CCC 1498 indulgences.

[myfavoritmartin]

Hello M,

The question should be does this contradict ALL OF SCRIPTURE, or just the passages you selectively quote out of context? I can quote one or two passages of scripture an claim that it affirms or contradict almost anything (That is the danger of Sola Scripturae). However placing this paragraph of the CCC against the whole deposit of faith we received from the apostles will reaffirm it. I’ll leave that for you to find out on your own.

In his Love

A Catholic Deacon

Nothing I’ve posted is out of context, besides
You getting on me about cherry picking verses? I learned it from the apostle Paul, he was exceptionally good at it!

 

[RobNY]

quote robny
. If by dying on the cross the merits were automatically communicated to all men, then all men would be saved, infallibly, because Christ paid the price for all men’s sins, and God would not demand payment unjustly on what has already been paid.

1 tim 2:
3 For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour;

4 Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.

2 peter3:
9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but** that all should come to repentance**.

I’m not sure if you’re trying to say you’re a universalist or not, but my point stands… the individual must appropriate Christ’s merits in some way. In your view, it is by faith alone.

-Rob

 

[I_Leatherman]

Mfm:

…but that all should come to repentance.

And…

'As the Father hath sent me, I also send you…

… Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them;…’

 

[myfavoritmartin]

tetelestai=Paid in full, finished make amends, make right!

30 When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished:

He didn’t say this and then ask for a lil help on our end with indulgences and penance

matt 4:17 reads,properly translated from greek " be penitent for the kingdom of heaven is at hand."

Therefore god demands not outward deeds but a changed heart and mind. “doing” ** has literally nothing to do with salvation**, particularly with regards to indulgences. “to repent” and to “do penance” are 2 diffrent things.

 

[clmowry]

I believe this is all that an indulgence was ever officially claimed to do. Rather than being saved “as through fire” in pergatory that pain could be avoided by taking certain steps while still here on earth.

Chuck

The only “temporal punishment” is the pain involved in detaching ourselves from sin. If indulgences are simply declarations by the Church that certain actions will (if done with the right intention) help detach ourselves from sin, I have no problem with them. But this is clearly not how they were traditionally regarded.

 

[SORROWS]

Jesus assured the Apostles and their successors (the Popes and Bishops) “He who** listens** to you listens to me, and he who rejects you rejects me.” (Luke 10:16

Jesus promised to guide His Church in all truth John 16:12-13. We Catholics have confidence that the Catholic Church teaches ONLY the truth. Oral tradition in the Catholic Church includes indulgences and penance. When Our Lord said ,“It is finished” He didn’t mean teachings and traditions. The Apostles continued with Peter ensuring that what they taught was true.

 

[Catholicdeacon]

Nothing I’ve posted is out of context,

Hello M.

Before we proceed you might want to check the meaning of the word context in any good dictionary.

besides
You getting on me about cherry picking verses?

That is precisely what I’m saying and what you (by own admission) are doing, perhaps you do not know this but that is not apologetics. But more important than that, basing your beliefs or disbeliefs in a few out of context verses is a very precarious (dare I say even dangerous to your eternal salvation) way of living the Christian faith.

I learned it from the apostle Paul, he was exceptionally good at it!

I will let others judge this statement.

In His love

A Catholic Deacon

 

[I_Leatherman]

30 When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished:

And…

'As the Father hath sent me, I also send you…

… Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them;…’

 

[Randy_Carson]

**#1498 - “Through indulgences the faithful can obtain the remission of temporal punishment resulting from sin for themselves and also for the souls in Purgatory.” **

biblegateway.com/passage/?search=acts%205:31&version=31

SEEMS CONTRADICTORY TO SCRIPTURE>>>

Acts 13:38 - Be it known unto you therefore, men and brethren, that through this man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins:

Ephesians 1:7 - In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace;

Colossians 1:14 - In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:

Simon-

Here is a brief article on the subject of indulgences written by Jimmy Akin.

catholic.com/thisrock/2006/0609fea3.asp

You probably know that Jimmy was once a Protestant, and he works very hard at trying to explain the Catholic faith in ways that non-Catholics will understand.

Please let us know what you think of his explanation.

 

[Church_Militant]

Why did Christ die on the cross?

Why would Christ have given the commissions and powers to do the binding and loosing if it was not meant to be exercised for the benefit of the Body of Christ?

I have yet to see you provide a viable and logical alternative.

So? Where is it?

 

[Church_Militant]

tetelestai

=Paid in full, finished make amends, make right!

30 When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished:

He didn’t say this and then ask for a lil help on our end with indulgences and penance

matt 4:17 reads,properly translated from greek " be penitent for the kingdom of heaven is at hand."

Therefore god demands not outward deeds but a changed heart and mind. “doing” ** has literally nothing to do with salvation**, particularly with regards to indulgences. “to repent” and to “do penance” are 2 diffrent things.Really? Better tell the folks in Nineveh! (The Book of Jonah)

 

[JoeyWarren]

Primer on indulgences?

1Pe 4:8 And above all things have fervent charity among yourselves: for charity shall cover the multitude of sins.

Jam 5:20 Let him know, that he which converteth the sinner from the error of his way shall save a soul from death,and **shall hide a **multitude of sins.

 

[Contarini]

tetelestai=Paid in full, finished make amends, make right!

30 When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished:

He didn’t say this and then ask for a lil help on our end with indulgences and penance

matt 4:17 reads,properly translated from greek " be penitent for the kingdom of heaven is at hand."

Therefore god demands not outward deeds but a changed heart and mind. “doing” has literally nothing to do with salvation, particularly with regards to indulgences. “to repent” and to “do penance” are 2 diffrent things.

I don’t think that when the New Testament speaks of “doing” it is referring only to “outward deeds.” In traditional Christian theology, “doing” refers primarily to acts of the will. Repenting is clearly doing something, even if it’s a purely internal act.

Edwin

 

[Contarini]

I believe this is all that an indulgence was ever officially claimed to do.

Well, Cardinal Cajetan and others could have saved us all a lot of trouble by telling Luther this!

The theology in the late Middle Ages, backed up by papal bulls, was that there was a “treasury of merits” on which the Pope could draw *at will, *not simply telling the faithful that certain deeds were profitable but giving those deeds a precise legal value (for purposes of working off canonical penance in this life or the next) that they did not have before the Pope made the proclamation.

In Christ,

Edwin

 

[I_Leatherman]

Well, Cardinal Cajetan and others could have saved us all a lot of trouble by telling Luther this!

The theology in the late Middle Ages, backed up by papal bulls, was that there was a “treasury of merits” on which the Pope could draw *at will, *not simply telling the faithful that certain deeds were profitable but giving those deeds a precise legal value (for purposes of working off canonical penance in this life or the next) that they did not have before the Pope made the proclamation.

In Christ,

Edwin

Christ has no merits?

Say you walk 1000 miles Contarini and when you reach the end you will have your indulgence.
But the conditions of the indulgence are that you first live, say, in as perfectly Christlike way as you possibly can.
Now, if you manage to live like that for the duration of the 1000 miles then obviously that is going to be of some benefit to you - as you are simply living in a Christlike manner, what we should be doing anyway.
But if you don’t meet the conditions of the indulgence obviously you gain nothing. What you put into it is what you get out.

You know, I think the Apostles did not grow in holiness by following Christ closely, nor do I think they achieved any good for themselves or others by praying for one-another - prayer being a thought, word, deed - or even a life lived well. Christ has no merits and its all for nothing - and whatever you do, take care that you never do anything for anything.

 

[myfavoritmartin]

I don’t think that when the New Testament speaks of “doing” it is referring only to “outward deeds.” In traditional Christian theology, “doing” refers primarily to acts of the will. Repenting is clearly doing something, even if it’s a purely internal act.

Edwin

Why does it seem catholocism constantly strives to find ways to present outward signs for the inward state of the individual believer?

Wouldn’t you say that temporal punishment was developed as a way someone could “show” they are repentant?

 

[Contarini]

Why does it seem catholocism constantly strives to find ways to present outward signs for the inward state of the individual believer?

What form of Christianity doesn’t? If you don’t have outward signs, you don’t have Christianity at all. A simple “religion of the heart” is not Christianity–you could just as well be a Sufi Muslim or something.

I find this a very odd question.

Wouldn’t you say that temporal punishment was developed as a way someone could “show” they are repentant?

Calvin argued this, yes–that the original concept of penance was a public demonstration of repentance to the congregation. I’m not sure the dichotomy between demonstrating your repentance and actually doing things that make your more repentant is a helpful one. I think this dichotomy was invented by the Reformed, and it has done a lot of damage.

Edwin

 

[Contarini]

Christ has no merits?

I’m not sure that account-book language is useful in theology. I’m not at all sure that there are things called “merits” that people can “have.” This language can no doubt be translated into more orthodox and adequate language–but why not use this language in the first place?

If by “Christ has merits” you mean “Christ’s life, death, and resurrection are infinitely worthy,” then of course you are right.

However, what I object to is the notion that these “merits” can be stored in a “treasury,” and (this is the real point at issue) that they can be dispensed by the hierarchy of the Church at will. This latter is the real point at issue between Catholics and Protestants. The imagery of “merits” has been used by Protestants as well, but I think it has always had unfortunate results. (The “forensic” doctrine of justification thus springs from the same basic presuppositions as the doctrine of indulgences–and both are bad.)

Say you walk 1000 miles Contarini and when you reach the end you will have your indulgence.
But the conditions of the indulgence are that you first live, say, in as perfectly Christlike way as you possibly can.
Now, if you manage to live like that for the duration of the 1000 miles then obviously that is going to be of some benefit to you - as you are simply living in a Christlike manner, what we should be doing anyway.
But if you don’t meet the conditions of the indulgence obviously you gain nothing. What you put into it is what you get out.

I don’t follow what you are saying. Is the indulgence given for walking 1000 miles or for living in a Christlike way? If the former, then we are back to what Protestants find problematic. If the latter, then the “indulgence” adds nothing, since the benefits would occur anyway. This is my point. If indulgences are simply declarations that certain actions are beneficial, then they are harmless. But if they allegedly add a benefit that would not occur had the Pope not so decreed, then they are heretical. As I understand it, the traditional Catholic doctrine is the latter.

The rest of your post attacks a straw man.

Edwin

 

[I_Leatherman]

Very generally then. St.Paul asks for prayers from the faithful for himself, say.
If no particular or special benefits accrue from those prayers of the Church, say, to him, then indulgences - very generally understood - have no value.
If St.Paul is told by his Creator that He will decide how much St.Paul is to suffer, and if St.Paul asks the Church for help through his sufferings, then there is precedent, if only in an unordered, general way, for indulgences.

 

[Contarini]

Very generally then. St.Paul asks for prayers from the faithful for himself, say.
If no particular or special benefits accrue from those prayers of the Church, say, to him, then indulgences - very generally understood - have no value.
If St.Paul is told by his Creator that He will decide how much St.Paul is to suffer, and if St.Paul asks the Church for help through his sufferings, then there is precedent, if only in an unordered, general way, for indulgences.

Sorry, but it’s not enough. I don’t have a problem with the prayers of the Church having this kind of effect–but indulgences are not a form of prayer. They are, or traditionally were, a form of legal declaration. That is what is problematic about them.

Edwin