The only way that could make sense is if in purgatory, repentence brought on purgative fires, but there is no repentence after death

Now one could argue that if there is always repentance, it would be "forced" and not really something achieved

After death you're stuck with whatever you did during your life

And there is no changing that, but if someone achieves salvation through grace, God could lead to repentance and purification with grace in purgatory

Then the purpose of this life is clear and irreversible: to attain salvation.

If salvation is possible after death through purgation, then the purpose of this life is not clear.

No, purgation comes after salvation is sure

Purgation does not save you, it purifies you for Heaven

Now that's where the masochism rears its ugly head

Why would it remove a person's need to REPENT?

Sorry, don't know why that all-capsed

Anyway.

DEBUNKED

The whole idea of purgative fire is the completion of God's justice.

Whereas absolution of sin is God's mercy.

If one does not seek mercy, why would our Lord's justice be so... light?

Just seems like a demonic trick to convince you that hellfire is purgative fire to me.

One is eternal punishment

The other is temporal

Caused by the nature of sin

So purgatory is a place of measured time?

Well...no

But how are you supposed to describe it otherwise?

I don't know enough about time and divine places as to study how one applies to the other

The divine places exist outside of time.

The whole concept of indulgences is to try and put a comprehensible spin on their nature.

You sure that everything not in this life is outside time?

If divine places exist outside of time then it is metaphysically inconsistent to have temporal punishment in a supra-temporal plane.

We know that God is outside time, and that is consistent with his knowledge of everything

Does praying Salve Regina in front of a Marian shrine actually remove 500 tangible days of purgatory?

Probably not.

But try wracking your mind around the concept otherwise, m8

I wouldn't say that purgatory has to be outside time. But of course, I don't even really know what being outside time would imply beyond the fact of not being limited to knowing the present

Now the teaching is that purgatory removes the temporal punishment

Is "temporal punishment" the official term for the dogma?

or whatever the latin equivalent is

It is mentioned in the catechism, but I don't know what are the original documents that describe it. Is is also said that "This purification frees one from what is called the "temporal punishment" of sin

You can't interpret scriptures on your own @Mozalbete ⳩ saying that they imply Purgatory. Show me the Church Fathers saying that or your interpretation is false.

The Church fathers constantly refer to praying for the dead and purification.

Tertulian says " Indeed, she prays for his soul, and requests refreshment for him meanwhile, and fellowship (with him) in the first resurrection; and she offers (her sacrifice) on the anniversaries of his falling asleep".

Cyprian or Carthage says "For to adulterers even a time of repentance is granted by us, and peace is given. Yet virginity is not therefore deficient in the Church, nor does the glorious design of continence languish through the sins of others. The Church, crowned with so many virgins, flourishes; and chastity and modesty preserve the tenor of their glory. Nor is the vigour of continence broken down because repentance and pardon are facilitated to the adulterer. It is one thing to stand for pardon, another thing to attain to glory: it is one thing, when cast into prison, not to go out thence until one has paid the uttermost farthing; another thing at once to receive the wages of faith and courage. It is one thing, tortured by long suffering for sins, to be cleansed and long purged by fire; another to have purged all sins by suffering. It is one thing, in fine, to be in suspense till the sentence of God at the day of judgment; another to be at once crowned by the Lord.".

Gregory of Nyssa says: ""If a man distinguish in himself what is peculiarly human from that which is irrational, and if he be on the watch for a life of greater urbanity for himself, in this present life he will purify himself of any evil contracted, overcoming the irrational by reason. If he has inclined to the irrational pressure of the passions, using for the passions the cooperating hide of things irrational, he may afterward in a quite different manner be very much interested in what is better, when, after his departure out of the body, he gains knowledge of the difference between virtue and vice and finds that he is not able to partake of divinity until he has been purged of the filthy contagion in his soul by the purifying fire"

I think it is clear that Purgatory isn't just some silly modern invention.

And by the way, the Church fathers can interpret Scripture as much as I can, which is why some fathers interpreted Scripture and were wrong. My interpretations, of course, are always inside what is left for interpretation. Something isn't false because the Fathers didnt mention. What kind of logic is that? The fathers mentioning something means that something was already a thing back then, in a more or less explicit way.