Confession For Money back in the day

  • Thread starter Thread starter RomanRyan1088
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
R

RomanRyan1088

Guest
I was in HIstory Class, and my history teacher was talking about evolution, then we got into talking about religion. She said that Martin Luther left the Church because people were killing others, and that when they went to go confess, the would pay the cardinals so that they could be forgivin. Can someone please explain this to me?
 
Where do you go to school and what religion is your history teacher? I think she is referring to abuse of indulgences, though she sure has a fundamentalist protestant take on it. I will not attempt to explain this practice as I am sure someone can come up with an appropriate internet link which would explain it best.
 
La Chiara:
Where do you go to school and what religion is your history teacher? I think she is referring to abuse of indulgences, though she sure has a fundamentalist protestant take on it. I will not attempt to explain this practice as I am sure someone can come up with an appropriate internet link which would explain it best.
Click to expand...
I go to a Public High School, in Texas. My teacher is Baptist.
 
40.png
RomanRyan1088:
I was in HIstory Class, and my history teacher was talking about evolution, then we got into talking about religion. She said that Martin Luther left the Church because people were killing others, and that when they went to go confess, the would pay the cardinals so that they could be forgivin. Can someone please explain this to me?
Click to expand...
You “History” teacher is wrong. He should not be discussing evolution or religion in the first place. But HISTORY. Second. Luther did not leave the Church, he was kicked out. Confession and Absolution never cost money.

Your “Teacher” is confusing “Confession” and “Indulgences”. The Church authorized the selling of certain Indulgences to raise money for projects. The practice quickly got out of hand. Luthers issues with the Church revolved around the pratice of some corrupt clerics selling any and all Ingulgences, most of which the Church did NOT authorize. But he went too far and denied the DOCTRINE of indulgences. Which caused ever increasing heresy in his personal theology until he was excommunicated.

A modern example…

A Pastor is perfectly within his rights to take up collections, for example, for the restoration of the parish hall. He is perfectly within his rights to offer prayers and blessing on all who donate. He crosses the line when he starts charging for prayers and blessings. Certain televangelists come to mind.

The Doctrines and Pratice of Indulgences is perfectly fine and biblical. But there were those in the Church who took advantage. It was clearly wrong and the Church reformed the Pratices associated with Indulgences so that it cant happen anymore.
 
That’s a slightly misleading account of things by your teacher. People have always been able to go to Confession and be forgiven of their sins without paying for it. What was being sold was Indulgences. Indulgences were the remission of temporal payment for sins, i.e. the “suffering” in Purgatory required by Divine Justice. Even when your sins are forgiven, and you’re assured a place in Heaven barring further mortal sin, you still have to make up for the sins you commited, either on Earth or in what Catholics call Purgatory, the state of cleansing prior to entering Heaven. It’s a kind of “settling of accounts”, so to speak. If you were granted an Indulgence, you were relieved in part, or in entirety, of this “cleansing” period. Indulgences never work for future sins, and only count towards sins that are forgiven in Confession.

Basically people with money were paying bishops and such to grant them Indulgences so they wouldn’t have a cleansing of their sins in Purgatory. It was a scandalous practice that was not condoned by the Church, and was stamped out, and Luther was right to complain about it. Indulgences are still issued nowadays for doing special deeds, or during certain times, but again they only apply to those who Confess their sins. Confession was always open to anyone who wanted to, and all mortal sins can be forgiven in Confession.
 
OK, what are indulgences. From what i’ve read here, it looks like they are somewhat of a kinda “Get Outta Jail Free Card”, but im pertty sure thats wrong.
 
From what you’ve told us your teacher shows a shocking lack of knowledge on a critical turning point in history for someone who is supposed to be teaching history to young people.

A few titles you may wish to recommend to her reading:

“Characters of the Reformation” and “How the Reformation Happened” by Hilaire Belloc.

“The Facts About Luther” by Msgr. Patrick F. O’Hare, LL.D.

“The Cleaving of Christendom: Volume 4” in a series by Warren Carroll.
 
The Church authorized the selling of certain Indulgences to raise money for projects.
Click to expand...
No. This is wrong. The Church NEVER authorized the selling of indulgences. The practice was to give alms to the Church which would gain the giver indulgences. But, because this practice could so easily be confused with buying indulgences and because of abuses that occurred, the Church stopped this practice.
 
40.png
RomanRyan1088:
OK, what are indulgences. From what i’ve read here, it looks like they are somewhat of a kinda “Get Outta Jail Free Card”, but im pertty sure thats wrong.
Click to expand...
Here’s an example. If you hit somebody with a car and injure them, then you go to them and tell them you are sorry, they may forgive you. But, you should still take care of them until they are recovered. This is the result of what you have done to them, even though they have forgiven you. If they were to say to you, you don’t have to do that for me, that would be equivalent to an indulgance.
 
OK, what are indulgences. From what i’ve read here, it looks like they are somewhat of a kinda “Get Outta Jail Free Card”, but im pertty sure thats wrong.
Click to expand...
From the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

1471 The doctrine and practice of indulgences in the Church are closely linked to the effects of the sacrament of Penance.
What is an indulgence?

“An indulgence is a remission before God of the temporal punishment due to sins whose guilt has already been forgiven, which the faithful Christian who is duly disposed gains under certain prescribed conditions through the action of the Church which, as the minister of redemption, dispenses and applies with authority the treasury of the satisfactions of Christ and the saints.”

“An indulgence is partial or plenary according as it removes either part or all of the temporal punishment due to sin.” The faithful can gain indulgences for themselves or apply them to the dead.
 
40.png
Della:
No. This is wrong. The Church NEVER authorized the selling of indulgences. The practice was to give alms to the Church which would gain the giver indulgences. But, because this practice could so easily be confused with buying indulgences and because of abuses that occurred, the Church stopped this practice.
Click to expand...
No you are wrong. The Pope himself (Leo X) authorized the selling of an Indulgence to raise money for the building of St. Peter’s Basilica. The price asked for was in proportion to one’s earnings, but it was possible for a poor peasent to gain the same plenary indulgence by prayers for the project and the usual conditions (confession, & communion). Nevertheless the Indulgence was SOLD and the Priest in charge pf the program, Fr. Tetzel, used every marketing technique at his disposal to raise the money. Many other clerics forged copies and sold them also and many other Indulgences for other intentions were sold. Luther attacked him personally in the 95 Theses and that was the start of the prot revolt.

After the Luther matter erupted, the Church launched an investigation to figure out what went wrong and who was to blame. This was hardly an objective investigation. This was a major fiasco and they were looking for someone to pin it on. The investigation cleared Tetzel and his people of any wrong-doing. It said that there was evidence of improprieties at the grass-roots level but that this was spontaneous and not due
to poor directions from higher authorities. The directives and
standards imposed by Fr. Tetzel and the German bishops were declared appropriate. This result is remarkable because in those days it was more important to find a scapegoat than to clear someone’s name. Fr. Tetzel was fully exonerated. Prots generally have been told a very simplistic and inaccurate story about the indulgence in Germany. Luther and his cronies frankly lied and misrepresented the matter shamelessly. They too were not interested in the objective truth but in justifying themselves and their revolt.

So who gets the blame?? Pope Leo X for using an Indulgence to raise money for the building of St Peters.
 

FWIW:​

TAN Books publishes the entire canons and decrees of Trent. Session 25 explicitly refers to abuses of indulgences, even while defending indulgences themselves. Anyone who tries to deny that there were real and scandalous abuses has the words of the Council to explain. The Fathers of Trent seemed to think there were serious abuses. Innocent VII (1389-1404) is suspected of having trafficked in indulgences as Pope. (I got that from a Catholic source - “The Popes”, by E.John (1964).
The translation is that of H.J.Schroeder O.P, “The Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent”, TAN Books 1978. It should not be confused with the translation by Canon Waterworth, also republished by TAN, which is to be found in the TAN book “Dogmatic Canons and Decrees”. This is a collection of the doctrinal and dogmatic parts of Trent - it does not, unlike Schroeder’s book, include the decrees for the reform of the Church which are included in the sessions of the Council. “Dogmatic Canons and Decrees” also includes the 1864 Syllabus of Errors and the definitions of Vatican I.

Session 21 chapter 9:

“Since many remedies heretofore applied by different councils, those of the Lateran [Lateran V (1512-17) ? ] and Lyons [it is not clear which one] as well as that of Vienne [in 1312], against the pernicious abuses of quaestors of alms, have in later times become useless, and since their depravity is, to the great scandal and complaint of the faithful, found to be daily so much on the increase that there seems no longer to be any hope of their amendment left, it is decreed that in all parts of Christendom their name and service be henceforth absolutely abolished and in no wise shall they be permitted to exercise such an office; any privileges granted to churches, monasteries, hospitals, pious places, and to any persons of whatever rank, state, or dignity, or any customs, even though immemorial, notwithstanding. With regard to indulgences or other spiritual graces of which the Christian faithful ought not on this account to be deprived, it is decreed that they are in the future to be announced to the people at suitable times by the local ordinaries aided by two members of the chapter. To these also the authority is given to collect faithfully and without fee the alms and chritable contributions offered them so that all may understand that these heavenly treasures of the Church are administered not for gain but for piety.”

(Schroeder p.142)

Session 5 Chapter 2 in June 1546 had restrained quaestors (Schroeder p. 28) - now, 16 years and a month later, the Fathers of the Council are making a clean sweep.

Session 25 chapter 21

Session 25 in December 1563 says:

“…But desiring that the abuses which have become connected with them, [indulgences, which are being regulated by the decree here quoted] and by reason of which this excellent name of indulgences is blasphemed by the heretics, be amended and corrected, it [the council] ordains in a general way by the present decree that all evil traffic in them, which has been a most prolific source of abuses among the christian people, be absolutely abolished…”

(Schroeder p.253, 254.) ##
 
My friends, let’s not fall into the trap of trying to explain something in terms of, say, quantum level physics when the question is “Name Kepler’s law of motion”.

In other words, let’s not hash out the whole history of the Reformation; let’s answer Ryan’s question.

He says that his teacher told him, “that Martin Luther left the Church because people were killing others, and that when they went to go confess, the(y) would pay the cardinals so that they could be forgivin (sic)”

His teacher is wrong. Confessions were never “for sale” in the Catholic church. Period. The fact that the teacher is so confused that she equates confession with indulgences is BESIDE the point; the point is, and I repeat, CONFESSIONS WERE NEVER FOR SALE IN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH. People did not “pay cardinals so that they could be forgiven”.

That’s really all that needs to be said. Let’s not “assume” what the teacher may or may not have MEANT, let’s address what she SAID–and what she said is W-R-O-N-G.
 
it was recently posted : ‘He should not be discussing evolution or religion in the first place. But HISTORY.’

i would suggest that evolution (at least the development of the idea) and certainly religion play a huge role in any meaningful discussion of history.
 
40.png
jeffreedy789:
it was recently posted : ‘He should not be discussing evolution or religion in the first place. But HISTORY.’

i would suggest that evolution (at least the development of the idea) and certainly religion play a huge role in any meaningful discussion of history.
Click to expand...
I definitely agree with you that religion has played a huge role in history and is so closely linked that it needs to be discussed. The history I got in a public high school avoided virtually all mention of religion and its role in history. But the flip side is what this young man is getting from his Baptist history teacher–a distorted view of religion’s role in history.

I also wanted to point out that while indulgences are not sold, they are still around. When we went to Rome in 2000 for the Holy Year, the Pope granted special indulgences for those who visited the Holy Doors at the great Roman basilicas. The pilgrims also needed to have the sacraments of Penance and Eucharist within a certain period of their pilgrimage to get the special indulgences. I believe there are indulgences associated with such practices as saying the Rosary and attending First Friday Mass. Gaining indulgences was something I recall from my parochial school days in the 1960s.
 
Metal 1633, you wrote:

The Pope himself (Leo X) authorized the selling of an Indulgence to raise money for the building of St. Peter’s Basilica.

Source for this comment please.

When you use other people’s comments please source them.
 
Roman Ryan1088, your teacher made the comment it is up to her/him to give you the source. When he/she has done that come back with it and we can see if it is a reputable source. Remember, teachers are human beings and unfortunately sometimes their prejudices shape the lessons they give to those whom they should instruct objectively.

It is not your responsibility to refute every Anti Catholic claim people make. Always ask for proof of the claim; not just vague naming of a document but what chapter etc. Once they have provided you with first source evidence you can then see what the Church has to say about the matter.
 
My (public) high school teacher kinda glossed over the whole reformation thing, too, but he did it from the other angle. “Martin Luther was a priest who wanted to marry a nun, so he started the reformation.”
 
Metal 1633, you wrote:
Click to expand...
The Pope himself (Leo X) authorized the selling of an Indulgence to raise money for the building of St. Peter’s Basilica.
Click to expand...
Source for this comment please.
Click to expand...
Its faily common knowledge, my degree in Medieval Studies notwithstanding. Plenty of Encyclopedias will have the info your looking for.

encyclopedia.com “The Protestant Reformation began when Martin Luther posted (1517) his famous theses against the sale of indulgences, an activity practiced by Leo to provide income for his building program.”

tuscali "A patron of the arts, he sponsored the rebuilding of St Peter’s Church, Rome. He raised funds for this by selling indulgences "

Encyclopedia Britannica "The theses were written in response to the selling of indulgences to pay for the rebuilding of St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome. "
 
Metal 1633

I asked for the source for your quote: The Pope himself (Leo X) authorized the selling of an Indulgence to raise money for the building of St. Peter’s Basilica.

You replied with some vague references to encyclopedias. If you have a degree in Medieval Studies you will know how to quote properly. If Leo X authorized the selling of indulgences then there will be an official document to prove this statement. I am sure that you didn’t obtain your degree using *secondary sources * to support comments. Please cite the *primary sources * for your comment.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top