Introduction
This article aims to summarize John Calvin’s major disputations against the Roman Catholic Church’s doctrine of Purgatory. In order to do that, I will first briefly present the official Roman Catholic dogma on Purgatory as decreed by the Council of Trent in 1563, which was also affirmed by Vatican II Council. Second, I will present Calvin’s main argument against Trent’s decree on purgatory. Third, I will explore on Calvin’s answer to the four canonical Scripture proofs offered by the Roman Catholic Church on Purgatory, including appeal to the early Church’s teaching, especially Augustine’s, on the subject. Finally, I will conclude with the brief summary of the effect of this doctrine to the Christian faith as well as the comfort that Calvin finds in believing and trusting on the ‘once for all’ sacrifice of Christ that gives the believers true assurance of salvation.
The truth that Christ paid everything for our justification and that he availed for us everything that we need for sanctification and ultimate glorification must motivate us to praise the Lord and serve Him faithfully by the power of the Spirit.
Roman Catholic Teaching on Purgatory
On the 25th Session of the Council of Trent which began on the third until the fourth of December 1563 a decree on Purgatory was adopted:
Whereas the Catholic Church, instructed by the Holy Ghost, has, from the sacred writings and the ancient tradition of the Fathers, taught, in sacred councils, and very recently in this ecumenical Synod, that there is a Purgatory, and that the souls there detained are helped by the suffrages of the faithful, but principally by the acceptable sacrifice of the altar.[1]
What has been firmly confessed in the Roman Catholic Church since the Reformation, as stated in this Tridentine decree is that there is such a temporary place or state of purging known as Purgatory in the intermediate period prior to the return of Christ. Roman Catholic believers ‘who die at peace with the church, but who are not perfect’[2] will not go straight to heaven.
They will, however, be in this intermediate realm or state, where their soul would undergo a process of penal and purifying suffering. This kind of suffering is intended for sins committed after baptism that were not atoned for in this life at the time of death. Living relatives and friends may help in reducing the degree and length of their love ones’ suffering in Purgatory. Through good works done by relatives and friends on behalf of the deceased, purgatorial suffering will be lessened or shortened. Such good works may come in the form of penance, almsgiving, paying the priest to say the mass or prayers, indulgences and other meritorious activities specified by the Catholic Church.
Papal absolution may also give outright passage for the departed soul. This process of penal suffering aims at the perfection or the purification, not probation, of the soul ‘until they are fully ready to be engaged in the beatific vision of God’[3] or until the final resurrection at the second coming of Christ.
The importance of this dogma is even emphasized by Trent’s mandate: “[T]he holy Synod enjoins on bishops that they diligently endeavour that the sound doctrine concerning Purgatory, transmitted by the holy Fathers and sacred councils, be believed, maintained, taught, and every where proclaimed by the faithful of Christ.”[4] It can be said that to be a faithful Roman Catholic believer one has to embrace and find assurance for salvation in this dogma, which the Second Ecumenical Council of Vatican also affirms:
The doctrine of purgatory clearly demonstrates that even when the guilt of sin has been taken away, punishment for it or the consequences of it may remain to be expiated or cleansed. They often are. In fact, in purgatory the souls of those who died in the charity of God and truly repentant, but who had not made satisfaction with adequate penance for their sins and omissions are cleansed after death with punishments designed to purge away their debt.
Clearly the Roman Catholic Church has not changed her basic tenet on Purgatory over time. Even in the recent change of emphasis from the penal to the preparatorial or purificatorial aspect of Purgatory, the Roman Church still maintains that it is necessary for a believer who died in the state of grace to temporarily pass through this realm before he can finally enter heaven.
Calvin’s Refutation of Trent’s Dogma of Purgatory
On the sixth session of Trent, Canon XXX was adopted by the Council which further stresses the doctrine of Purgatory. The weight of this dogma in the Catholic Church is found in its pronouncement of anathema or curse upon anyone who teaches contrary to this dogma: “If anyone says that once the grace of justification has been received, the fault of any repentant sinner is forgiven and the debt of eternal punishment is wiped out, in such a way that no debt of temporal punishment remains to be discharged, either in this world or later in purgatory, before entry to the kingdom of heaven can lie open: let him be anathema.”[5] The way this canon was formulated, it is obvious that the Catholic Church separates the guilt of sin that is forgiven and the ‘liability to punishment’ which according to this decree remains even if one has already been justified.
Scripture, however, denies this for it is clear, according to Calvin, that as the result of forgiveness of sin, “God withdraws his chastisements, and, forgetting his wrath and revenge, blesses us.”[6] That’s why when King David says, “Blessed is the one whose transgression is forgiven, whose sin is covered. Blessed is the man against whom the LORD counts no iniquity,” (Psalm 32:1-2a, ESV)[7] it is evident that he not only talks about forgiveness of sin but also the withdrawal of punishment upon a penitent person (cf. Psalm 32:5).[8] Thus David can call such a repentant sinner “blessed.” Calvin does acknowledge that there are times that God has to discipline His forgiven children “but it is in the way of admonition and correction – not vengeance.”[9] Just as a loving father disciplines his own children when they err so God uses the rod of discipline to His own people when they go astray that they may be trained to ‘act more wisely in the future.’
The idea of Purgatory however is a ‘profane fiction’ for Calvin, a devise that is ‘a kind of vaticination vented by ventriloquism.’[10] Calvin dismisses the doctrine of Purgatory as human ingenuity based on erratic assumptions and misinterpretation of the Holy Scripture. For Calvin, “Purgatory cannot stand without destroying the whole truth of Scripture.”[11]
Calvin’s Answer to Alleged Canonical Scripture Proofs and Early Church Teaching of Purgatory
Calvin mentions several canonical passages used by the Roman Church to support Purgatory. Matthew 12:32 (cf. Mark 3:28-29; Luke 12:10) is one of them. On this Calvin says, “When the Lord, they [the Roman Catholic teachers] say, makes known that the ‘sin against the Holy Spirit is not to be forgiven either in this age or in the age to come’, he hints at the same time that there is forgiveness of certain sins in the world to come?”[12] The Roman Catholic Church deduced from this text that there are sins that can be forgiven in the age to come. The point of the passage, however, has something to do with the guilt of sinning against the Holy Spirit. So Calvin wonders where Purgatory is to be found in the text.
Now granted that there is Purgatory, which for the Romanists a place where punishment of sins is served, Calvin asks, “Why do they not deny that their guilt is remitted in the present life?”[13] In other words, if sins are really punished and atoned for in Purgatory, why is it that Roman Catholics are unwilling to say that full forgiveness of sins is impossible in this life? For Calvin the point of the text is to emphasize that such grievous sin as the sin against the Holy Spirit has no hope of pardon whether in this age or “in the Last Day, on which the lambs will be separated from the goats by the angels of God and the Kingdom of Heaven will be cleansed of all offenses” [cf. Matt. 25:32-33].[14]
Besides, the ‘age to come’ in Catholic understanding does not coincide with the intermediate period of Purgatory but refers to the age after the second coming of Christ. By then ‘purgatory will have ceased to exist, according to Catholic teaching.’[15] Apparently the Catholic Church cannot use this text as proof for Purgatory without contradicting her other doctrines.
Another Gospel passage assumed by Catholics to support Purgatory is Matthew 5:25-26:
“Come to terms 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 until you have paid the last penny.”
It was common for Roman Catholics in Calvin’s time to interpret this passage metaphorically. Thus it was believed that the judge is God, the accuser the devil, the guard the angel, and the prison is assumed as Purgatory. This is absurd for if the devil is the accuser then the Lord must be saying that you have to come to terms with the devil, which is not the case in this Gospel account. Calvin thus retorts, “So for the Papists to find their Purgatory, they must have devils as friends and brothers.”[16]
Calvin accuses Rome of Scripture twisting for the passage teaches that “Christ, in order to urge his followers more cogently to equity and concord, meant to show the many dangers and evils to which men expose themselves who obstinately prefer to demand the letter of the law rather than to act out of equity and goodness.”[17] Calvin thus concludes, “Nothing is more evident [in this passage] than that the subject of Christ’s discourse is the cultivation of friendship among men.”[18] Where then will purgatory be found in this text?
From the Gospels, Calvin explores other New Testament books which the Romanists employ to support their doctrine. He mentions Philippians 2:10, wherein it says, “at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth.” Catholics in Calvin’s time take the phrase “under the earth” (or nether regions) to mean purgatory where souls agonize. Calvin counters them by saying,
They would not be reasoning badly if by the bowing of the knee the apostle designated true and godly worship. But since he is simply teaching that dominion has been given to Christ with which to subject all creatures, what hinders us from understanding by the expression “nether regions” the devils, who will obviously be brought before God’s judgment seat and who will recognize their judge with fear and trembling [cf. James 2:19; 2 Corinthians 7:15]?”[19]
Calvin believes that the disputed phrase simply refers to the demons who are destined to hell, which interpretation is far more plausible than purgatory. These hell-bound creatures of course will bow down to the Lordship of Christ not “of their own accord and by cheerful submission,”[20] but they shall certainly submit to Christ. So Calvin replies, “The fire of purgatory, according to them, is temporary, and will be done away at the day of judgment: hence this passage cannot be understood as to purgatory, because Paul elsewhere declares that this prophecy will not be fulfilled until Christ shall manifest himself for judgment.” Calvin then dismisses their appeal from Paul by saying, “Papists trifle childishly when they draw purgatory from his words.”[21]
The classic passage which Catholics depend on as Scriptural proof for Purgatory is Paul’s discussion in 1 Corinthians 3:12-15, particularly verses 13-15, which read: “each one’s work will become manifest, for the Day will disclose it, because it will be revealed by fire, and the fire will test what sort of work each one has done. If the work that anyone has built on the foundation survives, he will receive a reward. If anyone’s work is burned up, he will suffer loss, though he himself will be saved, but only as through fire.” This passage of course talks about “a fire of judgment that will reveal and test the works of the righteous.”[22] But Catholics would boldly claim that this is a literal fire which the souls of believers will have to pass through in order to be purified. This fire, for them, is no other than that of Purgatory.
Calvin begs to differ in interpreting this passage. Aware of the Papists use of this passage to support Purgatory, he argues, first, that the apostle uses fire here in a metaphorical, not literal, sense as means of examining one’s work, which in context refers to one’s teaching. “Here, then,” Calvin goes on, “the fire is the Spirit of the Lord, who by His examination tests which teaching is like gold, and which is like stubble. The nearer the teaching that God gives is brought to this fire, the clearer it will be. On the other hand what is produced in men’s minds will vanish immediately, as stubble is consumed by fire.”[23]
Second, this testing of one’s work, that is, one’s teaching, by fire “will receive praise and reward only after it has withstood the day of the Lord,”[24] which day of course refers to the last day when the Lord returns to judge everyone and everything. Those whose work are made of gold will survive and receive the reward. Again, because Roman Catholics believe that on the day of the Lord Purgatory will cease to exist this passage must not be talking about the fire of Purgatory.
Third, Calvin understands that what the apostle is saying here is that though the works of those other men will not survive through fire, they will nevertheless be saved. Noting the surrounding context, Calvin is right to say that “Paul is quite definitely speaking about ministers only”[25] when he talks about those men who will suffer the loss of their works yet will be saved.
To sum it all up, there is no way one can ground the doctrine of Purgatory in this Pauline passage either, except when that doctrine is assumed to be present, which Calvin has proven to be nowhere in the text.
Calvin also mentions of Augustine whom the Roman Catholic Church looks up to as an important figure in Church history who embraces the doctrine of Purgatory. Calvin notes that in his Confessions, Augustine relates of his mother’s ardent request at her deathbed that ‘she be remembered in the celebration of rites at the altar,’ which is the Catholic mass. However Calvin is quick to counter this by saying that Augustine desired for other’s approval on this request for clearly he was carried off by his ‘natural affection’ and not by the norm of Scripture.[26]
In another book, The Care to Be Taken for the Dead, Augustine also wrote about praying for the dead. However, Calvin cautions those who practice this kind of prayer to be circumspect lest they pray what is beyond, even against, God’s Word.
Lastly, Calvin finds inconsistency in some early church writers, even Augustine, on the issue of praying for the dead and purgatory. Augustine, according to Calvin, teaches in his commentary on John’s Gospel that “the resurrection of the flesh and everlasting glory are awaited by all, but that every man when he dies receives the rest that follows death if he is worthy of it.”[27] Calvin concludes, “Therefore, he [Augustine] bears witness that all godly men, no less than prophets, apostles, and martyrs, immediately after death enjoy blessed repose. If such is their condition, what, I beg of you, will our prayers confer upon them?”[28]
Augustine therefore, in this account, even believes that prayer for believers who have died is unnecessary. If they died believing in Christ they will go to heaven and hope for the resurrection of their body. If they died in their unbelief, they have no hope of entering heaven, even if millions of prayers are offered on their behalf.
Conclusion
John Calvin summarized his polemics against Roman Catholic doctrine of purgatory in his Institutes of the Christian Religion:
…[W]hen expiation of sins is sought elsewhere than in the blood of Christ, when satisfaction is transferred elsewhere, silence is very dangerous. Therefore, we must cry out with the shouting not only of our voices but of our throats and lungs that purgatory is a deadly fiction of Satan, which nullifies the cross of Christ, inflicts unbearable contempt upon God’s mercy, and overturns and destroys our faith. For what means this purgatory of theirs but that satisfaction for sins is paid by the souls of the dead after their death? Hence, when the notion of satisfaction is destroyed, purgatory itself is straightway torn up by the very roots. But if it is perfectly clear… that the blood of Christ is the sole satisfaction for the sins of believers, the sole expiation, the sole purgation, what remains but to say that purgatory is simply a dreadful blasphemy against Christ? (3:5:6)
The holding and purging place of the dead called Purgatory is for Calvin a “deadly fiction of Satan.” It nullifies the cross of Christ, shows contempt on the mercy of God, and overturns and destroys our faith. The Scripture proofs that the Roman Catholic Church uses to purport their doctrine of Purgatory are proven to be wanting. Besides their interpretation of these passages assumes too much they ended up twisting the Scripture and exegeting the texts rather poorly.
Even if they claim that the custom of the Church for 1300 years is on their side, this is no argument. The question is “By what revelation or authority is such the tradition of the church?” If the appeal to the early church means appealing to the error and distortion of the Biblical texts, then the appeal holds no ground. Besides, Calvin has shown that there are inconsistencies even in the writings of the early church on the doctrine of Purgatory and praying for the dead.
So we are left with the choice to believe rather on the finish work of Christ at the cross for our only justification. God in His mercy finished the work of salvation in Christ’s death and resurrection. To those who put their trust in Christ they are assured of salvation, including the inward sanctifying work of the Holy Spirit.
Endnotes
[1] J. Walterworth, trans. The Canons and Decrees of the Sacred and Ecumenical Council of Trent, (Chicago: The Christian Symbolic Publication Soc., 1848), 232-233.
[2] Loraine Boettner, Roman Catholicism (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing, 1962), 218.
[3] Michael J. Walsh, ed. Commentary on the Catechism of the Catholic Church (Collegevillle, Minnesota: The Liturgical Press, 1994), 218.
[4] J. Walterworth, trans. The Canons and Decrees of the Sacred and Ecumenical Council of Trent, 233.
[5] Session 6, Creeds and Dogmatic Decrees of the Council of Trent, 1545-63, in Creeds and Confessions of Faith in the Christian Tradition. Vol. II: Part Four: Creeds and Confessions of the Reformation Era, eds. Jaroslav Pelikan and Valerie Hotchkiss (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2003), 839.
[6] John Calvin, Acts of the Council of Trent: With the Antidote, in Selected Works of John Calvin: Tracts and Letters. Vol. 3: Tracts 3, ed. & trans. Henry Beveridge (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1983), 160.
[7] All Scripture quotations are from The Holy Bible, English Standard Version, (Wheaton: Crossway Bibles, 2001).
[8] Acts of the Council of Trent, 160.
[9] Ibid., 161.
[10] Ibid.
[11] Ibid.
[12] John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, 3.5.7.
[13] Ibid.
[14] Ibid.
[15] Cornelis P. Venema, The Promise of the Future (Edinburgh: Banner of Truth, 2000), 70.
[16] Calvin’s Commentary on Matthew 5:25, in A Harmony of the Gospels: Matthew, Mark and Luke: Vol. I, trans. A.W. Morrison (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1972), 187.
[17] Institutes 3.5.7.
[18] Commentary on Matthew 5:25-26.
[19] Institutes 3.5.8.
[20] Calvin Commentary on Philippians 2:10, in Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians and Colossians, trans. T. H. L. Parker (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, reprint 1980), 252.
[21] Ibid.
[22] Venema, The Promise of the Future, 70.
[23] Calvin’s Commentary on 1 Corinthians 3:13-15, in 1 Corinthians, trans. John W. Fraser (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, reprint 1980), 76.
[24] Ibid., 77.
[25] Ibid., 78.
[26] Institutes, 3.5.10.
[27] Ibid.
[28] Ibid. See also Augustine’s Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel According to St. John, 49.10.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Boettner, Loraine. Roman Catholicism, Phillipsburg: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing,1962.
Calvin, John. Acts of the Council of Trent: With the Antidote, in Selected Works of John Calvin: Tracts and Letters, Vol. 3: Tracts 3, ed. & trans. Henry Beveridge, eds. Henry Beveridge and Jules Bonnet, Grand Rapids: Baker, 1983.
__________. A Harmony of the Gospels: Matthew, Mark and Luke: Vol. I, CNTC, trans. A.W. Morrison, eds. D. W. Torrance & T. F. Torrance, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1972.
__________. Articles by the Theological Faculty of Paris with the Antidote, in Selected Works of John Calvin: Tracts and Letters, Vol. 1: Tracts 1, ed. & trans. Henry Beveridge, eds. Henry Beveridge and Jules Bonnet, Grand Rapids: Baker, reprint 1983.
__________. Commentary on the First Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians, trans. John W. Fraser, eds. D. W. Torrance & T. F. Torrance, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, reprint 1980.
__________. Institutes of the Christian Religion, trans. Ford Lewis Battles, ed. John T. McNeill, Philadelphia: Westminster, 1960.
__________. The Epistles of Paul the Apostle to the Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians and Colossians, CNTC, trans. T. H. L. Parker, eds. D. W. Torrance & T. F. Torrance, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980.
Flannery, Austin P. ed., Documents of Vatican II, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975.
Pelikan, Jaroslav & Valerie Hotchkiss. eds., Creeds and Dogmatic Decrees of the Council of Trent, 1545-63, in Creeds and Confessions of Faith in the Christian Tradition. Vol. II: Part Four: Creeds and Confessions of the Reformation Era, New Haven: Yale University Press, 2003.
Venema, Cornelis P. The Promise of the Future, Edinburgh: Banner of Truth, 2000.
Walsh, Michael J. ed., Commentary on the Catechism of the Catholic Church, Collegevillle, Minnesota: The Liturgical Press, 1994.
Waterworth, J. trans. The Canons and Decrees of the Sacred and Ecumenical Council of Trent, Chicago: The Christian Symbolic Publication Soc., 1848.
Light and Life 