Indulgences, Do they contridict grace?

[unacanta]

What I see in your scenario is that the hatred for your neighbour still remains in your heart because you refuse to fix his window, smugly pointing to Jesus on the Cross and claiming that He paid for it.

Not at all, I am saying the sin in which I was participating when I broke the window is canceled

You imply that once you are forgiven, the window is miraculously fixed leaving no one to dig into their pockets and pay.

You are placing words in my mouth. It would not matter if I purchased 10,000 windows, the sin still remains until Christ absolves it through His finished works on the cross. You are much more worried about fixing the window than you are the bleeding Christ whom paid the penilty.

You know this doesn’t happen. Windows do not get miraculously fixed. The consequences of your sin, the broken window, still remain. You stick your innocent neighbour with the bill to fix his window. Paying the repair bill is the earthly temporal punishment which is the result of your hatred, your sin,

Now you are getting to the heart of the matter. The “earthly temporal punishment” has nothing to do with my sin. It is administered by two ways. An earthly court of law renders that I must fix the window or my repentant heart calls me to do so. Now, the actually fixing of the window or my payment to do so is an outward sign of an inward working of the Holy Spirit. The actual sin can not be attoned for by any means other than the blood of Christ.

and you are demanding that the innocent injured party pay it, after Christ paid the price for your death which came to you through your hatred. You are demanding that your neighbour fork over the cash to get his window fixed, that he bear the earthly, temporal punishment due for your actions. He cannot present that bill to Christ and say, “Please deposit this amount of money in my account. My neighbour, who broke my window, said that You had paid for it to be fixed. I had to get a glazier in to do the job so here’s the bill.” Refusing to pay for the broken window to be fixed indicates a heart that has not turned, has not repented.

Again, by paying for the broken window has not absolved me of the original sin. It does show remorse, it does indicate a repentant heart, but it never is considered part of the payment for the sin. Else you would stand before the throne of God dressed in the Righteousness of Christ and some of yours to adorne the robe.

It is obvious that you still hate your neighbour since you want him, who was innocent in all of this, to be the one to pay to have the window fixed. You thus injure your innocent neighbour yet again, with the malice and hatred still in your heart. This is not loving your neighbour. Charity and Justice, should now be living in your heart after your repentance, since Christ has put to death your hatred. By the absence of Charity and Justice in your heart, it can be seen that there is no repentance, that the eternal price has not been paid and you are not forgiven.

That is where you err in judgment for it is written
1 John 2:2
and He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world.

It is not sin but rather the belief in “Him whom I sent” is the issue. Charity and Justice are outward workings of the Holy One within. It is not your deeds, but rather His.

Rather, hatred and malice remain in your heart as you gleefully squirm out of paying for the broken window and chuckle over how you have gotten out of having to pay for anything. In fact, in this scenario, it is also obvious that you have not forgiven your neighbour for whatever it was that that made you hate him enough to chuck a ball through his window.

It was sin in the first place that caused my actions to break the window. A repentant heart is not gleeful nor wishes to squirm out of “paying” but rather is eternally grateful that the Saviour was willing to do so. Grateful that His sacrifice was sufficient and I now am at peace with my God and I can repair the window and maybe become friends with the neighbor whom once I hated. If the neighbor accepts my offer to fix his window matters not in my standing with the Lord.

 

[Turtullian]

Colossians 2:14
having canceled out the certificate of debt consisting of decrees against us, which was hostile to us; and He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross.

This has to do with the Old Law not the notion of a temporal punishment due sin. There is a good reason why the blasphemous notion Penal Substitution is not found in scripture.

Now, is it a good thing to repair the neighbor’s window, Yes. Should we, Yes. Does the Holy Spirit lead us to fix it, probably so. Does fixing it pay for the sin, under no circumstances.

Small problem, while Christ’s forgiveness is still absolute, there is still the problem justice due sin. Nothing in scripture remotely suggests that man while justified dpes not escape the punishment due to sin (at least outside Baptism). Infact Christ’s parables teach against the notion man escapes punishment due to sin in his or her repentence. (See the Parable of the Man who sins pleads for mercy of the court, is sent to prison until he pays the last farthing.) It also should be noted that is only by the merits of Christ’s passion that things like Purgatory or indulgences are effacacious.

—The answer is too long to fit in one passage, see my next post to this one----

I would be looking forward to such a post.

 

[Phil12123]

This has to do with the Old Law not the notion of a temporal punishment due sin. There is a good reason why the blasphemous notion Penal Substitution is not found in scripture.

Would you please explain what you mean by the “notion Penal Substitution” and why you call it “blasphemous”?

Small problem, while Christ’s forgiveness is still absolute, there is still the problem justice due sin. Nothing in scripture remotely suggests that man while justified does not escape the punishment due to sin (at least outside Baptism). In fact Christ’s parables teach against the notion man escapes punishment due to sin in his or her repentence. (See the Parable of the Man who sins pleads for mercy of the court, is sent to prison until he pays the last farthing.) It also should be noted that is only by the merits of Christ’s passion that things like Purgatory or indulgences are effacacious.

You have confused me. Christ’s forgiveness is absolute and yet the forgiven person “does not escape the punishment due to sin”? How is that? One who is forgiven is still punished for what he is forgiven? What kind of forgiveness is that? And where do you see anyone in Scripture who is forgiven and still punished? The parable of the unforgiving servant in Matt. 18 may show he had his forgiveness revoked when he showed himself unforgiving toward a fellow servant. But we are not talking about that situation. We are here talking about a person—any person—who simply repents and believes in Christ. Are you saying HE still is punished for sins that are forgiven? On what basis?

 

[Turtullian]

Would you please explain what you mean by the “notion Penal Substitution” and why you call it “blasphemous”?
Penal substitution is balsphemous because suposes that 1 person of the Trinity was declared guilty by God the Father. If Christ was declared guilty for all men at his passion, then you have a seperation in the Godhead and the trinity according to orthodoxy is neither conounded in persons nor divided.

You have confused me. Christ’s forgiveness is absolute and yet the forgiven person “does not escape the punishment due to sin”? How is that? One who is forgiven is still punished for what he is forgiven?
Was not david forgiven of his crime yet was still punished by the taking away of his child? Was not moses forgiven but was punished insofar as he could not see the promised land? None of these men were forgiven outside the merits of Christ and yet they experienced chastisement and punishment.

What kind of forgiveness is that? And where do you see anyone in Scripture who is forgiven and still punished?

 

[Phil12123]

Penal substitution is blasphemous because supposes that 1 person of the Trinity was declared guilty by God the Father. If Christ was declared guilty for all men at his passion, then you have a seperation in the Godhead and the trinity according to orthodoxy is neither conounded in persons nor divided.

Christ, of course, was sinless Himself. An essential part of the “Gospel” as defined in 1 Cor. 15:1-3 is that He died for our sins.

**1 Corinthians 15

1. Moreover, brethren, I declare to you the gospel **which I preached to you, which also you received and in which you stand,
2. by which also you are saved, if you hold fast that word which I preached to you unless you believed in vain.
3. For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures,
4. and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures,

That was a fulfillment of Isaiah’s prophecy:

Isaiah 53:
3. He is despised and rejected by men, a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief. And we hid, as it were, our faces from Him; He was despised, and we did not esteem Him.
4. Surely He has borne our griefs and carried our sorrows; yet we esteemed Him stricken, smitten by God, and afflicted.
5. But He was wounded for our transgressions, He was bruised for our iniquities; the chastisement for our peace was upon Him, and by His stripes we are healed.
6. All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned, every one, to his own way; and the Lord has laid on Him the iniquity of us all.
7. He was oppressed and He was afflicted, yet He opened not His mouth; He was led as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before its shearers is silent, so He opened not his mouth.
8. He was taken from prison and from judgment, and who will declare His generation? For He was cut off from the land of the living; for the transgressions of My people He was stricken.
9. And they made His grave with the wicked but with the rich at His death, because He had done no violence, nor was any deceit in His mouth.
10. Yet it pleased the Lord to bruise Him; He has put Him to grief. When You make His soul an offering for sin, He shall see His seed, He shall prolong His days, and the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in His hand.
11. He shall see the travail of His soul, and be satisfied. by His knowledge My righteous Servant shall justify many, for He shall bear their iniquities.
12. Therefore I will divide Him a portion with the great, and He shall divide the spoil with the strong, because He poured out His soul unto death, and He was numbered with the transgressors, and He bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.

In bearing our sins, how would Jesus NOT be declared guilty by His Father? Verse 4 says He was “smitten by God” and verse 6 says, “the Lord has laid on Him the iniquity of us all,” and verse 11 says God shall see the travail of Jesus’ soul and be satisfied. All that sounds like what you are calling, "blasphemous."

1 Peter 3:18 says, “For Christ also suffered once for sins, the just for the unjust, that He might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive by the Spirit,”. The “just for the unjust” shows a substitution—Him (just) for us (the unjust). And “suffered once for sins” shows the penal aspect of it. He took our penalty.

**Finally, 2 Cor. 5:21 — " For He [God the Father] made Him [Jesus] who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him." Is that also blasphemous? **

 

[unacanta]

This has to do with the Old Law not the notion of a temporal punishment due sin. There is a good reason why the blasphemous notion Penal Substitution is not found in scripture.

I was quoting:
Colossians 2:14
having canceled out the certificate of debt consisting of decrees against us, which was hostile to us; and He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross

This passage is directly talking about Christ on the cross taking out of the way our debt. Now, in light of 1John 2:2 and He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world., then yes, Christ’s death canceled the sins under the Mosaic Law. The words**“not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world”** ring true in our ears. Sin is no longer a problem for God, he dealt with it through His Son on the Cross. Our belief in Him is a very real problem.

Small problem, while Christ’s forgiveness is still absolute, there is still the problem justice due sin.

Absolutely, the problem was totally and completely dealt with the advent of Christ. It is His righteousness we plead, not our own. Justice was served or at least in God’s eyes.

Nothing in scripture remotely suggests that man while justified dpes not escape the punishment due to sin (at least outside Baptism).

The question remains, what does it mean to be justified. The only answer can be:

(Baptist Confession of Faith)
Justification is an act of God’s free grace, wherein he pardoneth all our sins and accepteth us as righteous in his sight, only for the righteousness of Chris imputed to us, and received by fatih alone.

There are many, here are two that drive the point home:

Hebrews 8:12
" FOR I WILL BE MERCIFUL TO THEIR INIQUITIES, AND I WILL REMEMBER THEIR SINS NO MORE."
Hebrews 10:17
" AND THEIR SINS AND THEIR LAWLESS DEEDSI WILL REMEMBER NO MORE."

We are justified, our sins are removed and they are remembered not more. The punishment due was metted out on Calvery.

Infact Christ’s parables teach against the notion man escapes punishment due to sin in his or her repentence. (See the Parable of the Man who sins pleads for mercy of the court, is sent to prison until he pays the last farthing.) It also should be noted that is only by the merits of Christ’s passion that things like Purgatory or indulgences are effacacious.

I would be looking forward to such a post.

Again, our punishment for sin was born by Christ on the cross. I stated in another post, will do the same here concerning Purgatory. We are to stand before the throne of God wrapped in the righteousness of Christ. Purgatory can only be a false doctrine in that it adds to Christ’s completed work. We do not need to adorn our robes of righteounsness found in Him with our efforts in Purgatory. Either you believe He is suffecient or you don’t.

Alas, the great battle of the Reformers still rages,

Blessings,
Len

 

[Turtullian]

In bearing our sins, how would Jesus NOT be declared guilty by His Father? Verse 4 says He was “smitten by God” and verse 6 says,

. 4 Surely he hath borne our infirmities and carried our sorrows: and we have thought him as it were a leper, and as one struck by God and afflicted.

Your translation leaves out we thought. Israel as a nation thinks that God has killed this person. Verse 4 is no proof of penal substitution.

“the Lord has laid on Him the iniquity of us all,” and verse 11 says God shall see the travail of Jesus’ soul and be satisfied. All that sounds like what you are calling, “blasphemous.”

There is a difference between the Satisfaction View of the Atonement as Aquinas and Anselm verses penal substitution. The Satisfaction view is taht christ’s atonement not only merits us salvation but it turns away the wrath of God.

1 Peter 3:18 says, “For Christ also suffered once for sins, the just for the unjust, that He might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive by the Spirit,”. The “just for the unjust” shows a substitution—Him (just) for us (the unjust). And “suffered once for sins” shows the penal aspect of it. He took our penalty.

Out of Context. That is in reference to dying for the salvation of man. However Verse 19 talks about christ preaching to the spirits in prison tying into Matthew 5,

Finally, 2 Cor. 5:21 — " For He [God the Father] made Him [Jesus] who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him." Is that also blasphemous?

Christ was made sin in a figurative sense not a literal sense. For if Christ was literally made sin then Christ as both God and Man had sin in him. You would tell me that Christ was made guilty and therefore for a brief moment God was made guilty by God. You divide the substance of God in making the assertion for penal substitution and is rightly blasphemy.

 

[Turtullian]

I was quoting:
Colossians 2:14
having canceled out the certificate of debt consisting of decrees against us, which was hostile to us; and He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross

This passage is directly talking about Christ on the cross taking out of the way our debt. Now, in light of 1John 2:2 and He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world., then yes, Christ’s death canceled the sins under the Mosaic Law. The words**“not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world”** ring true in our ears. Sin is no longer a problem for God, he dealt with it through His Son on the Cross. Our belief in Him is a very real problem

Ver. 14. Blotting out, &c.[4] This is commonly expounded of the sentence of eternal death pronounced against sinful Adam, and all his posterity, for having sinned in him. Others would have it to signify only the yoke and obligations of the Mosaical law, which could not of itself remit sins, and occasionally made persons greater sinners. This sentence of death (whether we understand the one or the other) Christ took away, fastening it as it were, to the cross, taking it away by his death on the cross. (Witham)

Absolutely, the problem was totally and completely dealt with the advent of Christ. It is His righteousness we plead, not our own. Justice was served or at least in God’s eyes.

It is by Christ’s justice that “pay the last farthing” (Mat 5).

The question remains, what does it mean to be justified. The only answer can be:

(Baptist Confession of Faith)
Justification is an act of God’s free grace, wherein he pardoneth all our sins and accepteth us as righteous in his sight, only for the righteousness of Chris imputed to us, and received by fatih alone.

Of course that one who gains an indulgence or who is purgatory is already justified, and it is by Christ’s merits that thier justification is increased.

There are many, here are two that drive the point home:

Hebrews 8:12
" FOR I WILL BE MERCIFUL TO THEIR INIQUITIES, AND I WILL REMEMBER THEIR SINS NO MORE."

This has to do with the Final judgement which comes at the end of the world.

Hebrews 10:17
" AND THEIR SINS AND THEIR LAWLESS DEEDSI WILL REMEMBER NO MORE."

The context is coming into a covenantal relationship from both unbelief and/or the Law of moses via baptism. It doesn’t say taht if they sin after coming into that relationship, God won’t chastise them for sin.

We are justified, our sins are removed and they are remembered not more. The punishment due was metted out on Calvery.

Which is based on the blasphemy that is penal substitution.

Again, our punishment for sin was born by Christ on the cross. I stated in another post, will do the same here concerning Purgatory. We are to stand before the throne of God wrapped in the righteousness of Christ.

We are not just wrapped in Christ’s Righteousness. It is either Christ’s righteousness is infused into us making us truly justified or it is indeed a legal fiction. Not only that but there is scant evidence to prove from scripture penal substitution.

Purgatory can only be a false doctrine in that it adds to Christ’s completed work. We do not need to adorn our robes of righteounsness found in Him with our efforts in Purgatory. Either you believe He is suffecient or you don’t

Which is a false accusation of what puragtory is. Those in purgatory are cleansed by the merits of Christ.

 

[unacanta]

Ver. 14. Blotting out, &c.[4] This is commonly expounded of the sentence of eternal death pronounced against sinful Adam, and all his posterity, for having sinned in him. Others would have it to signify only the yoke and obligations of the Mosaical law, which could not of itself remit sins, and occasionally made persons greater sinners. This sentence of death (whether we understand the one or the other) Christ took away, fastening it as it were, to the cross, taking it away by his death on the cross. (Witham)

It is by Christ’s justice that “pay the last farthing” (Mat 5).

Colossians 2:14
having canceled out the certificate of debt consisting of decrees against us, which was hostile to us; and He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross

The pronouncement of death upon sinful Adam was indeed removed, not only for him but we who also believe and trust in Christ. The death sentence was pronounced due to sin, with the cancellation of the debt, we are no longer in wrong standing but rather in right standing in the eyes of the Lord. The scripture does not just say the eternal death pronounced against Adam and we who believe in Christ, but is states the debt.
The Mosaic Law of course was not designed to bring death but rather to reveal sin so we should not engage in it.

Of course that one who gains an indulgence or who is purgatory is already justified, and it is by Christ’s merits that their justification is increased.

If they be justified, then more of Christ’s, Mary’s nor the Saint’s merits are not needed. Any doctrine be it Indulgences or Purgatory would be in error. You are either justified or you are not. There is not just a little, little more, most with the status.

There are many, here are two that drive the point home:

This has to do with the Final judgement which comes at the end of the world.

The context is coming into a covenantal relationship from both unbelief and/or the Law of moses via baptism. It doesn’t say taht if they sin after coming into that relationship, God won’t chastise them for sin.

Hebrews 8:12
" FOR I WILL BE MERCIFUL TO THEIR INIQUITIES, AND I WILL REMEMBER THEIR SINS NO MORE."

Hebrews 10:17
" AND THEIR SINS AND THEIR LAWLESS DEEDS I WILL REMEMBER NO MORE."

Colossians 2:14 clearly states that the debt has been canceled and the writ against us nailed to the cross. It is upon the cross that the iniquities and sins the Father remembers no more. Surely we can not believe that once forgiven and our debt canceled that Father continues to remember our sins. Alas, we are back to Mosaic Law where we must strive to please.

Perhaps I misunderstood you. Neither of the passages state nor insinuate the necessity for baptism. In fact the word in both passages is plural, SINS. The Lord is talking about the sins of the whole world.

1JN2:2 He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.

Again, sins was dealt with forever, the last sacrifice was made by the unblemished Lamb of God. That is the reason He said “THEIR SINS AND THEIR LAWLESS DEEDS I WILL REMEMBER NO MORE” There is a reason all judgement was given over to the Son of Man. Our forgiveness of sin is not based upon what we have done regarding sin but rather our belief in His Son.

Footnotes:

Which is based on the blasphemy that is penal substitution.

We are not just wrapped in Christ’s Righteousness. It is either Christ’s righteousness is infused into us making us truly justified or it is indeed a legal fiction. Not only that but there is scant evidence to prove from scripture penal substitution.

Which is a false accusation of what puragtory is. Those in purgatory are cleansed by the merits of Christ.

2 Corinthians 5:21
He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.

1 Peter 3:18
For Christ also died for sins once for all, the just for the unjust, so that He might bring us to God, having been put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit;

The above are just a couple.
Indulgences and also Purgatory to an extent all place the “monkey” so to speak on our back and we are no longer relying on Christ’s atoning blood and sacrifice but are attempting to somehow shoulder the punishment for sin which is totally contrary to the “Good News”

Again, any doctrine which teaches that we must “do” something other than place our faith in the Son of Man, must be viewed as a false doctrine. Any teaching which says our justification is by any means other than the precious blood of Christ can only be errant.

Thank you for your response,
Blessings,
Len

 

[MarcoPolo]

Again the truth is only by the blood of Christ do we ever obtain the full assurance that the attonement has been made.

Hi unacanta, glad to see you were able to create a thread! Anyway, what alarms me in this thread is the notion that Catholics do not rely on Christ’s sacrifice for forgiveness or atonement or even the grace of repentance all the way from declaration to indulgence. So I really don’t see what the problem or issue is.

 

[Vincent]

You are either justified or you are not. There is not just a little, little more, most with the status.

Catholics see justification as the Father declaring us, in the Holy Spirit, to be his adopted sons in his only begotten Son. And since God’s Word does not return unto him void (cf. Isaiah 55:11), what God declares truly is: we have been called his children, and so we are (cf. 1 John 3:1).

Yes, you are either a son or you are not. That’s the *qualitative *dimension.

And then there’s the *quantitative *dimension: sons grow. Just as we mature the moment we are conceived, so we mature the moment we are born from above.

Since Catholics see justification and divine adoption as the same reality, to grow as God’s sons is to grow in righteousness. That’s what Catholics mean by “increasing in justification”.

 

[Genesis315]

Indulgences are not contrary to grace as they are a great grace! Instead of having to do long penances, an indulgence draws on the merits of Jesus Christ and His enter Mystical Body and spares us from that suffering.

Thus St. Paul says Col. 1:24 Who now rejoice in my sufferings for you and fill up those things that are wanting of the sufferings of Christ, in my flesh, for his body, which is the church:

St. Paul is saying his suffering can supply for that due to other members of the Church.

Such suffering is a temporal punishment due to sin. We can either do penance for it or be exercised by God in chastisement (see Hebrews 12:1-11) and we can suffer for others. An indulgence is an application of that vicarious penance, good works, etc. It’s a gift of grace.

 

[Vincent]

Indulgences and also Purgatory to an extent all place the “monkey” so to speak on our back and we are no longer relying on Christ’s atoning blood and sacrifice but are attempting to somehow shoulder the punishment for sin which is totally contrary to the “Good News”

Christ’s atoning blood and sacrifice are precisely what makes Indulgences and Purgatory effective. In fact, they are two gratuitous applications of Christ’s atoning blood and sacrifice.

It’s a fact: Christians sin, even after being born again. And sin committed after being born again has consequences, which are entailed by the very nature of sin itself.

One consequence is wounding our communion of love with God, who is Love. Thus, we his sons pray, “Our Father . . . forgive us our trespasses”. Like the Father of the Prodigal Son, He runs to meet us, embrace us, and kiss us. And the Father forgives us by the atoning blood and sacrifice of his only begotten Son.

Then there’s the other consequence: the unhealthy attachment to creatures. If we re-turn to God with fervent love for Him—that is, if we are completely receptive to God’s gift of self—then not only will we be forgiven of our sins, but we will also be healed of the unhealthy attachment that sins entail. And this healing is by the atoning blood and sacrifice of his only begotten Son.

If, however, this unhealthy attachment remains after receiving forgiveness, there is no reason for despair because God loves us too much for us to stay this way. Heaven is definitive communion with God, who is Love. Even if this unhealthy attachment remains until we die, it won’t be so in Heaven, for God is a consuming fire (cf. Hebrews 12:29).

This is what Purgatory is all about—the transition into the “fire” of God’s love that is experienced by his sons whose unhealthy attachment to creatures are being “burned” away (cf. 1 Corinthians 3:15). Purgatory therefore cannot be other than by the atoning blood and sacrifice of his only begotten Son.

In this context, indulgences, as the gift of tenderness that they are, are associated with God’s gift of forgiveness. Indulgences are offered by God through his Son’s body, the Church, to heal us of the unhealthy attachments to creatures that may remain after He has forgiven us. Like God’s forgiveness and Purgatory, indulgences are gifts of God that are grounded on the atoning blood and sacrifice of His only begotten Son.

 

[unacanta]

Christ’s atoning blood and sacrifice are precisely what makes Indulgences and Purgatory effective. In fact, they are two gratuitous applications of Christ’s atoning blood and sacrifice.

It’s a fact: Christians sin, even after being born again. And sin committed after being born again has consequences, which are entailed by the very nature of sin itself.

One consequence is wounding our communion of love with God, who is Love. Thus, we his sons pray, “Our Father . . . forgive us our trespasses”. Like the Father of the Prodigal Son, He runs to meet us, embrace us, and kiss us. And the Father forgives us by the atoning blood and sacrifice of his only begotten Son.

Then there’s the other consequence: the unhealthy attachment to creatures. If we re-turn to God with fervent love for Him—that is, if we are completely receptive to God’s gift of self—then not only will we be forgiven of our sins, but we will also be healed of the unhealthy attachment that sins entail. And this healing is by the atoning blood and sacrifice of his only begotten Son.

If, however, this unhealthy attachment remains after receiving forgiveness, there is no reason for despair because God loves us too much for us to stay this way. Heaven is definitive communion with God, who is Love. Even if this unhealthy attachment remains until we die, it won’t be so in Heaven, for God is a consuming fire (cf. Hebrews 12:29).

This is what Purgatory is all about—the transition into the “fire” of God’s love that is experienced by his sons whose unhealthy attachment to creatures are being “burned” away (cf. 1 Corinthians 3:15). Purgatory therefore cannot be other than by the atoning blood and sacrifice of his only begotten Son.

In this context, indulgences, as the gift of tenderness that they are, are associated with God’s gift of forgiveness. Indulgences are offered by God through his Son’s body, the Church, to heal us of the unhealthy attachments to creatures that may remain after He has forgiven us. Like God’s forgiveness and Purgatory, indulgences are gifts of God that are grounded on the atoning blood and sacrifice of His only begotten Son.

It is as I suspected and now becoming more of a reality to me is basically RCC doctrine is this, please correct me if I am wrong:

I am saved by Christ and forgiven. Now that I am such,(forgiven of all my sins of the past) any new sins that I commit after my conversion are my responsibility and I am bound to make atonement for them. If it were not so, then there would not be any need of Indulgences nor Purgatory.

With this thought in mind then I have to admit I am very grateful that I have not experienced the Jesus of RCC teachings. This Savior is only a partial Savior. He is willing to die for part of my sins but not all of them. The Savior in which you speak is one in whom I can not place my full trust, there is punishment awaiting me no matter what:

2. It is a divinely revealed truth that sins bring punishments inflicted by God’s sanctity and justice. These must be expiated either on this earth through the sorrows, miseries and calamities of this life and above all through death,(3) or else in the life beyond through fire and torments or “purifying” punishments.(4) Therefore it has always been the conviction of the faithful that the paths of evil are fraught with many stumbling blocks and bring adversities, bitterness and harm to those who follow them.(5)

If it be a truth that my sin must bring purnishment from God here and in the hereafter, then I must ask why it was necessary for Christ to suffer at all on the cross. If I can expiate my sins here or in the torments of “purifying punishments”, then we insult the Spirit of Grace.

Nope, sorry I will not accept a partial atonement. Christ was able and did by His death on the cross forever take away all sin. Not only ours, but the sins of the whole world which include, past, present and future sin.

1Jn2:2 and He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world.

This passage does not speak nor hint of just sin prior to our being born again but rather all sin. In other understanding would be incorrect.

Blessings,
Len

 

[unacanta]

Indulgences are not contrary to grace as they are a great grace! Instead of having to do long penances, an indulgence draws on the merits of Jesus Christ and His enter Mystical Body and spares us from that suffering.

Thus St. Paul says Col. 1:24 Who now rejoice in my sufferings for you and fill up those things that are wanting of the sufferings of Christ, in my flesh, for his body, which is the church:

St. Paul is saying his suffering can supply for that due to other members of the Church.

Such suffering is a temporal punishment due to sin. We can either do penance for it or be exercised by God in chastisement (see Hebrews 12:1-11) and we can suffer for others. An indulgence is an application of that vicarious penance, good works, etc. It’s a gift of grace.

So are we saying that the sufferings of Christ was not a sufficient atonement for sin? We now need St. Paul, Mary and other Saints to help out.?

 

[Vincent]

I am saved by Christ and forgiven. Now that I am such,(forgiven of all my sins of the past) any new sins that I commit after my conversion are my responsibility and I am bound to make atonement for them. If it were not so, then there would not be any need of Indulgences nor Purgatory.

If I sin – having been saved by Christ to be God’s adopted son – then yes, I am** response**-able, by the grace of Christ.

I ***respond ***to God’s gift of repentance by asking God for forgiveness. I ask “Our Father” to “forgive us our trespasses”, who generously grants forgiveness. And my response is itself a gift of grace made possible only by the blood of Christ.

And then, having been forgiven, I ***respond ***to God’s gift of forgiveness by reconciling with my neighbor, and by allowing Him to heal me of the unhealthy attachments to creatures – if they remain – that are entailed by the sins of which He has forgiven:

In the first aspect, if my sin was theft, then I return what I have stolen; if my sin was slander, then I restore the reputation of the person whom I’ve slandered. In the second aspect, I carry my cross, by his grace, and follow Him. And these responses too are *themselves *gifts of grace made possible only by the blood of Christ.

With this thought in mind then I have to admit I am very grateful that I have not experienced the Jesus of RCC teachings. This Savior is only a partial Savior. He is willing to die for part of my sins but not all of them. The Savior in which you speak is one in whom I can not place my full trust, there is punishment awaiting me no matter what

The Jesus whom the Catholic Church believes Him is a total Savior: He died for every single one of our sins, once for all, and we place our full trust in Him. Asking for forgiveness for the sins we commit after having been saved by Christ cannot be possible unless He died for all of our sins.

Sin is a wound to our relationship with God. If you, a Christian, sin, then you’re “punishing” yourself, not only by wounding this relationship by turning away from Him, but also by attaching yourself unhealthily towards creatures.

This unhealthy attachment to creatures goes with the very nature of sin; it is unhealthy, a “punishment” that you’ve inflicted on yourself. God will heal you of this attachment, as well as forgive you of your sins, but we can’t ignore that this attachment is a real consequence of the sins we commit.

And to reiterate yet again, being forgiven of our sins and being healed of the unhealthy attachment to creatures (a self-inflicted punishment) are gifts of Grace that are won by Christ’s sacrifice on the Cross.

 

[MarcoPolo]

So are we saying that the sufferings of Christ was not a sufficient atonement for sin? We now need St. Paul, Mary and other Saints to help out.?

Please stop trying to rephrase what people say to fit your preconceived caricature of what the Catholic Church teaches.

 

[unacanta]

If I sin – having been saved by Christ to be God’s adopted son – then yes, I am** response**-able, by the grace of Christ.

I ***respond ***to God’s gift of repentance by asking God for forgiveness. I ask “Our Father” to “forgive us our trespasses”, who generously grants forgiveness. And my response is itself a gift of grace made possible only by the blood of Christ.

And then, having been forgiven, I ***respond ***to God’s gift of forgiveness by reconciling with my neighbor, and by allowing Him to heal me of the unhealthy attachments to creatures – if they remain – that are entailed by the sins of which He has forgiven:

In the first aspect, if my sin was theft, then I return what I have stolen; if my sin was slander, then I restore the reputation of the person whom I’ve slandered. In the second aspect, I carry my cross, by his grace, and follow Him. And these responses too are *themselves *gifts of grace made possible only by the blood of Christ.

We have to decide, are my actions by returning the item stolen, the slander I have given recanted necessary for the forgiveness from the Lord. You seem to think not and I agree with you, for you said:

“I ask “Our Father” to “forgive us our trespasses””, who generously grants forgiveness".

The Father made not stipulation or condition on His forgiveness that I must return the item or recant the slander. The reconcilling with my neighbor must be an inward working of the Holy Spirit.

The Jesus whom the Catholic Church believes Him is a total Savior: He died for every single one of our sins, once for all, and we place our full trust in Him. Asking for forgiveness for the sins we commit after having been saved by Christ cannot be possible unless He died for all of our sins.

Absolutely, this is scary…a Protestant in agreement with a Catholic…

Now since we both agree that “He died for every single one of our sins, once for all,”, you can see why I am at a total loss concerning Indulgences and the Sister of it it Purgatory. I can not follow the logic which states “I am forgiven” but now I must “pay” for my sins when we “place our full trust in Him”

Sin is a wound to our relationship with God. If you, a Christian, sin, then you’re “punishing” yourself, not only by wounding this relationship by turning away from Him, but also by attaching yourself unhealthily towards creatures.

This unhealthy attachment to creatures goes with the very nature of sin; it is unhealthy, a “punishment” that you’ve inflicted on yourself. God will heal you of this attachment, as well as forgive you of your sins, but we can’t ignore that this attachment is a real consequence of the sins we commit.

And to reiterate yet again, being forgiven of our sins and being healed of the unhealthy attachment to creatures (a self-inflicted punishment) are gifts of Grace that are won by Christ’s sacrifice on the Cross.

Sin is by far more than wound in our relationship with God, it was a mortal wound in which we experienced spirtual death. He sent the Son to heal us, only by Him are we healed. You are very correct in saying that sin be it commited as a believer or non-believer does have its own punishment, but not by God. God’s wrath for sin was metted out on Calvary.

I am not understanding what the “unhealthy attachment to creatures” thing is, but in any event Indulgences seem to be a manner in which men can somehow find reconcilliation with the Father.

 

[Semper_Fi_1]

It is as I suspected and now becoming more of a reality to me is basically RCC doctrine is this, please correct me if I am wrong:

I am saved by Christ and forgiven. Now that I am such,(forgiven of all my sins of the past) any new sins that I commit after my conversion are my responsibility and I am bound to make atonement for them. If it were not so, then there would not be any need of Indulgences nor Purgatory.

With this thought in mind then I have to admit I am very grateful that I have not experienced the Jesus of RCC teachings. This Savior is only a partial Savior. He is willing to die for part of my sins but not all of them. The Savior in which you speak is one in whom I can not place my full trust, there is punishment awaiting me no matter what:

2. It is a divinely revealed truth that sins bring punishments inflicted by God’s sanctity and justice. These must be expiated either on this earth through the sorrows, miseries and calamities of this life and above all through death,(3) or else in the life beyond through fire and torments or “purifying” punishments.(4) Therefore it has always been the conviction of the faithful that the paths of evil are fraught with many stumbling blocks and bring adversities, bitterness and harm to those who follow them.(5)

If it be a truth that my sin must bring purnishment from God here and in the hereafter, then I must ask why it was necessary for Christ to suffer at all on the cross. If I can expiate my sins here or in the torments of “purifying punishments”, then we insult the Spirit of Grace.

Nope, sorry I will not accept a partial atonement. Christ was able and did by His death on the cross forever take away all sin. Not only ours, but the sins of the whole world which include, past, present and future sin.

1Jn2:2 and He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world.

This passage does not speak nor hint of just sin prior to our being born again but rather all sin. In other understanding would be incorrect.

Blessings,
Len

Jesus Christ is our savior, plain and simple. Purgatory and indulgences are only for sins which have been forgiven, for the temporal punishment due to those sins. Only those that reach the state of purgatory have been saved… it’s not a last chance effort it’s an after the fact thing.

 

[unacanta]

Please stop trying to rephrase what people say to fit your preconceived caricature of what the Catholic Church teaches.

Here is the original statment:

***Originally Posted by Genesis315
Indulgences are not contrary to grace as they are a great grace! Instead of having to do long penances, an indulgence draws on the merits of Jesus Christ and His enter Mystical Body and spares us from that suffering.

Thus St. Paul says Col. 1:24 Who now rejoice in my sufferings for you and fill up those things that are wanting of the sufferings of Christ, in my flesh, for his body, which is the church:

St. Paul is saying his suffering can supply for that due to other members of the Church.

Such suffering is a temporal punishment due to sin. We can either do penance for it or be exercised by God in chastisement (see Hebrews 12:1-11) and we can suffer for others. An indulgence is an application of that vicarious penance, good works, etc. It’s a gift of grace.***

Since Genesis315 specifically said "St. Paul is saying his suffering can supply for that due to other members of the Church."

He says "Such suffering is a temporal punishment due to sin."

So again I say, why do we need Paul, Mary or any other Saint to suffer for us when Christ’s suffering which was for our atonment for sin was sufficient?

I am very pleased that there are such as Vincent and others whom has been very helpful in dispelling some of my “preconceived ideas”. Due to this discussion I am much better informed on what RCC doctrine is and thankful for it.

Blessings,
Len