Indulgences, 2 Maccabees, and 1 Peter

[Erich]

CA’s Primer on Indulgences tract explains,

…In the Old Testament, Judah Maccabee finds the bodies of soldiers who died wearing superstitious amulets during one of the Lord’s battles. Judah and his men “turned to prayer, beseeching that the sin which had been committed might be wholly blotted out” (2 Macc. 12:42).

The reference to the sin being “wholly blotted out” refers to its temporal penalties. The author of 2 Maccabees tells us that for these men Judah “was looking to the splendid reward that is laid up for those who fall asleep in godliness” (verse 45); he believed that these men fell asleep in godliness, which would not have been the case if they were in mortal sin. If they were not in mortal sin, then they would not have eternal penalties to suffer, and thus the complete blotting out of their sin must refer to temporal penalties for their superstitious actions. Judah “took up a collection, man by man, to the amount of two thousand drachmas of silver and sent it to Jerusalem to provide for a sin offering. In doing this . . . he made atonement for the dead, that they might be delivered from their sin” (verses 43, 46).

Judah not only prayed for the dead, but he provided for them the then-appropriate ecclesial action for lessening temporal penalties: a sin offering…

I’m looking for some insight into how I might better explain why this does not conflict with 1 Peter 1:18-19

18 For you know that it was not with perishable things such as silver or gold that you were redeemed from the empty way of life handed down to you from your ancestors, 19 but with the precious blood of Christ, a lamb without blemish or defect.

I know that sin offerings (as per the Mosaic Law) are of course perfectly consistent with Scripture. There are “traditions of men” which keep us from fulfilling the commandments of God (these are what Jesus and the Apostles preached against), and the traditions of the Church which are from God and help us live the commandments of the Gospel faithfully (the Mosaic Law is from God, and of course Christ did not come to abolish the Law but to fulfill it). These latter traditions must be maintained because they are established by the Body of Christ, the Church, and give a worthy expression to the truths of our Faith.

 

[Gailgirl]

I think the problem I have is that the Bible says the only atonement for sin is the blood of Christ, which was poured out for us at his crucifixion.
This was accomplished on the cross, was it not? I’m not sure that any collection of moneys (2 Maccabbees) to offer to the dead because of their sin of idolatry would benefit them. Didn’t Augustine address this?

 

[Spencerian]

The passage from Maccabees does not conflict with 1 Peter because the two actions are valid within two different Covenants, as well as for people in different states of existence.

The sin offering and prayer for the dead warriors holds to the principle of purgatory, as they pray for people who have died in friendship with God but with…problems in how they expressed it.

Peter tells that offerings of gold or sacrifices of ordinary animals while you are still living is no longer necessary, as the sacrifice of the Lamb of God is atonement for the sins of the living.

So your Maccabees deals with purgatory and temporal cleansing for effects of sin after death. Peter spoke of the New Covenant’s way of atonement of sin in Christ for the living.

Indulgences are acts of contrition which aid in the remission of temporal punishments for sins confessed, which would otherwise be received in purgatory.

As Karl Keating put it, temporal punishment is like a child spilling a cup of water. The child may say “I’m sorry,” and the mother forgives the child…but there is still a mess to be cleaned up. Purgatory is the child cleaning up their mess. An indulgence is like dad stepping in to clean things up instead. Atonement is never dropping the cup at all.

 

[Gailgirl]

Thanks for the comments Spencerian. But I’m confused. Jesus Christ is the redeemer for all…no matter what time frame they lived. The O.T. rituals pointed to Jesus, who fulfilled and completed what was looked forward to in the Law. Being dead, or living, a person’s sins are atoned for by the sacrifice of Christ; O.T. saints looking forward to the cross, and since Christ, all looking back at the cross. Our former priest agreed with my grandmother, who always quoted Scripture: “It is appointed for man once to die, then the judgement”. This judgement pertains to a person’s acceptance, or rejection of Christ while on earth.
Is this not biblical truth? Thanks for any comments.

Gailgirl

 

[Spencerian]

Thanks for the comments Spencerian. But I’m confused. Jesus Christ is the redeemer for all…no matter what time frame they lived. The O.T. rituals pointed to Jesus, who fulfilled and completed what was looked forward to in the Law. Being dead, or living, a person’s sins are atoned for by the sacrifice of Christ; O.T. saints looking forward to the cross, and since Christ, all looking back at the cross. Our former priest agreed with my grandmother, who always quoted Scripture: “It is appointed for man once to die, then the judgement”. This judgement pertains to a person’s acceptance, or rejection of Christ while on earth.
Is this not biblical truth? Thanks for any comments.

Gailgirl

Note that Scripture is not the only source of our Catholic faith. The very last verses of the Book of John note this, in John 21:25: “There are also many other things that Jesus did, but if these were to be described individually, I do not think the whole world would contain the books that would be written.”

How are we to know the teachings of Christ and the Apostles and their immediate successors if everything could not have been written down? The answer is, of course, is in the apostolic ministry that Christ founded, where teachings, both oral and written in the form of Scripture, is handed down over the millenia.

Christ’s Passion was more than sufficient for the atonement of sins, true, but we are still responsible for holding up our end to “sin no more.” When we sin, we temporarily break the Covenant, partially (venial sin) or totally (mortal sin). The Sacrament of Confession repairs this completely, for God knows we are not perfect but leaves us a way to always return to him.

In other words, rather than the “Get out of hell free” nature of some Protestants who believe that “Accepting Jesus as your personal Lord and Savior” is enough for all time, Catholics believe that acceptance in the ways of Christ AND continuous responsibility in following His way by behaving as Christ did (a sinless man) gives us hope for eternal life.

Christ’s Sacrifice was both timeless and temporal. Scripture points this out in many places as Christ breaks the bonds of death on mankind, specifically the pious dead before the Passion who died in Christ’s friendship yet were still denied access to the gates of Heaven before His death.

He goes to preach to these souls in the realm of Sheol. Sheol was not Hell itself (despite our use of the old language translations) but was a place for the pious dead, some of the prophets and children of Abraham. It’s also known as “Abraham’s Bosom” (as described in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus the poor man in Luke 16:19-31).

Once we’re dead, we are committed to judgement in God’s eyes to either eternal life or death. We can only change this course while alive. To keep the course, we must always behave as Christ lived or (prior to His coming) per the Jewish ways of the Old Testament.

I’m sure I’m not getting to the meat of your question, so perhaps this Catholic Answers tract on salvation will be of further help.

 

[Gailgirl]

Thanks for your comments again. They were helpful.
I did read the ‘tract’, and I have never heard of Kenneth Hagen. However, the Protestants I know do not think that accepting Christ is a ‘get out of jail free card’. They have told me that yes, they did make a personal commitment to Christ by acknowledging who He really is and that He died in their place. They also say that you cannot just ‘state this in words’, but must repent, which is biblical. The Protestants I know love Jesus, and live their lives in service to Him. My friend who I respect, and she respects me, says that we must ‘persevere’ to the end, like you said. One who perseveres is one who truly loves Christ, and is faithful to Him all of their lives.
So, those Protestants I know are not into an ‘easy believism’, and are quick to point out that being a Christian (either Catholic or Protestant) is more than a baptism, more than an altar call, more than raising your hand; it is a life-long commitment to Jesus because He died for us. Therefore, we serve Him.
I know there are large differences in many Christian denominations, and there seem to be some ‘kooky’ ones, but the common denominator is our Lord Jesus Christ.
Gailgirl