do that. And yet people present John as if he’s on the same side on the issue of purgatory. So for example, in his sermon on Philippians 3, he says, “let us then not make wailings for the dead simply. But for those who have died in sins, they deserve wailing. They deserve beating of the breast and tears, for tell me what hope is there when our sins accompany us thither, where there is no putting off sins? As long as they were here for chance, there was great expectation that they would change that they would become better. But when they are gone to Hades, where naught can be gained from repentance…” And he quotes Psalm 6:5: “Are they not worthy of our lamentation? Let us wail for those who depart in such sort.”
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
It sounds like he’s talking about people without hope, right? Sounds like he’s talking about people in hell who can’t change; there’s no more chance for repentance, not just imperfectly, purified Christians. He continues and calls them unbelievers: “Weep for the unbelievers. Weep for those who differ in nowise from them; those who depart, hence without the illumination, without the seal, they indeed deserve our wailings. They deserve our groans. They are outside the palace with the culprits, with the condemned. Let us weep for these. Let us assist them according to our power. Let us think of some assistance for them, small than it will be. Yet still let us assist them. How, and in what way? By praying and intriguing others to make prayers for them, by continually giving to the poor on their behalf.”
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
There’s other examples I found too. In his sermon on Acts 9, he quotes Mark 14:21. That’s the statement, “it would’ve been better for him, for that man, if he had not been born.” And then he writes, “Here is a man who has lost all the labor of a whole life. Not one day has he lived for himself, but to luxury, to debauchery, to covetousness, to sin, to the devil. Then say, shall we not bewail this man? Shall we not try to snatch him from his perils? For it is, yes, it is possible, if we will to mitigate his punishment. If we make continual prayers for him…” It’s one of those many areas where people just gloss over all the nuances. They say, “oh, John believed in purgatory, Augustine…” You know, they cite all these figures… Origen, Gregory of Nyssa, another one, and they gloss over all the differences. John is not advocating for something here in these passages that is consistent with Roman Catholic theology. He’s… I don’t think Catholics believe in praying for the damned.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
Now someone’s going to say, “Okay, fine. John had a quirky view. He believed in praying for the damned, but he also believed in praying for deceased believers. So that means he believes in purgatory, right?” I don’t think so. I’ve spent a lot of time reading John and I’ve spent a lot of time reading the scholarship on this point. No, that’s not true. I’ve spent a lot of time reading and I’ve looked into the scholarship on this point. I’m firmly convinced John thinks deceased Christians go straight to Heaven. He interprets the fire of 1 Corinthians 3:15 as the fire of hell. And he consistently speaks about deceased Christians going straight to Heaven. Let me give a few examples, because again, this point is so important and I don’t find anybody talking about it, so I really want to document my claim here.
Trent Horn:
There is some literature on the question of early Christians who believed one could pray for the salvation of dead non-Christians. These include books like Rescue for the Dead: the Posthumous Salvation of Non-Christians in Early Christianity by Jeffrey Trumbower, and Postmortem Opportunity: a Biblical and Theological Assessment of Salvation After Death by James Beilby. But both of them held the view that St. John Chrysostom did not believe in salvation for the damned. So Beilby cites Chrysostom’s Homily 36 on the Gospel of Matthew where Chrysostom makes it clear: unbelievers could be saved by minimal knowledge of God before the Incarnation. But now, Chrysostom says explicit faith in Christ is needed. He writes, “if unbelievers are after death to be saved on their believing, no man shall ever perish for all will then repent and adore.” He’s saying no, not everyone’s going to be saved after death, because then everybody would go to Heaven and Chrysostom doesn’t think that’ll happen.
Trent Horn:
Trumbower says right before this passage quote “Chrysostom uses one of Paul’s most universalistic passages, Philippians 2:10 to argue against repentance in the afterlife.” So Chrysostom doesn’t believe the damned can be saved. Now let’s read a little bit more of Chrysostom’s homily on Philippians to get a sense of what he’s talking about. Here’s what he writes: “Weep for the unbelievers. Weep for those who differ in nowise from them. Those who depart hence without the illumination, without the seal, they indeed deserve our wailing. They deserve our groans. They are outside the palace with the culprits, with the condemned. For verily I say unto you, unless a man be born of water and the Spirit, he shall not enter into the kingdom of Heaven.” The reference to John 3:5 and to Baptism. Dr. Ortland leaves this part out, but Chrysostom makes it clear. They cannot be saved because they have not been baptized, for Chrysostom believed in baptismal regeneration like the other Church Fathers.
Trent Horn:
Now, he continues a few sentences later: “Let us weep for these. Let us assist them according to our power. Let us think of some assistance for them, small though it be, yet still let us assist them. How and in what way? By praying and intriguing others to make prayers for them, by continually giving to the poor on their behalf.” So what does this mean? Some people interpret the “these” and “them” in the later sentences to be “saved Christians,” in contrast to the damned people that were referenced earlier. But they may be the damned, and Chrysostom believes that prayer can at least mitigate their punishment in hell even if it can’t save them. However, Chrysostom goes on to say that only certain types of prayer are appropriate for certain kinds of deceased people.
Trent Horn:
Chrysostom writes: “Not in vain did the apostles order that remembrance should be made of the dead in the dreadful mysteries,” or the mass. “They know that great gain results to them, great benefit. For when the whole people stands with uplifted hands, a priestly assembly, and that awful sacrifice lies displayed…” Once again, the Mass, the sacrifice of the Mass. “How shall we not prevail with God by our entreaties for them?” All right. Now, here’s the important part: “And this we do for those who have departed in faith, while the catechumens are not thought worthy even of this consolation, but are deprived of all means of help save one. And what is this? We may give to the poor on their behalf.”
Trent Horn:
So you can give to the poor to help the souls of deceased unbaptized people, even ones who are waiting to be baptized before they die (the catechumens), but the prayers offered at the Mass by the priests, by the people without stretched hands, those are reserved to help the departed in faith, the souls of baptized people who have died to cleanse them of sin.
Trent Horn:
Chrysostom writes: “Job offered sacrifice for his children and freed them from their sins,” which is interesting because here is what Chrysostom says in his homily on 1 Corinthians. Here’s what he writes: “For if the children of Job were purged by the sacrifice of their father, why do you doubt that when we too offer for the departed, some consolation arises to them? Let us not then be wary in giving aid to the departed, both by offering on their behalf and obtaining prayers for them, for the common expedition of the world is even before us. Therefore with boldness, do we then treat for the whole world and name their names with those of martyrs, of confessors, of priests. For in truth one body are we all, though some members are more glorious than others, and it is possible from every source to gather pardon for them, from our prayers, from our gifts on their behalf, from those whose names are named with theirs, like the saints who in Heaven. Why therefore do you grieve? Why mourn when it is in your power to gather so much pardon for the departed?”
Trent Horn:
Remember… End quote, remember that Chrysostom does not believe the damned can be pardoned from their eternal punishment. So this must mean that a pardon can be obtained for baptized Christians who have died without repenting from certain sins, right? And also only certain prayers are appropriate for these saved Christians to purify them: the prayers offered at the mass or divine liturgy. All right. So let’s look at Dr. Ortland’s examples of Chrysostom’s teaching allegedly about immediate entry into Heaven. That may be true for Christians, and so that doesn’t contradict others needing to be purified or being detained as the other Eastern Fathers might call it.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
My friend Damian Zietek helped me find some of these. In his sermon on Acts 9, John is talking about where Peter raises Tabitha back to life, and he’s rebuking those who are improperly mourning death. And he starts describing why we shouldn’t mourn Christians dying. Now listen to what he says. “And if leaving her dwelling, the soul goes forth, speeding on her way to her own Lord, why do you mourn? Why then you should do this on the birth of a child where this in fact is also a birth and better than that. For here she comes forth to a very different light; is loosed as from a prison house; comes off as from a contest. Yes, you will say, it is all very well to say this in the case of those whose salvation we are assured, then what ails you O man, that even in the case of such thou does not take it in this way.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
Say, what can you have to condemn in the little child? Why do you mourn for it? What in the newly baptized, for he too is brought into the same condition. Why do you mourn for him? For as the sun rises clear and bright, so the soul leaving the body with a pure conscience, shines joyously. Not such the spectacle of emperor as he comes in state to take possession of the city, not such the hush of awe as when the soul having quitted the body is departing in company with angels. Think what the soul must then be, in what amazement, what wonder, what delights, why do you mourn?”
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
And I know that’s a longer quote, but hopefully you could follow. And of course John’s language can be a little bit foreign, but it doesn’t sound like he’s believing that the soul goes to purgatory. It sounds like he’s believing that the soul of the deceased believer, consistently with Cyril of Alexandria and the others I’ve mentioned thus far, goes straight to Heaven.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
There’s many other passages like this. Philippians 1, when he’s commenting on the phrase that “to die is gain,” he writes, “And to die is gain. Wherefore? Because I shall more clearly be present with Him, so that my death is rather a coming to life. They who kill me will work on me no dreadful thing. They will only send me onward to my proper life and free me from that which is not mine.”
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
There’s many other examples. I’ll just mention one other. In a homily in honor of the deceased Philogonius, who is an earlier Bishop in Antioch. He says, “he’s been translated and has left our city. He’s nevertheless gone up to the city of God. And while he’s left the church here, he’s in it up in the church in Heaven, in which the firstborn are enrolled. He’s left the feast on Earth and has moved on instead to celebrating with the angels.” And then he is going on and on about the benefits of Heaven. And he’s enjoining his hearers to follow Philogonius’s example. And he basically says, “You will go to heaven too if you follow his example.” And there’s lots of other examples like this.
Trent Horn:
I’m not sure what Dr. Ortland is getting at here, because St. John Chrysostom is asking why we should mourn at the death of those who have full assurance they will go to Heaven, and in many cases immediately so. Listen to him again: “Say, what can you have to condemn in the little child? Why do you mourn for it? What in the newly baptized? For he too, is brought into the same condition. Why do you mourn for him?” This mirrors the language in the Council of Trent during the Counter-Reformation, which says of the newly baptized, “there is no condemnation to those who are truly buried together with Christ, by baptism into death; who walk, not according to the flesh, but putting off the old man and putting on the new who was created according to God, are made innocent, immaculate, pure, harmless, and beloved of God, heirs indeed of God, but joint heirs with Christ, so that there is nothing whatever to retard their entrance into Heaven.”
Trent Horn:
So just because some people go immediately to Heaven like the newly baptized, it doesn’t mean all people do that. So Chrysostom goes on to say of their mourning at death, “But is it only in the case of sinners you do this? Would that it were so, and I would not forbid your mournings, would that this were the object. This lamentation were apostolic. This were after the pattern of the Lord, for even Jesus wept over Jerusalem.” Chrysostom then goes on to the passage that Dr. Ortland discussed earlier. So let me read that one again. “Shall we not bewail this man? Shall we not try to snatch him from his perils? For it is, yes, it is possible if we will to mitigate his punishment. If we make continual prayers for him, if for him, we give alms, however, unworthy he may be. God will yield to our importunity, for if Paul showed mercy on one who had no claims on his mercy and for the sake of others spared one whom he would not have spared. Much more is it right for us to do this?”
Trent Horn:
So is Chrysostom talking about mitigating punishment in hell, or punishment in some interim state between death and a heavenly reward? So a state like purgatory? Well, look what he goes on to say about this individual and what the church ought to do. Here’s what he says. “This is the greatest memorial: set widows to stand around him, tell them his name, bid them all make for him their prayers, their supplications. This will overcome God. Though it have not been done by the man himself, yet because of him. Another is the author of the almsgiving. Even this pertains to the mercy of God, widows standing around and weeping know how to rescue, not indeed from the present death, but from that which is to come. Many have profited even by the alms done by others on their behalf.
Trent Horn:
For even if they have not got perfect deliverance, at least they found some comfort hence. If it be not so, how are children saved? And yet there, the children themselves contribute nothing, but their parents do all. And often have women had their children given them, though the children themselves contributed nothing.”
Trent Horn:
And now here’s the kicker. We’re talking about the salvation of different people. “Many are the ways God gives us to be saved. Only let us not be negligent.” Okay? So remember, St. John Chrysostom does not believe we can save someone who is in hell, but he is talking here about the prayers of holy people having an effect on the save to have died, remitting their sins. He talks about Job, which we see in scripture. His prayers had more value than other people. Jo 42:8 says “my servant Job shall pray for you, for I will accept his prayer, not to deal with you according to your folly. James 5:16 is, in the New Testament, similar. It says, “the prayer of a righteous man has great power in its effects.” This provides even more evidence that St. John Chrysostom believed in the power of praying, especially in the Mass, to aid the salvation of departed Christians by obtaining pardon for them from sin, all of which fits perfectly with an adoption of purgatory.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
I’ve given a lot, so I’ll probably just stop there with John. I’ve put… I did a deep dive in John, and it’s been fascinating, but I think it’s very clear that John thinks you pray for everybody. You pray for the damned to alleviate their sufferings and you pray for the righteous, and the righteous are in Heaven with God. That’s how he consistently talks. And I’m not aware… I’ve not read everything in John, of course, he’s John. John wrote a lot, but I’ve spent a lot of time in his sermons. I don’t know of any passages, by the way, any passages where he talks about a Christian dying and anything happening to them other than go to Heaven.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
Now, some people… I’ve been doing this long enough to anticipate how people are going to respond. Some people are just going to say, “oh, you’re just taking John out of context,” or “you’re taking these other Fathers out of context.” And I think some people have bought into this idea that if a Protestant… if a Church Father says something that sounds vaguely Protestant, then you must be taking them out of context. But I’m not taking these quotes out of context-
Trent Horn:
I understand Dr. Ortland’s frustration here because we shouldn’t expect the Church Fathers to sound like modern Catholics. The Catechism says in paragraph 78: “Through tradition, the Church in her doctrine, life, and worship perpetuates and transmits to every generation all that she herself is, all that she believes. The sayings of the Holy Fathers are a witness to the life-giving presence of this Tradition, showing how its riches are poured out in the practice and life of the Church in her belief and her prayer.”
Trent Horn:
Notice that the fathers are a witness to Tradition. Their writings are not sacred Tradition itself. They’re part of a witness which shows the development of doctrine that we receive from sacred Tradition, a development of it over time. On the other hand, I’m concerned about rhetoric I’ve heard from some Protestant apologists. They’ll say the Church Fathers weren’t Catholic, they weren’t Orthodox, they weren’t Protestant, they were just the Church Fathers.
Trent Horn:
But we can’t just write off the Church Fathers as some kind of contradictory mess of doctrine. We can’t write them off if we take seriously, God’s promise the Holy Spirit will guide the faithful, the whole faithful, and the deposit of faith that was left once for all to the Saints as Jude 3 says. That if the fathers are just a contradictory mess of doctrine, I feel like as a Protestant you have to believe the Holy Spirit abandoned the Church very early. Maybe you do believe that as a Protestant. That’s not what Jesus taught.
Trent Horn:
I do think though that when we go back through the Fathers and look at the trajectory of the doctrines they witnessed to, it is certainly not these Protestant doctrines like the ones that Dr. Ortland is sharing with us, like universal, immediate entry into Heaven for all believers. Just because some passages in the Fathers talk about the hope of salvation we all have in Christ, or some of them talk about some people immediately going into Heaven, doesn’t mean that applies to all people. I think he really stretches the meaning of these passages to try to get that, and they contradict where the Fathers clearly articulate things that oppose that doctrine.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
And I do hate to break it to people, because I almost sort of feel compassion because they bought into this paradigm and it’s… the simplicity of their paradigm gets punctured and I know that that can be disturbing, but unfortunately it’s just not true that all the Church Fathers are like proto Roman Catholics or proto Eastern Orthodox or proto Protestant. The Church Fathers have enormous diversity and I’m not taking these quotes out of context. Just go read them. I’m firmly convinced if you just go spend a lot of time reading John Chrysostom’s sermons and you examine, what does he believe about the souls believers at death, it’s pretty clear. So by the way, the view… another thing that people do is they try to discredit what I’m saying by saying it’s bad scholarship. The view that I am pounding right now is very common in the scholarship, pretty much on all of this.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
You could look at Brian Daley’s book, which I think I held up earlier. He argues for the exact same thing on pages 108 and 109 about John. He says, and he draws it from John… Another resource in John is his sermons on the Parable of Lazarus and the poor man. And in his second of four sermons there he makes it very clear, deceased Christians go to Heaven. Another example is, you could look at Marnis’s book, where he makes the exact same point from the exact same sermon. He says, “John thinks you go to Heaven when you die.”
Trent Horn:
I wouldn’t say it’s bad scholarship, so much as these scholars operate with different assumptions of what counts as evidence, or what they find to be plausible. So some of the scholars we cite and debate on the issues, some are going to be more tentative than others. My challenge to Dr. Ortland would be to examine whether other Protestant or mere Christian doctrines would pass the same test that he’s put on purgatory. Because you can find scholars that that cast doubt on the historicity of the doctrine of hell or original sin by looking at the Fathers and saying, well, this passage is ambiguous or this passage seems to contradict.
Trent Horn:
And I’m sure Dr. Ortland would want to say that those doctrines are a solid part of the Christian tradition… Or maybe he wouldn’t. I don’t know. I don’t want to put words in his mouth. So hopefully he and I can chat, because I think it’s good for us to have a solid approach to the Fathers. It just ought to be applied consistently across all the doctrines that we hold. So look, don’t have a knee jerk reaction to scholarly consensus. Don’t say, “oh, those are bad scholars.” Just read the scholarship, weigh it, weigh the evidence, make up your own mind.
Dr Gavin Ortlund:
Here’s my conclusion of the church history section in light of A: the incredible diversity of the church’s thought about the experience of the believer upon death, and B: the significant differences between patristic conceptions of purgatorial fire and the later medieval system that develops in relation to that in the West. When people say things like “all the Church Fathers believed in purgatory,” or “purgatory is universal throughout church history,” it’s the person who is saying that who is taking the Church Fathers out of context or who is picking and choosing among the Fathers. Those are charges often leveraged against me and other Protestants: we pick and choose. It is exactly the opposite. It is the Catholic apologist, not the Catholic scholars, the Catholic apologists who make these overstatements like “everyone believed in purgatory.” They’re the ones picking and choosing and taking out of context. My position, namely that there’s a complicated development, that is the position that’s trying to look at the whole picture and let every patristic voice be heard.
Trent Horn:
I agree. And that’s why I think it’ll be helpful for you to see the other Church Fathers and writers that I cited on this response to offer balance. All the ones we’ve gone through Origen, Clement of Alexandria, Cyril of Alexandria, Epiphanius, Cyril of Jerusalem, the Cappadocian Fathers. So… Ephraim the Syrian, Gregory the Great, Augustine, seeing so much that’s there. I think that it shows that the historicity of the doctrine and purgatory in the Church Fathers, there is extremely strong evidence for this doctrine. Now, Dr. Ortland concludes his video with a look at what scripture says about death and purgatory and what the afterlife is like for believers. And there’s a ton I could say on that subject, I might do a whole episode just maybe on 1 Corinthians 3 and talk about a bunch of different Protestant apologists and their views on purgatory and scripture.
Trent Horn:
This episode has gone on long enough. So I hope this is helpful for you. Thank you guys so much for supporting us. But I will say that I am appreciative of Dr. Ortland’s work. I think he raises a lot of good questions. He… Once again, he’s charitable. So I am looking forward to a time in the future, to a time… Sorry, it’s getting late here… To a time in the future and I can sit across from him and in person, ideally… I like that better than online… Ideally in person, to talk about the differences between Catholics and Protestants in an edifying conversation for you and for others.
Trent Horn:
But what should we talk about? What should I talk about with Dr. Ortland if I could sit across from him? Because he might respond to this video; I’m going to respond to his other videos. I’m not going to do responses to his responses, but I do want to sit down with him. What do you think I should talk with him about? Leave an idea in the comments section below. Don’t forget to like this video, to subscribe to our YouTube channel, subscribe to us on iTunes and Google play to get us on podcast, wherever you go. And yeah, just thank you guys and definitely consider supporting us at trenthornpodcast.com Thank you guys so much. I hope you have a very blessed day.
If you like today’s episode, become a premium subscriber at our Patreon page and get access to member only content. For more information, visit trenthornpodcast.com.