Acts 9:36-42

[cutenickname]

Brothers and Sisters!

I am an Episcopalian. I have been here off and on for almost twenty years, which is wild to think. Nevermind who I have been.

What do you guys think of Acts 9:36-42?

Quote

36 Now there was in Joppa a disciple named Tabitha, which, translated, means Dorcas.[a] She was full of good works and acts of charity. 37 In those days she became ill and died, and when they had washed her, they laid her in an upper room. 38 Since Lydda was near Joppa, the disciples, hearing that Peter was there, sent two men to him, urging him, “Please come to us without delay.” 39 So Peter rose and went with them. And when he arrived, they took him to the upper room. All the widows stood beside him weeping and showing tunics and other garments that Dorcas made while she was with them. 40 But Peter put them all outside, and knelt down and prayed; and turning to the body he said, “Tabitha, arise.” And she opened her eyes, and when she saw Peter she sat up. 41 And he gave her his hand and raised her up. Then, calling the saints and widows, he presented her alive. 42 And it became known throughout all Joppa, and many believed in the Lord.

Where was Tabitha/Dorcas when she was dead? This is post-Resurrection and Ascension, so "Heaven" (the Intermediate State, the place/state where we are going to chill while waiting on our glorified and immortal bodies) is open for business.

Why was she raised from the dead? Presumably she was in "Heaven," in which case raising her from the dead in a mortal body that must die again seems cruel. If she was in "Purgatory," it still does not make sense for the same reason, if souls in this place/state are to be understood as guaranteed entry into Heaven.

It looks like this site is slower than it used to be, but I am very curious about Catholic views on this. I have never heard a Protestant take on these verses that satisfies.

[Credo in Deum]

1 hour ago, cutenickname said:

Brothers and Sisters!

I am an Episcopalian. I have been here off and on for almost twenty years, which is wild to think. Nevermind who I have been.

What do you guys think of Acts 9:36-42?

Where was Tabitha/Dorcas when she was dead? This is post-Resurrection and Ascension, so "Heaven" (the Intermediate State, the place/state where we are going to chill while waiting on our glorified and immortal bodies) is open for business.

Why was she raised from the dead? Presumably she was in "Heaven," in which case raising her from the dead in a mortal body that must die again seems cruel. If she was in "Purgatory," it still does not make sense for the same reason, if souls in this place/state are to be understood as guaranteed entry into Heaven.

It looks like this site is slower than it used to be, but I am very curious about Catholic views on this. I have never heard a Protestant take on these verses that satisfies.

Ahoy, 

Purgatory is not a place of reward but a place of penance and purification.  Why is this important? Because being sent out of a place of penance to return to a place of penance is in line with God’s justice while sending a person in a place of reward back to a place of penance would not be in line with God’s justice.  

Also keep in mind the view of purgatory as it is not considered a fun place and most visions and revelations we have about there usually have the occupants warning us about not wasting our time here since we don’t realize how easy we have it now as compared to purgatory.   
 

Commentary according to Haydock:

Ver. 41. Raising the dead to life can only be the work of God. This woman was raised to life for the comfort of the faithful, and the conversion of others. She herself might likewise have an opportunity of acquiring greater merit, otherwise the repose of another life is preferable to a return to the miseries of this world. D. Dion. Carthus.
 

https://www.ecatholic2000.com/haydock/ntcomment104.shtml

Edited August 21, 2020 by Credo in Deum

[cutenickname]

27 minutes ago, Credo in Deum said:

Ahoy, 

Purgatory is not a place of reward but a place of penance and purification.  Why is this important? Because being sent out of a place of penance to return to a place of penance is in line with God’s justice while sending a person in a place of reward back to a place of penance would not be in line with God’s justice.  

Also keep in mind the view of purgatory as it is not considered a fun place and most visions and revelations we have about there usually have the occupants warning us about not wasting our time here since we don’t realize how easy we have it now as compared to purgatory.   
 

Commentary according to Haydock:

Ver. 41. Raising the dead to life can only be the work of God. This woman was raised to life for the comfort of the faithful, and the conversion of others. She herself might likewise have an opportunity of acquiring greater merit, otherwise the repose of another life is preferable to a return to the miseries of this world. D. Dion. Carthus.
 

https://www.ecatholic2000.com/haydock/ntcomment104.shtml

I have a big red Douay with Haydock's commentary in it somewhere. Spent a hundred dollars on it maybe 6 or 7 years ago. Forgot that it existed. Probably in my book room.

Purgatory is an elegant solution; but I am not a strong believer in private revelation on such matters and the idea of it as a concretized place where some kind of punishment or penance is going on SEEMS unlikely to me based on the written revelation and tradition. My understanding of "purgatory/heaven/the intermediate state" is as being the same place/state of reward and purification (imo as witnessed by Scripture and The tradition of the Universal Church at least in the first 1000 years of Her history), a foretaste of what we will have at the immediate presence of God who is per Hebrews 12:29 a consuming fire. I am on a ramble and realize most of this second paragraph is hard to follow--I have edited many times trying not to sound like a Buddhist; I give up, just take my word for it: I am not a Buddhist.

[Credo in Deum]

9 minutes ago, cutenickname said:

I have a big red Douay with Haydock's commentary in it somewhere. Spent a hundred dollars on it maybe 6 or 7 years ago. Forgot that it existed. Probably in my book room.

Purgatory is an elegant solution; but I am not a strong believer in private revelation on such matters and the idea of it as a concretized place where some kind of punishment or penance is going on SEEMS unlikely to me based on the written revelation and tradition. My understanding of "purgatory/heaven/the intermediate state" is as being the same place/state of reward and purification (imo as witnessed by Scripture and The tradition of the Universal Church at least in the first 1000 years of Her history), a foretaste of what we will have at the immediate presence of God who is per Hebrews 12:29 a consuming fire. I am on a ramble and realize most of this second paragraph is hard to follow--I have edited many times trying not to sound like a Buddhist; I give up, just take my word for it: I am not a Buddhist.

The belief in purgatory is not so much elegant as it is practical. Tabitha was a disciple who did good deeds, died, and was brought back to life.  As a disciple she would have been baptized so that rules out limbo. As someone who did good deeds it shows she tried to live justly and in a state of grace, so if you don’t believe in Purgatory, then you have to believe she went to Heaven and was then sent back.  Yet that does not really fall in line with Gods nature of justice, does it? How can someone in Heaven, who’s seen the beatific vision of God, be sent back only to once again die the punishment of a sinner? If she was in Heaven she then was a saint and therefor no longer subject to death.  
 

The only solution to this problem is that there exists a middle ground between Heaven and Hell and that this middle ground, however it may be, allowed God to bring her back while not going against His justice.  In regards to the nature of Purgatory we can’t call it a reward because it’s not Heaven.  Heaven, total unity with God, is the reward. Purgatory, while a place of mercy, is still not a reward and is a place of purification and recompense.  The specifics of how that is done in Purgatory is a moot point. The fact remains that a place of middle ground, such as Purgatory, is the only explanation that makes sense when it comes to Tabitha’s situation.

[cutenickname]

To be clear I believe in Hell (which may or may not be populated) and in another place which is where the saints we pray for and the saints we ask to pray for us are together awaiting the resurrection. This second place is a place of glorification imo (borrowing a term from Calvin and the Christian East). 

Even if purgatory, as understood by Catholicism exists I have trouble imagining Tabitha being there "She was full of good works and acts of charity" I am not comfortable accusing her of attachment to sin. God has revealed things about her namely that she was a disciple, she lived a holy life, she died, she was raised from the dead (presumably for the comfort of the saints). Anything else we speculate about her ought flow from these revealed facts about her.

I always thought the limbo of the fathers seemed like a better alternative--but I have even less warrant for positing someone went there after the work on the cross than you have for positing she went to purgatory. Acts is obviously very early in the history of the Church, it is conceivable that she wasn't baptised, and thusly was unfit for "Heaven," there are I believe other examples of people being described as disciples before being baptised.

I have no solution I am fully comfortable with.

Thank you for responding.

 

Edited August 22, 2020 by cutenickname
deleted a redundant "though"

[Credo in Deum]

It is an interesting topic.  I notice you view purgatory as putting a negative light on Tabitha because it’s a place of penance and purification, yet you don’t view her returning from the dead in a negative light? What is this life but a journey in a temporary place of penance and purification? 
 

I don’t expect an answer to the question, I just ask you to think about it.  

Edited August 22, 2020 by Credo in Deum

[phatcatholic]

This isn't the only passage that is difficult (if not impossible) to understand without Purgatory. For example:

Quote

Mt 12:32 And whoever says a word against the Son of man will be forgiven; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come

The phrase “in the age to come” generally refers to the afterlife (cf. Mk 10:30; Lk 18:30; 20:34-35; Eph 1:21). But, there is no forgiveness in hell and forgiveness is not necessary in heaven. Thus, this must refer to purgatory.
 

Quote

Lk 12:46-48 the master of that servant will come on a day when he does not expect him and at an hour he does not know, and will punish him, and put him with the unfaithful. 47 And that servant who knew his master's will, but did not make ready or act according to his will, shall receive a severe beating. 48 But he who did not know, and did what deserved a beating, shall receive a light beating. Every one to whom much is given, of him will much be required; and of him to whom men commit much they will demand the more.

The coming of the master is certainly an allusion to Judgment, either once we die or at the end of time. At this time, those who knew His will and did not do it will be put with the unfaithful and punished severely. This is the condemnation of hell. But, those who sinned unknowingly will receive, at their Judgment, a light beating. But, hell is a severe punishment for those who knowingly sin, and there is no beatings (or punishment) for those in heaven. Thus, this light beating refers to Purgatory, where all our lesser sins are purged away.
 

Quote

Phil 2:10 that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth

Jesus is not worshiped in hell, and heaven is already mentioned in this verse, so the place (for lack of a better word) under the earth where knees bow at the name of Christ is Purgatory.
 

Quote

2 Tim 1:16-18 May the Lord grant mercy to the household of Onesiph'orus, for he often refreshed me; he was not ashamed of my chains, 17 but when he arrived in Rome he searched for me eagerly and found me-- 18 may the Lord grant him to find mercy from the Lord on that Day--and you well know all the service he rendered at Ephesus.

Onesiphorus is already dead, yet Paul still prays that he will find mercy from the Lord "on that day", or at the Judgment (cf. Rom 2:5,16; 1 Cor 1:8; 3:13; 5:5; 2 Cor 1:14; Phil 1:6,10; 2:16; 1 Thes 5:2,4,5,8; 2 Thes 2:2,3; 2 Tim 4:8). But, there is no mercy, and nor can we pray for, those in hell, and those in heaven do not need mercy. Thus, Paul is praying for the dead because he knows there's the possibility Onesiphorus is undergoing a purging.
 

Quote

1 Cor 3:12-17 Now if any one builds on the foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, straw, 13 each man's work will become manifest; for the Day will disclose it, because it will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test what sort of work each one has done. 14 If the work which any man has built on the foundation survives, he will receive a reward. 15 If any man's work is burned up, he will suffer loss, though he himself will be saved, but only as through fire. 16 Do you not know that you are God's temple and that God's Spirit dwells in you? 17 If any one destroys God's temple, God will destroy him. For God's temple is holy, and that temple you are.

Pay close attention to what is going on here. It is not in every day life that the fire is refining. It is on "the Day" which, as well have already seen, is Judgment Day. It is when we stand before Christ that the perishable works of a man's life will be consumed. "He will suffer loss, though he himself will be saved." This can only describe that last act of sanctification called Purgatory. "For our God is a consuming fire" (Heb 12:29). The flashes of his love "are flashes of fire, a most vehement flame" (So 8:6), and through it are "the spirits of just men made perfect" (Heb 12:23).

Even if you don't consider Maccabees a canonical book of the Bible, it is still a reliable historical record of Jewish belief and practice. In Maccabees, we read of their prayers and atonement for the dead:

Quote

2 Macc 12:43-45 He also took up a collection, man by man, to the amount of two thousand 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. 44 For if he were not expecting that those who had fallen would rise again, it would have been superfluous and foolish to pray for the dead. 45 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.

There is also a very interesting practice that takes place in the First Book of Samuel:

Quote

1 Sam 31:11-13 But when the inhabitants of Ja'besh-gil'ead heard what the Philistines had done to Saul, 12 all the valiant men arose, and went all night, and took the body of Saul and the bodies of his sons from the wall of Beth-shan; and they came to Jabesh and burnt them there. 13 And they took their bones and buried them under the tamarisk tree in Jabesh, and fasted seven days.

The Jews here seem to be fasting for the dead, which would further affirm their belief in a purging in the afterlife. And since the first Christians were Jews, it makes sense that their belief in Purgatory would continue among the Church they founded, and would be present in the New Testament texts that were written by that community. 

[cutenickname]

Phatcatholic. I will respond on the morrow. I love a good Biblical chew. (Your words were found, and I ate them, and your words became to me a joy and the delight of my heart, for I am called by your name, O LORD, God of hosts.
 Jeremiah 15:16)

I accept the canonicity of the deuterocanonical books. 1) My understandings and my faith formation are/were broadly Catholic 2) The Anglican Communion while not using those books to "build doctrine" on uses them, and has always used them, exactly like the rest of the Old Testament in liturgy, prayer, etc. 3) As an individual Christian working out my salvation in fear and trembling (Philippians 2:12), I do not feel bound to refuse to "build doctrine" on texts I believe were God-breathed (2 Tim 3:16),  because "the word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and of spirit, of joints and of marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart." (Hebrews 4:12)
 

Thank you for a response so dense with God's Word.

[cutenickname]

22 hours ago, phatcatholic said:

This isn't the only passage that is difficult (if not impossible) to understand without Purgatory. For example:

The phrase “in the age to come” generally refers to the afterlife (cf. Mk 10:30; Lk 18:30; 20:34-35; Eph 1:21). But, there is no forgiveness in hell and forgiveness is not necessary in heaven. Thus, this must refer to purgatory.
 

The coming of the master is certainly an allusion to Judgment, either once we die or at the end of time. At this time, those who knew His will and did not do it will be put with the unfaithful and punished severely. This is the condemnation of hell. But, those who sinned unknowingly will receive, at their Judgment, a light beating. But, hell is a severe punishment for those who knowingly sin, and there is no beatings (or punishment) for those in heaven. Thus, this light beating refers to Purgatory, where all our lesser sins are purged away.
 

Jesus is not worshiped in hell, and heaven is already mentioned in this verse, so the place (for lack of a better word) under the earth where knees bow at the name of Christ is Purgatory.
 

Onesiphorus is already dead, yet Paul still prays that he will find mercy from the Lord "on that day", or at the Judgment (cf. Rom 2:5,16; 1 Cor 1:8; 3:13; 5:5; 2 Cor 1:14; Phil 1:6,10; 2:16; 1 Thes 5:2,4,5,8; 2 Thes 2:2,3; 2 Tim 4:8). But, there is no mercy, and nor can we pray for, those in hell, and those in heaven do not need mercy. Thus, Paul is praying for the dead because he knows there's the possibility Onesiphorus is undergoing a purging.
 

Pay close attention to what is going on here. It is not in every day life that the fire is refining. It is on "the Day" which, as well have already seen, is Judgment Day. It is when we stand before Christ that the perishable works of a man's life will be consumed. "He will suffer loss, though he himself will be saved." This can only describe that last act of sanctification called Purgatory. "For our God is a consuming fire" (Heb 12:29). The flashes of his love "are flashes of fire, a most vehement flame" (So 8:6), and through it are "the spirits of just men made perfect" (Heb 12:23).

Even if you don't consider Maccabees a canonical book of the Bible, it is still a reliable historical record of Jewish belief and practice. In Maccabees, we read of their prayers and atonement for the dead:

There is also a very interesting practice that takes place in the First Book of Samuel:

The Jews here seem to be fasting for the dead, which would further affirm their belief in a purging in the afterlife. And since the first Christians were Jews, it makes sense that their belief in Purgatory would continue among the Church they founded, and would be present in the New Testament texts that were written by that community. 

The verses you provided all work together to legitimate the Apostolic practice of praying for the dead. I think my issue is with how the theological imagination perceives purgatory. My sense of things is more in line with Eastern (Catholic and Orthodox) understandings of people being in the same "place," but having different experiences of that place depending on the state of their soul, as opposed to Western (Catholic and Protestant) of discrete places with very distinct degrees of proximity to the Trinity.

[phatcatholic]

On 9/14/2020 at 12:19 PM, cutenickname said:

The verses you provided all work together to legitimate the Apostolic practice of praying for the dead. I think my issue is with how the theological imagination perceives purgatory. My sense of things is more in line with Eastern (Catholic and Orthodox) understandings of people being in the same "place," but having different experiences of that place depending on the state of their soul, as opposed to Western (Catholic and Protestant) of discrete places with very distinct degrees of proximity to the Trinity.

I think it helps us to think of these "final destinies" (CCC, no. 1021) as places because, as material beings that take up space, we have to make sense of the soul going somewhere after we die. But, I don't think the Catholic Church has settled the matter of whether or not the afterlife consists of distinct "places" or distinct "experiences."

It's interesting that the Catechism seems to avoid referring to Heaven, Purgatory, and Hell as places. It says Heaven is "the state of supreme, definitive happiness" (no. 1024). Purgatory is "the final purification of the elect" (no. 1031). Hell is the "state of definitive self-exclusion from communion with God and the blessed" (no. 1033).

I think you're free to think of it in either way, as long as you believe that Heaven, Hell, and Purgatory actually exist.

[cutenickname]

1 hour ago, phatcatholic said:

I think it helps us to think of these "final destinies" (CCC, no. 1021) as places because, as material beings that take up space, we have to make sense of the soul going somewhere after we die. But, I don't think the Catholic Church has settled the matter of whether or not the afterlife consists of distinct "places" or distinct "experiences."

It's interesting that the Catechism seems to avoid referring to Heaven, Purgatory, and Hell as places. It says Heaven is "the state of supreme, definitive happiness" (no. 1024). Purgatory is "the final purification of the elect" (no. 1031). Hell is the "state of definitive self-exclusion from communion with God and the blessed" (no. 1033).

I think you're free to think of it in either way, as long as you believe that Heaven, Hell, and Purgatory actually exist.

I always forget Catholicism does not actually demand belief in the ontologically problematic "place" stuff.

[phatcatholic]

I read this from the Catechism today, and it about knocked me out of my chair. This is from the section on the "Our Father" prayer. It's relevant to what we have been discussing about the afterlife as a "place":

IV. "WHO ART IN HEAVEN"

2794 This biblical expression does not mean a place ("space"), but a way of being; it does not mean that God is distant, but majestic. Our Father is not "elsewhere": he transcends everything we can conceive of his holiness. It is precisely because he is thrice holy that he is so close to the humble and contrite heart.

"Our Father who art in heaven" is rightly understood to mean that God is in the hearts of the just, as in his holy temple. At the same time, it means that those who pray should desire the one they invoke to dwell in them. (St. Augustine, De serm. Dom. in monte 2,5,18:PL 34,1277.)

"Heaven" could also be those who bear the image of the heavenly world, and in whom God dwells and tarries. (St. Cyril of Jerusalem, Catech. myst. 5:11:PG 33,1117.)

[cutenickname]

That is good stuff. The CCC often seems dry and uninteresting to me as opposed to Scripture which never does (unless one is faced with some super long list of begots); but when it is good the CCC is very good indeed. Thank you for posting this.

 

[phatcatholic]

Really? I absolutely love the Catechism. I think it's a beautiful, sometimes even poetic presentation of Catholicism. It makes me cry, sometimes. Check out this paragraph on prayer:

2560 "If you knew the gift of God!" (Jn 4:10) The wonder of prayer is revealed beside the well where we come seeking water: there, Christ comes to meet every human being. It is he who first seeks us and asks us for a drink. Jesus thirsts; his asking arises from the depths of God's desire for us. Whether we realize it or not, prayer is the encounter of God's thirst with ours. God thirsts that we may thirst for him.

[cutenickname]

3 hours ago, phatcatholic said:

Really? I absolutely love the Catechism. I think it's a beautiful, sometimes even poetic presentation of Catholicism. It makes me cry, sometimes. Check out this paragraph on prayer:

2560 "If you knew the gift of God!" (Jn 4:10) The wonder of prayer is revealed beside the well where we come seeking water: there, Christ comes to meet every human being. It is he who first seeks us and asks us for a drink. Jesus thirsts; his asking arises from the depths of God's desire for us. Whether we realize it or not, prayer is the encounter of God's thirst with ours. God thirsts that we may thirst for him.

That is another good one, but the Catechism isn't the Bible. Nothing, to me, compares with the God-breathed words. The Bible ain't no common book, no mere exposition of revelation, it is revelation. The Book is alive. Test it.