PURGATORY AND PRAYERS FOR THE DEAD

Says Killen:—
“The Platonic philosophy taught the necessity of a state of purification after death; and a modification of this doctrine formed part of at least some of the systems of gnosticism. It is inculcated by Tertullian, the great champion of Montanism; and we have seen how, according to Mani, departed souls must pass, first to the moon, and then to the sun, that they may thus undergo a two-fold purgation. Here, again, a tenet originally promulgated by the heretics, became at length a portion of the creed of the church. The Manichaeans, as well as the gnostics, rejected the doctrine of the atonement, and as faith in the perfection of the cleansing virtue of the blood of Christ declined, a belief in purgatory became popular.”—Ancient Church, period 2, sec. 2, chap. 4, paragraph 15.FACC 272.3

Of course an acceptance of the philosophy of Plato, was an acceptance of the heathen dogma of the inherent immortality of the soul, and from that the doctrine of purgatory is a legitimate outgrowth. In the writings of the Fathers themselves, we have already found all these errors and superstitions plainly taught. See especially Hermas and Tertullian.FACC 272.4

Again we quote from Bingham:—
“Next after prayer for kings, followed prayer for the dead, that is, for all that were departed in the true faith in Christ.... We have heard Arnobius say already, that they prayed for the living and the dead in general. And long before him Tertullian speaks of oblations for the dead, for their birthdays, that is, the day of their death, or a new birth unto happiness, in their annual commemorations. He says every woman prayed for the soul of her deceased husband, desiring that he might find rest and refreshment at present, and a part in the first resurrection, and offering an annual oblation for him on the day of his death. In like manner he says the husband prayed for the soul of his wife, and offered annual oblations for her.... Cyril of Jerusalem [A. D. 315-386], in describing the prayer after consecration, says, We offer this sacrifice in memory of all those that are fallen asleep before us, first patriarchs, prophets, apostles, and martyrs, that God by their prayers and intercessions may receive our supplications; and then we pray for our holy fathers and bishops, and all that are fallen asleep before us, believing it to be a considerable advantage to their souls to be prayed for, whilst the holy and tremendous sacrifice lies upon the altar.”—Antiquities, book 15, chap. 3.FACC 273.1

When Paul warned the Colossians against being spoiled “through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ,” he mentions as connected with it “voluntary humility [asceticism] and worshiping of angels” (demons under the name of departed men), a thing introduced by men “vainly puffed up” by their “fleshly mind.” Colossians 2:8, 18. Whoever has given the matter any thought, knows that the heathen religion was Spiritualism, and so when the church became paganized, she assumed a form of Spiritualism; for purgatory, prayers to and for the dead, and the worship of martyrs, are nothing else. This doctrine remains in the Catholic Church to-day; but Protestant denominations have generally repudiated it. Why this ancient dogma of “the church” should be rejected, while others no more ancient, and resting on no better authority, are accepted, we cannot determine. There are some things for which not even “a reasonable creature” can give a reason. But it would seem from the following that in the matter of purgatory, a part, at least, of the ancient church was even more Catholic than Catholicism itself:—“Many of the ancients believed that there would be a fire of probation, through which all must pass at the last day, even the prophets and apostles, and even the Virgin Mary herself not excepted. Which is asserted not only by Origen, Irenaeus, and Lactantius, but also by St. Ambrose, who says after Origen, that all must pass through the flames, though it be John the evangelist, though it be Peter.”—Bingham’s Antiquities, book 15, chap. 3.FACC 273.2

“PIOUS” FRAUDS.FACC 274.1

Referring again to the testimony which we quoted concerning the kind of morality inculcated by the Greek philosophy, the reader will find that lying was thought to be a virtue, and often to be preferred to truth. When the early Christians accepted the Greek philosophy it was not long before they adopted the heathen maxim that “a lie is better than a hurtful truth,” as is proved by the following testimony:—
“The code of heathen morality supplied a ready apology for falsehood, and its accommodating principles soon found too much encouragement within the pale of the church. Hence the pious frauds which were now perpetrated. Various works made their appearance with the name of some apostolic man appended to them, their fabricators thus hoping to give currency to opinions or to practices which might otherwise have encountered much opposition. At the same time many evinced a disposition to supplement the silence of the written word by the aid of tradition.... During this period the uncertainty of any other guide than the inspired record was repeatedly demonstrated; for, though Christians were removed at so short a distance from apostolic times, the traditions of one church sometimes diametrically contradicted those of another.”—Killen’s Ancient Church, period 2, sec. 2, chap. 5, paragraph 7.FACC 274.2

It may be allowable to quote also in this place an extract already quoted from Mosheim. It is this:—
“By some of the weaker brethren, in their anxiety to assist God with all their might [in the propagation of the Christian faith], such dishonest artifices were occasionally resorted to, as could not, under any circumstances, admit of excuse, and were utterly unworthy of that sacred cause which they were unquestionably intended to support. Perceiving, for instance, in what vast repute the poetical effusions of those ancient prophetesses, termed Sybils, were held by the Greeks and Romans, some Christian, or rather, perhaps, an association of Christians, in the reign of Antoninus Pius [A. D. 138-161], composed eight books of Sybilline verses, made up of prophecies respecting Christ and his kingdom.... Many other deceptions of this sort, to which custom has very improperly given the denomination of pious frauds, are known to have been practiced in this and the succeeding century. The authors of them were, in all probability, actuated by no ill intention, but this is all that can be said in their favor, for their conduct in this respect was certainly most ill-advised and unwarrantable. Although the greater part of those who were concerned in these forgeries on the public, undoubtedly belonged to some heretical sect or other, and particularly to that class which arrogated to itself the pompous denomination of gnostics, I yet cannot take upon me to acquit even the most strictly orthodox from all participation in this species of criminality; for it appears from evidence superior to all exception, that a pernicious maxim, which was current in the schools not only of the Egyptians, the Platonists, and the Pythagoreans, but also of the Jews, was very early recognized by the Christians, and soon found amongst them numerous patrons, namely, that those who made it their business to deceive with a view of promoting the cause of truth, were deserving rather of commendation than censure.”—Commentaries, cent. 2, sec. 7.FACC 275.1

He says also that the disputing of the Fathers “had victory rather than truth for its object.” If this was done by the teachers in the church, it is easy to imagine what was the prevalent standard; and remember that this was within less than fifty years after the death of the last apostle, so rapidly did the “mystery of iniquity” work. Now there is just as much reason for following the custom of “the early church” in the matter of “pious” frauds as in the matter of substituting Sunday for Sabbath. Both were violations of the decalogue; but the “pious” fraud has the advantage of the other on the score of antiquity, since it was common long before Sunday began to take the place of the Sabbath. People should be consistent; if they are going to adopt one practice of the early church, they should not reject another which stands on the same authority, and which is more ancient.FACC 276.1