Another Question on indulgences

[vgrandja]

Indulgences. Isn’t that the same thing as lust? Money, greed, gaming, sex, overeating, etc.

I don’t know anyone personally who has the problem with indulgences, but in the world where people seek material goods I think it’s okay to have something, but too much. I know there must be a Bible passage that will explain what happens to a person over time.

I, for one, enjoy reading the Bible. I’m not keen on being materialistic.

 

[windlessuser]

Indulgences. Isn’t that the same thing as lust? Money, greed, gaming, sex, overeating, etc.

I don’t know anyone personally who has the problem with indulgences, but in the world where people seek material goods I think it’s okay to have something, but too much. I know there must be a Bible passage that will explain what happens to a person over time.

I, for one, enjoy reading the Bible. I’m not keen on being materialistic.

Your confusing the secular term for indulgence with what the church means by indulgence. I believe this was adequately explained in this thread. Start reading from page 1

 

[alfonzay_123]

I thought that you could do penance either way.

Example- if someone had a really terrible life becuase they had been doing bad things, then they would get their heavenly reeward much sooner after death- that those who have NOT suffered on this earth, even though they were just as bad.

At least, that is my interpretation of penance.

Peace xx

 

[windlessuser]

I thought that you could do penance either way.

Example- if someone had a really terrible life becuase they had been doing bad things, then they would get their heavenly reeward much sooner after death- that those who have NOT suffered on this earth, even though they were just as bad.

At least, that is my interpretation of penance.

Peace xx

hmm, thats a strange way of looking at it. What brought you to think like that?

 

[Umvard]

Dear bona fides,

I know what you are saying. It’s just that I don’t agree with it as an Oriental. This talk of jurisdiction is peculiar to the Latin Tradition. Orientals (and Easterns) don’t think in that way. While Latins believe that the power of the keys is applied separately in the manner of jurisdiction for the living, and in the manner of suffrage for the dead, Orientals and Easterns generally believe that the power of the keys is applied in the manner of suffrage for all instances, both for the living and the dead.

As an example, during the Rite of Reconciliation, whereas the Latin Church uses the indicative method to absolve (e.g., the priest says, “I absolve you from all your sins”), the Oriental and Eastern Churches use the peccatory method (e.g., the priest says, "may God absolve you from all your sins).Marduk

You guys (bona fides and mardukm) are both much more enlightened in these matters than I, but this comment you, mardukm, have made on Reconciliation doesn’t seem to apply very well to the case at hand. It appears to be more of a question of the position of the priest acting in the place of Christ and the authority therein. I am wondering: how does “may God absolve you from all your sins” make sense when you know that God has granted the power of binding and loosing etc. but are not using it? Instead, you provide a blessing that it seems any lay person could give. Could you explain why you Orientals do that? Thanks.

 

[bona_fides_1]

BF,

I have a question about the above. While I understand that an indulgence can’t be applied to another member of the Church militant, I wonder what you mean that there is no concept of taking someones penalty (i.e. making satisfaction) against his will or even with his consent.

Do you have any thoughts regarding vicarious satisfaction? For instance see St Thomas here:

Thank you for your thoughts!
VC

Thanks for the question VC. I am not ignoring you but wanted to to gather thoughts and do some research before I responded. Unfortunately, I got busy and never got back around to giving more thought to this and how to adequately respond.

Let me say this for now - the Catholic belief in Communion of the Saints permits us all to assist each other in offsetting each others failures - even when members of the church are in estrangement due to grave sin. This is one of the huge benefits of being a formal Catholic - even if one is not conforming to the Christian mores the grace available through the Church itself and the communion of the saints can help gain for us the helps a sinner needs to overcome his vices and get back to God - much more so than a single soul can do who is not a formal Catholic. This is related to the concept of vicarious atonement - a concept that is necessary for Christ’s good works to have any applicable merit to humanity at large in the first place. This is why that initial baptism is so very important - even for those infants who are not able to form their consciences yet.

My prior comments about us being unable to apply our sufferage directly to another living soul is based on my own personal insights and logic that I believe is consistent with Catholic teaching. Above all else a person’s freewill is sacrosanct and can not be deprecated or nullified by forced charity by way of sufferage, Yet we have various saintly accounts that God chooses certain souls to be victim-souls for others to win more souls to God. I believe this is all tied to God’s justice and that when sufferage is acceptable to God that He does in fact release more “actual grace” (not the sanctifying grace) that operates with greater efficacy on certain souls in need that are destined to respond to it by operation of their freewill working through active cooperation with Divine Providence. But this is an indirect sort of help that does not circumvent freewill - it only gives more intensity of resistible grace (the exact inner workings are a mystery of course) that potentiates or draws the freewill with greater zeal to cooperate and repent. I think this principal is seen in God sending his angel to Jesus to strengthen Him during his agony in the garden and in other such helps. Thus I believe that freewill is still sacrosanct (and must be respected by God as a condition of supernatural Love) but through some mystery God can fortify the freewill with a refreshing breeze of clarity and urgency to draw more sinners to cooperate and repent. Thus any temporal penalty still due must in the economy of grace be actually earned by either the living soul who can merit by supernatural works and cooperation or by God electing by His own Mercy to declare the temporal penalty satisfied. It is therefor the mystery of the inner workings of Mercy as it is applied to the economy of grace (which may very well include vicarious sufferage) and God’s sovereign will that are principal here. The apostolic authority of binding and loosing does not apply since its outside the scope of the Church’s jurisdiction and is not a juridical decision for the living to make but rather a divine ordinance reserved only to God.

*Romans 9:15 For He says to Moses, “I WILL HAVE MERCY ON WHOM I HAVE MERCY, AND I WILL HAVE COMPASSION ON WHOM I HAVE COMPASSION.” *

Those are my current thoughts - admittedly not well developed yet and I think outside the current scope of official Church teaching and therefor still open for personal insights and contemplation/exhibition.

BF

 

[Verbum_Caro]

Thank you BF. I’ll be interested in what you come up with.

Please keep in mind, too, that I am speaking solely of satisfaction done on behalf of another. I am not speaking of merit narrowly defined, nor petitioning for actual grace for another.

I am also distinguishing between the satisfaction that is granted by way of an indulgence and satisfaction won through a good act (both present, by the way, in gaining an indulgence). I am speaking only of the latter type of satisfaction.

Also, note, that I am not speaking of satisfaction imposed for a remedial purpose, for example the penance given in confession.

It seems to me that satisfaction personally won can be transferred to other living members of the Church. I think this is consistent with the mind of the Church.

For instance, see this from the Catholic Encyclopedia:

We can thus make some sort of reparation to the justice of God for our own offences against Him, and by virtue of the Communion of the Saints, the oneness and solidarity of the mystical Body of Christ, we can also make satisfaction and reparation for the sins of others.

or ST Supp., 71, 1

through the intention of the doer who does certain works specially for the purpose that they may profit such persons: so that those works become somewhat the works of those for whom they are done, as though they were bestowed on them by the doer. Wherefore they can avail them (. . .) for the fulfillment of satisfaction

VC

 

[PJM]

=windlessuser;

The church teaches that an indulgence is what we receive when the Church lessens the temporal (lasting only for a short time) penalties to which we may be subject even though our sins have been forgiven. Is it for the above reasons why the church created the principle of indulgence? If so, can’t this be spread to those who are suffering with their choices -especially n-c and non believers so that they may have hope? Then again, does the church even have the practical power to grant an indulgence in the current age, seeing as the church and state have become so separate?/QUOTE]

The power of the Church is God’s promise and at the same time, a mandate. Mt. 28:19-20.

The power of the “key’s to heaven” rest with the Pope and the Magisterium as commanded by Christ in Matt. 16:19 and Matt. 18:18. These last two verses assign UNLIMITED authority for Complete Goveranance of the CC for all time to the Pope and his successors. Were this not so, them Matt. 28:19-20 would not be possible.

You are intirely correct in recogonizing that Only Christ Catholic Church has the Power to forgive sins [John 20:19-23], and that four of the Seven Sacraments, in different ways and to different degrees, have the God Given Power to remit sins! Two of them have the power to not only remit sins. but also the lasting effects that sin leave on our souls; EVEN AFTER they have been forgiven.

Just as the Sacraments are a “Catholic Privilege,” so too are Indulgences; and for the same reason. Jesus Founded Only One Church /One faith; and that desire continues to the present day. There are many GREAT reasons to be a Catholic including the Sacrament of KNOWN forgiveness of sins; getting the most possible Intimate Relationship with our God possible here on earth, as He [God] receives us while at the same time we receive Him in Catholic Holy Communion. Not a sign, or a symbol; BUT JESUS CHRIST HIMSELF. And then the issue of Indulgences that permit a necessary payback to God for the EFFECTS of our sins, while we are still able to do so before death.

There are more Graces availble to Catholics than to non-Catholics, so the possibility of Eternal Life in God’s Presence is also greater for Catholics. On the other hand; “one who has more; more shall be expected of them.” So being a Catholic requires more of a committment; more of a willingness to take up our crosses daily; as God demands. Catholics will be judged not just on Obedience to the Commandmets; but also th Lwas of The Catholic Church.

Protestants accept Martin Luthers 450 year old “New enlightened understanding” of knowing more and knowing Better than God, Christ, the Bible and the Apostles and Saints
Before and After Luther. OSAS. It’s not biblical and it’s not true.That’s a real iffy bet for salvation.

Love and payers,

 

[alfonzay_123]

hmm, thats a strange way of looking at it. What brought you to think like that?

Well that’s my thinking because it just seems like the just/right thing to do. like God wouldn’t make people suffer for the fun of it, no.
He’s just, therefore if their life is full of penance then they’d do less penance when they die. So then, they’d get to Heaven sooner.

That’s just how i think of it.
Peace xx

 

[windlessuser]

Well that’s my thinking because it just seems like the just/right thing to do. like God wouldn’t make people suffer for the fun of it, no.
He’s just, therefore if their life is full of penance then they’d do less penance when they die. So then, they’d get to Heaven sooner.

That’s just how i think of it.
Peace xx

Ah, i kinda see your line of thinking. So what do think now, having read this thread?

 

[Verbum_Caro]

if someone had a really terrible life becuase they had been doing bad things, then they would get their heavenly reeward much sooner after death- that those who have NOT suffered on this earth, even though they were just as bad.

alfonzay,

St. Thomas mentions something like this, but he points out that those “bad things” that happen in this life are only punishment until we make them our penance by bearing them patiently out of love of God and in reparation for our sins. I don’t think they would be satisfaction unless that happens.

See here:

Compensation for a past offense can be enforced either by the offender or by another. When it is enforced by another, such compensation is of a vindictive rather than of a satisfactory nature, whereas when it is made by the offender, it is also satisfactory. Consequently, if the scourges, which are inflicted by God on account of sin, become in some way the act of the sufferer they acquire a satisfactory character. Now they become the act of the sufferer in so far as he accepts them for the cleansing of his sins, by taking advantage of them patiently. If, however, he refuse to submit to them patiently, then they do not become his personal act in any way, and are not of a satisfactory, but merely of a vindictive character.

I have in mind as an example the two thieves on Calvary – one accepted his punishment and one didn’t.

I can think of many times in my own life that I’ve let inconveniences, sorrows, pain, and suffering slip through my fingers when I could have been accepting them and so making satisfaction for my sins.

VC

 

[JohnMPhilomena]

This is the way I look at indulgences:

If I am mad at my neighbor and throw a rock through his window and then feel bad about it and ask for his forgiveness, I still have to pay for the window even after he forgives me.

When we sin, we damage ourselves and in effect after we repent, there is still “damage” that needs to be repaired. We can either pay that debt here on earth by acts of penance or later in purgatory.

Once in purgatory, there is nothing we can do to lessen our time there. Our families can pray for us and lessen it, but we cannot.

So, repent, change your life, do penance and pray while you’re here on earth.

Peace,
John Marie Philomena