What is your objection to the Catholic doctrine of Indulgences?

  • Thread starter Thread starter SSTeacher
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

SSTeacher

Guest
What is your objection to the Catholic doctrine of Indulgences?

a) That it isn’t in the Bible?
b) That it renders confession of sins pointless?
c) That it assumes there’s a place called purgatory?
d) That it portrays God as some sort of celestial Shylock?
e) That it effectively turned Western Christianity into a religion of works?
f) Other?

Curiously,
Mick
👍
 
SSTeacher said:
What is your objection to the Catholic doctrine of Indulgences?

a) That it isn’t in the Bible?
b) That it renders confession of sins pointless?
c) That it assumes there’s a place called purgatory?
d) That it portrays God as some sort of celestial Shylock?
e) That it effectively turned Western Christianity into a religion of works?
f) Other?

Curiously,
Mick
👍
Click to expand...
Maybe this will clear it up for you; oce.catholic.com/index.php?title=Indulgences.
 
The idea of the repository of Good Works is completely unbelievable to me. We cannot do more good than we are “required” to or need to, even if we work flat out and never do one bad thing. Every good work we do is something we owe to God.

Without this, the doctrine of indulgences does not function.
 
Edwardjohn said:
Maybe this will clear it up for you; oce.catholic.com/index.php?title=Indulgences.
Click to expand...
To me, it seems to denigrate the sufficiency of Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross. Without agreeing to differentiating between mortal and venial sin or between eternal and temporal punishment, it would mean that Jesus’ sacrifice was not enough to remove all the punishment for sin and we can and must remit part of the punishment ourselves. It does not fit with God’s promise that He will no longer remember our sins if He is still going to punish us for them.

In addition, the granting of indulgences depends on the Church having a treasury of merits. Part of this treasury supposed arises from the excess merits of the saints. To have an excess of something is to suggest that there is a minimum of that something required. In other words it implies that there is some minimum level of good works that is required and there can be an excess of good works for which God owes recompense.
 
SSTeacher said:
What is your objection to the Catholic doctrine of Indulgences?

a) That it isn’t in the Bible?
b) That it renders confession of sins pointless?
c) That it assumes there’s a place called purgatory?
d) That it portrays God as some sort of celestial Shylock?
e) That it effectively turned Western Christianity into a religion of works?
f) Other?

Curiously,
Mick
👍
Click to expand...
All of the above…and add that it opened the door for the abuse of the laity by some.
 
originally posted by sycarl To me, it seems to denigrate the sufficiency of Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross. Without agreeing to differentiating between mortal and venial sin or between eternal and temporal punishment, it would mean that Jesus’ sacrifice was not enough to remove all the punishment for sin and we can and must remit part of the punishment ourselves. It does not fit with God’s promise that He will no longer remember our sins if He is still going to punish us for them.
Click to expand...
In addition, the granting of indulgences depends on the Church having a treasury of merits. Part of this treasury supposed arises from the excess merits of the saints. To have an excess of something is to suggest that there is a minimum of that something required. In other words it implies that there is some minimum level of good works that is required and there can be an excess of good works for which God owes recompense.
Click to expand...
bouncing off this train of thought;
to me another human being can not pay for someone elses soul. I have heard of catholic paying exorbatant amounts of dollars for masses to get there loved ones out of purgatory.

All this seems to mean to me, a good money making skeem for the C.C.

Please don’t take offense, this is how I see it, from the ouside looking in and discussions with catholics (current and former).

but for a side question:
If there then is a treasury of merit ( I say this for human understanding and lack of a better term.) Did not Christ fill it to the brim for all believers. If he then filled it to the brim for all believers then is not Christ suffecient enough.

Cruisin
 
cruisin said:
bouncing off this train of thought;
to me another human being can not pay for someone elses soul. I have heard of catholic paying exorbatant amounts of dollars for masses to get there loved ones out of purgatory.

All this seems to mean to me, a good money making skeem for the C.C.

Please don’t take offense, this is how I see it, from the ouside looking in and discussions with catholics (current and former).

but for a side question:
If there then is a treasury of merit ( I say this for human understanding and lack of a better term.) Did not Christ fill it to the brim for all believers. If he then filled it to the brim for all believers then is not Christ suffecient enough.

Cruisin
Click to expand...
This is how I see it too. If Christ’s sacrifice was not enough, then we are all without hope anyway. There is no valid purpose for indulgences other than to enforce a works-based religious system.
 
SyCarl said:
To me, it seems to denigrate the sufficiency of Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross. Without agreeing to differentiating between mortal and venial sin or between eternal and temporal punishment, it would mean that Jesus’ sacrifice was not enough to remove all the punishment for sin and we can and must remit part of the punishment ourselves. It does not fit with God’s promise that He will no longer remember our sins if He is still going to punish us for them.

In addition, the granting of indulgences depends on the Church having a treasury of merits. Part of this treasury supposed arises from the excess merits of the saints. To have an excess of something is to suggest that there is a minimum of that something required. In other words it implies that there is some minimum level of good works that is required and there can be an excess of good works for which God owes recompense.
Click to expand...
This pretty much sums up my objection…there can NEVER be enough good works to have them “left over” in a “depository” to be withdrawn by someone who need the benefits of good works because they lack good works themselves to be used as “merits” for their temporal punishment…makes no sense to me in any way…all that we do…from holiest saint to most wretched sinner will NEVER BE ENOUGH to have any of them “left over” to be drawn upon for someone “lacking” good works at some future date…there are no “left over good works”…there will never be enough to deserve the depth of God’s love, mercy and grace.
 
Yes, it is always going to be our finite efforts set against an infinite mark. There is no way to fulfill such an objection.

I always thought that the difference between Catholic “works and faith” and Protestant “faith alone” was only one of emphasis. And at the level it is usually discussed, that is true. Catholics understand works to be useless without faith and have their ground in faith, most Protestants understand faith to necessarily bring forth works, or fruit.

But Luther was not an uneducated Catholic, and was not looking at things in that way. When he was suffering from his depression it was because he was, as a good disciple of Augustine, seeing that infinite, uncrossable gulf between himself and God. And in his mind, there was NO WAY he could come close to doing the works required of him to cross that gap. It is only when certain scriptural passages were pointed out to him that he moved out of his depression.

And I think this is why he and other Reformers reacted so much against indulgences. Not because they were abused, but because their existence implies that it is possible not oly to do the work required to get one to Heaven, but to have “left-overs” as well.
 
This is from the Vatican “Secret Archives”:

%between%

It appears that today indulgences are freely given and prayed. I think you will find complete answers in the links I have posted.



"And next, there comes to Our mind the sweet remembrance of the motherly protection of the august Queen of Heaven; and this memory likewise We shall cherish and preserve inviolate, ever thanking her and proclaiming her benefits. From her, as from an abundant spring, are derived the streams of heavenly graces. “In her hand are the treasures of the mercies of the Lord” (St. John-Damascene, Sermon I. on the Nativity of the blessed Virgin). “God wisheth her to be the beginning of all good things” (St. Irenaeus, Contra Valen., J. iii., cap. 33). In the love of this tender mother, which We have constantly striven to cherish and to grow in day by day, We confidently hope that We may end Our life.

The Value of Indulgences
  1. It remains to be added that great value and utility accrue to the Rosary from the abundance of privileges and favours which adorn it, and more particularly from the rich treasures of indulgences attached to it. It is evident how greatly to the advantage of all who are solicitous for their eternal salvation is the obtaining of these benefits. For it is a question of obtaining either totally or partially a remission of the debt of temporal punishment which, even after guilt has been forgiven, must be paid either in this life or in the next. Vast indeed is the treasure won by the merits of Christ, His Mother and the Saints, to which our predecessor Clement VI. so aptly applied those words of the Book of Wisdom: “She is an infinite treasure to men: which they that use become the friends of God” (Wisdom vii., 14).
Without these indulgences, I believe, as a Catholic, that my ancestors and relatives who have not been, are not and never were members of the Catholic Church let alone practicing Christians may not make it to heaven and may be saved or their sins remitted by my practice of indulgences in the form of the Rosary and other means of indulgence

I, personally, have received great comfort, consolation and blessings of the Queen of Heaven our Blessed Virgin. I believe as an act of faith that prayers for my deceased parents, relatives, etc. are of some benefit to their souls. I am grateful for the intercession of the Mother of God who has continously interceded for me and my family.🙂
 
I_Fortuna said:
This is from the Vatican “Secret Archives”:

%between%

It appears that today indulgences are freely given and prayed. I think you will find complete answers in the links I have posted.



"And next, there comes to Our mind the sweet remembrance of the motherly protection of the august Queen of Heaven; and this memory likewise We shall cherish and preserve inviolate, ever thanking her and proclaiming her benefits. From her, as from an abundant spring, are derived the streams of heavenly graces. “In her hand are the treasures of the mercies of the Lord” (St. John-Damascene, Sermon I. on the Nativity of the blessed Virgin). “God wisheth her to be the beginning of all good things” (St. Irenaeus, Contra Valen., J. iii., cap. 33). In the love of this tender mother, which We have constantly striven to cherish and to grow in day by day, We confidently hope that We may end Our life.

The Value of Indulgences
  1. It remains to be added that great value and utility accrue to the Rosary from the abundance of privileges and favours which adorn it, and more particularly from the rich treasures of indulgences attached to it. It is evident how greatly to the advantage of all who are solicitous for their eternal salvation is the obtaining of these benefits. For it is a question of obtaining either totally or partially a remission of the debt of temporal punishment which, even after guilt has been forgiven, must be paid either in this life or in the next. Vast indeed is the treasure won by the merits of Christ, His Mother and the Saints, to which our predecessor Clement VI. so aptly applied those words of the Book of Wisdom: “She is an infinite treasure to men: which they that use become the friends of God” (Wisdom vii., 14).
Without these indulgences, I believe, as a Catholic, that my ancestors and relatives who have not been, are not and never were members of the Catholic Church let alone practicing Christians may not make it to heaven and may be saved or their sins remitted by my practice of indulgences in the form of the Rosary and other means of indulgence

I**, personally, have received great comfort, consolation and blessings of the Queen of Heaven our Blessed Virgin. I believe as an act of faith that prayers for my deceased parents, relatives, etc. are of some benefit to their souls. I am grateful for the intercession of the Mother of God who has continously interceded for me and my family**.🙂
Click to expand...
If this is true then what is the difference between what you have described and the baptism for the dead as the followers of Mormonism describe to?

it also seems to me that you have placed the works of someone else before the blood of Christ. Therefore what Christ did on the cross is meaningless.
 
Edwardjohn said:
SSTeacher;6588994:
What is your objection to the Catholic doctrine of Indulgences?

a) That it isn’t in the Bible?
b) That it renders confession of sins pointless?
c) That it assumes there’s a place called purgatory?
d) That it portrays God as some sort of celestial Shylock?
e) That it effectively
Click to expand...
turned Western Christianity into a religion of works?
f) Other?

Curiously,
Mick
:thumbsup:Maybe this will clear it up for you; oce.catholic.com/index.php?title=Indulgences.
Click to expand...
Many thanks for supplying the above link to The Original Catholic Encyclopedia. The explanation commences as follows:
Treatment of the practice of granting indulgences
Indulgences. The word indulgence (Lat. indulgentia, from indulgeo, to be kind or tender) originally meant kindness or favor; in post–classic Latin it came to mean the remission of a tax or debt. In Roman law and in the Vulgate of the Old Testament (Is., lxi, 1) it was used to express release from captivity or punishment. In theological language also the word is sometimes employed in its primary sense to signify the kindness and mercy of God. But in the special sense in which it is here considered, an indulgence is a remission of the temporal punishment due to sin, the guilt of which has been forgiven. Among the equivalent terms used in antiquity were pax, remissio, donatio, condonatio.
Click to expand...
Let’s discuss.

Firstly, there is the idea of God forgiving sins but forgiving only the guilt. What does that mean, exactly? In what way does God manage to forgive only guilt? And even if one assumes that God works in this mysterious way then comes the question of what is left to forgive once the guilt is dealt with? If the guilt has been expunged, cancelled or neutralized then might not one reasonably suppose that God sees the penitent as being innocent? Where does any punishment fit in to this scenario? In other words, what exactly needs to be punished if the penitent is innocent (or, at least, not guilty) in the sight of God since he or she has confessed his or her sins?

This brings me to my second point, which is the Catholic understanding of God and His justice. It seems to me that in the Catholic understanding of what God is like, God must insist upon punishment for sin. This punishment is the “temporal punishment owing to sin.” Are you able to supply some examples of what Catholics understand to be “temporal” punishment and explain how Catholics understand the process whereby this kind of punishment can be carried over into the spiritual realm? According to the Psalmist, “as far as the east is from the west, so far has he removed our transgressions from us.” According to Saint Paul, “love keeps no record of wrongs.” How do you, as a Catholic, make sense of these conflicting ideas?

Cordially,
Mick
👍
 
SSTeacher said:
Firstly, there is the idea of God forgiving sins but forgiving only the guilt. What does that mean, exactly? In what way does God manage to forgive only guilt? And even if one assumes that God works in this mysterious way then comes the question of what is left to forgive once the guilt is dealt with? If the guilt has been expunged, cancelled or neutralized then might not one reasonably suppose that God sees the penitent as being innocent? Where does any punishment fit in to this scenario? In other words, what exactly needs to be punished if the penitent is innocent (or, at least, not guilty) in the sight of God since he or she has confessed his or her sins?

This brings me to my second point, which is the Catholic understanding of God and His justice. It seems to me that in the Catholic understanding of what God is like, God must insist upon punishment for sin. This punishment is the “temporal punishment owing to sin.” Are you able to supply some examples of what Catholics understand to be “temporal” punishment and explain how Catholics understand the process whereby this kind of punishment can be carried over into the spiritual realm? According to the Psalmist, “as far as the east is from the west, so far has he removed our transgressions from us.” According to Saint Paul, “love keeps no record of wrongs.” How do you, as a Catholic, make sense of these conflicting ideas?

Cordially,
Mick
👍
Click to expand...
Excellent observations, Mick. Indeed, the Catholic concept of purgatory and satisfaction essentially has God punishing people for sins which are already paid for. i.e. punishing people who are innocent in the sight of God. It is indeed true that God must punish sin, since He is just. The entire point of Christianity, however, and of the gospel itself, is that Christ was punished in our place. For God to punish us again is double jeopardy.

Catholics will usually insist that purgatory is not a punishment for sin, but is a cleansing from sin. However, this was certainly not the medieval view of the doctrine. Even if it is a cleansing, it is still God requiring something from us which has already been forgiven in Christ.
 
Bluegoat said:
The idea of the repository of Good Works is completely unbelievable to me. We cannot do more good than we are “required” to or need to, even if we work flat out and never do one bad thing. Every good work we do is something we owe to God.

Without this, the doctrine of indulgences does not function.
Click to expand...
I agree. I guess some people are good by human standards. But when one remembers that the goal for all of us according to Christ is godly perfection one has to wonder how God could ever judge any human being as having an excess of good. How can godly perfection be exceeded?

Thoughtfully,
Mick
👍
 
SSTeacher said:
What is your objection to the Catholic doctrine of Indulgences?

a) That it isn’t in the Bible?
b) That it renders confession of sins pointless?
c) That it assumes there’s a place called purgatory?
d) That it portrays God as some sort of celestial Shylock?
e) That it effectively turned Western Christianity into a religion of works?
f) Other?

Curiously,
Mick
👍
Click to expand...
A, C, and E
 
I have real trouble accepting the bank account idea that saints, the BVM, and individual Catholics have been so virtuous and holy that they actually “overdid” it with goodness and grace that we have excess grace in this vault that can be opened up for withdrawl if we do certain acts.

I also have issues with the acts. While I have real trouble swallowing indulgences at all, it would at least make more sense to see an indulgence given for feeding the homeless, volunteering at a soup kitchen, serving on a mission, teaching the youth, volunteering to help and visit the elderly, participating in a prison ministry, etc. But instead the Indulgences are given for visiting a church with a saint’s name in it or for praying a prayer on a certain day then going to confession and praying for the pope? Why is the indulgence granted for such superficial or easy things? For things that don’t help others? We see in the Middle Ages people getting indulgences for visiting a shrine or for going on a pilgrimage to touch a saint’s bones or teeth, for climbing up stairs on one’s knees praying Pater Nosters, I don’t get it? The whole doctrine smells not of Christ but of a merit-based points system. It sounds too bankish, almost like stocks and bonds, and it presupposes that the penitent, as Triune said, still has residue left over even after confession, dues to pay…

I also struggle with it because it’s nowhere in the Scriptures even remotely IMO. I also don’t see it as a practice by the Early Church or something lauded by men like Augustine.
 
TriuneUnity said:
Excellent observations, Mick. Indeed, the Catholic concept of purgatory and satisfaction essentially has God punishing people for sins which are already paid for. i.e. punishing people who are innocent in the sight of God. It is indeed true that God must punish sin, since He is just. The entire point of Christianity, however, and of the gospel itself, is that Christ was punished in our place. For God to punish us again is double jeopardy.

Catholics will usually insist that purgatory is not a punishment for sin, but is a cleansing from sin. However, this was certainly not the medieval view of the doctrine. Even if it is a cleansing, it is still God requiring something from us which has already been forgiven in Christ.
Click to expand...
I find the idea that Christ was “punished in our place” rather perverse.

orthodoxinfo.com/inquirers/orth_cath_diff.aspx
(see number 5)
 
I_Fortuna said:
This is from the Vatican “Secret Archives”:

%between%

It appears that today indulgences are freely given and prayed. I think you will find complete answers in the links I have posted.



"And next, there comes to Our mind the sweet remembrance of the motherly protection of the august Queen of Heaven; and this memory likewise We shall cherish and preserve inviolate, ever thanking her and proclaiming her benefits. From her, as from an abundant spring, are derived the streams of heavenly graces. “In her hand are the treasures of the mercies of the Lord” (St. John-Damascene, Sermon I. on the Nativity of the blessed Virgin). “God wisheth her to be the beginning of all good things” (St. Irenaeus, Contra Valen., J. iii., cap. 33). In the love of this tender mother, which We have constantly striven to cherish and to grow in day by day, We confidently hope that We may end Our life.

The Value of Indulgences
  1. It remains to be added that great value and utility accrue to the Rosary from the abundance of privileges and favours which adorn it, and more particularly from the rich treasures of indulgences attached to it. It is evident how greatly to the advantage of all who are solicitous for their eternal salvation is the obtaining of these benefits. For it is a question of obtaining either totally or partially a remission of the debt of temporal punishment which, even after guilt has been forgiven, must be paid either in this life or in the next. Vast indeed is the treasure won by the merits of Christ, His Mother and the Saints, to which our predecessor Clement VI. so aptly applied those words of the Book of Wisdom: “She is an infinite treasure to men: which they that use become the friends of God” (Wisdom vii., 14).
Without these indulgences, I believe, as a Catholic, that my ancestors and relatives who have not been, are not and never were members of the Catholic Church let alone practicing Christians may not make it to heaven and may be saved or their sins remitted by my practice of indulgences in the form of the Rosary and other means of indulgence

I, personally, have received great comfort, consolation and blessings of the Queen of Heaven our Blessed Virgin. I believe as an act of faith that prayers for my deceased parents, relatives, etc. are of some benefit to their souls. I am grateful for the intercession of the Mother of God who has continously interceded for me and my family.🙂
Click to expand...
Remember though that prayers for the dead could be effectual without indulgences or the doctrine surrounding them, or the Catholic view of works. The Orthodox and Protestants do not have these things in the same way, but they still pray for the dead and believe such prayers to be effectual.

In any case, if it isn’t true it doesn’t matter if it is comforting.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top