“According to Romish theology, all past sins both as respects their eternal and temporal punishment are blotted out in baptism and also the eternal punishment of the future sins of the faithful. But for the temporal punishment of post-baptismal sins the faithful must make satisfaction either in this life or in purgatory. In opposition to every such notion of human satisfaction Protestants rightly contend that the satisfaction of Christ is the only satisfaction for sin and is so perfect and final that it leaves no penal liability for any sin of the believer” (John Murray, Redemption: Accomplished and Applied, 51).

###

We live in strange times. Belief in purgatory within Protestantism is currently on the rise, see Christianity Today’s guest column – “Purgatory is Hope” – by Kevin Timpe. The column begins:

A recent study suggests that belief in purgatory among Catholics in the United States is on the decline. But there is also reason for thinking that belief in purgatory is on the rise among Protestants. My own attraction to the doctrine comes primarily from the work of a Wesleyan philosopher, Jerry Walls. While Walls’ Hell: The Logic of Damnation (Notre Dame, 1992) is one of numerous extended philosophical treatments of hell, his Heaven: The Logic of Eternal Joy (Oxford, 2002) is a rare book-length treatment of the philosophical issues surrounding heaven. Heaven also contains a chapter providing the best philosophical defense of purgatory that I’m aware of. Walls there argues that the Christian doctrine of “salvation must involve changing us to love God as we ought [for] the aim of salvation is to make us holy, and this is what fits us for heaven.” Walls completed his trilogy with Purgatory: The Logic of Total Transformation (Oxford, 2011). It is dedicated to defending the doctrine of purgatory “as a rational theological inference from other important biblical and theological commitments … for those who take seriously the role of human freedom in salvation.”

 Wesleyan-Arminian theology and Romish theology are kissing cousins: both advocate an imperfect atonement. Since their understanding of the atonement is not fully biblical, so too inferred doctrines, e.g. purgatory, human participation in salvation, etc., are not fully biblical.