Indulgence

[Maria Billingsley]

There is so much variety in the answers that protestants give to questions such as "can one buy forgiveness", so many different approaches, so much difference. One cannot decide which is most and which is least representative.

Variety? I believe all Christians belive that they can not buy their salvation aka forgiveness and grace. They also know that Jesus Christ of Nazareth is the only buyer here. Blessings.

 

[Chaleb]

There is so much variety in the answers that protestants give to questions such as "can one buy forgiveness", so many different approaches, so much difference. One cannot decide which is most and which is least representative.

The answer is not "protestant" but its found here......... John 14:6


Let me teach this , and im not a Protestant or a Catholic.
Im born again.
Thats it.

Here is the situation.

Adam sinned and sin , the result of it is the fall of us all., as the NT teaches...>"all have sinned".

So, as a sinner, what can we do to get rid of our sin, to pay for it, so that God will take us back, as our sin keeps us separated from God?

A.) Nothing.

You can offer God NOTHING that will pay for your sin.


So, what did God do about that?

A.) God offers JESUS The Christ on the Cross to deal with all your sin.

2 Corinthians 5:21

"God made JESUS to be SIN for us"....


Result and final answer??

He did..... = The Cross.

2 Corinthians 5:19
-
New International Version
that God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting people’s sins against them. And he has committed to us the message of reconciliation.

New Living Translation
For God was in Christ, reconciling the world to himself, no longer counting people’s sins against them. And he gave us this wonderful message of reconciliation.

English Standard Version
that is, in Christ God was reconciling the world to himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and entrusting to us the message of reconciliation.

Berean Standard Bible
that God was reconciling the world to Himself in Christ, not counting men’s trespasses against them. And He has committed to us the message of reconciliation.

Berean Literal Bible
how that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not reckoning their trespasses to them, and having put into us the word of reconciliation.

King James Bible
To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.

New King James Version
that is, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not imputing their trespasses to them, and has committed to us the word of reconciliation.

New American Standard Bible
namely, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not counting their wrongdoings against them, and He has committed to us the word of reconciliation.

NASB 1995
namely, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and He has committed to us the word of reconciliation.

NASB 1977
namely, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and He has committed to us the word of reconciliation.

Legacy Standard Bible
namely, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not counting their transgressions against them, and He has committed to us the word of reconciliation.

Amplified Bible
that is, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not counting people’s sins against them [but canceling them]. And He has committed to us the message of reconciliation [that is, restoration to favor with God].

 

[Clare73]

There is so much variety in the answers that protestants give to questions such as "can one buy forgiveness", so many different approaches, so much difference. One cannot decide which is most and which is least representative.

I would expect all are quite consistent that it is contra-Biblical.

We've changed drivers.

 

[Philip_B]

1471 The doctrine and practice of indulgences in the Church are closely linked to the effects of the sacrament of Penance.

What is an indulgence?

"An indulgence is a remission before God of the temporal punishment due to sins whose guilt has already been forgiven, which the faithful Christian who is duly disposed gains under certain prescribed conditions through the action of the Church which, as the minister of redemption, dispenses and applies with authority the treasury of the satisfactions of Christ and the saints."81
"An indulgence is partial or plenary according as it removes either part or all of the temporal punishment due to sin."82 Indulgences may be applied to the living or the dead.

I guess I don't really understand what this part of CCC is trying to say.

Romans 6

Almighty God, our heavenly Father,
who of thy tender mercy
didst give thine only Son Jesus Christ
to suffer death upon the cross
for our redemption;
who made there,
by his one oblation
of himself once offered,
a full, perfect and sufficient sacrifice,
oblation and satisfaction
for the sins of the whole world;
and did institute,
and in his holy gospel command us to continue,
a perpetual memory of that his precious death,
until his coming again.

What is the purpose of an indulgence when the guilt has already been forgiven?

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

I guess I don't really understand what this part of CCC is trying to say.

I suspect that the CCC says what it intends to say. The understanding part comes with study and thinking.

 

[Philip_B]

I suspect that the CCC says what it intends to say. The understanding part comes with study and thinking.

I trust you recognise that you now answered a question. That question was, in case you missed it:

What is the purpose of an indulgence when the guilt has already been forgiven?

 

[Clare73]

Indulgences date to the early days of the Church and their use entails praying for the release of the faithful departed from Purgatory. Praying for the dead has its basis in Judaism (2 Macc. 12:42-46), of which Catholicism is the fulfillment (Matt. 16:18-19; Gal 6:15-16).

Which is why 1 & 2 Maccabees are not in the Protestant canon.

Misuses of indulgences took place over time, particularly in advance of the Protestant Reformation, and yet the Church’s actual teaching has never changed. See CCC 1471-79.

---

X. Indulgences
1471 The doctrine and practice of indulgences in the Church are closely linked to the effects of the sacrament of Penance.

What is an indulgence?

"An indulgence is a remission before God of the temporal punishment due to sins whose guilt has already been forgiven, which the faithful Christian who is duly disposed gains under certain prescribed conditions through the action of​

Where do we find this notion of additional "temporal punishment" and its "remission" in the NT?

the Church which, as the minister of redemption, dispenses and applies with authority the treasury of the satisfactions of Christ

Where do we find this notion of "dispensing and applying the treasury of the satisfactions of Christ" in the NT?

the satisfactions of Christ and the saints."81

"An indulgence is partial or plenary according as it removes either part or all of the temporal punishment due to sin."82 Indulgences may be applied to the living or the dead.​

Where in the NT do we find anyone adding to the satisfaction (singular) of Christ for sin?
That makes Christ's satisfaction incomplete, contrary to his statement, "It is finished."
The NT emphasizes Christ's complete satisfaction for sin (Ro 6:10, Jn 19:30), nothing else needed, wanted or allowed.

The punishments of sin

1472 To understand this doctrine and practice of the Church,

This doctrine and practice are not in agreement with the NT.

it is necessary to understand that sin has a double consequence. Grave sin deprives us of communion with God and therefore makes us incapable of eternal life, the privation of which is called the "eternal punishment" of sin.

However, NT doctrine is that we are born condemned by the sin of Adam (Ro 5:18),
by nature (with which we are born) objects of wrath (Eph 2:3),
from which wrath Jesus Christ saves us (Ro 5:9),
by grace through faith alone (Eph 2:8-9) in him and his atoning work (blood, Ro 3:25) for the forgiveness of our sin,
justified (declared righteous) by that faith (Ro 3:28),
permanently adopted as a son of God (Jn 1:12-13),
given the Holy Spirit as a deposit, guaranteeing (2 Co 1:22, 5:5, Eph 1:14) our participation in Christ's own eternal inheritance (Ro 8:17),
with God working in us both to will and to act in its completion (Php 2:13).

On the other hand every sin, even venial, entails an unhealthy attachment to creatures, which must be purified either here on earth, or after death in the state called Purgatory. This purification frees one from what is called the "temporal punishment" of sin. These two punishments must not be conceived of as a kind of vengeance inflicted by God from without, but as following from the very nature of sin.

This being man's notion of what follows from the nature of sin, which is nowhere presented in the NT.
These totally contra-Biblical notions add man's efforts to Christ's completed work as though man could help complete it for him.

A conversion which proceeds from a fervent charity can attain the complete purification of the sinner in such a way that no punishment would remain.83

In the NT, this is called the new birth (Jn 3:3-8), the origin of every true Christian, which is irrevocable and always accompanied by the actions of God presented above, God guaranteeing its irrevocability through the operation of his Holy Spirit (Php 2:13).

1473 The forgiveness of sin and restoration of communion with God entail the remission of the eternal punishment of sin, but temporal punishment of sin remains. While patiently bearing sufferings and trials of all kinds and, when the day comes, serenely facing death, the Christian must strive to accept this temporal punishment of sin as a grace. He should strive by works of mercy and charity, as well as by prayer and the various practices of penance, to put off completely the "old man" and to put on the "new man."84

Nowhere presented in the NT.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

Which is why 1 & 2 Maccabees are not in the Protestant canon.

That's right, throw away the holy scriptures if they don't fit one's theology.

Where do we find this notion of additional "temporal punishment" and its "remission" in the NT?

Do you ask because you do not know or for a different purpose?
A temporal punishment is a punishment in time, such as repaying what one stole or defrauded.

Where in the NT do we find anyone adding to the satisfaction (singular) of Christ for sin?

I wonder, do you recall saint Paul writing about his sufferings completing what was lacking in the sufferings of Christ? Have a look at Colossians chapter one.

 

[Clare73]

That's right, throw away the holy scriptures if they don't fit one's theology.

If you're reading the Bible beginning at Ge 1:1, when you get to those books, it is evident they are not Scripture.
They lack the power, the majesty and the style of Scripture.

Do you ask because you do not know or for a different purpose?
A temporal punishment is a punishment in time, such as repaying what one stole or defrauded.

I wonder, do you recall saint Paul writing about his sufferings completing what was lacking in the sufferings of Christ? Have a look at Colossians chapter one.

But that was not about Paul's sin, that was about the suffering required to spread the gospel in pagan territory.
He could have been sinless, and the price of spreading the gospel would still be there.

 

[Philip_B]

If you're reading the Bible beginning at Ge 1:1, when you get to those books, it is evident they are not Scripture.
They lack the power, the majesty and the style of Scripture.

Your argument would be more convincing here, were it not for the reliance of many of the New Testament writers on passages from the Deutero-canonical texts. In the main, it seems that the New Testament writers mainly relied on the Septuagint (LXX) when referencing Scripture, and we know that the LXX includes the Deuterocanonicals.

 

[BobRyan]

Your argument would be more convincing here, were it not for the reliance of many of the New Testament writers on passages from the Deutero-canonical texts. In the main, it seems that the New Testament writers mainly relied on the Septuagint (LXX) when referencing Scripture, and we know that the LXX includes the Deuterocanonicals.

1. no NT references Deuterocanonicals texts as scripture. by contrast in Heb 3 the Hebrew Bible is quoted as being authored by the Holy Spirit.
2. The first century Jewish Historian - Josephus confirms that the Jews regarded the OT text as fully completed 300+ years before the first century.
3. The Jews authored the OT, the Christians authored the NT and Josephus points out that the Jewish text was kept in canonized form in the Temple - unchanged for over 300 years

So then no "indulgences" for the Jews in the Hebrew Bible either.

 

[BobRyan]

LATERAN COUNCIL V 1512-1517: Indulgences ​

"the Roman Church, which the other churches are bound to follow as their mother, has decreed that the Roman Pontiff, the successor of PETER the key bearer, and the Vicar of Jesus Christ on earth, by the power of the keys, to which it belongs to open the kingdom of heaven, by removing the obstacles in the faithful of Christ (namely the fault and punishment due to actual sins, the fault by means of the sacrament of penance, but the temporal punishment due for actual sins according to divine justice by means of the indulgence of the Church), for the same reasonable causes can concede indulgences from the superabundant merits of Christ and the saints to these same faithful of Christ"​

So then the "merits of Christ AND the saints" are applied on behalf of the soul in purgatory to get them out of the "temporal punishment" due for sins. And this happens when one earns an indulgence for said dearly departed loved one. For a specific indulgence earned the church takes the action of granting an indulgence for that case.

", who belong to Christ by the charity that joins the members, whether they be in this life or in purgatory; and by granting an indulgence by apostolic authority to the living as well as to the dead, has been accustomed to dispense from the treasury of the merits of Jesus Christ and the saints, and by means of absolution to confer that same indugence or to transfer it by means of suffrage.​

​

The "treasury of merits" is the concept of a bank of merits that has been filled not only by Christ but also by the saints who suffered more torment in this life - than they actually owed - since they were in fact holy people not wicked.

​

" And for that reason that all, the living as well as the dead, who have truly gained such indulgences, are freed from such temporal punishment due for their actual sins according to divine justice, as is equivalent to the indulgence granted and acquired. And thus by apostolic authority in accordance with the tenor of these letters we decree that it should be held by all and be preached under punishment of excommunication, of a sentence [automatically] imposed [latae sententiae]. . . ."​

None of that in the OT Hebrew Bible
None of that in the NT
None of that in Apocrypha

 

[Philip_B]

1. no NT references Deuterocanonicals texts as scripture. by contrast in Heb 3 the Hebrew Bible is quoted as being authored by the Holy Spirit.

John 3:14-15

And just as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up, that whoever believes in him may have eternal life.

I understand that you do not accept this, however, I believe that this is the development of this passage

Wisdom of Solomon 16:7-10

For the one who turned towards it was saved, not by the thing that was beheld, but by you, the Saviour of all. And by this also you convinced our enemies that it is you who deliver from every evil. For they were killed by the bites of locusts and flies, and no healing was found for them, because they deserved to be punished by such things. But your children were not conquered even by the fangs of venomous serpents, for your mercy came to their help and healed them.

Could you get to this position simply of Numbers, perhaps, however, I can't see how this is not the root on which John is building here.

 

[Clare73]

Your argument would be more convincing here, were it not for the reliance of many of the New Testament writers on passages from the Deutero-canonical texts. In the main, it seems that the New Testament writers mainly relied on the Septuagint (LXX) when referencing Scripture, and we know that the LXX includes the Deuterocanonicals.

Keeping in mind that 1 & 2 Maccabees are not in the Jewish canon.