Indulgences

[JonNC]

Are you serious? (Even ) Lutherans don’t believe that the Church is merely a place. Jon, can you back me up on this?

Sure can. Christ established the Church to provide the means of His grace, sanctifying grace, in word and sacrament.

Jon

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Jon is a cool guy. If I were Lutheran (my son attends a Lutheran LCMS school) I’m not sure I’d beam on the “even the Lutherans” setup there?

No, it’s more like when Dad sends you to your room for TPing the neighbor’s house…you’re forgiven but you still get punished. Now if you go and clean up the neighbor’s house, you don’t have to spend so much time in your room.

Are you serious? (Even ) Lutherans don’t believe that the Church is merely a place. Jon, can you back me up on this?

 

[JonNC]

=Apollos;7033411]Indulgences are of scripture:

• “We being many, are one body in Christ, and every one members one of another” (Romans 12:5); therefore even sinners in the Church can benefit from the good of the holy.
• “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” (Colossians 1:24); therefore satisfaction can be made for another person.
• “To whom you have pardoned anything, I also. For, what I have pardoned, if I have pardoned anything, for your sakes have I done it in the person of Christ” (2 Corinthians 2:10); therefore anyone with apostolic authority may dispense someone from penalties.

That’s an interesting take. I’ll ponder it. It doesn’t answer the question of why the Orthodox don’t view it in the same way Rome does.

Indulgences area also of Tradition:

• As early as the late 100s and early 200s it was understood that Christians who had caved in during the persecutions can be dispensed from their penances in view of the merits of those who were actually martyred.
• By the 700s the Church was already substituting easier penances for hard ones.

Source, please.

Jon

 

[JonNC]

=guanophore;7034608]
Do you believe there are temporal consequences for sins?

Hi guano,
Do you mean temproal punishments in terms of from God, or simply from the consequences that happen here on Earth as a result of our actions.

Do you think that people should bear the fruits that befit repentance?

“There is no justification without sanctification, no forgiveness without renewal of life, no real faith from which the fruits of new obedience do not grow.” - Luther

Do you believe that we are all members of one Body, and that what each person does affects the others?

Do you believe that our acts of love can help other members of the Body?

Of course. Are you saying that our good works, as the regenerate, are a form of indulgence?

Jon

 

[JonNC]

Jon is a cool guy. If I were Lutheran (my son attends a Lutheran LCMS school) I’m not sure I’d beam on the “even the Lutherans” setup there?

Newbie is a cool guy, too. I don’t think he meant it quite like that.

Jon

 

[guanophore]

I don’t think this is fair. The Early Church Fathers and the councils did not rule about Christology or soteriology or matters of salvation in a vacuum free of Scripture. Go and read St. Augustine’s Confessions. The man quotes Scripture every page practically. Go read the Didache for crying out loud! That’s an early Church manual and it quotes the OT and NT right and left! The Fathers like Ambrose, Ignatius of Antioch, Polycarp, Clement, on and on, use Scripture in all their arguments and debates.

So why is it “you’re being a Protestant!!!” always the charge in here when someone does what the Fathers did? Indulgences were not a part of the Early Church and are not mentioned ever in the early writings. It’s not Protestant to feel that they have no place in the Church.

Now I’ll duck and prepare for incoming RPG’s…

You are right, it is not fair, because there are many non-Catholics that do not hold to sola scriptura. It is a common mistake that many of our separated brethren make, though,that everything that is germaine to the faith must come from the Bible.

It is a principle that has it’s source in scripture, though, as well as the Teachings.

 

[guanophore]

Apollos,
So, since indulgences aren’t of scripture, as you seem to imply here, and they are not of the Tradition of the early Church, what is the source of the origin of the teaching?

Jon

We find some of them in the Letters of Paul, where he expounds that all members of the Body affect all of the others with their actions. He uses an example of a man in adultery,and joining with a prostitute, but the opposite is also true. One can influence the whole body by offering sacrifice. Often Paul pointed out that he was suffering for the sake of the Churches.

2 Corinthians 1.6:If we are being afflicted, it is for your consolation and salvation; if we are being consoled, it is for your consolation, which you experience when you patiently endure the same sufferings that we are also suffering.

This is the basic principle of indulgences - that our suffering can benefit other members of the Body, for their consolation and salvation.

Indulgences are based upon the basic premise that we are members one of another, and that our efforts toward holiness can benefit the whole body, as well as ourselves.

Colossians 1.24:
I am now rejoicing in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I am completing what is lacking in Christ’s afflictions for the sake of his body, that is, the church.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

My problem with this idea is largely that the indulgences don’t benefit others. Saying some Hail Mary’s or Our Fathers or visiting a Church named after a saint and going to confession, going through a prescribed formula of litanies, etc. does not help the hungry, does not help the addicted, doesn’t visit the prisoner, doesn’t counsel the lost, doesn’t feed the lambs. It’s very private and formulaic. Jesus tells us that when we do these things to the least of His flock, we do it for Him. I would think that indulgences wouldn’t have been the private and formulaic rote prayers and individualistic expressions they are but rather MORE of a community outreach to make amends and benefit the Body, literally.

We find some of them in the Letters of Paul, where he expounds that all members of the Body affect all of the others with their actions. He uses an example of a man in adultery,and joining with a prostitute, but the opposite is also true. One can influence the whole body by offering sacrifice. Often Paul pointed out that he was suffering for the sake of the Churches.

2 Corinthians 1.6:If we are being afflicted, it is for your consolation and salvation; if we are being consoled, it is for your consolation, which you experience when you patiently endure the same sufferings that we are also suffering.

This is the basic principle of indulgences - that our suffering can benefit other members of the Body, for their consolation and salvation.

Indulgences are based upon the basic premise that we are members one of another, and that our efforts toward holiness can benefit the whole body, as well as ourselves.

Colossians 1.24:
I am now rejoicing in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I am completing what is lacking in Christ’s afflictions for the sake of his body, that is, the church.

 

[guanophore]

Catholics have a concept called "Purgatory," where people who are actually *already headed for Heaven* need some spiritual rough edges knocked off; a sort of training/proving ground, where the person undergoes.......something (I get varied information about this one)...that

is meant to get them prepared to enter the presence of God. Some have called it punishment…

You are close. I am not sure the “rough edges” is really the best descriptor. Scripture says that “nothing unclean will enter” heaven, The state in which any attachments to this world we still have at death are removed is called purgation, or purification by fire.

1 Corinthians 3.10-20 12Now if anyone builds on the foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, straw— 13the work of each builder will become visible, for the Day will disclose it, because it will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test what sort of work each has done. 14If what has been built on the foundation survives, the builder will receive a reward. 15If the work is burned, the builder will suffer loss; the builder will be saved, but only as through fire.

It is a state in which our works are revealed, and anything left in us that is not of God is burned away. Like the gold heated so that the dross can be separated. There is no training there, and the “proving” is only the proof that is in the deeds of the saved.

 I don't know if that's the right word, since prayers for the inhabitants of Purgatory may shorten their stay.

It is difficult for us to think outside our space time continuum. There is no “time” in purgatory, just as there is none in heaven, or hell. It is a state of being.

The final judgment is about the totality of one’s life, all the actions, all the good and evil one does; everything…a weighing in the balance of all good (including repentance and contrition) against sin.

Yes, but the Church teaches that there is an individual judgement of everyone at death, and a final judgment for everyone at the end of time.

Indulgences, then, are those acts of contrition and intercessory prayers by oneself and  others which aid those who are in Purgatory (and who are here, for that matter.)  They may be performed by the sinner prior to sinning, even.

I think this is accurate, except that any "acts’ in themselves do not necessarily qualify as an indulgence. There are conditions that must be met for the benefits to be applied to oneself or others. The main one is that the person engaging in them must be in a state of grace.

The point is the motive: an indulgence is the result of  something that must be done for the right reason; not to get oneself out of trouble, or in purposeful preparation for a planned sin, but..because it needs to be done.

Do you mean the indulgence “needs to be done”? I am not sure this can be supported.

  Donations of money may get an indulgence (which, I understand, is kept track of in Heaven, not here...) but only if that donation is made for the right reasons; not to get out of trouble, but to aid whatever purpose the donation will serve.

This used to be the case, but after the abuses of the Reformation, the scandal was put to rest by withdrawing this opportunity. That way, there would not even be an appearnace that indulgences could be “sold”. It is a theological impossibility in the first place, but the Church did not want the faithful to be misled as they were.

 the idea, I understand, is that good deeds balance out...not sin, which is taken care of through confession, but the ordinary consequences of that sin.

I think this was also what Kathleen was trying to say using the term “remission”. This is always dangerous with our separated brethren, because it adds to the confusion about what it means.

I’m saying this badly. Sorry.

Actually, you did a better job than most Catholics could do!

Perhaps one analogy is the very earthly idea of a parole. One of the requirements for getting one, in today's prison system, is that the felon actually admit guilt and show remorse/rehabilitiation through behavior that shows a change in character and ability to behave. THEN he might get out early, but if he isn't remorseful, or fails to admit guilt, any hope of early release is impossible.  An indulgence, like a parole, only works after the sinner has confessed and been forgiven for the sin already. It does not give anybody freedom TO sin, nor does it 'pay for' sin. Christ did that.

Yes, but it still lacks some elements in the analagy. For example, if the offense is forgiven, it is more like having the case thrown out, or dismissed. This is the nature of the language used with the crucifixion, that the “bond was nailed to the cross”. Parole also implies that the person is still guilty of the offense.

 In other very confusing words, I don't see any problem with the Catholic idea of indulgences; it works very well with the idea of Purgatory, and actually makes sense. It is the abuses of the idea that caused problems, not the actual notion of them.

Very true.

 

[guanophore]

Pius X described indulgences accurately as the means “by which he makes certain reparation to the justice of God for his sins”

If we really look at it, are Catholics really making reparation with indulgences? If I graffiti a man’s fence then go to confession. I’m given ten Hail Mary’s and I go do some indulgences. I pray for the Holy Father, pray a novena to a saint for so many days, make a pilgrimage to a holy place, go to Mass daily, confession, etc. That’s all nice but what would REAL reparation be? Go to the guy’s house and repair his fence that I tagged with graffiti and repaint the fence.

Yes, the latter would be the more approrpriate reparation. But, what if you could not fix it? What if you sincerely wanted to do something reparative, but the opporutnity was not there? Suppose, by the time you repented of your sin, the fence had already been painted over?

 Or I steal something.  Rather than all those indulgence prayers and hooplah, maybe I should give the item back as reparation with a heart-felt apology?  Or I lie to someone? Go admit it to them and make amends.

Exactly. But what if the person you stole from died already, or the store went out of busienss? Or the person you lied to moved away?

The shame in each case is a greater reparation than praying and doing rosaries or trips to holy shrines.

Yes. But indulgences are not primarily used for oneself, but for others, and what each of us can do to make reparation for the sins of others has some limitations, would you not agree?

If I cheated on my wife, I should apologize to her face, then apologize to the women with whom I committed adultery, then apologize to the husband of the wife I scandalized.  That is a lot harder and more of a reparation than to pray in the shadows or go to confession alone.

But what if you wanted to contribute to the reparation of someone else who committed adultery?

So are indulgences really reparation?

They can be limited forms of it, yes.

Why don't indulgences ask us to

feed the hungry
work in homeless shelters
do a prison visit or ministry
help with fellowship or ministry in our parish
work with parish outreach
do volunteer time
donate $$$ to charity if possible,

etc. etc?

These are works of mercy that we are supposed to be doing anyway.

Why are they always, if they’re to be reparation, so easy, so private, so NOT involving the person or thing we’ve violated, and ritualistic? They just don’t smell of God, if I may be so bold…

They are intended to take place on the spiritual plane,and are usually for others, not ourselves. It is a way for us to contribute to the consolation and salvation of others, as Paul wrote. Besides, they are not so easy! Well, I guess you are speaking for yourself, and maybe they are easy for you? I find maintaining a state of grace keeps my hands full daily.

 Now I'll duck for the RPG's that will come in on me any second...

INCOMING!!

Hear that whistling sound?

 

[guanophore]

A memory. As a child I recall a black-covered Latin missal, and after certain prayers it would say in parentheses 5 days indulgence or 7 days indulgence. Even then I was puzzled by that. It seemed to suggest that if we prayed that particular prayer one’s stay in purgatory would be shortened by that much. I wondered how the number of days had been arrived at, at who arrived at them, etc.???

 Now, I'm still not clear? Does it mean that our stay in purgatory is reduced by that amount? If I had repeated fifty times, for example, a pray for five days of indulgence, would I have 250 days cut from my stay in prugatory? All a bit strange. It seemed then - and now - rather mechanical.

I have read some similar missals recently. It also does not make sense, since there are no “days” in purgatory.

 

[guanophore]

 Hi guano,

Do you mean temproal punishments in terms of from God, or simply from the consequences that happen here on Earth as a result of our actions.

From my perspective, God has built consequences into our actions. Some are eternal, some are temporal.

"*There is no justification without sanctification, **no forgiveness without renewal of life***, no real faith from which the fruits of new obedience do not grow."   - Luther

Of course. Are you saying that our good works, as the regenerate, are a form of indulgence?

Jon

No, but they are reparative, and hopefully, restorative. An indulgence is the means by which reparative efforts are a applied from a spiritual perspective.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

No worries, Guano. There was no whistling sound. I’m used to hearing mortars from ya but that was pretty tame LOL…thanks be to God!

I understand your perspective and it makes sense. It’s not illogical or loony by any means. I just think that we can always do other good works that benefit the down and out or the offended other than just rote prayers and litanies. I actually had a very very open mind to indulgences years back. I still have the official “handbook of indulgences.” I went through all the motions and in my heart and intellect I cannot justify them as beneficial to my soul or to others nor do they seem pleasing to God. I think going to Mass is the best worship and honor and glory we can give to God and outside of Mass besides our normal prayers, the best “indulgence” is to do works of mercy for others and amend our ways. I’m not convinced that there is temporal satisfaction to be made up. The Orthodox don’t seem to be convinced either and I greatly value their perspective also. I guess I’m too much a fan of Martin Luther on this issue. I’d have probably supplied Luther a nailgun from Lowe’s if I had been at Wittenberg “back in the day”

Yes, the latter would be the more approrpriate reparation. But, what if you could not fix it? What if you sincerely wanted to do something reparative, but the opporutnity was not there? Suppose, by the time you repented of your sin, the fence had already been painted over?

Exactly. But what if the person you stole from died already, or the store went out of busienss? Or the person you lied to moved away?

Yes. But indulgences are not primarily used for oneself, but for others, and what each of us can do to make reparation for the sins of others has some limitations, would you not agree?

But what if you wanted to contribute to the reparation of someone else who committed adultery?

They can be limited forms of it, yes.

These are works of mercy that we are supposed to be doing anyway.

They are intended to take place on the spiritual plane,and are usually for others, not ourselves. It is a way for us to contribute to the consolation and salvation of others, as Paul wrote. Besides, they are not so easy! Well, I guess you are speaking for yourself, and maybe they are easy for you? I find maintaining a state of grace keeps my hands full daily.

Hear that whistling sound?

 

[UniversalistGuy]

UniversalistGuy;7034972:

Back in the day didn’t penitents have to walk from London to Canterbury in their bare feet and stuff?

At least that fit the crime!

But if Catholic teaching doesn’t change and has always been the same since the beginning the penitents back in the day that walked around in their bare feet doing penance still had to go through being cleansed in purgatory, right? So I don’t get what ANY penance is for if the punishment for whatever sins you’ve committed still has to be suffered after you’re dead. It doesn’t add up.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

I don’t think indulgences were a part of the first church, the early church, or the church until the middle ages, frankly.

But if Catholic teaching doesn’t change and has always been the same since the beginning the penitents back in the day that walked around in their bare feet doing penance still had to go through being cleansed in purgatory, right? So I don’t get what ANY penance is for if the punishment for whatever sins you’ve committed still has to be suffered after you’re dead. It doesn’t add up.

 

[Cranmer2010]

I don’t think indulgences were a part of the first church, the early church, or the church until the middle ages, frankly.

I absolutely agree. To be at risk for sounding very simple here, I must say that jumping through the hoops and being part of the True Body of Christ are two different things.

 

[UniversalistGuy]

I don’t think indulgences were a part of the first church, the early church, or the church until the middle ages, frankly.

Okay thanks. So you’re not a Catholic? You have to believe Jesus taught indulgences to be Catholic, right?

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

At the Catholic Church in our town, it’s a two-year process for a child’s first communion. Not only do the kids have to go to classes each week, so do the adults. They also monitor your donation envelope barcodes to see that you attend Mass weekly. If you miss twice, you’re kicked out of the communion program and have to start over one year later.

The kicker is they expect each child to learn and memorize 70, yes, 70 prayers!

You know, there are rote prayers I truly love and think a child SHOULD know. I pray the Our Father, the Hail Mary, the Glory Be, the Fatima Prayer (Oh my Jesus…), Apostles/Nicene Creed, etc. etc. with my daughter each night. But more importantly than just memorizing prayers, I try to get my daughter to pray from the heart for her family, her brothers, her parents, thanksgiving for the Passion and Resurrection, asking Jesus to guide our hearts, etc. Praying from the heart AND some memorized prayers is what I think is the way it should be. 70 memorized rote prayers? sigh…

I absolutely agree. To be at risk for sounding very simple here, I must say that jumping through the hoops and being part of the True Body of Christ are two different things.

 

[PAboy57]

I was raised in the Catholic Church and I attend my parish. However I have some difficulties to accept the Catholic teaching. Especially I don’t believe in the indulgences.
Do you think that I am still a Catholic?

The Church is inspired by the Holy Spirit and He wouldn’t let them make a mistake like that.

God wants you to earn them because He wants you in Heaven. Asking is good. I think you got some great feedback. Please relax on the issue. God Bless.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

I’m a baptized cradle Catholic who has been an interlopper between Anglicanism and Catholicism for several years now. Still trying to find my niche, brother. Like my other Anglican friends in here, Anna Scott and Soldier X, we’re seekers trying to find where we belong. I can admit that. I don’t have all the answers. But, yes, I’d make a pretty lousy Catholic at this point because I am not sold on a few items. One is indulgences. I’ve been attending my old Catholic parish for a little over a month now. My wife and I are both NOT happy campers with it but we are trying to truly give it a shot.

Okay thanks. So you’re not a Catholic? You have to believe Jesus taught indulgences to be Catholic, right?