From: allan@hc.ti.com (Allan Poindexter)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: free grace
Date: 31 Jul 92 05:42:12 GMT

Indentation guide:
             hedrick@geneva.rutgers.edu (OFM)
      poindexter@hc.ti.com
   jhpb@sarto.budd-lake.nj.us (Joseph H. Buehler)
poindexter@hc.ti.com

	     (Our Catholic readers may notice that he has come very
	     close to reinventing a certain Catholic doctrine...)

      As explained to me the doctrine of rewards would differ from the
      doctrine of purgatory in at least three ways:

   I don't quite see where Purgatory comes into this.  You basically
   start to expound the Catholic doctrine of Heaven, and contrast
   Purgatory to it, seems like:

It seemed OFM was noticing that the free grace movement`s doctrine of
rewards seems to have some similarities to purgatory.  I was trying to
point out some possible differences between the doctrines.

   Here is the Catholic doctrine: The happiness of Heaven consists in the
   vision of the Divine Essence.  The clarity of this vision, and thus
   the degree of happiness, is a function of the degree of sanctity that
   one reaches on earth.  But everyone is perfectly happy.  The usual
   example is two different size glasses full of water.  Which is
   fuller?  So it is with souls in Heaven.  Some are happier that
   others, but everyone completely content.

I am unclear.  Is this a description of heaven, purgatory, or both?  If
you are saying that there is nothing to avoid in Purgatory you would be
the first RC I have ever encountered to say it.  Your analogy with
glasses and your last sentence are also points made by people in the
free grace movement with regard to heaven.  The point was that rewards
only has some similarities with purgatory but there are still important
differences.  I am guessing from what you say here that you agree.  But
that depends on whether you are talking here about heaven (as it seems
you are) or whether you are including purgatory.

   Catholics believe that one's place in Heaven is set for all eternity
   at the moment of death.  Purgatory doesn't change this.

So would it be safe to say that Catholics hold to something like the
doctrine of rewards but that it is distinct from purgatory?  Again, that
Distinction was what I was trying to point out by contrasting the two.

      3.  Purgatory is traditionally protrayed as a place outside of
      heaven.  Rewards are something that are part of the economy of
      heaven itself as opposed to an antechamber to heaven.  (N.B.  I
      say purgatory is *traditionally* portrayed this way.  I know of at
      least one Roman Catholic philosopher who has proposed that
      purgatory is a part of heaven.  I will leave it to the s.r.c RCs
      to clarify this issue.)

   I'm curious who the philosopher is.  As stated, it is rather silly,
   because the essence of Heaven is the Beatific Vision, which excludes
   all suffering.  The principal suffering of Purgatory is deprivation
   of this vision.

The philosopher is Peter Kreeft of Boston College.  He posits three
stages to heaven: Purgatory, the Communion of Saints, and the Beatific
Vision.  (I am doing this from memory so I may get some of the details
wrong.  The book is at home.)  He thinks that all three stages start to
some degree when we enter heaven but that at some point we will finish
Purgatory.  This is laid out in _Everything_You_Ever_Wanted_to_Know_
_About_Heaven_But_Never_Dreamed_of_Asking_.  (Title also from memory but
it's in that neighborhood.)

dex