What is your objection to the Catholic doctrine of Indulgences?

[mardukm]

Dear brother Michael,

It is based on the notion that sin is not fully forgiven in confession. There must be some sort of satisfaction made to God. Apostolic churches did not have this theory originally, it only developed in the Roman west.

Not exactly. From the earliest days, the Church (not just the Roman west) imposed a minor excommunication for sins, and this apart from confession, and the penance attached to it. The purpose of the minor excommunication and penance was to impress upon the penitent the awesomeness of God’s holiness, while inspiring the penitent to be more holy in the sight of God. In effect, it was the chastisement for the sake of holiness that St. Paul speaks of in the Book of Hebrews. Upon evidence of sufficient penance and contrition, a bishop had the authority (through the power of the keys) to shorten the sentence of minor excommunication. That shortening of the sentence was called an indulgence. This whole process was for the satisfaction of Divine Justice.

As time progressed, the Orient, East, and West developed their own distinctions. I believe the Oriental Churches have kept the patristic doctrine and practice most pure, though there has been a drastic lessening and sometimes disappearance of the practice of minor excommunication. In the East, not only has the practice of minor excommunication fallen into disuse, but the whole doctrine of Divine Justice has practically disappeared. And along with the disappearance of the minor excommunication attached to sin, the granting of indulgences, as well as the whole principle, has disappeared in the East as well. In the West, the benefit of indulgences has extended to those in the afterlife, and this is the primary contention that the Oriental Tradition has with the Western development.

It is wishful thinking to claim the East has preserved the patristic teaching and practice without change, just as it is wishful thinking to claim that only the West has made developments to the patristic teaching and practice. What we must look for is our common ground. I personally find nothing objectionable in the Catholic dogma on indulgences, at least nothing that would warrant disunity. Orthodox who are not in communion with Rome who make the dogmas of indulgences and Purgatory matters of disunity are simply forgetting their own patristic roots.

But beyond that the Latin church teaches that there may still be a punishment due to God for this escapade and others already confessed. Supposedly the church has loads of Mercy at it’s disposal, the basis of which is the overabundant merits piling up in the church’s accounts in heaven from the acts of saints now with God. These merits can be transferred to you and me if we fulfill the requirements. This is the theory of satisfaction on steroids.

St. Paul tells us that if we are not God’s children, he will not chastise us. St. Paul tells us we should expect this chastisement. I hope you are not making light of the doctrine of satisfaction. It is the East who has divested itself of the patristic doctrine of Divine Justice, so it’s not right for the pot to call the kettle black. I have no problem with the Eastern development, but I’m not going to sit by and have an Eastern mock the doctrine of Divine Justice which is dear not only to the Westerns, but also the Orientals.

That whole theory is totally unnecessary. God Himself is all Love and merciful, He can see into our hearts. He forgives and that which is absolved in confession is forgiven.

According to the early Fathers, it is not unnecessary. You believe so because your particular Eastern Tradition developed distinctly from the Western and Oriental Traditions.

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[dzheremi]

There is another reason besides our lack of knowledge of the state of an individual’s soul at death that allows for praying for them.
God is not confined by time. Prayers made now by you or me may be “applied” by God, should he choose, in the future or the past.

I hadn’t thought of that, but I think it’s a good point.

I’ve always understood “rest for their souls” as a simile for “enter into heaven.”

Yes, that’s how I’ve understood it, too. I was arguing against the idea advanced by Loboto-me that prayers for the dead are only useful to hasten their time in purgatory. You will agree with me, I hope, that purgatory is not heaven. So I do not see the overlap in one group praying for entry into heaven (as the Orthodox do) and another praying for diminished time in purgatory (as the Catholics do). I know, it is sensible (in Catholic understanding) to say that one leads to the other, and that would be fine with me if the poster I was originally replying to did not hold to the idea that prayers for the dead are effectively useless because final judgment has already occurred. If this is the case with regard to the ultimate resting place of the soul, then what makes Catholics so sure that they can influence God’s judgment regarding any soul’s time in purgatory? One is too late but the other is not? Sorry, that does not make sense to me.

Purgatory is intended only for the righteous. It is a state of undergoing perfection. It does not mean that the Catholic Church does not pray generally for the dead. In fact, in the Latin Church, their Eucharistic Prayer 2 and 3 contain general prayers for the dead.

Yeah, I know! That’s why I was surprised that the poster making the argument that prayers for the dead are useless outside of purgatory is a Catholic.

Another poster stated that an Eastern Orthodox priest told him that Purgatory is in heaven. It might interest you to know that there is nothing in the dogma of Purgatory that would prevent someone from holding this belief.

That is fine. I would want to talk to that priest to find out what he means by that. My own priest certainly did not tell me the concept of “particular judgment” (mentioned in this thread) when I asked him about the fate of the soul of the non-Catholic, so I think we can probably all agree on the potential pitfalls inherent in taking one individual priest’s advice or explanation at face value.

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

Rejecting the idea of purgatory does not mean rejecting works. You must stop imagining that other people are rejecting the place of works, because they are explicitly not doing so. The texts you have given are not clearly arguments for purgatory, or indulgences, either.

I have to stop myself here; because you offer no argument for your position except to look for other commentaries to do the speaking for you, . Thus far, I hear from you is “i reject purgatory”. Catholics have defined Indulgences very well here. The problem is those who have protested and left the Apostolic Catholic Faith, have given in to every wind of doctrine that has come from men. May be this is why Catholics understand purgatory, and non catholics and protestants (including new self claimed orthodoxy separated from the Pope) don’t understand this Apostolic faith, because non catholics and protestants follow pride of men theologies apart from what God has revealed through his son Jesus.

Truthfully the gap or misunderstanding of the biblical Apostolic Tradition of purgatory and indulgences comes from those who oppose God’s authority in his Apostolic Catholic Church, which consist of Peter our present day Pope and every Bishop world wide in communion with (Peter) the Pope since the resurrection with unbroken succession to the original Apostles.

You don’t reject purgatory or indulgences because you practice these unknowingly from the Catholic Faith you protest and seperated yourself from. You reject the authority of Jesus Christ placed upon Peter and his successors along with those Eastern Orthodox who have never broken unity with Peter and his successors since apostolic times. One cannot blame you for rejecting purgatory or indulgences because they don’t fit the theologies of men, from which protestantism derived from.

Remove this plague from your Anglican protestant mindset about Peter and his successors. Then** maybe you can be able to see again the scriptures /B I provided for you do indeed speak of purgatory and indulgences,in light of the Apostolic Catholic Faith from Tradition and Sacred Scripture.

By your denial of the Apostolic Traditional teaching from the scriptures I provided for you in regards to purgatory and indulgences, only reveals that your Anglican teachings are not that very old, in fact your rejection reveals your Anglican belief’s wateredown from your founder + new founders.

Peace be with you**

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

I believe that the whole thing is faulty theory that the church is stuck with, because it has been taught in the past. It is based on the notion that sin is not fully forgiven in confession. There must be some sort of satisfaction made to God.

 

[mardukm]

Dear brother dzheremi,

Yes, that’s how I’ve understood it, too. I was arguing against the idea advanced by Loboto-me that prayers for the dead are only useful to hasten their time in purgatory. You will agree with me, I hope, that purgatory is not heaven. So I do not see the overlap in one group praying for entry into heaven (as the Orthodox do) and another praying for diminished time in purgatory (as the Catholics do). I know, it is sensible (in Catholic understanding) to say that one leads to the other, and that would be fine with me if the poster I was originally replying to did not hold to the idea that prayers for the dead are effectively useless because final judgment has already occurred. If this is the case with regard to the ultimate resting place of the soul, then what makes Catholics so sure that they can influence God’s judgment regarding any soul’s time in purgatory? One is too late but the other is not? Sorry, that does not make sense to me.

Yeah, I know! That’s why I was surprised that the poster making the argument that prayers for the dead are useless outside of purgatory is a Catholic.

Thank you for explaining. Without having read through the whole thread, I do agree with your position and concerns.

That is fine. I would want to talk to that priest to find out what he means by that. My own priest certainly did not tell me the concept of “particular judgment” (mentioned in this thread) when I asked him about the fate of the soul of the non-Catholic, so I think we can probably all agree on the potential pitfalls inherent in taking one individual priest’s advice or explanation at face value.

I surmise the priest was referring to the similarity in the Eastern principle that theosis still occurs in heaven, and the idea that Purgatory is for the perfection of righteous souls in the afterlife.

P.S. As to your statement above that Purgatory is not heaven, I have no opinion on the matter. I believe Purgatory is simply a state whereby souls are perfected. I don’t particularly care if people think it’s in heaven, on the border of heaven, the border of hell, or “anywhere” else.

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[dzheremi]

P.S. As to your statement above that Purgatory is not heaven, I have no opinion on the matter. I believe Purgatory is simply a state whereby souls are perfected. I don’t particularly care if people think it’s in heaven, on the border of heaven, the border of hell, or “anywhere” else.

Hahaha. Fair enough, my friend. I don’t think it’s terribly important to p(name removed by moderator)oint a location, either (I wouldn’t think knowing where it is would change what it is). When I wrote that I was trying to mold my argument to the Catholic apologetics I read about this concept, which stated (paraphrasing now, as I can’t remember the links) that purgatory was some sort of “third place” or “third state”, neither heaven nor hellfire.

 

[Bluegoat]

I just do not agree that we cannot pray for the deads (if that’s what you said in your last post).

I find it bizarre that we can only pray while the person is alive and the effect is the same after he is dead. What difference is there to pray for the person whether alive or dead? So why can’t we pray for the dead? If you say yes; we can pray for the deads, then I have no issue with you and please ignore my last post because I could have misunderstood you there.

I know about God not governed by time and space but we are.

I am saying that we can pray for the dead.

 

[Bluegoat]

I have to stop myself here; because you offer no argument for your position except to look for other commentaries to do the speaking for you, . Thus far, I hear from you is “i reject purgatory”. Catholics have defined Indulgences very well here. The problem is those who have protested and left the Apostolic Catholic Faith, have given in to every wind of doctrine that has come from men. May be this is why Catholics understand purgatory, and non catholics and protestants (including new self claimed orthodoxy separated from the Pope) don’t understand this Apostolic faith, because non catholics and protestants follow pride of men theologies apart from what God has revealed through his son Jesus.

Truthfully the gap or misunderstanding of the biblical Apostolic Tradition of purgatory and indulgences comes from those who oppose God’s authority in his Apostolic Catholic Church, which consist of Peter our present day Pope and every Bishop world wide in communion with (Peter) the Pope since the resurrection with unbroken succession to the original Apostles.

You don’t reject purgatory or indulgences because you practice these unknowingly from the Catholic Faith you protest and seperated yourself from. You reject the authority of Jesus Christ placed upon Peter and his successors along with those Eastern Orthodox who have never broken unity with Peter and his successors since apostolic times. One cannot blame you for rejecting purgatory or indulgences because they don’t fit the theologies of men, from which protestantism derived from.

Remove this plague from your Anglican protestant mindset about Peter and his successors. Then** maybe you can be able to see again the scriptures **

Gotta love those newly schismatic Orthodox!

 

[KathleenGee]

I still think no matter the knowledge or experience shared, that we are manipulating God, doing works, earning merits…

When in fact, through the authority of the church, we are being given more graces by the Lord to remove remission of sin…the punishment due to still want to sin.

Secondly, people put more thought into terms than the Catholic does…meaning, you take it much more into thought than we do. I call on the Lord every day to forgive me and may He live in the recesses of the heart that I lack of Him…and trust in His mercy… as well as what the Church provides…it is all coming from the life of Jesus Himself.

Merits mean His life, teaching, miracles, death and atonement, His resurrection, and the Holy Spirit and sacraments…we are drawing on His life through additional helps the Church has given us.

I am saying this as a believer in response to the graces given.

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

QUOTE=Bluegoat;6606293]Gotta love those newly schismatic Orthodox!

Amen, and Peter present day Pope is obeying Christ’s words, to call back his brethern after they lose their faith. I pray for their release from isolation in the cold and return back into the consuming fire of God where they belong, in unity with the Pope and their other Eastern Orthodox brethren.

 

[Daedelus76]

I honestly don’t understand, why would the “dead” who are more alive than you or I and are already in heaven need prayers? They wouldn’t need prayers unless they are in purgatory. Also, praying for the dead that are already in hell doesn’t make sense since these prayers wouldn’t be doing anything for them anyway.

Orthodoxy and Anglicanism don’t apply that kind of rigorist thinking to the subject. And actually I have heard a few opine that prayers for those in “hell” would be effecacious, somehow.

The Church has consistently and indignantly repudiated and denounced the Protestant doctrine of mere imputed justice. When God pardons the sinner, he does not merely cloak over his corruption with Christ’s merits — as the Reformers held — but he blots out the stain of sin from the soul, beautifies it with his holy grace and enlivens it with his own divine life.

I believe theologians like J.I. Packer have said that they interpret the Reformed doctrine as kerygmatic more than mechanical. Protestants do not deny infusion of grace, either, they just don’t think ones own merits have anything to do with the pardon of God. The emphasis is what God does for you, not what you can do.

And BTW, not all Christians accept the satisfaction doctrine. Very few Orthodox do, they do not think of the atonement as propitiation.

Each soul thus united to Christ may truly say with St. Paul, “It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me” (Gal. 2:20). In such a soul, Christ lives and works. Therefore the good works of the just are not only meritorious of a reward, but they possess an expiatory virtue — that is, they not only deserve a reward proportionate to their value in God’s sight, but also merit the remission of the temporal punishment due to sin.

What about being “unprofitable servants”? God rewards the person who works for him a day or an hour the same.

 

[Loboto-Me]

Prayer for the dead is efficatious even if one is praying for a soul that was destined to hell. That prayer however cannot do any good for the damned soul, therefore it’s my belief that God takes that prayer and applies it to another soul who needs it (I know I read that somewhere but don’t remember where).

It is true that God is above and beyond time, but, as humans we are not above and beyond time. My belief is that God although may be timeless, when He deals with his own, He follows a set of rules that He has set forth for this plan of His. If our prayers were efficatious for the damned, we would have prayed everyone out of hell already. Can we pray people out of hell retroactively?

From the CCC:

Teaching on purgatory: Praying for the dead

1032 This teaching is also based on the practice of prayer for the dead, already mentioned in Sacred Scripture: "Therefore [Judas Maccabeus] made atonement for the dead, that they might be delivered from their sin."609 From the beginning the Church has honored the memory of the dead and offered prayers in suffrage for them, above all the Eucharistic sacrifice, so that, thus purified, they may attain the beatific vision of God.610 The Church also commends almsgiving, indulgences, and works of penance undertaken on behalf of the dead

Also:

1022 Each man receives his eternal retribution in his immortal soul at the very moment of his death, in a particular judgment that refers his life to Christ: either entrance into the blessedness of heaven-through a purification594 or immediately,595 – or immediate and everlasting damnation.596

Prayers for the dead from New Advent:

What of such prayers? If they cannot avail to the ultimate salvation of the damned, may it at least be held that they are not entirely unavailing to procure some alleviation of their sufferings, some temporary refrigeria, or moments of mitigation, as a few Fathers and theologians have suggested? All that can be said in favour of this speculation is, that the Church has never formally reprobated it. But the great majority of theologians, following St. Thomas (In Sent. IV, xlv, q. ii, a. 2), consider it rash and unfounded…

newadvent.org/cathen/04653a.htm

So all that can be said is that speculatively praying for the damned MIGHT alleviate some of their pain in hell, but most theologians consider it unfounded, although the Church hasn’t formally condemned the idea. I think the operative word for me personally would be “formally”

… and continuing on this is…

It is only, then, for the souls in purgatory that our prayers are really beneficial. But we do not and cannot know the exact degree in which benefits actually accrue to them, collectively or individually. The distribution of the fruits of the communion of saints among the dead, as among the living, rests ultimately in the hands of God, and is one of the secrets of His economy. We cannot doubt that it is His will that we should pray not only for the souls in purgatory collectively, but individually with whom we have been bound on earth by special personal ties.

 

[TriuneUnity]

To me, though I have long since lost the ebb and flow of the thread, the issue comes down to the Gospel, pure and simple.

“We believe in the communion of all the faithful of Christ, those who are pilgrims on earth, the dead who are attaining their purification, and the blessed in heaven, all together forming one Church.” - Pope Paul VI.

Speaking of the God-man, Jesus Christ; “who gave himself for us to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people for his own possession who are zealous for good works.” - Titus 2:14

Every lawless deed, no distinctions, no divisions. To purify for himself a people for his own possession. Not that they purify themselves. Not that they obtain their purification. The difference between the Gospel in Scripture and in Roman Catholicism is that Jesus purifies for Himself in the Gospel and in Catholicism, you add to the work of purification, He cannot do it Himself. One is God centered, one is man centered. One brings life, the other does not.

“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, or else in the life beyond through fire and torments or “purifying” punishments…These punishments are imposed by the just and merciful judgment of God for the purification of souls, the defense of the sanctity of the moral order and the restoration of the glory of God to its full majesty.” - Indulgentiarum Doctrina

God’s very glory and majesty will be dependent on your suffering, your satispassio in purgatory?..Not the finished work of Christ? I am not quite sure how anyone can read the Word of God, believe that Scripture is the Word of God and not see such a concept as blasphemy… any Christian should recoil at the thought. This is not a mere difference of opinion. This is about the Gospel.

“For this reason there certainly exists between the faithful who have already reached their heavenly home, those who are expiating their sins in purgatory and those who are still pilgrims on earth a perennial link of charity and an abundant exchange of all the goods by which, with the expiation of all the sins of the entire Mystical Body, divine justice is placated.” - Indulgentiarum Doctrina

 

[Reuben_J]

I seem to lost track on the actual direction on the contention of this thread. We can pray for the dead but we do not believe in indulgence. So what is it now? Sorry about that but I would rather things be lot simpler.

 

[dvdjs]

God’s very glory and majesty will be dependent on your suffering, your satispassio in purgatory?..Not the finished work of Christ? I am not quite sure how anyone can read the Word of God, believe that Scripture is the Word of God and not see such a concept as blasphemy… any Christian should recoil at the thought. This is not a mere difference of opinion. This is about the Gospel.

Every sin in fact causes a perturbation in the universal order
…the universal order itself, which have been diminished or destroyed by sin, be fully reintegrated whether through voluntary reparation which will involve punishment or through acceptance of the punishments established by the just and most holy wisdom of God, from which there will shine forth throughout the world the sanctity and the splendor of His glory… - Indulgentiarum Doctrina

While the excerpt that you quote could be misconstrued, the broader context makes it clear that we are talking about the effect that sin has on obscuring the splendor of His glory.

So here’s the simple fact: Christ has died and has risen, even so there is sin in the world, even among believers, and the order and sanctity of God’s creation is perturbed. What does that suggest about the “finished” work of Christ? It is your train of thought that leads to blasphemy. The reality is that we need to work synergistically with HIm, in His plan of salvation, to participate in His divine life. And the fact that some don’t, and that there is still sin in the world and pertubation of the divine order, does not diminsh in the slightest what has been done for us.

 

[Hesychios]

So here’s the simple fact: Christ has died and has risen, even so there is sin in the world, even among believers, and the order and sanctity of God’s creation is perturbed. What does that suggest about the “finished” work of Christ? It is your train of thought that leads to blasphemy. The reality is that we need to work synergistically with HIm, in His plan of salvation, to participate in His divine life. And the fact that some don’t, and that there is still sin in the world and pertubation of the divine order, does not diminsh in the slightest what has been done for us.

Good points.

 

[TriuneUnity]

So here’s the simple fact: Christ has died and has risen, even so there is sin in the world, even among believers, and the order and sanctity of God’s creation is perturbed. What does that suggest about the “finished” work of Christ? It is your train of thought that leads to blasphemy. The reality is that we need to work synergistically with HIm, in His plan of salvation, to participate in His divine life. And the fact that some don’t, and that there is still sin in the world and pertubation of the divine order, does not diminsh in the slightest what has been done for us.

And you think that because there is still sin in the world, even among believers, that this means that Christ has failed to reconcile mankind to God unless we provide Him our synergistic help? The fact of the matter is, from God’s perspective, it is already a done deal. The fate of unbelievers is already certain, Christ has already made His enemies a footstool, and He only waits to destroy the sin of the world until of His people are called to Himself.

 

[dvdjs]

And you think that because there is still sin in the world, even among believers, that this means that Christ has failed to reconcile mankind to God unless we provide Him our synergistic help?

Not at all. But reconciliation still leaves us to “work out our salvation with fear and trembling”. Yes, work. Moreover, we do not help, we cooperate with His help - without which cooperation we cannot participate in salvation. The blasphemy on this thread is by those who have the audacity to second guess God’s plan of salvation.

 

[dvdjs]

Not at all. But reconciliation still leaves us to “work out our salvation with fear and trembling”. Yes,* work*. Moreover, we do not help, we cooperate with His help - without which cooperation we cannot participate in salvation. The blasphemy on this thread is by those who have the audacity to second guess God’s plan of salvation.

 

[KathleenGee]

His work is finished, and now He is glorified in Heaven…but we become incorporated with Jesus Christ who remains with us in the sacraments, and we now begin our mission for Him.