Jerry L. Walls’ Protestant View of Purgatory: The Logic of Total Transformation

“Purgatory on this account is not in any way about satisfying divine justice or paying a debt of punishment. It is entirely a matter of continuing and completing the process of sanctification, of making us truly holy so that we can be fully at home in the presence of God and enjoy his presence with no troubling shadows to darken our fellowship with him.” – Jerry L. Walls

Introduction: Understanding Walls’ Protestant Perspective on Purgatory

Jerry L. Walls, a prominent Protestant theologian and philosopher, has written extensively on the afterlife, producing what he calls a trilogy on these important topics. His three major works include “Hell: The Logic of Damnation” (1992), “Heaven: The Logic of Eternal Joy” (2002), and “Purgatory: The Logic of Total Transformation” (2012). What makes Walls’ contribution particularly significant is that he approaches purgatory from a distinctly Protestant perspective, seeking to recover what he sees as a biblical doctrine that was unfortunately lost during the Reformation’s reaction against Roman Catholic abuses.

In his preface to “Purgatory: The Logic of Total Transformation,” Walls admits that he had no initial plans to write a trilogy when he began with his book on hell. As he explains in the book’s preface, the first volume was actually a revised version of his PhD dissertation at Notre Dame. The progression from hell to heaven to purgatory represents his evolving theological journey and his conviction that Protestant theology needs to reconsider this ancient Christian doctrine.

Walls’ approach to purgatory is revolutionary within Protestant circles because he argues that properly understood, purgatory is not only compatible with Protestant theology but actually makes better sense of key Protestant commitments about sanctification than traditional Protestant alternatives. He carefully distinguishes his “sanctification model” of purgatory from the traditional Catholic “satisfaction model,” arguing that the former is fully consistent with justification by faith alone while the latter is not.

Chapter 1: The Historical Development of Purgatory According to Walls

Walls begins his comprehensive study by tracing the historical development of the doctrine of purgatory, noting that “A Short History of Purgatory” forms the foundation for understanding how this doctrine emerged and evolved. He recognizes that the doctrine has ancient roots that predate Christianity itself, with similar concepts appearing in various religious traditions.

According to Walls’ historical analysis, the birth of purgatory as a formal doctrine occurred gradually between the early church fathers and the medieval period. He notes that the doctrine emerged from “five factors conducive to birth” which included the church’s pastoral concerns, theological reflections on the nature of sin and sanctification, biblical interpretation, liturgical practices, and popular religious experiences. The doctrine was not simply invented but grew organically from the church’s reflection on Scripture and experience.

Walls carefully documents how early church fathers like Clement of Alexandria, Cyprian of Carthage, and Augustine contributed to the development of purgatorial thinking. As he notes in his book, Augustine’s influence was particularly significant. Augustine wrote in his work “The City of God”: “It is a matter that may be inquired into, and either ascertained or left doubtful, whether some believers shall pass through a kind of purgatorial fire.” This tentative exploration by Augustine would later become more developed in medieval theology.

The medieval period saw the full flowering of the doctrine, with theologians like Thomas Aquinas providing sophisticated philosophical and theological frameworks for understanding purgatory. Walls observes that during this period, the doctrine became increasingly associated with the satisfaction model – the idea that purgatory was primarily about paying a debt of temporal punishment owed to divine justice. This development would prove problematic and contribute to the Protestant rejection of the doctrine during the Reformation.

Chapter 2: Protestant Objections and Why Walls Believes They Miss the Mark

In his chapter “Protestant Objections and Alternatives to Purgatory,” Walls systematically addresses the reasons why Protestants have historically rejected purgatory. He identifies several key objections that emerged during the Reformation and continue to influence Protestant thinking today.

The first and most significant objection concerns justification by faith alone. Protestant reformers like Martin Luther and John Calvin argued that purgatory implied a form of works righteousness that contradicted the gospel of grace. Luther was particularly vehement in his rejection, seeing the sale of indulgences related to purgatory as a fundamental corruption of the gospel. As Walls documents, Luther viewed the “lucrative benefits of purgatory” as evidence of the Roman Church’s departure from biblical Christianity.

However, Walls argues that this objection is based on a misunderstanding. He contends that when purgatory is understood primarily as sanctification rather than satisfaction, it becomes fully compatible with justification by faith. As he explains: “Purgatory on this account is not in any way about satisfying divine justice or paying a debt of punishment. It is entirely a matter of continuing and completing the process of sanctification.”

The second major Protestant objection concerns the sufficiency of Christ’s atonement. If Christ’s death fully paid for our sins, the argument goes, then there is no need for any additional purification or punishment in purgatory. Walls responds that the sanctification model of purgatory does not diminish Christ’s work but rather applies it. Purgatory is not about adding to Christ’s atonement but about the transformative application of that atonement to make us fully holy.

A third objection relates to the Protestant understanding of what happens at death. Many Protestants believe that sanctification is completed instantly at death, making purgatory unnecessary. Walls challenges this assumption, arguing that there is no biblical or logical reason to believe that sanctification, which is a gradual process throughout life, suddenly becomes instantaneous at death. He writes: “If sanctification is a process that requires our cooperation in this life, why should we assume it requires no cooperation in the next?”

Walls also addresses John Wesley’s perspective on purgatory, noting that Wesley and his followers developed a doctrine of entire sanctification that in some ways parallels purgatorial thinking. Wesley believed in the possibility of Christian perfection in this life, but also recognized that most Christians die without achieving it. This creates a theological problem that purgatory could potentially solve.

Chapter 3: Models of Purgatory – Distinguishing Satisfaction from Sanctification

One of Walls’ most important contributions is his careful analysis of different models of purgatory. In his chapter “Models of Purgatory,” he identifies three primary models along a spectrum: the pure satisfaction model, the pure sanctification model, and various satisfaction/sanctification hybrid models.

The Satisfaction Model

The satisfaction model, which Walls associates with much of medieval and post-medieval Catholic theology, understands purgatory primarily in terms of paying a debt to divine justice. According to this model, even after sins are forgiven, there remains a debt of temporal punishment that must be paid. Walls quotes from historical sources showing that this view held that “a man, not a reprobate at the hour of death, becomes a perfect saint the moment after, whatever be his debts to the divine justice, which indeed will have to be paid to the last farthing.”

Walls finds this model problematic for several reasons. First, it seems to separate sanctification from satisfaction in a way that is artificial and theologically questionable. Second, it appears to make salvation partly dependent on human suffering rather than solely on God’s grace. Third, it creates problems for understanding how indulgences and prayers for the dead actually function.

The Sanctification Model

The sanctification model, which Walls champions, understands purgatory as the completion of the sanctification process that begins in this life. Rather than paying a debt to divine justice, souls in purgatory are being transformed and made holy so they can fully enjoy God’s presence. Walls explains: “While it may be possible to conceive of scenarios that transform us without pain… the reality is that our encounters with God’s holy love are often, if not typically, painful, as we discern the contrast between his truth, goodness, and beauty, and the deceit, evil, and ugliness in our hearts.”

This model has several advantages according to Walls. It maintains continuity with the sanctification process in this life, it emphasizes God’s transformative love rather than punitive justice, and it makes better sense of why purgatory would be necessary for souls to enter heaven. The pain involved is not punitive but transformative, like the pain of physical therapy that restores health.

Hybrid Models

Walls also discusses various hybrid models that combine elements of both satisfaction and sanctification. These models, exemplified in Dante’s “Divine Comedy,” understand purgatory as involving both the payment of temporal punishment and spiritual transformation. While Walls finds these models more nuanced than pure satisfaction models, he ultimately argues for a pure sanctification model as most theologically coherent and biblically defensible.

Chapter 4: Personal Identity, Time, and the Nature of Purgatorial Transformation

In his chapter “Personal Identity, Time, and Purgatory,” Walls addresses crucial philosophical questions about how purgatory relates to human nature and the continuity of personal identity through death. This discussion is essential because different views of human nature lead to different understandings of how purgatory might function.

Walls explores various philosophical positions on personal identity, including dualism (the view that humans consist of both body and soul) and materialism (the view that humans are purely physical beings). He notes that traditional understandings of purgatory have typically assumed some form of dualism, where the soul can exist separately from the body and undergo purification between death and resurrection.

However, Walls argues that purgatory is compatible with various views of personal identity. Even if one holds to a materialist view of human nature, purgatory could occur after the resurrection in transformed resurrection bodies. The key point is not the metaphysical nature of the person undergoing purgatory, but the moral and spiritual transformation that occurs.

Regarding time, Walls addresses the question of how long purgatory might last. He rejects mechanical views that assign specific temporal punishments for specific sins, arguing instead that purgatory lasts as long as necessary for complete transformation. This could vary greatly between individuals depending on their spiritual condition at death. Some might need extensive purification while others might need very little.

Walls also discusses what he calls “the logic of character and time,” arguing that genuine character transformation typically requires time and cannot happen instantaneously. Just as character formation in this life is a gradual process involving countless decisions and experiences, so the completion of sanctification in purgatory would naturally involve a process rather than an instant transformation.

Chapter 5: Purgatory and Theories of a Second Chance

One of the most controversial aspects of Walls’ discussion involves the relationship between purgatory and what he calls “second chance” theories. In his chapter “Purgatory and Theories of a ‘Second Chance,'” Walls carefully distinguishes between purgatory proper and postmortem evangelism or probation.

Traditional purgatory doctrine, as Walls emphasizes, is not about second chances for salvation. It assumes that those in purgatory are already saved and are simply being prepared for heaven. However, Walls explores whether the logic of purgatory might extend to those who die without having made a definitive choice for or against God.

Walls discusses what he calls “optimal grace” versus “sufficient grace.” He argues that while Christian theology has traditionally held that everyone receives sufficient grace for salvation, not everyone receives optimal grace – the most favorable circumstances for responding to God’s love. This raises questions about divine justice and whether some form of postmortem opportunity might be necessary for those who never had a fair chance to respond to the gospel.

While Walls is sympathetic to arguments for postmortem evangelism, he maintains that this is a separate issue from purgatory proper. Purgatory is about sanctification for the saved, not evangelism for the lost. However, he suggests that Protestant theology needs to take these questions seriously rather than dismissing them out of hand.

Chapter 6: C.S. Lewis and the Prospect of Mere Purgatory

Walls devotes significant attention to C.S. Lewis’s understanding of purgatory, which he calls “Mere Purgatory.” Lewis, perhaps the most influential Christian writer of the twentieth century, affirmed a Protestant version of purgatory that closely aligns with Walls’ own views.

In his “Letters to Malcolm,” Lewis wrote: “Our souls demand Purgatory, don’t they? Would it not break the heart if God said to us, ‘It is true, my son, that your breath smells and your rags drip with mud and slime, but we are charitable here and no one will upbraid you with these things, nor draw away from you. Enter into the joy’? Should we not reply, ‘With submission, sir, and if there is no objection, I’d rather be cleaned first.’ ‘It may hurt, you know’—’Even so, sir.'”

This passage captures what Walls sees as the essential insight of the sanctification model of purgatory. It is not imposed as an external punishment but is rather the natural demand of the redeemed soul that longs to be made fully holy. The pain involved is not retributive but restorative, like the pain of surgery that brings healing.

Walls also discusses Lewis’s imaginative portrayal of purgatorial themes in “The Great Divorce,” where Lewis depicts the journey from hell to heaven as requiring profound personal transformation. The ghosts from hell must become solid, real people capable of enjoying heaven, and this transformation is often painful as they must let go of their sins and illusions.

Lewis’s affirmation of purgatory was also connected to his practice of praying for the dead. As Lewis wrote: “Of course I pray for the dead. The action is so spontaneous, so all but inevitable, that only the most compulsive theological case against it would deter me. And I hardly know how the rest of my prayers would survive if those for the dead were forbidden. At our age, the majority of those we love best are dead. What sort of intercourse with God could I have if what I love best were unmentionable to him?”

Chapter 7: The Biblical Foundation for Purgatory in Walls’ Theology

While Walls acknowledges that the word “purgatory” does not appear in Scripture, he argues that the concept is deeply biblical. He identifies several key passages that support the idea of postmortem purification and transformation.

1 Corinthians 3:11-15 – The Foundation Text

Walls, like many purgatory advocates throughout history, sees 1 Corinthians 3:11-15 as the most important biblical text supporting purgatory. Paul writes: “For no other foundation can anyone lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ. Now if any one builds on the foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, straw—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. If the work which any man has built on the foundation survives, he will receive a reward. If any man’s work is burned up, he will suffer loss, though he himself will be saved, but only as through fire.”

Walls argues that this passage describes a process of purification by fire that occurs after death but before final glory. The person is saved (so not in hell) but suffers loss and goes through fire (so not yet in heaven). This intermediate state of purification is precisely what purgatory doctrine describes. The fire burns away the “wood, hay, and straw” of our imperfect works while preserving the “gold, silver, and precious stones” of what was done in genuine love for God.

Matthew 12:31-32 – Forgiveness in the Age to Come

Jesus states: “Therefore I tell you, people will be forgiven for every sin and blasphemy, but blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven. Whoever speaks 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.”

Walls notes that this passage implies that some sins can be forgiven in the age to come, which suggests some form of postmortem purification. While this is not explicitly stated, the implication seems clear: if Jesus needs to specify that one particular sin cannot be forgiven in the age to come, this suggests that other sins can be.

Matthew 5:25-26 – The Prison Parable

Jesus teaches: “Come to terms quickly with your accuser while you are on the way to court with him, or your accuser may hand you over to the judge, and the judge to the guard, and you will be thrown into prison. Truly I tell you, you will never get out until you have paid the last penny.”

While this passage has an obvious application to earthly relationships, Walls notes that early church fathers saw it as also referring to the afterlife, where believers might need to “pay the last penny” of their spiritual debts before entering heaven. This payment is not understood as earning salvation but as completing the process of sanctification.

The Logic of Total Transformation: Walls’ Core Argument

The heart of Walls’ argument for purgatory rests on what he calls “the logic of total transformation.” This logic proceeds through several key steps that build a cumulative case for the necessity of purgatory in any coherent Christian theology.

Step 1: The Requirement of Holiness

Walls begins with the biblical teaching that “without holiness no one will see the Lord” (Hebrews 12:14). Heaven is not simply a place of reward but a state of perfect communion with God. To enjoy this communion, we must be holy as God is holy. As Revelation 21:27 states, “Nothing impure will ever enter it, nor will anyone who does what is shameful or deceitful.” This is not an arbitrary requirement but reflects the nature of the relationship between a holy God and his people.

The requirement of holiness is not merely external or legal but involves a deep transformation of character. We must become the kind of people who can genuinely enjoy God’s presence and participate fully in the life of heaven. This transformation involves not just the removal of sin but the positive development of virtue and Christ-like character.

Step 2: The Incompleteness of Sanctification at Death

Walls observes that very few, if any, Christians achieve complete sanctification in this life. Even the greatest saints acknowledge their ongoing struggle with sin and their need for continued growth in holiness. If we are honest about the spiritual condition of most Christians at death, we must acknowledge that they are not yet fully sanctified.

This creates what Walls calls “the sanctification gap” – the distance between where most Christians are spiritually at death and where they need to be to enter heaven. Protestant theology has traditionally dealt with this gap by asserting that sanctification is completed instantaneously at death, but Walls finds this solution problematic and without biblical support.

Step 3: The Problem with Instantaneous Sanctification

Walls argues that the idea of instantaneous sanctification at death faces several serious problems. First, there is no biblical text that teaches this doctrine. It appears to be a theological inference rather than a biblical teaching. Second, it seems to contradict the nature of sanctification as we experience it in this life, which is always a gradual process requiring our cooperation.

Moreover, instantaneous sanctification would seem to override human freedom and personality. If God can make us instantly holy at death, why doesn’t he do so earlier? Why does he allow us to struggle with sin throughout our earthly lives if he could simply make us perfect by divine fiat? The doctrine of instantaneous sanctification seems to create more theological problems than it solves.

Step 4: The Natural Solution of Purgatory

Given these considerations, Walls argues that purgatory provides the most natural and coherent solution. Purgatory allows for the completion of sanctification in a way that maintains continuity with the process in this life. It respects human freedom and the integrity of personal transformation while ensuring that all who are saved will eventually be made fully holy.

As Walls explains it, purgatory is simply “the continuation of the sanctifying grace of God in the lives of those who have died in Christ but are not yet fully Christlike in character.” It is not a second chance for salvation but the completion of salvation for those who have already been justified by faith.

Theological Implications of Walls’ View

Walls’ Protestant doctrine of purgatory has significant implications for various areas of Christian theology. These implications help demonstrate why he believes recovering this doctrine is important for contemporary Christianity.

Implications for Soteriology (Doctrine of Salvation)

Walls’ view maintains the Protestant emphasis on justification by faith alone while providing a more coherent account of sanctification. Salvation remains entirely by grace through faith, but the application of that salvation to transform us into Christ’s likeness may continue after death. This helps resolve the tension many Protestants feel between the “already” of justification and the “not yet” of complete sanctification.

The sanctification model of purgatory also emphasizes that salvation is not merely forensic (legal declaration) but transformative. God doesn’t just declare us righteous; he makes us righteous. Purgatory is part of the process by which God completes what he began in regeneration, fulfilling his promise that “he who began a good work in you will carry it on to completion until the day of Christ Jesus” (Philippians 1:6).

Implications for Theodicy (Problem of Evil)

Walls argues that purgatory helps address certain aspects of the problem of evil. Many people die young or in circumstances that prevented them from experiencing the full sanctifying work of God in this life. Purgatory provides space for God to complete his work in these individuals, ensuring that premature death or difficult circumstances don’t prevent anyone from reaching full spiritual maturity.

Additionally, purgatory helps explain how God can be perfectly just while also being perfectly merciful. Those who are saved by grace but die with significant spiritual immaturity are not simply granted instant perfection (which might seem unjust to those who struggled for holiness in this life) nor are they excluded from heaven (which would seem unmerciful). Instead, they undergo the transformation necessary to fit them for heavenly life.

Implications for Pastoral Theology

Walls notes that belief in purgatory has significant pastoral implications. It provides comfort to those who mourn, knowing that their loved ones who died in Christ but were far from perfect are being perfected by God’s love. It also provides motivation for holy living, knowing that the sanctification we neglect in this life will need to be completed in the next.

The doctrine also supports the practice of praying for the dead, which Walls sees as a natural expression of Christian love and fellowship. If the dead in Christ are undergoing sanctification, it makes sense that we would pray for them just as we pray for the sanctification of living believers. This practice, far from being superstitious, expresses our continued communion with those who have died in Christ.

Implications for Eschatology (Doctrine of Last Things)

Walls’ view provides a more nuanced understanding of the intermediate state between death and resurrection. Rather than souls simply “sleeping” or existing in a static state of waiting, they are actively being transformed and prepared for the full glory of the resurrection life. This makes the intermediate state meaningful and purposeful rather than merely a waiting period.

It also helps explain the biblical teaching about degrees of reward in heaven. If everyone is instantly perfected at death, it’s hard to understand how there could be meaningful differences in heavenly reward. But if sanctification continues after death, with some requiring more transformation than others, the concept of different rewards becomes more intelligible.

Addressing Common Objections to Walls’ Position

Throughout his work, Walls addresses numerous objections to his Protestant doctrine of purgatory. Understanding his responses to these objections helps clarify and strengthen his position.

Objection 1: “Purgatory Undermines Justification by Faith”

This is perhaps the most serious Protestant objection. Critics argue that if we need purgatory to complete our salvation, then we are not truly saved by faith alone. Walls responds that this objection confuses justification with sanctification. Justification – being declared righteous before God – is indeed by faith alone and is complete at the moment of conversion. Purgatory is not about justification but about sanctification – being made actually holy.

Walls uses the analogy of adoption to illustrate this point. When a child is adopted, they immediately and fully become a member of the family (justification). But learning to live as a member of that family, developing family traits and values, takes time (sanctification). Purgatory is simply the completion of this process of learning to be who we already are in Christ.

Objection 2: “The Thief on the Cross Went Straight to Paradise”

Many Protestants point to Jesus’ promise to the thief on the cross – “Today you will be with me in paradise” (Luke 23:43) – as evidence against purgatory. Walls offers several responses. First, “paradise” in first-century Jewish thought didn’t necessarily mean the final heavenly state but could refer to the blessed compartment of Sheol where the righteous awaited resurrection. Second, even if the thief went directly to heaven, this could be an exceptional case. Perhaps his suffering on the cross and his humble faith constituted his purgatory.

More importantly, Walls argues that we shouldn’t build doctrine on exceptional cases. The thief’s situation was unique – dying alongside Jesus himself, receiving a direct promise from the Lord. Most Christians die in very different circumstances, and we need a theology that addresses the normal case, not just the exceptional.

Objection 3: “Paul Said to Be Absent from the Body is to Be Present with the Lord”

Paul’s statement in 2 Corinthians 5:8 is often cited as evidence that Christians go immediately to heaven at death. Walls responds that Paul is expressing his preference and confidence, not giving a detailed theology of what happens immediately after death. Moreover, being “present with the Lord” doesn’t necessarily mean being in the final heavenly state. Christians in purgatory would still be “with the Lord” in an important sense, just as Christians on earth are “in Christ.”

Walls also notes that Paul elsewhere speaks of death as “sleep” (1 Thessalonians 4:13-14) and of the need for judgment and purification (1 Corinthians 3:11-15). A comprehensive biblical theology must account for all these passages, not just select proof texts.

Objection 4: “Purgatory is a Medieval Invention”

Some critics argue that purgatory was unknown in the early church and only developed in the medieval period. Walls acknowledges that the fully developed doctrine of purgatory emerged gradually, but he argues that the essential ideas – postmortem purification, prayers for the dead, the intermediate state – are present from the earliest Christian writings.

He cites numerous early church fathers who taught forms of postmortem purification, including Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Gregory of Nyssa, and Augustine. While these early teachings were not as systematic as later medieval doctrine, they show that the basic concept of purgatory has ancient roots in Christian tradition.

The Ecumenical Promise of Walls’ Approach

One of Walls’ most significant contributions is showing how a properly understood doctrine of purgatory could serve ecumenical purposes, bringing Protestants and Catholics closer together. He argues that many Protestant objections to purgatory are based on misunderstandings or outdated versions of the doctrine.

Walls notes that contemporary Catholic theology has largely moved away from the satisfaction model toward the sanctification model. Recent papal statements and the Catechism of the Catholic Church emphasize purification and transformation rather than punishment and debt payment. Pope Benedict XVI, for example, described purgatory as an “interior fire” that transforms and purifies through encounter with Christ.

If both Protestants and Catholics can agree that purgatory is primarily about sanctification rather than satisfaction, Walls believes this doctrine need no longer divide the churches. Instead, it could become a point of convergence, helping Christians understand how God’s saving grace completes its work in human lives.

Practical and Spiritual Benefits of Believing in Purgatory

Walls argues that recovering the doctrine of purgatory has numerous practical and spiritual benefits for Christian life and faith. These benefits go beyond theological coherence to touch on daily Christian experience and practice.

Benefit 1: Realistic Hope

Purgatory provides realistic hope for ordinary Christians who know they are far from perfect. Rather than facing the terrifying thought that they might not be “good enough” for heaven or the presumptuous assumption that God will overlook their sins, believers can trust that God will complete his work of transformation in them. This hope is both comforting and motivating.

As Walls explains: “The doctrine of purgatory is good news for those of us who know we are not yet saints but who trust in God’s determination to make us so. It assures us that God will not give up on us, that he will complete what he has begun, that nothing will ultimately separate us from his transforming love.”

Benefit 2: Meaningful Response to Death

Belief in purgatory provides a meaningful way to respond to the death of fellow Christians. Rather than simply assuming they are “in a better place” regardless of their spiritual condition, or worse, wondering whether they were “saved enough,” we can pray for their continued transformation and trust God to complete his work in them.

This practice of praying for the dead, far from being morbid or superstitious, maintains our sense of communion with departed believers and expresses our continued love for them. It acknowledges that death does not sever the bonds of Christian fellowship.

Benefit 3: Motivation for Spiritual Growth

Understanding that sanctification may continue after death provides proper motivation for spiritual growth in this life. Rather than thinking we can coast into heaven on the basis of a past conversion experience, we are motivated to cooperate with God’s sanctifying grace now, knowing that what we neglect in this life will need to be addressed in the next.

This doesn’t make salvation dependent on works but recognizes that genuine faith produces transformation. The more we allow God to transform us now, the less painful purification we will need later. This provides a balanced motivation that avoids both legalism and antinomianism.

Benefit 4: Theodicy and Divine Justice

Purgatory helps address questions about divine justice and the inequality of human experiences. Why do some Christians have decades to grow in faith while others die shortly after conversion? Why do some have optimal circumstances for spiritual growth while others face constant obstacles? Purgatory assures us that God will ensure everyone who is saved reaches full spiritual maturity, regardless of their earthly circumstances.

This doesn’t minimize the importance of earthly life but recognizes that God’s work of transformation is not limited by human circumstances or lifespans. God’s justice ensures that everyone will have the opportunity to become fully who they were meant to be in Christ.

Walls’ Vision for Protestant Recovery of Purgatory

In concluding his comprehensive study, Walls calls for Protestants to reconsider their rejection of purgatory. He argues that this rejection was based more on reaction against medieval abuses than on careful theological reflection. The sale of indulgences and other corruptions associated with purgatory in the late medieval period were indeed problematic, but they don’t negate the biblical and theological validity of the doctrine itself.

Walls envisions a Protestant doctrine of purgatory that maintains core Reformation insights while recovering ancient Christian wisdom. This doctrine would affirm justification by faith alone while recognizing that sanctification is a process that may continue after death. It would emphasize God’s transforming grace rather than human works or punishment. It would see purgatory not as a place of divine wrath but as a continuation of divine love that refuses to leave us in our sins.

Such a recovery would have numerous benefits for Protestant theology and practice. It would provide a more coherent account of sanctification, a more realistic view of spiritual growth, and a more meaningful understanding of the communion of saints. It would also remove a significant barrier to Christian unity, allowing Protestants and Catholics to find common ground on this historically divisive issue.

Contemporary Relevance and Application

Walls’ work on purgatory speaks to numerous contemporary concerns in Christian theology and practice. In an age where many Christians struggle with questions about salvation, sanctification, and the afterlife, his carefully reasoned approach provides helpful insights and pastoral wisdom.

Addressing Modern Anxieties About Death and Judgment

Many contemporary Christians experience anxiety about death and judgment, unsure whether they are “good enough” for heaven. The traditional Protestant answer – that sanctification is completed instantly at death – can seem like magical thinking to modern believers who are acutely aware of their ongoing struggles with sin. Walls’ doctrine of purgatory provides a more psychologically satisfying answer: God will complete his work of transformation in us, even if it takes time after death.

This view maintains the assurance of salvation while acknowledging the reality of ongoing spiritual imperfection. Believers can have confidence that God will not abandon them while also taking seriously the need for continued transformation. This balanced approach avoids both the presumption of cheap grace and the despair of works righteousness.

Responding to Religious Pluralism

While Walls is careful to distinguish purgatory from “second chance” theories, his work does address questions raised by religious pluralism. In a world where people are increasingly aware of those who die without hearing the gospel, the logic of purgatory suggests that God’s transforming grace might extend beyond the boundaries we typically assume.

Walls doesn’t develop this implication fully, but he notes that if sanctification can continue after death for believers, this raises questions about whether some form of postmortem opportunity might exist for those who never had a genuine chance to respond to the gospel in this life. While maintaining the uniqueness of Christ and the necessity of faith, Walls’ approach opens space for hope regarding those who die in ignorance rather than rebellion.

Contributing to Spiritual Formation

The doctrine of purgatory as Walls presents it has significant implications for spiritual formation and discipleship. If sanctification is a process that may continue after death, this affects how we understand spiritual growth in this life. Rather than seeing sanctification as an all-or-nothing achievement, we can understand it as an ongoing journey that God is committed to completing.

This perspective encourages patience with ourselves and others in the process of spiritual growth. It also emphasizes the importance of developing spiritual disciplines and practices that cooperate with God’s transforming grace. The habits we form in this life will shape our readiness for the life to come.

Conclusion: The Enduring Significance of Walls’ Contribution

Jerry L. Walls’ work on purgatory represents a major contribution to contemporary Christian theology. By carefully distinguishing between different models of purgatory and showing that the sanctification model is fully compatible with Protestant theology, he has opened new possibilities for ecumenical dialogue and theological reflection.

His argument that purgatory is not a Catholic addition to the gospel but a biblical doctrine that helps us understand how God completes his saving work deserves serious consideration from all Christians. The logic of total transformation – that God must and will complete the work of making us holy – is compelling both biblically and theologically.

Walls shows that purgatory, properly understood, is not about earning salvation or paying for sins but about the completion of God’s transforming grace in human lives. It is not a place of divine punishment but a process of divine love, not a denial of Christ’s sufficient atonement but an application of it. This understanding addresses many traditional Protestant concerns while recovering important insights from the broader Christian tradition.

The pastoral and practical benefits of this doctrine are significant. It provides comfort to those who mourn, motivation for those pursuing holiness, and hope for all who know their need for transformation. It maintains the tension between divine grace and human responsibility, between the “already” of justification and the “not yet” of complete sanctification.

Perhaps most importantly, Walls’ work demonstrates that Protestant theology need not be bound by sixteenth-century polemics. Just as the Reformers called the church to return to Scripture and reassess traditional doctrines, so contemporary Protestants can reassess Reformation positions in light of Scripture and the broader Christian tradition. The recovery of purgatory, far from betraying Protestant principles, may actually fulfill them by taking seriously the biblical call to holiness and God’s commitment to complete his saving work.

As we face questions about death, judgment, and the afterlife in our contemporary context, Walls’ careful scholarship and theological reflection provide valuable resources. His vision of purgatory as the completion of God’s transforming love offers hope to all who long for the day when we shall be like Christ, for we shall see him as he is (1 John 3:2). In the meantime, we can trust that whether in this life or the next, God will complete the good work he has begun in us, transforming us by his grace until we are fit for the eternal joy of his presence.

The doctrine of purgatory, as Walls presents it, is ultimately about the triumph of divine love. It assures us that God’s love is stronger than death, that his transforming grace extends beyond the grave, and that nothing – not even our own sinfulness and imperfection – can ultimately separate us from his determination to make us holy. This is not a message of fear but of hope, not of human achievement but of divine grace, not of separation from God but of his unrelenting pursuit of our complete transformation.

In recovering this ancient Christian doctrine for contemporary Protestant theology, Walls has provided a great service to the church. His work challenges us to think more carefully about sanctification, to take seriously the holiness of heaven, and to trust more fully in God’s commitment to complete his saving work. Whether or not one accepts all of Walls’ arguments, his contribution demands serious engagement from all who seek to understand what it means to be saved by grace and transformed by love.

The logic of total transformation that Walls articulates is finally the logic of divine love – a love that will not rest until we are fully conformed to the image of Christ, a love that pursues us beyond death itself, a love that refuses to leave us in our sins but insists on our complete transformation. This is the deepest meaning of purgatory: not a place of punishment but a process of love, not a denial of grace but its ultimate expression, not a barrier to heaven but the pathway to it.

As Walls himself concludes in his masterwork: “Purgatory is the good news that God will not give up on us, that he will complete what he has begun, that his love is stronger than our sin, and that nothing can ultimately prevent him from making us into the people he created us to be. This is not a doctrine to fear but to celebrate, not a threat to Protestant theology but its fulfillment, not a barrier to Christian unity but a bridge to it.”

May this examination of Jerry L. Walls’ profound theological contribution inspire further reflection on these crucial matters of faith, sanctification, and our ultimate destiny in Christ. The conversation he has initiated deserves to continue, as Christians of all traditions seek to understand more fully the height and depth and breadth of God’s transforming love, which pursues us relentlessly until we are made perfect in Christ.

© 2025, LearnTheology.com. All rights reserved.