Indulgences Are Back!

[bbbbbbb]

According to an article here - NYTimes.com: For Catholics, Heaven Moves One Step Closer - the Catholic Church is back in the indulgence game again after having dropped the ball for a few decades.

For those of us old enough to remember, an indulgence is like a ticket to get some time out of prison (purgatory) for good behavior or, more importantly, performing good deeds like giving a certain amount of money to the Catholic Church. It appears that the financial woes of the Catholic Church have provided an excellent incentive for reintroducing indulgences.

One of the theological difficulties with indulgences is that they get time off from a place (Purgatory) that has been heavily marketed as either being non-existent as a place or is merely a pleasant experience akin to taking a shower to cleanse one's soul prior to entering heaven. If it is the latter, indulgences are really quite meaningless. If Purgatory is the nasty place of torment which has been the traditional marketing tool of the Catholic Church, then the CC needs to revisit that doctrine and ramp up the tales of woe and terror awaiting the faithful Catholic after death.

 

[MrPolo]

Is it ok to open this thread here when it was closed in GT? Just asking.

 

[ChrisPietraszko]

Indulgences have never left the Church, they have only been misused in the past. I.e. selling grace was very wrong, but dispencing grace, forgiving sins, and healing souls has always been scripturally sound.

 

[katholikos]

Indulgences have never left the Church, they have only been misused in the past. I.e. selling grace was very wrong, but dispencing grace, forgiving sins, and healing souls has always been scripturally sound.

Good post

 

[bbbbbbb]

Is it ok to open this thread here when it was closed in GT? Just asking.

It's called hedging my bets. I decided that the topic was actually denomination-specific and initially posted it here. Then I realized that it would not get many responses, so I posted it over in GT where, of course, it got a lot of responses before the mods closed all of the Catholic-Protestant threads for a week. At least it is only a week and not Lent. I think I would have difficulty giving up GT for Lent.

In any event, I am impressed that the Catholics here at CF are much quicker to find this thread than the Protestants. I am not quite sure what that means. I am also not sure how the thread will fare over in GT when the ban is lifted.

 

[St. Paul]

Indulgences have never left the Church, they have only been misused in the past. I.e. selling grace was very wrong, but dispencing grace, forgiving sins, and healing souls has always been scripturally sound.

Wrong. A person can repent their sins but they can't buy a piece of paper to forgive sins. It is definitely NOT scriptually sound!

 

[&Abel]

purgatory is a false doctrine

if your in christ, pain ends with death

29 But all they that have offended against my commandments and have taught other doctrine, (perverting) the Scripture and adding thereto, striving after their own glory, and that teach with other words them that believe on me in uprightness, ie they make them fall thereby, shall receive everlasting punishment. We said unto him: Lord, shall there then be teaching by others, diverse from that which thou hast spoken unto us? He said unto us: It must needs be, that the evil and the good may be made manifest; and the judgement shall be manifest upon them that do these things, and according to their works shall they be judged and shall be delivered unto death.

37 Then said we unto him: Lord, teach us what shall come to pass thereafter? And he answered us: In those years and days shall war be kindled upon war; the four ends of the earth shall be in commotion and fight against each other. Thereafter shall be quakings of clouds (or, clouds of locusts), darkness, and dearth, and persecutions of them that believe on me and against the elect. Thereupon shall come doubt and strife and transgressions against one another. And there shall be many that believe on my name and yet follow after evil and spread vain doctrine. And men shall follow after them and their riches, and be subject unto their pride, and lust for drink, and bribery, and there shall be respect of persons among them.

And we asked him: Lord, shall such things be among us? And he answered us: Fear not; it shall not be in many, but in a few. We said unto him: Yet tell us, in what manner it shall come to pass. And he said unto us: There shall come forth another doctrine, and a confusion, and because they shall strive after their own advancement, they shall bring forth an unprofitable doctrine. And therein shall be a deadly corruption (of uncleanness), and they shall teach it, and shall turn away them that believe on me from my commandments and cut them off from eternal life. But woe unto them that falsify this my word and commandment, and draw away them that hearken to them from the life of the doctrine and separate themselves from the commandment of life: for together with them they shall come into everlasting judgement.

http://www.pseudepigrapha.com/apocrypha_nt/episaps.htm

I believe the "confusion" is the reformation and the doctrine is indulgences

 

[MrPolo]

Wrong. A person can repent their sins but they can't buy a piece of paper to forgive sins.

That's not what an indulgence is, so we're good.

 

[bbbbbbb]

That's not what an indulgence is, so we're good.

Good for what?

 

[Super Kal]

Good for what?

they're basically granted by the church when people do certain good deeds... a piece of paper that says "you're forgiven"

 

[&Abel]

Because of the great demand from associations that their favourite prayers, devotions, places of worship or pilgrimage, their processions and meetings, be enriched with indulgences, there was a tendency to forge documents declaring that such indulgences, sometimes of extraordinary character, had been granted. Indulgences were attached to many works that were not only good but also served the common good, both religious and civil: churches, hospitals, leprosaria, charitable institutions and schools, and also roads and bridges.[29]
The later Middle Ages saw the growth of considerable abuses, such as the unrestricted sale of indulgences by professional "pardoners"[3] (quaestores in Latin), who were sent to collect contributions to the project. In many cases the preaching of these, out of ignorance or shrewdness, went far beyond dogmatic teachings; some of them even dared to promise that the damned would be released from hell. Permission began to be granted to Catholic kings and princes, particularly on the occasion of Crusades, to retain for themselves a rather considerable part of the alms collected for the gaining of indulgences. The most well-known and debated question is the indulgence granted for building the new St. Peter's Basilica in Rome.[29]
The Fourth Lateran Council (1215) suppressed some abuses connected with indulgences, spelling out, for example, that only a one-year indulgence would be granted for the consecration of churches and no more than a 40-days indulgence for other occasions. But very soon these limits were widely exceeded. In fact, false documents were circulated with indulgences surpassing all bounds: indulgences of hundreds or even thousands of years.[29] In 1392, more than a century before Martin Luther published the 95 Theses, Pope Boniface IX wrote to the Bishop of Ferrara condemning the practice of certain members of religious orders who falsely claimed that they were authorized by the pope to forgive all sorts of sins, and exacted money from the simple-minded among the faithful by promising them perpetual happiness in this world and eternal glory in the next.[31]


seems like a deadly corruption of uncleanliness to me

 

[MrPolo]

seems like a deadly corruption of uncleanliness to me

Why would it be. Can you think of any examples in Scripture of person A being granted grace or healing because of the actions of person B? I can think of a lot.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Why would it be. Can you think of any examples in Scripture of person A being granted grace or healing because of the actions of person B? I can think of a lot.

I think this is what he was referring to:
si⋅mo⋅ny

   /ˈsaɪ

mə

ni, ˈsɪm

ə-/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [sahy-muh-nee, sim-uh-] Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun 1. the making of profit out of sacred things. 2. the sin of buying or selling ecclesiastical preferments, benefices, etc.
Origin:
1175–1225; ME simonie < LL sim&#333;nia; so called from Simon Magus, who tried to purchase apostolic powers; see Simon (def. 5), -y 3

This comes from Acts 8:9-24 where Simon, the magician, attempted to purchase supernatural powers from the apostles.

 

[MrPolo]

Oh, well the Church recognizes simony as sinful too and has condemned incidents by clergy in the past. Even the guy Luther criticized was criticized by other Catholic clergy at that time.

 

[bbbbbbb]

That's right. As I understand &Abel's quotation, he was using it to show how the practice of simony developed and was condemned. I think his comment was aimed toward the historical situation and not the present situation in the Catholic church.

 

[papist1]

uhhhh, indulgences never left.

did yo think they had?
peace, papist

 

[Sphinx777]

The word indulgence (Latin 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 (Isaiah 61:1) 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.

To facilitate explanation, it may be well to state what an indulgence is not. It is not a permission to commit sin, nor a pardon of future sin; neither could be granted by any power. It is not the forgiveness of the guilt of sin; it supposes that the sin has already been forgiven. It is not an exemption from any law or duty, and much less from the obligation consequent on certain kinds of sin, e.g., restitution; on the contrary, it means a more complete payment of the debt which the sinner owes to God. It does not confer immunity from temptation or remove the possibility of subsequent lapses into sin. Least of all is an indulgence the purchase of a pardon which secures the buyer's salvation or releases the soul of another from Purgatory. The absurdity of such notions must be obvious to any one who forms a correct idea of what the Catholic Church really teaches on this subject.

An indulgence is the extra-sacramental remission of the temporal punishment due, in God's justice, to sin that has been forgiven, which remission is granted by the Church in the exercise of the power of the keys, through the application of the superabundant merits of Christ and of the saints, and for some just and reasonable motive. Regarding this definition, the following points are to be noted:

* In the Sacrament of Baptism not only is the guilt of sin remitted, but also all the penalties attached to sin. In the Sacrament of Penance the guilt of sin is removed, and with it the eternal punishment due to mortal sin; but there still remains the temporal punishment required by Divine justice, and this requirement must be fulfilled either in the present life or in the world to come, i.e., in Purgatory. An indulgence offers the penitent sinner the means of discharging this debt during his life on earth.

* Some writs of indulgence—none of them, however, issued by any pope or council (Pesch, Tr. Dogm., VII, 196, no. 464)—contain the expression, "indulgentia a culpa et a poena", i.e. release from guilt and from punishment; and this has occasioned considerable misunderstanding (cf. Lea, "History" etc. III, 54 sqq.). The real meaning of the formula is that, indulgences presupposing the Sacrament of Penance, the penitent, after receiving sacramental absolution from the guilt of sin, is afterwards freed from the temporal penalty by the indulgence (Bellarmine, "De Indulg"., I, 7). In other words, sin is fully pardoned, i.e. its effects entirely obliterated, only when complete reparation, and consequently release from penalty as well as from guilt, has been made. Hence Clement V (1305-1314) condemned the practice of those purveyors of indulgences who pretended to absolve "a culpa et a poena" (Clement, I. v, tit. 9, c. ii); the Council of Constance (1418) revoked (Sess. XLII, n. 14) all indulgences containing the said formula; Benedict XIV (1740-1758) treats them as spurious indulgences granted in this form, which he ascribes to the illicit practices of the "quaestores" or purveyors (De Syn. dioeces., VIII, viii. 7).

* The satisfaction, usually called the "penance", imposed by the confessor when he gives absolution is an integral part of the Sacrament of Penance; an indulgence is extra-sacramental; it presupposes the effects obtained by confession, contrition, and sacramental satisfaction. It differs also from the penitential works undertaken of his own accord by the repentant sinner -- prayer, fasting, alms-giving -- in that these are personal and get their value from the merit of him who performs them, whereas an indulgence places at the penitent's disposal the merits of Christ and of the saints, which form the "Treasury" of the Church.

* An indulgence is valid both in the tribunal of the Church and in the tribunal of God. This means that it not only releases the penitent from his indebtedness to the Church or from the obligation of performing canonical penance, but also from the temporal punishment which he has incurred in the sight of God and which, without the indulgence, he would have to undergo in order to satisfy Divine justice. This, however, does not imply that the Church pretends to set aside the claim of God's justice or that she allows the sinner to repudiate his debt. As St. Thomas says (Supplement.25.1 ad 2um), "He who gains indulgences is not thereby released outright from what he owes as penalty, but is provided with the means of paying it." The Church therefore neither leaves the penitent helplessly in debt nor acquits him of all further accounting; she enables him to meet his obligations.

* In granting an indulgence, the grantor (pope or bishop) does not offer his personal merits in lieu of what God demands from the sinner. He acts in his official capacity as having jurisdiction in the Church, from whose spiritual treasury he draws the means wherewith payment is to be made. The Church herself is not the absolute owner, but simply the administratrix, of the superabundant merits which that treasury contains. In applying them, she keeps in view both the design of God's mercy and the demands of God's justice. She therefore determines the amount of each concession, as well as the conditions which the penitent must fulfill if he would gain the indulgence.

CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Indulgences

 

[Sphinx777]

An indulgence that may be gained in any part of the world is universal, while one that can be gained only in a specified place (Rome, Jerusalem, etc.) is local. A further distinction is that between perpetual indulgences, which may be gained at any time, and temporary, which are available on certain days only, or within certain periods. Real indulgences are attached to the use of certain objects (crucifix, rosary, medal); personal are those which do not require the use of any such material thing, or which are granted only to a certain class of individuals, e.g. members of an order or confraternity. The most important distinction, however, is that between plenary indulgences and partial. By a plenary indulgence is meant the remission of the entire temporal punishment due to sin so that no further expiation is required in Purgatory. A partial indulgence commutes only a certain portion of the penalty; and this portion is determined in accordance with the penitential discipline of the early Church. To say that an indulgence of so many days or years is granted means that it cancels an amount of purgatorial punishment equivalent to that which would have been remitted, in the sight of God, by the performance of so many days or years of the ancient canonical penance. Here, evidently, the reckoning makes no claim to absolute exactness; it has only a relative value.

God alone knows what penalty remains to be paid and what its precise amount is in severity and duration. Finally, some indulgences are granted in behalf of the living only, while others may be applied in behalf of the souls departed. It should be noted, however, that the application has not the same significance in both cases. The Church in granting an indulgence to the living exercises her jurisdiction; over the dead she has no jurisdiction and therefore makes the indulgence available for them by way of suffrage (per modum suffragii), i.e. she petitions God to accept these works of satisfaction and in consideration thereof to mitigate or shorten the sufferings of the souls in Purgatory.

CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Indulgences

 

[Sphinx777]

The distribution of the merits contained in the treasury of the Church is an exercise of authority (potestas iurisdictionis), not of the power conferred by Holy orders (potestas ordinis). Hence the pope, as supreme head of the Church on earth, can grant all kinds of indulgences to any and all of the faithful; and he alone can grant plenary indulgences. The power of the bishop, previously unrestricted, was limited by Innocent III (1215) to the granting of one year's indulgence at the dedication of a church and of forty days on other occasions. Leo XIII (Rescript of 4 July. 1899) authorized the archbishops of South America to grant eighty days (Acta S. Sedis, XXXI, 758). Pius X (28 August, 1903) allowed cardinals in their titular churches and dioceses to grant 200 days; archbishops, 100; bishops, 50. These indulgences are not applicable to the souls departed. They can be gained by persons not belonging to the diocese, but temporarily within its limits; and by the subjects of the granting bishop, whether these are within the diocese or outside--except when the indulgence is local. Priests, vicars general, abbots, and generals of religious orders cannot grant indulgences unless specially authorized to do so. On the other hand, the pope can empower a cleric who is not a priest to give an indulgence (St. Thomas, "Quodlib.", II, q. viii, a. 16).

CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Indulgences

 

[Sphinx777]

The mere fact that the Church proclaims an indulgence does not imply that it can be gained without effort on the part of the faithful. From what has been said above, it is clear that the recipient must be free from the guilt of mortal sin. Furthermore, for plenary indulgences, confession and Communion are usually required, while for partial indulgences, though confession is not obligatory, the formula corde saltem contrito, i.e. "at least with a contrite heart", is the customary prescription. Regarding the question discussed by theologians whether a person in mortal sin can gain an indulgence for the dead, see PURGATORY. It is also necessary to have the intention, at least habitual, of gaining the indulgence. Finally, from the nature of the case, it is obvious that one must perform the good works -- prayers, alms deeds, visits to a church, etc. -- which are prescribed in the granting of an indulgence. For details see "Raccolta".

CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Indulgences