Does the treasury of merit exist?

[joe370]

Hey dzheremi…

I

do not believe in Mary Faustina Kowalska, nor any other post-schism Roman Catholic saint. How does she fit into this discussion?

Jesus, in detail, discussed with her, what we are discussing, but I digress since you do not believe in the apparitions of Mary Faustina Kowalska. Got to go, but will be back brother…

 

[fakename]

Those in heaven who offer to God our prayers are not just angels, but human souls as well. John sees that “the twenty-four elders (the leaders of the people of God in heaven) - fell down before the Lamb, each holding a harp, and with golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints.” Rev. 5:8 John also says "Another angel, who had a golden censer, came and stood at the altar. He was given much incense to offer, with the prayers of all the saints, on the golden altar before the throne. Rev. 8 The simple fact is, as these passage show: These saintly souls in heaven offer to God the prayers of the saints on earth, and their prayers are far more efficacious than the saints on earth for they are now perfectly united to God.

These saintly souls have finally passed into the inner circle spoken of in the book of Revelation, and have drawn near to the Throne of God, forever gazing upon the golden vials full of incense, which represent the prayers of the saints. These prayers of the saints in heaven, (which in no way take anything away from the infinite merits of Christ or add anything to the infinite merits of Christ) - before the golden alter and throne of God, must serve a purpose, otherwise, what would be the point of their prayers, on our behalf, being offered up to the throne of God? If they do serve a purpose, which, logically speaking, would be to draw people, on earth, closer to Christ, then is it safe to say that these prayers do indeed have a certain meritorious value, drawing Christians to Christ, again, without taking anything away from the infinite merits of Christ or adding anything to the infinite merits of Christ? If so, then certainly Christians would have no problem viewing these meritorious prayers of the heavenly saints, as a treasury of merit - right?

Yes the treasury of merit exists since it is from this that indulgences are granted.

 

[joe370]

Dzheremi, real quick…

Yes, but this of course leads us to the unavoidable question regarding this idea, namely, that since all apostolic churches agree with this idea, how can it be that the same Holy Spirit leads some to doctrinalize philosophical notions that others either openly discard or at least relegate to the realm of pious opinion?

And there in lies the rub…To my knowledge only the CC and the EOC are churches that can trace their lineage all the way back to the apostolic age, thereby making them - apostolic churches?

Obviously you have your own opinion as to who is following correctly and who is not, as I have mine, but that’s exactly why I would not resort to such open ended questions. They won’t be answered satisfactorily in our lifetimes, my friend, and if they were…

Opinions notwithstanding, (and I totally agree with you) - do you believe that the holy spirit continues to guide Jesus’ one church (either the apostolic eastern orthodox church or the apostolic catholic church) - into all truth, just as the holy spirit did in the beginning, when the Jesus’ apostolic church was codifying the canon and formulating doctrines such as the Trinity and Theotokos etc, Nicene creed…?

…I doubt such answers would be forthcoming on an internet messageboard, of all places.

LOL…

 

[dzheremi]

And there in lies the rub…To my knowledge only the CC and the EOC are churches that can trace their lineage all the way back to the apostolic age, thereby making them - apostolic churches?

No. The various Antiochian churches (Syriac Orthodox, Syriac Catholics, Syriac Maronite Catholics, Antiochian Orthodox, Melkite Greek Catholics) also trace themselves back to the apostle Peter. Most are in the RC or EO communion, with the exception of the Syriac Orthodox who are OO and are one of the earlier claimants The Orthodox Church of Alexandria (existing in OO Coptic and EO Greek patriarchates; the Coptic patriarchate is the elder of the two) traces its foundation back to Saint Mark. The Indian Syrians (Malankara, Malabar, etc. Orthodox and Catholics) trace their origin back to St. Thomas. As far as I know, there is no significant native EO church among them. Even the Assyrian Church of the East, in communion with no one since succumbing to the Nestorian heresy which is now among their most distinctive traits, traces its apostolic foundation to Sts. Thomas (who they call “Mar Toma”), Thaddeus (“Mar Addai”), and Bartholomew (“Mar Bar Tulmay”, known more often in the West as St. Nathaniel).

Opinions notwithstanding, (and I totally agree with you) - do you believe that the holy spirit continues to guide Jesus’ one church (either the apostolic eastern orthodox church or the apostolic catholic church) - into all truth, just as the holy spirit did in the beginning, when the Jesus’ apostolic church was codifying the canon and formulating doctrines such as the Trinity and Theotokos etc, Nicene creed…?

As I am a recent catechumen in the Coptic Orthodox Church, one of the Oriental Orthodox churches that has apparently escaped your notice, I’m not entirely sure how I should answer the question as asked. I can say this much with confidence: The Holy Spirit guides the Orthodox church in preserving the apostolic faith as it has been passed down by our holy fathers of the church. The workings of other churches are not so much systematically included or excluded from guidance (Orthodox churches do not make pronouncements about the status of other churches outside of their own), but their positions, as far as they can be measured against the standard of the apostolic faith expressed as in the examples you’ve given above, may or may not be found to conform to that apostolic faith.

 

[KathleenGee]

Again, however, there is great grace in living the celibate priestly life, and I believe that to declare, for example, Mary as Immaculate Conception, comes from the spiritual insight of priests who have given up all for Christ.

Christ has special blessings for the Latin rite. It is not better. But to give up marriage for total sacrifice in Christ has its benefits … and insights.

 

[joe370]

Dzheremi;8324194]No. The various Antiochian churches (Syriac Orthodox, Syriac Catholics, Syriac Maronite Catholics, Antiochian Orthodox, Melkite Greek Catholics) also trace themselves back to the apostle Peter…

Which Eastern Orthodox Church today, is considered the eastern church that existed when the Catholic Church in the east and the west split in the 11th century?

As I am a recent catechumen in the Coptic Orthodox Church, one of the Oriental Orthodox churches that has apparently escaped your notice, I’m not entirely sure how I should answer the question as asked. I can say this much with confidence: The Holy Spirit guides the Orthodox church in preserving the apostolic faith as it has been passed down by our holy fathers of the church.

And if you are right then doctrinal truth has been preserved in the Coptic Orthodox Church.

 

[joe370]

Dzheremies…

My apologies for misunderstanding on this point. If this is the case, then, I don’t really understand why you apparently disagreed with me when I related Swiss Guy’s use of “merits” (plural) to something “countable, money-like” (post #17), as that’s not the literal involvement of money, either. And that’s why I phrased it that way, because it leads to a financial understanding of salvation (in keeping with my objection to this view related later in the same post) – not because it involves actual money. It obviously doesn’t involve actual money (accusations of purchasing indulgences in medieval Europe aside…), but De Maria and now you both seem to agree that the financial metaphor is the most appropriate one to use to understand how this concept is supposed to work.

My apologies right back at you for I must have, somewhat, misunderstood your analogy. causing me to misspeak.

Regarding the points from your subsequent posts:

I must emphasize again that while I absolutely agree with the intercessions of the saints and see their intercessions as a reality and a great strength of the church throughout all ages, I do not see how you get from belief in the intercession of saints to this “treasure of merit” concept.

This was how I came to understand the Treasury of merits: Every Christian here on earth, still separated from God’s Glory, benefits from Jesus’ divine Intercession, namely, the infinite merits of Christ, derived directly from His atoning work on the Cross, along with His endless prayers, and of course, all of that depends on how well each of us, as Christians, is disposed regarding the infusion of His infinite grace; That we both agree on - I think? Furthermore, from that perspective alone, the treasury of merits, consisting of ONLY the atoning work of Christ on the Cross, is believed by all Christians, so, from a purely non-catholic perspective, the treasury of merits does in fact exist - right?

If we, as Christians, depending on our state in life and how receptive we are to Jesus’ grace, can derive a certain degree of grace from Jesus’ treasury of merits, again, depending on our spiritual disposition, and you absolutely agree with Jesus’ intercession, as I do, as a reality, and a great strength to His church, and, you absolutely agree with the intercession of the saints as well, and also see their intercession, as a reality, and a great strength to the church throughout all ages, as well, then logically, couldn’t the treasury of merits consist of both the merits of Christ, Who is the source of all merits (from which Christians on earth can derive a certain degree of grace depending on their spiritual disposition) - as well as the merits of all those heavenly saints, made perfect, also from which Christians on earth can derive a certain degree of grace, through Jesus of course, Who again, is the source of all merits - via their intercessory prayers which, by your own admission, provide a great deal of strength for the church, and always has, throughout all ages?

If those saints in heaven, interceding on our behalf, can provide great strength/merit for Jesus’ church, (even though, all that is need for Jesus’ church, is the strength/merit of Jesus) - then logically the church must benefit from the strength/merit of those heavenly saints via their intercession. If that is true and we benefit from their strength and merit, then the store of merits and satisfactions, (more terms employed by the CC) - consist not only of the strength and merits of our savior Jesus Christ, (the source of all merits) -but of the strength and merits of saints in heaven as well, and The catholic church has merely adopted the term “treasury of merits” to define this belief.

Are their prayers and intercession really needed to provide “great strength to the church”? Not at all. One drop of Jesus’ blood from the cross would have sufficed, but nonetheless, their prayers and intercession really do provide strength and merit for the church, ergo the treasury of merits.

Or rather, I see it, but I don’t see why it necessarily follows from belief in intercession. Surely the majority of churches that do believe in intercession of the saints have not developed this doctrine of the treasury of merits, as it is a uniquely Latin idea. Do you understand the distinction I am trying to make?

Absolutely…The question for me, as a former protestant, was this: Does the CC have the God given authority, (as they did when developing late doctrines such as the Trinity) - to develop this particular doctrine.

It’s like when Latins invoke the idea of purgatory in relation to the prayers of the saints: You can certainly have one without the other. The Orthodox churches have always believed in intercession without believing in these Latin/Western developments, for instance.

Doctrinal developments in the EOC exist as well. The following developments would have been foreign to the 1st century Christians:

Three Divine Persons in God, distinct, yet equal; The Father is the head of the Trinity, neither begotten, nor proceeds from anyone; The Son is begotten from the Father, of the very same essence (omo’ousios) of the Father; The Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father; The Codified canon; God assigned to every man an Angel to guide and help him; After death, man’s body goes to earth, and the soul, which is immortal, is presented before God and, according to its actions, pre-enjoys happiness or pre-suffers punishment until the General Judgement; All saints, the Mother of God has a supreme grace, and that the veneration given to icons and relics relates not to the sacred images as such, but to the person whom they represent; God knows which road man will take, but He does not predestine him.

 

[dzheremi]

Which Eastern Orthodox Church today, is considered the eastern church that existed when the Catholic Church in the east and the west split in the 11th century?

I’m not sure how to answer this one. As the Coptic Orthodox church split some 6 centuries prior to the split between the Eastern and Western Chalcedonians, it doesn’t really matter to me, but even if it did, I would have to say that just as the RC church considers itself as the unbroken continuation of the Western church that existed before the Great Schism, the Eastern Orthodox Church likewise considers itself to not have changed throughout this contentious period, and thus remaining today what it was then. So…the Eastern Orthodox consider themselves the Eastern church that is Orthodox… (as opposed to those Eastern churches in communion with Rome)

And if you are right then doctrinal truth has been preserved in the Coptic Orthodox Church.

It doesn’t really have anything to do with me. They were doing that before I got here.

 

[joe370]

Hey dzheremi, I thought I would just keep it short and to the point:

Can a Christian here on earth, due to infused grace from Christ alone - receive merit, drawn from the grace of Jesus Christ? We both agree the answer is yes - correct?

Can a Christian here on earth, due to infused grace from Christ alone thanks to the intercessory prayers and petitions of the saints - receive merit, drawn from the grace of Jesus, again due to the intercessory prayers and petitions of the saints? We both agree the answer is yes - correct?

 

[De_Maria]

I find this interesting, since the other main contributor to this thread (Joe370) has rejected the idea that this concept should be understood financially.

Is that what you see? You don’t see a family relationship described when a father deposits his hard earned wages in the bank and his wife, the mother of his children, uses these to feed and clothe the family? Strange.

I meant the mechanics by which prayers are answered.

God is not a machine.

I do not understand what you mean.

I can’t make it any simpler.

These things are as they are because of this treasury of merit idea?

No. The treasury of merit is a metaphor which seeks to explain the way that things are.

But perhaps we need to take baby steps here.

First, did you read the part, in the last message, where I said that the “treasury of merit” is a metaphor? Please answer yes or no.

Do you know what metaphor means? Please answer yes or no.

Because if you know what a metaphor is, then you know that metaphors are employed to explain difficult ideas by employing well understood concepts.

As I understand it from articles like this one, this treasury of merit concept was defined in 1343 by Clement VI.

All the doctrines of the Catholic Church were taught by Jesus Christ. When the Catholic Church defines a doctrine, it is when some group of people are either challenging it or are asking for confirmation.

God was not called “Father” before 1343?

Are you serious? Because it sounds as though you’re being fascetious.

I know of no saint outside of the Roman Catholic tradition

??? Perhaps I have you confused with someone else. Didn’t you say you were Catholic? Catholics FOLLOW CATHOLIC TRADITION.

(and quite late in it, at that) who has written on or otherwise endorsed the concept of a treasury of merit.

So? Are you challenging a Catholic doctrine BECAUSE NON CATHOLICS DON’T ENDORSE IT?

Then, pray tell, what is the treasury of which Jesus spoke?

This treasury of merit concept does not explain God.

It explains one part of His Economy of Grace.

I disagree

That’s all you needed to say? Why all this pretending that you’re seeking for understanding? Whether you disagree or not, makes no difference, the truth is true whether you believe it or not.

that the treasury of merit concept necessarily follows from a Patristically-informed understanding of scripture.

Provide your evidence.

If the opposite were the case, we would see support of the idea outside of medieval Latin scholastics.

Where is that rule written? If it is not written, then we can chalk it up to YOUR OPINION.

We do not see that, which makes sense given the late development of the concept from certain very specific understandings of earlier writings that are said to form the basis for this doctrine.

Which writings, where? Provide the evidence. Don’t tell me that something exists, show me. Previously you were pretending to be an uninformed convert. Now you claim to know. Teach me.

I do not understand faith in economic terms, so I have no such understanding to contribute.

Thank you. Just because you don’t understand, doesn’t mean it isn’t true.

Please clarify, are you Catholic?

Sincerely,

De Maria

 

[joe370]

De Maria, you said:

Is that what you see? You don’t see a family relationship described when a father deposits his hard earned wages in the bank and his wife, the mother of his children, uses these to feed and clothe the family? Strange.

Now that’s a cool analogy! A very clear expression of the treasury of merits.

No. The treasury of merit is a metaphor which seeks to explain the way that things are.

Exactly, and the Catholic Church simply identified this teaching as, the treasury of merits, just as they identified the teaching that says the Father, Son and Holy spirit are one - as the Trinity.

All the doctrines of the Catholic Church were taught by Jesus Christ. When the Catholic Church defines a doctrine, it is when some group of people are either challenging it or are asking for confirmation.

That was one of the first things I learned as a former non-catholic.

 

[dzheremi]

I honestly don’t know. What I agree with you (and Catholicism in general) about is the intercession of the saints. But I don’t know anything about this merit business. Like I wrote earlier in this thread, this is not a subject that ever came up when I was RC, and it also has not come up among the Orthodox I know. I am hesitant to agree with something that for all I know is not found in Orthodox thought.

Hey dzheremi, I thought I would just keep it short and to the point:

Can a Christian here on earth, due to infused grace from Christ alone - receive merit, drawn from the grace of Jesus Christ? We both agree the answer is yes - correct?

Can a Christian here on earth, due to infused grace from Christ alone thanks to the intercessory prayers and petitions of the saints - receive merit, drawn from the grace of Jesus, again due to the intercessory prayers and petitions of the saints? We both agree the answer is yes - correct?

 

[joe370]

I honestly don’t know. What I agree with you (and Catholicism in general) about is the intercession of the saints. But I don’t know anything about this merit business. Like I wrote earlier in this thread, this is not a subject that ever came up when I was RC, and it also has not come up among the Orthodox I know. I am hesitant to agree with something that for all I know is not found in Orthodox thought.

You know I find your allegiance and deference to the Orthodox Coptic Church quite commendable.

 

[dzheremi]

Is that what you see? You don’t see a family relationship described when a father deposits his hard earned wages in the bank and his wife, the mother of his children, uses these to feed and clothe the family? Strange.

It is still a financial analogy. As the financial aspect is what I had originally called into question, I am trying to be consistent in articulating the concerns I have about this idea. I am not sure what to make about the familial aspect of it. I have no opinion of it, I guess.

God is not a machine.

I agree.

All the doctrines of the Catholic Church were taught by Jesus Christ. When the Catholic Church defines a doctrine, it is when some group of people are either challenging it or are asking for confirmation.

I disagree with both of these assertions, but okay. I understand and respect that this is how the Catholic Church sees itself.

Are you serious? Because it sounds as though you’re being fascetious.

Yes, I’m serious. The implications of the way that you phrased that explanation were unsettling to me.

??? Perhaps I have you confused with someone else. Didn’t you say you were Catholic? Catholics FOLLOW CATHOLIC TRADITION.

I am not Roman Catholic.

So? Are you challenging a Catholic doctrine BECAUSE NON CATHOLICS DON’T ENDORSE IT?

I am pointing out that this particular doctrine lacks the clear Patristic witness of agreed upon pre-schism doctrines and is indeed the result of post-schism developments in the Roman church, yes.

Then, pray tell, what is the treasury of which Jesus spoke?

I do not believe it refers to a treasury of merit as Catholics understand it. HH Pope Shenouda III, in his book “The Heresy of the Jehovah’s Witnesses”, connects Matthew 6:20 with 2 Corinthians 5:1-2, in which St. Paul writes “For we know that if our earthly house, this tent, is destroyed, we have a building from God, a house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens.” To me, this connection is telling: It is not so much what the treasury is (if you believe it is a treasury of merit or not), because the important distinction made in both Matthew 6:19-21 is between heaven and earth. So, rather than focusing on what the treasury could be (and I have to believe that Catholics have developed this “treasury of merit” concept to work in tandem with their idea of purgatory, which of course is not shared across all apostolic communions), I would focus on the fact that the treasure we collect therein is safe from the degradation of the world. And it is important to have our treasure (merit, good works, whatever you want to call it) be stored there, as our Lord says that where your treasure is, there your heart is as well.

So I prefer to interpret it as being about the place, a sort of spatial metaphor for the spiritual reality that a person may live in (depending on where they’ve stored their treasures) to remind us of what is really important. To me it is not about what the treasury is or isn’t. I don’t see how that is important if looking at the passage outside of the Catholic concept of purgatory.

It explains one part of His Economy of Grace

.

Okay.

That’s all you needed to say? Why all this pretending that you’re seeking for understanding? Whether you disagree or not, makes no difference, the truth is true whether you believe it or not.

I am not pretending.

Provide your evidence.

Okay. Matthew Henry, Alexander MacClaren, and Thomas Manton are not Early Church Fathers, and all write from Protestant perspectives either about Catholicism or borrowing the Catholic concepts. Earlier writings (e.g., Thomas Aquinas in the 13th century) are also not Patristic witness of this concept.

Where is that rule written? If it is not written, then we can chalk it up to YOUR OPINION.

It is not a rule, but something that follows naturally out of the circumstances I’ve outlined: Those ideas which are common to all apostolic churches are found in teachings and writings of all apostolic churches, even when there are different understandings of them (e.g., the Trinity, the Theotokos, etc). When a particular concept is not found outside of a given church, we can say that this concept is particular to that church, or the understanding of a given church (for those terms that are applied with a particular understanding within one tradition, cf. “qnome” for the Syrians, “ousios” for the Greeks, etc). If you want to call this my opinion, fine. It is my opinion. But I also think that it is common sense, and something that Catholics would agree with were we talking about ideas like OSAS or other ideas that they maintain are foreign to Catholic theology.

Which writings, where? Provide the evidence. Don’t tell me that something exists, show me. Previously you were pretending to be an uninformed convert. Now you claim to know. Teach me.

The Catholic Encyclopedia entry on indulgences, which I’ve linked earlier in this thread, contains many references to certain Papal declarations or what have you, as well as other writings. Particularly I would look under the subheading “Treasury of the Church”, which seems thickest with references.

Thank you. Just because you don’t understand, doesn’t mean it isn’t true.

I never claimed (or would claim) otherwise. Certainly this is true for all of us.

Please clarify, are you Catholic?

No, I am not a Catholic. Sorry if that was somehow not clear from our earlier interaction.

 

[CopticChristian]

You know I find your allegiance and deference to the Orthodox Coptic Church quite commendable.

Dzheremi has posted elsewhere that allegiance is Coptic Orthodox and as I understand it is in the process of catechizing to Coptic Orthodoxy. There is no idenftifier under the name. If it said Orthodox your understanding of who you were addressing would be resolved.

 

[joe370]

Dzheremi has posted elsewhere that allegiance is Coptic Orthodox and as I understand it is in the process of catechizing to Coptic Orthodoxy. There is no idenftifier under the name. If it said Orthodox your understanding of who you were addressing would be resolved.

What do you mean by: “…it is in the process of catechizing to Coptic Orthodoxy?” Dzheremi is certainly not proselytizing, if that’s what you meant? Forgive me if I misunderstood…

 

[dzheremi]

You know I find your allegiance and deference to the Orthodox Coptic Church quite commendable.

Thank you. That’s very nice to say. Also, thank you for taking the time to discuss your views with me in this thread. That goes for you too, De Maria. I appreciate you all.

Coptic Christian: There is no identifier in the religious category because I do not feel confident identifying myself as Orthodox when I am still unbaptized, as I am still at a very early stage of my catechesis (until a month ago I lived in a place without a Coptic church, so proper catechesis was not possible).

Alright, enough me…I just don’t want anyone thinking I’m intentionally being deceptive or playing around regarding my identity. I’ll change it now to reflect my new status, I guess.

 

[CopticChristian]

What do you mean by: “…it is in the process of catechizing to Coptic Orthodoxy?” Dzheremi is certainly not proselytizing, if that’s what you meant? Forgive me if I misunderstood…

I am going to lunch
I am running to the door
I am catechizing to be Catholic
I am catechizing to Coptic Orthodoxy

These are statements with a verb. The verb is catechizing. The object of the verb is Dzheremi. This is what he is doing. If I was catechizing to Catholicism, I would be studying to be a Catholic. Dzheremi is a catechumen towards Coptic Orthodoxy.

Your identifier could be “leaning Coptic Orthodox”. What you put is great. Bless St. Mark.

 

[joe370]

I am going to lunch
I am running to the door
I am catechizing to be Catholic
I am catechizing to Coptic Orthodoxy

These are statements with a verb. The verb is catechizing. The object of the verb is Dzheremi. This is what he is doing. If I was catechizing to Catholicism, I would be studying to be a Catholic. Dzheremi is a catechumen towards Coptic Orthodoxy.

I am sooo tired and it just hit me, as I sent that post. Sorry about that brother. So now I am going to run to my bed. and get some sleep…LOL…

 

[De_Maria]

No, I am not a Catholic. Sorry if that was somehow not clear from our earlier interaction.

Thanks for the clarification and I am sorry for my misunderstanding.

You said:

It is still a financial analogy.

No. Its a family analogy.

As the financial aspect is what I had originally called into question, I am trying to be consistent in articulating the concerns I have about this idea. I am not sure what to make about the familial aspect of it. I have no opinion of it, I guess.

You don’t believe you are a child of God?

I am pointing out that this particular doctrine lacks the clear Patristic witness of agreed upon pre-schism doctrines and is indeed the result of post-schism developments in the Roman church, yes.

No.
Ignatius of Antioch

“Be pleasing to him whose soldiers you are, and whose pay you receive. May none of you be found to be a deserter. Let your baptism be your armament, your faith your helmet, your love your spear, your endurance your full suit of armor. **Let your works be as your deposited withholdings, so that you may receive the back-pay which has accrued to you” **(Letter to Polycarp 6:2 [A.D. 110]).

Justin Martyr

“We have learned from the prophets and we hold it as true that punishments and chastisements and** good rewards are distributed according to the merit of each man’s actions.** Were this not the case, and were all things to happen according to the decree of fate, there would be nothing at all in our power. If fate decrees that this man is to be good and that one wicked, then neither is the former to be praised nor the latter to be blamed” (First Apology 43 [A.D. 151]).

Tatian the Syrian

“[T]he wicked man is justly punished, having become depraved of himself;** and the just man is worthy of praise for his honest deeds, **since it was in his free choice that he did not transgress the will of God” (Address to the Greeks 7 [A.D. 170]).

I do not believe it refers to a treasury of merit as Catholics understand it. HH Pope Shenouda III, in his book …as our Lord says that where your treasure is, there your heart is as well.

Catholic doctrine does not restrict any passage to one interpretation. As long as the interpretations do not contradict. I don’t see a contradiction between what your Pope said and the treasury of merit.

So I prefer to interpret it as being about the place, a sort of spatial metaphor for the spiritual reality that a person may live in (depending on where they’ve stored their treasures) to remind us of what is really important. To me it is not about what the treasury is or isn’t. I don’t see how that is important if looking at the passage outside of the Catholic concept of purgatory.

So, instead of a treasury, which is the metaphor used in Scripture, the Word of God, you would prefer a metaphor of your own. That’s fine. But you still have something to store. And if you are Orthodox, then you also believe you are storing works.

As for the dismissal of Purgatory, what does your Church teach of this place, in the Spiritual Realm, where the righteous are burned before they enter heaven:
1 Corinthians 3:15
King James Version (KJV)
15If any man’s work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.

Revelation 2:10
Fear none of those things which thou shalt suffer: behold, the devil shall cast some of you into prison, that ye may be tried; and ye shall have tribulation ten days: be thou faithful unto death, and I will give thee a crown of life.

Okay. Matthew Henry, Alexander MacClaren, and Thomas Manton are not Early Church Fathers, and all write from Protestant perspectives either about Catholicism or borrowing the Catholic concepts. Earlier writings (e.g., Thomas Aquinas in the 13th century) are also not Patristic witness of this concept.

I posted a few Patristic witnesses above.

It is not a rule, but something that follows naturally out of the circumstances I’ve outlined:

Thank you. You have admitted that it is simply your opinion.

Those ideas which are common to all apostolic churches are found in teachings and writings of all apostolic churches, even when there are different understandings of them (e.g., the Trinity, the Theotokos, etc). When a particular concept is not found outside of a given church, we can say that this concept is particular to that church, or the understanding of a given church (for those terms that are applied with a particular understanding within one tradition, cf. “qnome” for the Syrians, “ousios” for the Greeks, etc). If you want to call this my opinion, fine. It is my opinion. But I also think that it is common sense, and something that Catholics would agree with were we talking about ideas like OSAS or other ideas that they maintain are foreign to Catholic theology.

You are wrong. Those apostolic churches which broke with the Catholic Church, REJECTED one or another aspect of Christ’s teachings. That is all.

The fullness of Truth, is in the Catholic Church.

The Catholic Encyclopedia entry on indulgences, which I’ve linked earlier in this thread, contains many references to certain Papal declarations or what have you, as well as other writings. Particularly I would look under the subheading “Treasury of the Church”, which seems thickest with references.

Thanks.

I never claimed (or would claim) otherwise. Certainly this is true for all of us.

Ok.

Sincerely,

De Maria