Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Reformation Day
Monergism ^ | 10/31/2010 | none given

Posted on 10/31/2010 6:58:53 AM PDT by RnMomof7

Reformation Day is a religious holiday celebrated on October 31st or the last weekend in October in remembrance of the Reformation.

Martin Luther posted a proposal at the doors of a church in Wittenberg, Germany to debate the doctrine and practice of indulgences. This proposal is popularly known as the 95 Theses, which he nailed to the Castle Church doors. This was not an act of defiance or provocation as is sometimes thought. Since the Castle Church faced Wittenberg's main thoroughfare, the church door functioned as a public bulletin board and was therefore the logical place for posting important notices.

Also, the theses were written in Latin, the language of the church, and not in the vernacular. Nonetheless, the event created a controversy between Luther and those allied with the Pope over a variety of doctrines and practices.

While it had profound and lasting impacts on the political, economic, social, literary, and artistic aspects of modern society, the Reformation was at its heart a religious movement.

The Reformation was the great rediscovery of the good news of salvation by grace through faith for Christ's sake. For centuries, the Roman Catholic Church had been plagued by false doctrines, superstition, ignorance, and corruption. Since most ordinary Christians were illiterate and had little knowledge of the Bible, they relied on their clergy for religious instruction and guidance. Tragically however, monks, priests, bishops, and even the popes in Rome taught unbiblical doctrines like purgatory and salvation through good works.

Spiritually earnest people tried to justify themselves by charitable works, pilgrimages, and all kinds of religious performances and devotions, but they were left wondering if they had done enough to escape God's anger and punishment. The truth of the gospel -- the good news that God is loving and merciful, that He offers each and every one of us forgiveness and salvation not because of what we do, but because of what Christ has already done for us -- was largely forgotten by both clergy and laity.

The Holy Spirit used an Augustinian monk and university professor named Martin Luther to restore the gospel to its rightful place as the cornerstone doctrine of Christianity. Martin Luther and his colleagues came to understand that if we sinners had to earn salvation by our own merits and good works, we would be lost and completely without hope.

But through the working of the Holy Spirit, the reformers rediscovered the gospel -- the wonderful news that Jesus Christ lived, died, and rose again to redeem and justify us. As Luther wrote in his explanation of the Second Article of the Apostles' Creed: I believe that Jesus Christ, true God, begotten of the Father from eternity, and also true man, born of the Virgin Mary, is my Lord, who has redeemed me, a lost and condemned creature, purchased and won me from all sins, from death, and from the power of the devil; not with gold or silver, but with His holy, precious blood and with His innocent suffering and death, that I may be His own and live under Him in His kingdom, and serve Him in everlasting righteousness, innocence, and blessedness, even as He is risen from the dead, lives and reigns to all eternity. This is most certainly true.

On Reformation Day, we glorify God for what he accomplished in 16th century Germany through His servant, Dr. Martin Luther -- the recovery of the gospel of salvation by grace through faith for Christ's sake.

We also earnestly pray that God would keep all of us faithful to the true gospel and help us to joyfully declare it to the world. This lovely hymn verse encapsulates the theme of our

Reformation celebration:

By grace God's Son, our only Savior,
Came down to earth to bear our sin.
Was it because of your own merit
That Jesus died your soul to win?
No, it was grace, and grace alone,
It brought Him from His heav'nly throne.


TOPICS: Apologetics; History; Theology
KEYWORDS: calvinist; luther; reformation
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-63 next last
Happy Reformation day !!
1 posted on 10/31/2010 6:59:01 AM PDT by RnMomof7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Dutchboy88; Iscool; OLD REGGIE; 1000 silverlings; editor-surveyor; metmom; boatbums; Quix; ...

Bump !


2 posted on 10/31/2010 7:00:15 AM PDT by RnMomof7 (Some call me harpy..God calls me His)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7

3 posted on 10/31/2010 7:01:01 AM PDT by Bean Counter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7

And to you Mom!

We are checking out a new church today. A good sign will be singing “A Mighty Fortress Is Our God” and a sermon on Christ’s perfect work and our sin, even when we think we are doing good.


4 posted on 10/31/2010 7:16:33 AM PDT by Gamecock ( Christianity is not the movement from vice to virtue, but from virtue to Grace.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7; saveliberty; fabrizio; Civitas2010; Radagast the Fool; DoctorBulldog; Celtic Cross; ...
+

Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:

Add me / Remove me

Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.

5 posted on 10/31/2010 7:19:54 AM PDT by narses ( 'Prefer nothing to the love of Christ.')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7

Celebrating with a Reformation Day Service, text is Romans 1:16-17.


6 posted on 10/31/2010 7:21:47 AM PDT by AZhardliner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7

And a happy Reformation Sunday to you and yours.


7 posted on 10/31/2010 7:25:09 AM PDT by markomalley (Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7

Disputation of Doctor Martin Luther
on the Power and Efficacy of Indulgences
by Dr. Martin Luther (1517)

Published in:

Works of Martin Luther:
Adolph Spaeth, L.D. Reed, Henry Eyster Jacobs, et Al., Trans. & Eds.
(Philadelphia: A. J. Holman Company, 1915), Vol.1, pp. 29-38

_______________

Out of love for the truth and the desire to bring it to light, the following propositions will be discussed at Wittenberg, under the presidency of the Reverend Father Martin Luther, Master of Arts and of Sacred Theology, and Lecturer in Ordinary on the same at that place. Wherefore he requests that those who are unable to be present and debate orally with us, may do so by letter.

In the Name our Lord Jesus Christ. Amen.

    1. Our Lord and Master Jesus Christ, when He said Poenitentiam agite, willed that the whole life of believers should be repentance.

    2. This word cannot be understood to mean sacramental penance, i.e., confession and satisfaction, which is administered by the priests.

    3. Yet it means not inward repentance only; nay, there is no inward repentance which does not outwardly work divers mortifications of the flesh.

    4. The penalty [of sin], therefore, continues so long as hatred of self continues; for this is the true inward repentance, and continues until our entrance into the kingdom of heaven.

    5. The pope does not intend to remit, and cannot remit any penalties other than those which he has imposed either by his own authority or by that of the Canons.

    6. The pope cannot remit any guilt, except by declaring that it has been remitted by God and by assenting to God's remission; though, to be sure, he may grant remission in cases reserved to his judgment. If his right to grant remission in such cases were despised, the guilt would remain entirely unforgiven.

    7. God remits guilt to no one whom He does not, at the same time, humble in all things and bring into subjection to His vicar, the priest.

    8. The penitential canons are imposed only on the living, and, according to them, nothing should be imposed on the dying.

    9. Therefore the Holy Spirit in the pope is kind to us, because in his decrees he always makes exception of the article of death and of necessity.

    10. Ignorant and wicked are the doings of those priests who, in the case of the dying, reserve canonical penances for purgatory.

    11. This changing of the canonical penalty to the penalty of purgatory is quite evidently one of the tares that were sown while the bishops slept.

    12. In former times the canonical penalties were imposed not after, but before absolution, as tests of true contrition.

    13. The dying are freed by death from all penalties; they are already dead to canonical rules, and have a right to be released from them.

    14. The imperfect health [of soul], that is to say, the imperfect love, of the dying brings with it, of necessity, great fear; and the smaller the love, the greater is the fear.

    15. This fear and horror is sufficient of itself alone (to say nothing of other things) to constitute the penalty of purgatory, since it is very near to the horror of despair.

    16. Hell, purgatory, and heaven seem to differ as do despair, almost-despair, and the assurance of safety.

    17. With souls in purgatory it seems necessary that horror should grow less and love increase.

    18. It seems unproved, either by reason or Scripture, that they are outside the state of merit, that is to say, of increasing love.

    19. Again, it seems unproved that they, or at least that all of them, are certain or assured of their own blessedness, though we may be quite certain of it.

    20. Therefore by "full remission of all penalties" the pope means not actually "of all," but only of those imposed by himself.

    21. Therefore those preachers of indulgences are in error, who say that by the pope's indulgences a man is freed from every penalty, and saved;

    22. Whereas he remits to souls in purgatory no penalty which, according to the canons, they would have had to pay in this life.

    23. If it is at all possible to grant to any one the remission of all penalties whatsoever, it is certain that this remission can be granted only to the most perfect, that is, to the very fewest.

    24. It must needs be, therefore, that the greater part of the people are deceived by that indiscriminate and highsounding promise of release from penalty.

    25. The power which the pope has, in a general way, over purgatory, is just like the power which any bishop or curate has, in a special way, within his own diocese or parish.

    26. The pope does well when he grants remission to souls [in purgatory], not by the power of the keys (which he does not possess), but by way of intercession.

    27. They preach man who say that so soon as the penny jingles into the money-box, the soul flies out [of purgatory].

    28. It is certain that when the penny jingles into the money-box, gain and avarice can be increased, but the result of the intercession of the Church is in the power of God alone.

    29. Who knows whether all the souls in purgatory wish to be bought out of it, as in the legend of Sts. Severinus and Paschal.

    30. No one is sure that his own contrition is sincere; much less that he has attained full remission.

    31. Rare as is the man that is truly penitent, so rare is also the man who truly buys indulgences, i.e., such men are most rare.

    32. They will be condemned eternally, together with their teachers, who believe themselves sure of their salvation because they have letters of pardon.

    33. Men must be on their guard against those who say that the pope's pardons are that inestimable gift of God by which man is reconciled to Him;

    34. For these "graces of pardon" concern only the penalties of sacramental satisfaction, and these are appointed by man.

    35. They preach no Christian doctrine who teach that contrition is not necessary in those who intend to buy souls out of purgatory or to buy confessionalia.

    36. Every truly repentant Christian has a right to full remission of penalty and guilt, even without letters of pardon.

    37. Every true Christian, whether living or dead, has part in all the blessings of Christ and the Church; and this is granted him by God, even without letters of pardon.

    38. Nevertheless, the remission and participation [in the blessings of the Church] which are granted by the pope are in no way to be despised, for they are, as I have said, the declaration of divine remission.

    39. It is most difficult, even for the very keenest theologians, at one and the same time to commend to the people the abundance of pardons and [the need of] true contrition.

    40. True contrition seeks and loves penalties, but liberal pardons only relax penalties and cause them to be hated, or at least, furnish an occasion [for hating them].

    41. Apostolic pardons are to be preached with caution, lest the people may falsely think them preferable to other good works of love.

    42. Christians are to be taught that the pope does not intend the buying of pardons to be compared in any way to works of mercy.

    43. Christians are to be taught that he who gives to the poor or lends to the needy does a better work than buying pardons;

    44. Because love grows by works of love, and man becomes better; but by pardons man does not grow better, only more free from penalty.

    45. 45. Christians are to be taught that he who sees a man in need, and passes him by, and gives [his money] for pardons, purchases not the indulgences of the pope, but the indignation of God.

    46. Christians are to be taught that unless they have more than they need, they are bound to keep back what is necessary for their own families, and by no means to squander it on pardons.

    47. Christians are to be taught that the buying of pardons is a matter of free will, and not of commandment.

    48. Christians are to be taught that the pope, in granting pardons, needs, and therefore desires, their devout prayer for him more than the money they bring.

    49. Christians are to be taught that the pope's pardons are useful, if they do not put their trust in them; but altogether harmful, if through them they lose their fear of God.

    50. Christians are to be taught that if the pope knew the exactions of the pardon-preachers, he would rather that St. Peter's church should go to ashes, than that it should be built up with the skin, flesh and bones of his sheep.

    51. Christians are to be taught that it would be the pope's wish, as it is his duty, to give of his own money to very many of those from whom certain hawkers of pardons cajole money, even though the church of St. Peter might have to be sold.

    52. The assurance of salvation by letters of pardon is vain, even though the commissary, nay, even though the pope himself, were to stake his soul upon it.

    53. They are enemies of Christ and of the pope, who bid the Word of God be altogether silent in some Churches, in order that pardons may be preached in others.

    54. Injury is done the Word of God when, in the same sermon, an equal or a longer time is spent on pardons than on this Word.

    55. It must be the intention of the pope that if pardons, which are a very small thing, are celebrated with one bell, with single processions and ceremonies, then the Gospel, which is the very greatest thing, should be preached with a hundred bells, a hundred processions, a hundred ceremonies.

    56. The "treasures of the Church," out of which the pope. grants indulgences, are not sufficiently named or known among the people of Christ.

    57. That they are not temporal treasures is certainly evident, for many of the vendors do not pour out such treasures so easily, but only gather them.

    58. Nor are they the merits of Christ and the Saints, for even without the pope, these always work grace for the inner man, and the cross, death, and hell for the outward man.

    59. St. Lawrence said that the treasures of the Church were the Church's poor, but he spoke according to the usage of the word in his own time.

    60. Without rashness we say that the keys of the Church, given by Christ's merit, are that treasure;

    61. For it is clear that for the remission of penalties and of reserved cases, the power of the pope is of itself sufficient.

    62. The true treasure of the Church is the Most Holy Gospel of the glory and the grace of God.

    63. But this treasure is naturally most odious, for it makes the first to be last.

    64. On the other hand, the treasure of indulgences is naturally most acceptable, for it makes the last to be first.

    65. Therefore the treasures of the Gospel are nets with which they formerly were wont to fish for men of riches.

    66. The treasures of the indulgences are nets with which they now fish for the riches of men.

    67. The indulgences which the preachers cry as the "greatest graces" are known to be truly such, in so far as they promote gain.

    68. Yet they are in truth the very smallest graces compared with the grace of God and the piety of the Cross.

    69. Bishops and curates are bound to admit the commissaries of apostolic pardons, with all reverence.

    70. But still more are they bound to strain all their eyes and attend with all their ears, lest these men preach their own dreams instead of the commission of the pope.

    71. He who speaks against the truth of apostolic pardons, let him be anathema and accursed!

    72. But he who guards against the lust and license of the pardon-preachers, let him be blessed!

    73. The pope justly thunders against those who, by any art, contrive the injury of the traffic in pardons.

    74. But much more does he intend to thunder against those who use the pretext of pardons to contrive the injury of holy love and truth.

    75. To think the papal pardons so great that they could absolve a man even if he had committed an impossible sin and violated the Mother of God -- this is madness.

    76. We say, on the contrary, that the papal pardons are not able to remove the very least of venial sins, so far as its guilt is concerned.

    77. It is said that even St. Peter, if he were now Pope, could not bestow greater graces; this is blasphemy against St. Peter and against the pope.

    78. We say, on the contrary, that even the present pope, and any pope at all, has greater graces at his disposal; to wit, the Gospel, powers, gifts of healing, etc., as it is written in I. Corinthians xii.

    79. To say that the cross, emblazoned with the papal arms, which is set up [by the preachers of indulgences], is of equal worth with the Cross of Christ, is blasphemy.

    80. The bishops, curates and theologians who allow such talk to be spread among the people, will have an account to render.

    81. This unbridled preaching of pardons makes it no easy matter, even for learned men, to rescue the reverence due to the pope from slander, or even from the shrewd questionings of the laity.

    82. To wit: -- "Why does not the pope empty purgatory, for the sake of holy love and of the dire need of the souls that are there, if he redeems an infinite number of souls for the sake of miserable money with which to build a Church? The former reasons would be most just; the latter is most trivial."

    83. Again: -- "Why are mortuary and anniversary masses for the dead continued, and why does he not return or permit the withdrawal of the endowments founded on their behalf, since it is wrong to pray for the redeemed?"

    84. Again: -- "What is this new piety of God and the pope, that for money they allow a man who is impious and their enemy to buy out of purgatory the pious soul of a friend of God, and do not rather, because of that pious and beloved soul's own need, free it for pure love's sake?"

    85. Again: -- "Why are the penitential canons long since in actual fact and through disuse abrogated and dead, now satisfied by the granting of indulgences, as though they were still alive and in force?"

    86. Again: -- "Why does not the pope, whose wealth is to-day greater than the riches of the richest, build just this one church of St. Peter with his own money, rather than with the money of poor believers?"

    87. Again: -- "What is it that the pope remits, and what participation does he grant to those who, by perfect contrition, have a right to full remission and participation?"

    88. Again: -- "What greater blessing could come to the Church than if the pope were to do a hundred times a day what he now does once, and bestow on every believer these remissions and participations?"

    89. "Since the pope, by his pardons, seeks the salvation of souls rather than money, why does he suspend the indulgences and pardons granted heretofore, since these have equal efficacy?"

    90. To repress these arguments and scruples of the laity by force alone, and not to resolve them by giving reasons, is to expose the Church and the pope to the ridicule of their enemies, and to make Christians unhappy.

    91. If, therefore, pardons were preached according to the spirit and mind of the pope, all these doubts would be readily resolved; nay, they would not exist.

    92. Away, then, with all those prophets who say to the people of Christ, "Peace, peace," and there is no peace!

    93. Blessed be all those prophets who say to the people of Christ, "Cross, cross," and there is no cross!

    94. Christians are to be exhorted that they be diligent in following Christ, their Head, through penalties, deaths, and hell;

    95. And thus be confident of entering into heaven rather through many tribulations, than through the assurance of peace.


pwimage

This text was converted to ASCII text for Project Wittenberg by Allen Mulvey, and is in the public domain. You may freely distribute, copy or print this text. Please direct any comments or suggestions to:

Rev. Robert E. Smith
Walther Library
Concordia Theological Seminary.

E-mail: smithre@mail.ctsfw.edu
Surface Mail: 6600 N. Clinton St., Ft. Wayne, IN 46825 USA
Phone: (260) 452-3149 - Fax: (260) 452-2126

8 posted on 10/31/2010 7:34:46 AM PDT by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7

Myths about Indulgences



Indulgences. The very word stirs up more misconceptions than perhaps any other teaching in Catholic theology. Those who attack the Church for its use of indulgences rely upon—and take advantage of—the ignorance of both Catholics and non-Catholics.

What is an indulgence? The Church explains, "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 defined conditions through the Church’s help when, as a minister of redemption, she dispenses and applies with authority the treasury of the satisfactions won by Christ and the saints" (Indulgentarium Doctrina 1). To see the biblical foundations for indulgences, see the Catholic Answers tract A Primer on Indulgences.

Step number one in explaining indulgences is to know what they are. Step number two is to clarify what they are not. Here are the seven most common myths about indulgences:

Myth 1: A person can buy his way out of hell with indulgences.
This charge is without foundation. Since indulgences remit only temporal penalties, they cannot remit the eternal penalty of hell. Once a person is in hell, no amount of indulgences will ever change that fact. The only way to avoid hell is by appealing to God’s eternal mercy while still alive. After death, one’s eternal fate is set (Heb. 9:27).

Myth 2: A person can buy indulgences for sins not yet committed.
The Church has always taught that indulgences do not apply to sins not yet committed. The Catholic Encyclopedia notes, "[An indulgence] is not a permission to commit sin, nor a pardon of future sin; neither could be granted by any power."

Myth 3: A person can "buy forgiveness" with indulgences.
The definition of indulgences presupposes that forgiveness has already taken place: "An indulgence is a remission before God of the temporal punishment due to sins whose guilt has already been forgiven" (Indulgentarium Doctrina 1, emphasis added). Indulgences in no way forgive sins. They deal only with punishments left after sins have been forgiven.

Myth 4: Indulgences were invented as a means for the Church to raise money.
Indulgences developed from reflection on the sacrament of reconciliation. They are a way of shortening the penance of sacramental discipline and were in use centuries before money-related problems appeared.

Myth 5: An indulgence will shorten your time in purgatory by a fixed number of days.
The number of days which used to be attached to indulgences were references to the period of penance one might undergo during life on earth. The Catholic Church does not claim to know anything about how long or short purgatory is in general, much less in a specific person’s case.

Myth 6: A person can buy indulgences.
The Council of Trent instituted severe reforms in the practice of granting indulgences, and, because of prior abuses, "in 1567 Pope Pius V canceled all grants of indulgences involving any fees or other financial transactions" (Catholic Encyclopedia). This act proved the Church’s seriousness about removing abuses from indulgences.

Myth 7: A person used to be able to buy indulgences.
One never could "buy" indulgences. The financial scandal surrounding indulgences, the scandal that gave Martin Luther an excuse for his heterodoxy, involved alms—indulgences in which the giving of alms to some charitable fund or foundation was used as the occasion to grant the indulgence. There was no outright selling of indulgences. The Catholic Encyclopedia states: "[I]t is easy to see how abuses crept in. Among the good works which might be encouraged by being made the condition of an indulgence, almsgiving would naturally hold a conspicuous place. . . . It is well to observe that in these purposes there is nothing essentially evil. To give money to God or to the poor is a praiseworthy act, and, when it is done from right motives, it will surely not go unrewarded."

Being able to explain these seven myths will be a large step in helping others to understand indulgences. But, there are still questions to be asked:

 

"How many of one’s temporal penalties can be remitted?"

Potentially, all of them. The Church recognizes that Christ and the saints are interested in helping penitents deal with the aftermath of their sins, as indicated by the fact they always pray for us (Heb. 7:25, Rev. 5:8). Fulfilling its role in the administration of temporal penalties, the Church draws upon the rich supply of rewards God chose to bestow on the saints, who pleased him, and on his Son, who pleased him most of all.

The rewards on which the Church draws are infinite because Christ is God, so the rewards he accrued are infinite and never can be exhausted. His rewards alone, apart from the saints’, could remove all temporal penalties from everyone, everywhere. The rewards of the saints are added to Christ’s—not because anything is lacking in his, but because it is fitting that they be united with his rewards as the saints are united with him. Although immense, their rewards are finite, but his are infinite.

 

"If the Church has the resources to wipe out everyone’s temporal penalties, why doesn’t it do so?"

Because God does not wish this to be done. God himself instituted the pattern of temporal penalties being left behind. They fulfill valid functions, one of them disciplinary. If a child were never disciplined, he would never learn obedience. God disciplines us as his children — "the Lord disciplines him whom he loves, and chastises every son whom he receives" (Heb. 12:6) — so some temporal penalties must remain.

The Church cannot wipe out, with a stroke of the pen, so to speak, everyone’s temporal punishments because their remission depends on the dispositions of the persons who suffer those temporal punishments. Just as repentance and faith are needed for the remission of eternal penalties, so they are needed for the remission of temporal penalties. Pope Paul VI stated, "Indulgences cannot be gained without a sincere conversion of outlook and unity with God"(Indulgentarium Doctrina 11). We might say that the degree of remission depends on how well the penitent has learned his lesson.

 

"How does one determine by what amount penalties have been lessened?"

Before Vatican II each indulgence was said to remove a certain number of "days" from one’s discipline—for instance, an act might gain "300 days’ indulgence"—but the use of the term "days" confused people, giving them the mistaken impression that in purgatory time as we know it still exists and that we can calculate our "good time" in a mechanical way. The number of days associated with indulgences actually never meant that that much "time" would be taken off one’s stay in purgatory. Instead, it meant that an indefinite but partial (not complete) amount of remission would be granted, proportionate to what ancient Christians would have received for performing that many days’ penance. So, someone gaining 300 days’ indulgence gained roughly what an early Christian would have gained by, say, reciting a particular prayer on arising for 300 days.

To overcome the confusion Paul VI issued a revision of the handbook (Enchiridion is the formal name) of indulgences. Today, numbers of days are not associated with indulgences. They are either plenary or partial.

 

"What’s the difference between a partial and a plenary indulgence?"

"An indulgence is partial or plenary according as it removes either part or all of the temporal punishment due to sin" (Indulgentarium Doctrina 2, 3). Only God knows exactly how efficacious any particular partial indulgence is or whether a plenary indulgence was received at all.

 

"Don’t indulgences duplicate or even negate the work of Christ?"

Despite the biblical underpinnings of indulgences, some are sharply critical of them and insist the doctrine supplants the work of Christ and turns us into our own saviors. This objection results from confusion about the nature of indulgences and about how Christ’s work is applied to us.

Indulgences apply only to temporal penalties, not to eternal ones. The Bible indicates that these penalties may remain after a sin has been forgiven and that God lessens these penalties as rewards to those who have pleased him. Since the Bible indicates this, Christ’s work cannot be said to have been supplanted by indulgences.

The merits of Christ, since they are infinite, comprise most of those in the treasury of merits. By applying these to believers, the Church acts as Christ’s servant in the application of what he has done for us, and we know from Scripture that Christ’s work is applied to us over time and not in one big lump (Phil. 2:12, 1 Pet. 1:9).

 

"Isn’t it better to put all of the emphasis on Christ alone?"

If we ignore the fact of indulgences, we neglect what Christ does through us, and we fail to recognize the value of what he has done in us. Paul used this very sort of language: "Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I complete what is lacking in Christ’s afflictions for the sake of his body, that is, the church" (Col. 1:24).

Even though Christ’s sufferings were superabundant (far more than needed to pay for anything), Paul spoke of completing what was "lacking" in Christ’s sufferings. If this mode of speech was permissible for Paul, it is permissible for us, even though the Catholic language about indulgences is far less shocking than was Paul’s language about his own role in salvation.

Catholics should not be defensive about indulgences. They are based on principles straight from the Bible, and we can be confident not only that indulgences exist, but that they are useful and worth obtaining.

Pope Paul VI declared, "[T]he Church invites all its children to think over and weigh up in their minds as well as they can how the use of indulgences benefits their lives and all Christian society.... Supported by these truths, holy Mother Church again recommends the practice of indulgences to the faithful. It has been very dear to Christian people for many centuries as well as in our own day. Experience proves this" (Indulgentarium Doctrina, 9, 11).

 

HOW TO GAIN AN INDULGENCE

To gain any indulgence you must be a Catholic in a state of grace. You must be a Catholic in order to be under the Church’s jurisdiction, and you must be in a state of grace because apart from God’s grace none of your actions are fundamentally pleasing to God (meritorious). You also must have at least the habitual intention of gaining an indulgence by the act performed.

To gain a partial indulgence, you must perform with a contrite heart the act to which the indulgence is attached.

To gain a plenary indulgence you must perform the act with a contrite heart, plus you must go to confession (one confession may suffice for several plenary indulgences), receive Holy Communion, and pray for the pope’s intentions. (An Our Father and a Hail Mary said for the pope’s intentions are sufficient, although you are free to substitute other prayers of your own choice.) The final condition is that you must be free from all attachment to sin, including venial sin.

If you attempt to receive a plenary indulgence, but are unable to meet the last condition, a partial indulgence is received instead.

Below are indulgences listed in the Handbook of Indulgences (New York: Catholic Book Publishing, 1991). Note that there is an indulgence for Bible reading. So, rather than discouraging Bible reading, the Catholic Church promotes it by giving indulgences for it! (This was the case long before Vatican II.)

• An act of spiritual communion, expressed in any devout formula whatsoever, is endowed with a partial indulgence.

• A partial indulgence is granted the Christian faithful who devoutly spend time in mental prayer.

• A plenary indulgence is granted when the rosary is recited in a church or oratory or when it is recited in a family, a religious community, or a pious association. A partial indulgence is granted for its recitation in all other circumstances.

• A partial indulgence is granted the Christian faithful who read sacred Scripture with the veneration due God’s word and as a form of spiritual reading. The indulgence will be a plenary one when such reading is done for at least one-half hour [provided the other conditions are met].

• A partial indulgence is granted to the Christian faithful who devoutly sign themselves with the cross while saying the customary formula: "In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen."

In summary, the practice of indulgences neither takes away nor adds to the work of Christ. It is his work, through his body the Church, raising up children in his own likeness. "The Christian who seeks to purify himself of his sin and to become holy with the help of God’s grace is not alone. ‘The life of each of God’s children is joined in Christ and through Christ in a wonderful way to the life of all the other Christian brethren in the supernatural unity of the Mystical Body of Christ, as in a single mystical person’" (Catechism of the Catholic Church 1474 [Indulgentarium Doctrina 5]).

NIHIL OBSTAT: I have concluded that the materials
presented in this work are free of doctrinal or moral errors.
Bernadeane Carr, STL, Censor Librorum, August 10, 2004

IMPRIMATUR: In accord with 1983 CIC 827
permission to publish this work is hereby granted.
+Robert H. Brom, Bishop of San Diego, August 10, 2004

www.catholic.com

Source for my previous post: www.iclnet.org

9 posted on 10/31/2010 7:39:37 AM PDT by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7

thx thx.


10 posted on 10/31/2010 7:41:02 AM PDT by Quix (Times are a changin' INSURE you have believed in your heart & confessed Jesus as Lord Come NtheFlesh)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7

11 posted on 10/31/2010 7:41:52 AM PDT by JoeProBono (A closed mouth gathers no feet - Visualize)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Quix

tsk tsk.


12 posted on 10/31/2010 7:42:28 AM PDT by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: annalex; Amityschild; Brad's Gramma; Captain Beyond; Cvengr; DvdMom; firebrand; ...

Just because you don’t have the decoder ring!


13 posted on 10/31/2010 7:44:42 AM PDT by Quix (Times are a changin' INSURE you have believed in your heart & confessed Jesus as Lord Come NtheFlesh)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7; Gamecock; Alex Murphy

Please don’t think I’m trying to be impertinent or anything, but I was just wondering in all innocence—do you folks ever run into people who complain about Reformation Day and say “this feast is not in the Bible—it’s a tradition of men”? You know...the kind of people who don’t celebrate Christmas and Easter?

That just occurred to me—if so, I’d find it kinda funny. :)


14 posted on 10/31/2010 8:09:31 AM PDT by Claud
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7

Thanks, Mom!!

Hoss


15 posted on 10/31/2010 8:21:14 AM PDT by HossB86
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7
Amen and thanks for posting this. I love Brother Martin's words:

"And though this world, with devils filled, should threaten to undo us, we will not fear, for God hath willed his truth to triumph through us"

16 posted on 10/31/2010 8:30:52 AM PDT by strongbow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7
Ways to celebrate Reformation Day.
17 posted on 10/31/2010 8:59:34 AM PDT by BibChr ("...behold, they have rejected the word of the LORD, so what wisdom is in them?" [Jer. 8:9])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7

Verse 3, translated from the German in 1868:

Though devils all the world should fill,
All eager to devour us.
We tremble not, we fear no ill,
They shall not overpower us.
This world’s prince may still
Scowl fierce as he will,
He can harm us none,
He’s judged; the deed is done;
One little word can fell him.


18 posted on 10/31/2010 9:04:12 AM PDT by Guyin4Os (A messianic ger-tsedek)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7

I am glad of Martin Luther even though he was given the “works” for daring to question the Catholic Church in its day !


19 posted on 10/31/2010 9:32:15 AM PDT by CORedneck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock
"We are checking out a new church today."

Perhaps them most telling statement of the thread. With each new schism and denomination Protestants move further from the Revealed Word and closer to the words of men.

20 posted on 10/31/2010 9:32:45 AM PDT by Natural Law ("opera Christi non deficiunt, sed proficiunt")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: BibChr

I was going to ask if you still become Luther ..I remembered that from some years ago and recount it to reformed friends :)


21 posted on 10/31/2010 9:54:30 AM PDT by RnMomof7 (Some call me harpy..God calls me His)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7

Dr. Luther may well make a visit tonight.

Pity of it, though, is that I always miss him!


22 posted on 10/31/2010 9:55:53 AM PDT by BibChr ("...behold, they have rejected the word of the LORD, so what wisdom is in them?" [Jer. 8:9])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock
When I arrived at church today the 95 thesis's were posted on the front door ...We had an awesome sermon on what became the major issue..justification

Great Sunday !

23 posted on 10/31/2010 9:56:52 AM PDT by RnMomof7 (Some call me harpy..God calls me His)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: narses

Happy reformation day to you Nares !


24 posted on 10/31/2010 9:57:34 AM PDT by RnMomof7 (Some call me harpy..God calls me His)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: annalex

Happy Reformation day !

Could you show us where Jesus taught purgatory or indulgences?


25 posted on 10/31/2010 10:03:04 AM PDT by RnMomof7 (Some call me harpy..God calls me His)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7
"Could you show us where Jesus taught purgatory or indulgences?"

Sure, just as soon as you tell us where Jesus taught any of the five Solas and explained why you needed five "onlys".

26 posted on 10/31/2010 10:27:36 AM PDT by Natural Law ("opera Christi non deficiunt, sed proficiunt")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Claud; RnMomof7; Gamecock; Alex Murphy

Nobody is opposed to traditions, like Easter and Christmas or annually recognizing any event, even as much as a birthday.

It’s traditions taught as if they were oracles of God Himself, on level with Scripture and necessary for salvation that people object to. It’s making up traditions hundreds or thousand(s) of years after the fact, when all true facts have been lost in time and there’s no way to verify or corroborate them, and declaring them as truth that people object to.


27 posted on 10/31/2010 10:34:37 AM PDT by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: metmom
Nobody is opposed to traditions, like Easter and Christmas or annually recognizing any event, even as much as a birthday.

You'd be surprised metmom. Every Christmas and Easter around here the anti-holiday folks come out of the woodwork. Anyhow, have a good day!

28 posted on 10/31/2010 10:44:45 AM PDT by Claud
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7

Its not over. Another 15,000 post thread?


29 posted on 10/31/2010 10:45:55 AM PDT by daniel1212 ( ("Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out," Acts 3:19))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: annalex
A partial indulgence is granted to the Christian faithful who devoutly sign themselves with the cross while saying the customary formula: "In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen."

Why on earth don't I see Catholics signing themselves and reciting this "customary formula" repeatedly, non-stop ("devoutly", of course)? At about 3 seconds per repetition, a 30 minute bus ride to work should be good for around 600 reps. Think of all the plenary indulgences to be had! The more the better, right?
30 posted on 10/31/2010 11:08:10 AM PDT by armydoc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: armydoc
My bad. I meant "think of all the partial indulgences to be had".
31 posted on 10/31/2010 11:10:31 AM PDT by armydoc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Claud; metmom
Please don’t think I’m trying to be impertinent or anything, but I was just wondering in all innocence—do you folks ever run into people who complain about Reformation Day and say “this feast is not in the Bible—it’s a tradition of men”? You know...the kind of people who don’t celebrate Christmas and Easter? That just occurred to me—if so, I’d find it kinda funny. :)

This is not a "holy day" honoring a "saint" (although no doubt Martin Luther is a Saint..)This is a day honoring the Gospel of Christ...and that is the good news of the bible..

The saved are free to celebrate holidays BTW because we enjoy the liberty in Christ

Act 10:15 And the voice [spake] unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, [that] call not thou common.

2Cr 3:17 Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord [is], there [is] liberty.

Happy Reformation day

32 posted on 10/31/2010 11:30:52 AM PDT by RnMomof7 (Some call me harpy..God calls me His)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: armydoc
Why on earth don't I see Catholics signing themselves and reciting this "customary formula" repeatedly, non-stop ("devoutly", of course)? At about 3 seconds per repetition, a 30 minute bus ride to work should be good for around 600 reps. Think of all the plenary indulgences to be had! The more the better, right?

They may actually get into heaven before they even die :)

33 posted on 10/31/2010 11:34:12 AM PDT by RnMomof7 (Some call me harpy..God calls me His)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Natural Law
RNMOM="Could you show us where Jesus taught purgatory or indulgences?"
NL=Sure, just as soon as you tell us where Jesus taught any of the five Solas and explained why you needed five "onlys".

LOL No mention of purgatory or indulgences huh?

Jesus actually taught Sola Scripture by His very example.. He did not initiate any new traditions. He used the OT scriptures to answer Satan and to teach who He is.. and the God ordained Holidays tat pointed to Him.., nothing new ..

In all His teachings He referred to the divine authority of the Old Testament (Mt. 5:17-18; 8:17; 12:40-42; Lk. 4:18-21; 10:25-28; 15:29-31; 17:32; 24:25-45; Jn. 5:39-47). He quoted the Old Testament 78 times, the Pentateuch alone 26 times. He quoted from Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Deuteronomy, Psalms, Proverbs, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, Hosea, Amos, Jonah, Micah, and Malachi. He referred to the Old Testament as The Scriptures, or the word of God.
God's Plan for Man

Sola Scriptura

34 posted on 10/31/2010 11:46:54 AM PDT by RnMomof7 (Some call me harpy..God calls me His)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: CORedneck
he was given

Theses are the Key words here..works ordained by God, not to be saved :)

35 posted on 10/31/2010 11:48:52 AM PDT by RnMomof7 (Some call me harpy..God calls me His)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7
"Jesus actually taught Sola Scripture by His very example.."

LOL....your best defense of Sola Scriptura is not found in Scripture.....LOL. Do you not see how ridiculous that is?

36 posted on 10/31/2010 11:52:33 AM PDT by Natural Law ("opera Christi non deficiunt, sed proficiunt")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Natural Law
LOL....your best defense of Sola Scriptura is not found in Scripture.....LOL. Do you not see how ridiculous that is?

Funny I thought the words and teachings of Christ meant something...

37 posted on 10/31/2010 12:05:28 PM PDT by RnMomof7 (Some call me harpy..God calls me His)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7
"Funny I thought the words and teachings of Christ meant something..."

They mean everything which is why your Sola's and little "reformation" are so ridiculous.

38 posted on 10/31/2010 12:10:36 PM PDT by Natural Law ("opera Christi non deficiunt, sed proficiunt")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: annalex
Say there's a (hypothetical) Catholic that trusts in Christ's work through the Church to remit the eternal punishment for his sins. However, his attitude regarding temporal punishment is completely different. Far from taking advantage of indulgences to remit this punishment, he avoids them. In fact, he fervently prays that he receive full punishment in the form of suffering (on earth and/or purgatory). He asks God that, when he is in purgatory, that no indulgences be applied to him. Bring on the burn, good and hard, for as long as it takes. He figures that since there are two equally valid ways of paying the temporal punishment (self suffering or the work of Christ and the Saints via indulgences), he is going to be a "man's man" and take it himself. He boasts the same. Anything wrong with this attitude? Would it be sinful?
39 posted on 10/31/2010 12:48:01 PM PDT by armydoc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7
Today at Mass, our priest was speaking of voting and said, "If you think it's not important to go vote, then go to the grave of a vet who died in a war and tell him that he was a fool to die for our country, since what we do to help our country doesn't really matter."

He also said since today is "Reformation Day," we should "go hug a Lutheran or maybe take them out to lunch." He also remembered that the first time we were allowed to play "A Mighty Fortress Is Our God" at Mass, several of his priest friends walked out in protest.

Anyway, from a 33-year Missouri-Synod Lutheran (now a Catholic for 26 years), since it's already past lunchtime, I'm sending a big cyber-hug instead. God be with you and please pray for some great and positive pro-life, pro-family, election returns.
40 posted on 10/31/2010 1:46:51 PM PDT by mlizzy (Hail Mary, full of grace, the Lord is with thee ...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mlizzy

I am not a Lutheran but I hold Martin Luther in great respect, it is always a trial to go against any authority ... I too am praying for pro life, pro family and pro religious freedom election .


41 posted on 10/31/2010 2:01:47 PM PDT by RnMomof7 (Some call me harpy..God calls me His)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Natural Law; RnMomof7

SS does not mean Solo Scriptura, but that all that it provides for, including the magisterium, are subject to the Scriptures.

And what is found in Scripture is

  1. That the word of God was progressively written down Scripture and became the authority that new revelation as well as doctrine was examined by.

  2. That the instruments and stewards of the Scriptures are to be subject to it.

  3. That when men assumed to teach for doctrines the commandments of men, they were reproved by the Scriptures.

  4. That is was Scriptural faith that the church exists by and overcomes.

  5. That the authenticity of the church is based upon upon Scriptural; faith, not a claim to formal historical lineage.

  6. That the church is grounded in and supportive of the truth, but nowhere is it stated that all the teaching office will teach will be infallible, based upon their formulaic declaration.

  7. That the Lord invoked the Scriptures to correct false doctrine as well as establish that He was the Messiah and work, and that the N.T. teaching was grounded in the Scriptures.

  8. That noble souls examined the preaching of the very apostles by the Scriptures.

  9. That the Scriptures are the only objective authority that is affirmed to be 100% inspired by God.

  10. That the Scriptures are able to make one wise to salvation and "perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works."

See http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/Sola_Scriptura.html for texts and more. Thanks be to God.

42 posted on 10/31/2010 4:16:14 PM PDT by daniel1212 ( ("Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out," Acts 3:19))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: daniel1212
""SS does not mean Solo Scriptura"

OK, so Sola Scriptura doesn't mean Sola Scriptura, riiiiiiigghht. Can you elaborate on what the definition of is is?

43 posted on 10/31/2010 4:26:17 PM PDT by Natural Law ("opera Christi non deficiunt, sed proficiunt")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Natural Law

While there is not universally precise statement as to what SS means (nor is there an infallible list of all infallible defined texts, but which are few) it basically entails what i said, that the Scriptures are the supreme and only infallible authority for doctrine, versus “sola ecclesia,” which places an assuredly infallible magisterium as supreme.

In addition, the Scriptures, being able to make the wise unto salvation, are normally formally sufficient for that, so one could read a sermon in Acts and be saved, and that the Scriptures also materially provide for the teaching office, and for God “speaking” to a believers heart, as well as using secular sources, but the key is all are subject the only objective authority we have, that being the Scriptures. And which has the testimony to prove its inspiration.

The obvious problem here is that this method makes obedience subject to the qualified assent of each believer, thus promoting disunity, versus a unity by “assent of faith,” by implicit confidence in an assuredly infallible magisterium (AIM). However, unity itself is not a goal of Godliness, and division because of truth is necessary and better than unity in error. (Ex. 23:2; Lk. 12:51-53; 1Cor. 11:19) And the quality of the unity resulting from Berean type hearts and its method is greater in quality, (Acts 4:32) even if not in quantity, than that which is based upon confidence in men.

Meanwhile, it is those who do not hold the Scriptures as supreme who deviate the most from core foundational truths which SS churches contend for, or they hold to such Scripturally unwarranted doctrines such as praying to the departed.

For more see the link i posted.


44 posted on 10/31/2010 5:30:41 PM PDT by daniel1212 ( ("Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out," Acts 3:19))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: daniel1212
That the Scriptures are the only objective authority that is affirmed to be 100% inspired by God.

Except that the Scriptures are utterly authoritative, but they are not an authority. An authority would have to be a person*, capable of an exercise of will and judgement, who could come back to you and say:

An authority can do things like that. An authoritative text (by itself) cannot. That is why even Protestant denominations have human authority structures -- at least larger Protestant denominations that take doctrine seriously do. (Try preaching Arminianism in a PCA church. It won't be a Bible that takes away your pastorate.)

I agree with you that the Magisterium is bound by the Scriptures (so does the Magisterium), but they are bound by the Church's interpretation of the Scriptures throughout her history (= tradition), not by my own or any individual's understanding of them.

*I'm using the word "person" in the metaphysical sense, not as a synonym for "human being". God is a person (in fact, he's Three Persons), and so He can be an authority, and in fact he is the ultimate authority.

45 posted on 10/31/2010 5:40:35 PM PDT by Campion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Campion

Thank you for a serious reply. Better for me to say then that Scripture is the only objective (tangible) authoritative source which is assuredly inspired by God, so that SS supremely rests on “the authority of Holy Scriptures” and that men have not the same “authority as Scripture.”

I do know that the divine and infallible magisterium of the Church is said to rest also on the authority of Holy Scripture, but as the only assuredly infallible interpreter of it, and what its revelation consists of, the IM is effectively holding to sola ecclesia.

The question is, upon what basis is one to have assurance that the magisterium is assuredly infallible (according to its criteria), and thus cannot be wrong?


46 posted on 10/31/2010 6:21:57 PM PDT by daniel1212 ( ("Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out," Acts 3:19))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7

I agree 100% with what you said about our freedom to celebrate holidays. And I’m not arguing the appropriateness of the day here, obviously if you think the Reformation was a good thing for the Church you will commemorate it—that’s not hard for me to understand in the least.

My point is to ask whether the same people that get on our case about feast days are also getting on yours about Reformation Day

I should research whether the Puritans celebrated it...they were generally anti-holiday. Hmmm....


47 posted on 10/31/2010 6:49:57 PM PDT by Claud
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7; Natural Law
Could you show us where Jesus taught purgatory or indulgences?

St. Paul teaches purification of the elect after death by the process similar to fire in 1 Cor. 3:9-15. The need to do penance is all over the Bible, starting with Matthew 4:17. How exactly to do penance is for the Church to decide (Mt 16:19).

I join Natural Law in his question, more precisely, where did Jesus taught that we are saved by faith alone (this is not the same as praising faith or saying that faith is necessary) or that everything that the Church should ever teach should be recorded in the yet-to-be-written New Testament?

Mind you this is a serious question that goes to the cornerstone of the Protestant error. Your confession is based on a lie. Reformation started the lie. Strange that anyone feels like celebrating.

48 posted on 11/01/2010 5:39:44 AM PDT by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: armydoc
Why on earth don't I see Catholics signing themselves and reciting this "customary formula" repeatedly, non-stop

Believe it or not, some do. Blesed are those who have the freedom to do so, and thank God for the monks and nuns. Most of us, however, have families to feed, and no, praying instead of doing the necessary work is not a Catholic virtue.

[post 39] Say there's a (hypothetical) Catholic that trusts in Christ's work through the Church to remit the eternal punishment for his sins. However, his attitude regarding temporal punishment is completely different. Far from taking advantage of indulgences to remit this punishment, he avoids them. [...] Anything wrong with this attitude? Would it be sinful?

It would be stupid, I think. The objective is to go to heaven, and the only way to get to heaven is to become a saint. If that is your desire, God will provide the way, as you live or at death. Prayers of others, when answered, are also divine will; it is stupid and serves no purpose to reject it.

49 posted on 11/01/2010 5:52:01 AM PDT by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: annalex

Faith Alone directly from Jesus Christ Himself.

Luke 23:39-43 ESV
39 One of the criminals who were hanged railed at him, saying, “Are you not the Christ? Save yourself and us!” 40 But the other rebuked him, saying, “Do you not fear God, since you are under the same sentence of condemnation? 41 And we indeed justly, for we are receiving the due reward of our deeds; but this man has done nothing wrong.” 42 And he said, “Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.” 43 And he said to him, “Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise.”

I’ve never heard of Purgatory described as paradise... What good work could the criminal possibly have done to aid in his single statement of Faith to earn paradise, rebuke the other criminal?


50 posted on 11/01/2010 6:46:17 PM PDT by cdaler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-63 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson