|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Indulgences
|
fletcher christian
Mutinous Seadog
# 13919
|
Posted
Can someone explain the concept of indulgences to me? I'm genuinely interested in trying to understand it, so comments like, 'well it's a load of old crap' won't be particularly helpful.
--------------------
'God is love insaturable, love impossible to describe'
Staretz Silouan
Posts: 5235 | From: a prefecture | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
IngoB
Sentire cum Ecclesia
# 8700
|
Posted
Say you steal a sizeable amount of money from someone. Later, you repent of that crime and ask that person for forgiveness. They do forgive you. Anything missing? Yes, you should still give that money back (as far as you can)! Say you murder someone. Later, you repent of that crime and ask the victim's family for forgiveness. They do forgive you. Anything missing? Yes, you should still go to prison and serve as sentence for the murder.
The basic point is that forgiveness does not as such remove the consequences of sins. There are still reparations to be made, there still is satisfaction to be given. There is a kind of duty to "pay back" for what one has done, whether literally (as in giving back money in the above example) or in some penitential transfer (as in serving a prison sentence in the above example). We also see this in the sacrament of confession, where a penance is attached to the absolution.
This "pay back" duty for one's sins is called "temporal punishment". It's called temporal, because it clearly has a finite scope bound to this world. In contrast, forgiveness has eternal scope bound to the world to come. If your sins are forgiven, then you go to heaven. If not, then you go to hell. (Even if you do not believe that, the principle remains: forgiveness is about the sin as such.) "Temporal punishment" is however measured in terms of this world: if you steal $100, then you should give back $100 (or perhaps a bit more, if that theft lost interest, caused hardship...). It can also occur in this world (for example, David was temporally punished in this world for his sins in the OT). But in RC teaching if there is unfinished business as far as "temporal punishment" goes, when you die, then that continues in purgatory (unless you go to hell, in which case you will get punished anyway). One of the functions of purgatory is to "even the score" on the consequences of sins before we get to heaven. You can see this as a separate function to "purifying" us for heaven, but it really is part of that (just as a repentant murderer may actually be "happy" to serve a prison sentence for his crime).
This brings us finally to indulgences. The traditional way of looking at this is to say that the Church has a "spiritual treasure" with which she can "pay off" the temporal punishment of individuals. A more contemporary analogy would be simply a parole board. The Church can release certain individuals that otherwise would have to suffer further temporal punishment. This does not forgive sins then. Rather, it removes the just consequences of a forgiven sin in an act of mercy. Indulgences are typically attached to doing certain things, which demonstrate particular faithfulness or charity. Again, this is a bit like the parole board considering whether the prisoner has reformed his character, according to their "objective" behaviour.
The historical abuse stems from over-selling (literally) the efficacy of indulgences, as if one could buy one's way into heaven. In truth though, this is a very humane practice. The Church can through indulgences honour the efforts of people trying to reform their lives. A saint who never (or very rarely) sins does not need indulgences, since he is not accumulating temporal punishment or rapidly paying it off through his own meritorious life. But for those of us who struggle hard with sin, and fail to be heroes of faith and charity most of the time, indulgences are like encouraging bonus points we get where we did make an effort.
--------------------
They’ll have me whipp’d for speaking true; thou’lt have me whipp’d for lying; and sometimes I am whipp’d for holding my peace. - The Fool in King Lear
Posts: 12010 | From: Gone fishing | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
So the pope said that anyone who prayed with him in person or via media during his address, who had been forgiven sins, was released form the obligaiton of further temporal punishment/penance for those sins ?
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
fletcher christian
Mutinous Seadog
# 13919
|
Posted
Thanks Ingo. Can you explain the concept of the church's 'Spiritual treasure'?
--------------------
'God is love insaturable, love impossible to describe'
Staretz Silouan
Posts: 5235 | From: a prefecture | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Autenrieth Road
Shipmate
# 10509
|
Posted
How does the Catholic church know that purgatory exists and that temporal punishment and indulgences work this way?
[ 14. March 2013, 13:41: Message edited by: Autenrieth Road ]
--------------------
Truth
Posts: 9559 | From: starlight | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208
|
Posted
There are plenty of theologians these days that want to distance themselves from the idea of paying satisfaction for our sins through suffering in purgatory. They tend to go for the idea of purgation after death- that after death we continue to struggle to be conformed to the image of God in us until we enter the beatific vision. The Church on earth continues to pray for these souls, and an indulgence is one of these prayers, which in Roman Catholicism is frequently performed after an offering is given to the Church. This isn't a payment, so much as the piety of the offering is part of the work of grace in the prayer.
--------------------
Don't give up yet, no, don't ever quit/ There's always a chance of a critical hit. Ghost Mice
Posts: 9148 | From: Boston, MA | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Autenrieth Road:
How does the Catholic church know that purgatory exists and that temporal punishment and indulgences work this way?
Presumably the same way they know that unforgiven sinners end up in Hell or that saints go to Heaven.
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Laurelin
Shipmate
# 17211
|
Posted
On which sections of Scripture does the Catholic Church precisely base this belief in indulgences on?
Serious question, not a baiting one. (Please note, I am not a wild-eyed, ranting Paisleyite who thinks the Church of Rome is the Whore of Babylon.)
I ask in all genuine perplexity, not from any desire to offend ... Why does the Catholic Church make stuff so complicated? The Christian faith has enough inherent mystery without adding more ... stuff. Especially if there is no direct biblical evidence for the stuff. The latter point is of paramount importance to me as an evangelical.
I take great comfort in majestic verses like the following:
2 Corinthians 5:21
For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.
Romans 5:1
Therefore, since we have been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ.
1 John 1:9
If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
Ephesians 2:8
For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God,
Romans 5:18
Therefore, as one trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all.
In Protestant thought, there is only one NT passage that ever hints at some kind of purification after death, and it's about the quality of what we did for the Lord on earth. We are still saved, but as those 'escaping through the flames'.
1 Corinthians 3:11-15
... For no one can lay any foundation other than the one already laid, which is Jesus Christ. If anyone builds on this foundation using gold, silver, costly stones, wood, hay or straw, their work will be shown for what it is, because the Day will bring it to light. It will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test the quality of each person’s work. If what has been built survives, the builder will receive a reward. If it is burned up, the builder will suffer loss but yet will be saved – even though only as one escaping through the flames.
This passage is enough to make us want to pull our socks up, so to speak, and not believe in 'cheap grace', to quote Bonhoeffer, but it's nowhere near a full-blown biblical picture of the Catholic version of purgatory. Paul indicates a holy mystery, one we shouldn't take lightly, and also one which in no way hurts our salvation through Christ alone.
So, indulgences. What is the biblical justification (as opposed to the traditional)?
--------------------
"I fear that to me Siamese cats belong to the fauna of Mordor." J.R.R. Tolkien
Posts: 545 | From: The Shire | Registered: Jul 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
IngoB
Sentire cum Ecclesia
# 8700
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink:
So the pope said that anyone who prayed with him in person or via media during his address, who had been forgiven sins, was released form the obligaiton of further temporal punishment/penance for those sins?
First, the temporal punishment here has nothing to do with what secular courts would worry about. We are talking about the spiritual aspect, not the material / criminal one (I just used the criminal cases as analogy). So if you murder someone, confess, receive absolution, and then manage to get a plenary indulgence somehow, the consequence is that if you were to die on the spot, you would go straight to heaven. The consequence very much is not that you do not have to deal with "secular" justice concerning your crime while still on earth. That's not the purpose here. Second, here are the norms for obtaining a plenary indulgence (Enchiridion Indulgentiarum quarto editur (1999), translated as Manual of Indulgences (2006), text via this blog):
quote:
N20. §1. To gain a plenary indulgence, in addition to excluding all attachment to sin, even venial sin, it is necessary to perform the indulgenced work and fulfill the following three conditions: sacramental confession, Eucharistic Communion, and prayer for the intention of the Sovereign Pontiff.
§2. A single sacramental confession suffices for gaining several plenary indulgences; but Holy Communion must be received and prayer for the intention of the Holy Father must be recited for the gaining of each plenary indulgence.
§ 3. The three conditions may be fulfilled several days before or after the performance of the prescribed work; it is, however, fitting that Communion be received and the prayer for the intention of the Holy Father be said on the same day the work is performed.
§4. If the full disposition is lacking, or if the work and the three prescribed conditions are not fulfilled, saving the provisions given in Norm 24 and in Norm 25 regarding those who are “impeded,” the indulgence will only be partial.
§5. The condition of praying for the intention of the Holy Father is fully satisfied by reciting one Our Father and one Hail Mary; nevertheless, one has the option of reciting any other prayer according to individual piety and devotion, if recited for this intention.
Do you feel free of all attachment to sin, even venial sin? I thought so. This means that the "plenary" indulgence de facto will become a partial one for you. Thus it will do you some good, but how much is not specified. (It used to be the case that partial indulgences were measured in days subtracted from time in purgatory. But this is not the case any longer, and anyway, that was for indulgences partial in the granting not through the less than perfect recipient.) This explains why it may make sense to obtain multiple "plenary" indulgences: in practice they become partial, but are additive. Furthermore, as you can see you need to confess, receive the Eucharist and pray for the pope to "cash in" the indulgence. If you don't do that, you don't get it.
quote:
Originally posted by fletcher christian:
Thanks Ingo. Can you explain the concept of the church's 'Spiritual treasure'?
If we consider temporal punishment as a kind of "debt", then you can "pay off" this debt through penitential acts of faith and charity. This provides satisfaction for your offences. But we can provide satisfaction for another. Again, to use a criminal analogy: if I steal $100 from someone, and now am supposed to give it back but do not have it any more, you can step in and pay $100 for me from your own money, if you so choose. Likewise I can dedicate my acts of faith and charity to provide satisfaction for you. If we consider the saints and in particular the BVM, they vastly outdo their own needs for satisfaction throughout their holy lives. The idea is now that all this satisfactory goodness is not simply lost, but can be applied to the faithful in need on the decision of the Church. It's like a reserve fund into which we all pay in what we don't need, and from which the Church pays out. Finally, Christ Himself can be considered to have made an infinite donation of satisfactory goodness to that reserve fund. So in that sense the Church can never run out.
It would be wrong though to expect the Church to pay off all temporal punishment just because she could. The point is not for people to cheat their way out of the spiritual consequences of their acts via the Church. The point is for the Church to occasionally give people more than they deserve, so that they are encouraged to become more deserving.
quote:
Originally posted by Autenrieth Road:
How does the Catholic church know that purgatory exists and that temporal punishment and indulgences work this way?
See here under "Proofs". Frankly though, I think purgatory makes immediate sense. Arguing for it feels a bit like arguing for the existence of doormats. You just point at the muddy shoes and the clean carpet, and you are sort of done with that. Here is a text from the magisterium concering indulgences (including scripture, if you follow the footnotes). Whether you find that convincing I do not know. I believe in this mainly on the say so of the Church. (In a more than trivial sense: if nothing else, then I believe that this is within the range of things that she can validly bind and loosen.)
quote:
Originally posted by Zach82:
There are plenty of theologians these days that want to distance themselves from the idea of paying satisfaction for our sins through suffering in purgatory. They tend to go for the idea of purgation after death- that after death we continue to struggle to be conformed to the image of God in us until we enter the beatific vision.
In truth though, the latter concept is as old as the Church Fathers, and the temporal punishment bit is simply part of a sophisticated explanation of what precisely is going on in purgatory. In modern terms then, the point is that our sins generally do not leave us just because we are forgiven. We know, experientially, that getting over our sins requires more than that. If we are truly sorry for our sins, then moving on requires more than just being released from them in forgiveness. Imagine that you have an affair, and your wife catches you, but ultimately forgives you and you stay together. Is that adultery truly gone? Probably it will linger, it still requires "making good". And it may be that this lingers in your mind much longer than in the mind of your wife. And yes, if you then live a good life together, you will live this down. But it takes time and effort to righten. That sort of afterglow of sin also has no place in heaven, we must live it down, temporally, before we can join God eternally.
quote:
Originally posted by Zach82:
The Church on earth continues to pray for these souls, and an indulgence is one of these prayers, which in Roman Catholicism is frequently performed after an offering is given to the Church. This isn't a payment, so much as the piety of the offering is part of the work of grace in the prayer.
Indulgences are of course primarily not for those in purgatory, but rather for the pilgrims on earth (who may end up in purgatory upon dying). And in a strict sense the Church can only determine the effects of indulgences for those living in this world, because that is her "jurisdiction". As with all things, we can pray to God that he may transfer benefits due to us to those in purgatory. But we do not know to what extent God will honour such prayers.
--------------------
They’ll have me whipp’d for speaking true; thou’lt have me whipp’d for lying; and sometimes I am whipp’d for holding my peace. - The Fool in King Lear
Posts: 12010 | From: Gone fishing | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Hawk
Semi-social raptor
# 14289
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Autenrieth Road:
How does the Catholic church know that purgatory exists and that temporal punishment and indulgences work this way?
I think it's because they say it does.
--------------------
“We are to find God in what we know, not in what we don't know." Dietrich Bonhoeffer
See my blog for 'interesting' thoughts
Posts: 1739 | From: Oxford, UK | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Hawk
Semi-social raptor
# 14289
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
Finally, Christ Himself can be considered to have made an infinite donation of satisfactory goodness to that reserve fund. So in that sense the Church can never run out.
So therefore everyone automatically gets out of purgatory immedietly, by Christ's donation.
Simple, surely?
Except, by donation to the Church, Rome doesn't think the 'people' are the Church, but rather the 'institution'. So they decree that they need to 'bestow' on beleivers what should actually come freely to them by their faith in Christ. IMO (as a heretic Protestant admittedly), that is at the root of all Rome's errors, that it places itself between the faithful and their God.
As well as Rome's insistence on using human legal analogies to construct its concepts of God's grace. The two are entirely dissimilar. God's grace is unfair, impossible, incredible, holy, and total. It is not akin to our attempts to expiate the consequences of human crime.
When God removes our sin, it is cast away as far as the east is from the west (Ps 103:12), He remembers our sins no more (Is 43:25). There are no more spritual consequences. That is what is so amazing about Grace! And why it is so hard for us to grasp.
[ 14. March 2013, 17:25: Message edited by: Hawk ]
--------------------
“We are to find God in what we know, not in what we don't know." Dietrich Bonhoeffer
See my blog for 'interesting' thoughts
Posts: 1739 | From: Oxford, UK | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
IngoB
Sentire cum Ecclesia
# 8700
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Laurelin:
Why does the Catholic Church make stuff so complicated? The Christian faith has enough inherent mystery without adding more ... stuff.
However, reality is complicated. People in particular are complicated. Forgiveness alone does not right everything that sin sets amiss. Catholicism has always been realistic and comprehensive, rather than idealistic and parsimonious.
quote:
Originally posted by Laurelin:
Especially if there is no direct biblical evidence for the stuff. The latter point is of paramount importance to me as an evangelical.
So? It is not of paramount importance to Catholics, who base their faith on scripture and tradition, and who believe in a continued line of apostles who - guided by the Holy Spirit - provide a cumulative exposition of Christian truths. Why do I have to argue a Catholic truth in Protestant terms, if I think that Protestant terms are fundamentally wrong?
All of this has really grown out of the core Christian practice of praying for one's dead. If you accept that this ancient tradition is not only pious, but true, then you will end up with some version of purgatory. (Not necessarily the Catholic version, more goes into the making of that...) And if there is such a things as purgatory, then a pastoral need arises which the Church can answer through the authority given to her. (Not necessarily through indulgences, which has other roots as well...)
quote:
Originally posted by Laurelin:
1 Corinthians 3:11-15 ... This passage is enough to make us want to pull our socks up, so to speak, and not believe in 'cheap grace', to quote Bonhoeffer, but it's nowhere near a full-blown biblical picture of the Catholic version of purgatory.
Of course it is not a full-blown biblical picture of the Catholic version of purgatory. That's what the Catholic Church in large part exists for, to bring the full-blown picture of Christian faith to life from scripture and tradition, with the help of theology and philosophy. The idea that the bible is a kind of closed and complete manual of all things Divine, that requires merely reading out loud to answer all question of faith and morals is just ... well, words charitably fail me.
quote:
Originally posted by Laurelin:
So, indulgences. What is the biblical justification (as opposed to the traditional)?
I've linked to a text of the magisterium above. See if it satisfies you. But this is not something that is abundantly clear from "scripture alone".
--------------------
They’ll have me whipp’d for speaking true; thou’lt have me whipp’d for lying; and sometimes I am whipp’d for holding my peace. - The Fool in King Lear
Posts: 12010 | From: Gone fishing | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208
|
Posted
I, unusually for an Episcopalian I admit, am perfectly at peace with the idea that punishment is part of redemption. "Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord" after all.
My sense of the today's dialogue in the Church is more about how to frame purgation, and how far to take the explanations given to us by tradition. There seems to be some dissatisfaction with the idea, even among perfectly Catholic theologians, with the idea that God is a banker keeping a ledger of sins and good deeds. Is purgatory about repaying a debt that God demands because we deserve it, or is it about struggling for sanctification. The latter seems to me pretty compatible to what IngoB is saying.
[ 14. March 2013, 17:42: Message edited by: Zach82 ]
--------------------
Don't give up yet, no, don't ever quit/ There's always a chance of a critical hit. Ghost Mice
Posts: 9148 | From: Boston, MA | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Laurelin
Shipmate
# 17211
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
Forgiveness alone does not right everything that sin sets amiss.
*blinks* Christ's sacrifice on the Cross most certainly 'sets right everything that sin sets amiss'. In spades. quote:
Once and for all.
And then, in His grace, His righteousness is imputed to us. Feeble, imperfect, fallible us.
Then we must work out our salvation 'with fear and trembling'. Sanctification is the work of a lifetime, the Spirit's application of Christ's righteousness to our lives. No, we're not perfect overnight. No, we're not passive in this process. Yes, faith without works is dead. ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
quote:
Catholicism has always been realistic and comprehensive, rather than idealistic and parsimonious.
'Justification by faith alone' seems pretty realistic and comprehensive to me. ![[Cool]](cool.gif)
quote:
Why do I have to argue a Catholic truth in Protestant terms, if I think that Protestant terms are fundamentally wrong?
I'm not asking you to. As someone who is not convinced by the doctrine of indulgences simply because it's a Catholic thing, I am genuinely interested in finding out why people believe what they believe. Please note, my particular question is to do with indulgences ... not praying for the departed per se, which I haven't really touched on, and is a concept I'm more open to. My usual reaction on hearing of someone's death is 'Lord, have mercy on them'.
quote:
The idea that the bible is a kind of closed and complete manual of all things Divine, that requires merely reading out loud to answer all question of faith and morals is just ... well, words charitably fail me.
Us quaint, funny Protestants, eh ...
Closed? Of course it's closed, in one very significant sense: as a Catholic, you believe that the canon is closed. So do I.
And you must know that most Protestants don't just regard the Bible as something to be 'merely read aloud' - give me a break. We think the Bible contains the very words of God, so we apply those words of life to our lives because they impact the way we live. (Man, that was an awful sentence - I'm in a hurry.)
quote:
But this is not something that is abundantly clear from "scripture alone".
From your POV. As a Protestant, indulgences are of no interest to me whatsoever personally, since I don't believe in them.
But when I have time, I will certainly check out the links you've provided, since I asked the question, and I am genuinely interested to see where the doctrine comes from.
[ 14. March 2013, 18:08: Message edited by: Laurelin ]
--------------------
"I fear that to me Siamese cats belong to the fauna of Mordor." J.R.R. Tolkien
Posts: 545 | From: The Shire | Registered: Jul 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
IngoB
Sentire cum Ecclesia
# 8700
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Hawk:
So therefore everyone automatically gets out of purgatory immedietly, by Christ's donation. Simple, surely?
Or God could put us all into heaven right this very instant. Christ's sacrifice could foot the bill for that as well, surely? Yet that is not what is happening. So maybe infinite means do not make for such simple solutions after all.
quote:
Originally posted by Hawk:
That is what is so amazing about Grace! And why it is so hard for us to grasp.
Indeed. Now, think about that a bit more. For to be with God, it is not sufficient for God to be OK with you. You must also be OK with God. And perhaps it will take some time for you to come to terms with grace that is so hard to grasp? If you really wronged someone, and you really repented, and you really asked for forgiveness and really received that forgiveness - is that sin really, really gone? In your heart? Or is there perhaps a pain left, a dissonance, a dissatisfaction? When can you forgive yourself? Truly, I say to you, you will never get out till you have paid the last penny. (Matt 5:26) That God has opened the prison door does not mean that you dare to leave your cell. How long after a forgiven adultery until you can look your partner into the eyes as before? A month? A year? A decade? Well, how long after a forgiven sinful life until you dare facing God?
This is about temporal punishment. This is not about the eternal life. One day you will walk through that open door, with every penny paid. But for most of us it isn't going to be easy. Because we sure made a mess of things. And grace is not simply a clean slate, a whitewash. The resurrected Christ bore the marks of his torturous death. Our tears will be dried, not uncried.
--------------------
They’ll have me whipp’d for speaking true; thou’lt have me whipp’d for lying; and sometimes I am whipp’d for holding my peace. - The Fool in King Lear
Posts: 12010 | From: Gone fishing | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208
|
Posted
quote:
Justification by faith alone' seems pretty realistic and comprehensive to me. [Cool]
Do you have faith, though? Speaking for myself, I would imagine that, if I really believed, I would be less hateful, less wrathful, less slothful... My life of faith has been a struggle, involving lots of prayer. Indulgences are just one of the sorts of prayer in that process.
--------------------
Don't give up yet, no, don't ever quit/ There's always a chance of a critical hit. Ghost Mice
Posts: 9148 | From: Boston, MA | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Rhythm Methodist
Shipmate
# 17064
|
Posted
While it may be immensely difficult to find scriptural justification for 'purgatory', it is a relatively simple matter to ascertain the motivation for this teaching....and (of course)the indulgences which accompany it.
As Luther wrote to the Archbishop of Mainz: "Under your most distinguished name, papal indulgences are offered all across the land for the construction of St. Peter. Now, I do not so much complain about the quacking of the preachers, which I haven’t heard; but I bewail the gross misunderstanding among the people which comes from these preachers and which they spread everywhere among common men. Evidently the poor souls believe that when they have bought indulgence letters they are then assured of their salvation. They are likewise convinced that souls escape from purgatory as soon as they have placed a contribution into the chest."
But the invention of unscriptural doctrine - in order to relieve the faithful of their resources - is not the exclusive territory of Catholicism. For many years, the Pentecostal/Charismatic element of Protestantism has been taken in by the prosperity teachers, whose message of "give to get" has raised billions of dollars worldwide. In essence, it is exactly the same scam: "God's favour can be bought, and we are his accredited representatives who you must pay".
In both cases - Catholic and Protestant - there is the elevation of the teaching of man above the Word of God, and a contemptuous portrayal of God's nature in the pursuit of financial gain.
It is an appalling witness.
Posts: 202 | From: Wales | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208
|
Posted
The fact that uninformed or impious people get indulgences wrong is not an argument against their validity. As for scriptural warrant,
quote:
Then Judas assembled his army and went to the city of Adullam. As the seventh day was coming on, they purified themselves according to the custom, and kept the sabbath there.
39 On the next day, as had now become necessary, Judas and his men went to take up the bodies of the fallen and to bring them back to lie with their kindred in the sepulchres of their ancestors. 40Then under the tunic of each one of the dead they found sacred tokens of the idols of Jamnia, which the law forbids the Jews to wear. And it became clear to all that this was the reason these men had fallen. 41So they all blessed the ways of the Lord, the righteous judge, who reveals the things that are hidden; 42and they turned to supplication, praying that the sin that had been committed might be wholly blotted out. The noble Judas exhorted the people to keep themselves free from sin, for they had seen with their own eyes what had happened as the result of the sin of those who had fallen. 43He also took up a collection, man by man, to the amount of two thousand drachmas of silver, and sent it to Jerusalem to provide for a sin-offering. In doing this he acted very well and honourably, taking account of the resurrection. 44For if he were not expecting that those who had fallen would rise again, it would have been superfluous and foolish to pray for the dead. 45But if he was looking to the splendid reward that is laid up for those who fall asleep in godliness, it was a holy and pious thought. Therefore he made atonement for the dead, so that they might be delivered from their sin. 2 Maccabees 12:38-46
[ 14. March 2013, 18:51: Message edited by: Zach82 ]
Posts: 9148 | From: Boston, MA | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
IngoB
Sentire cum Ecclesia
# 8700
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by The Rhythm Methodist:
In essence, it is exactly the same scam: "God's favour can be bought, and we are his accredited representatives who you must pay". In both cases - Catholic and Protestant - there is the elevation of the teaching of man above the Word of God, and a contemptuous portrayal of God's nature in the pursuit of financial gain. It is an appalling witness.
I largely agree, even with that particular comment of the Augustinian friar. However, two points: First, the Church and indeed the world still has St Peter in Rome, and it is a truly marvellous building. Second, in my opinion it should count as something positive before God if one supports the building of a church financially. So I do think that the abuse here is about details and even nuances, at least in the Catholic case. It is not simply bad outright.
--------------------
They’ll have me whipp’d for speaking true; thou’lt have me whipp’d for lying; and sometimes I am whipp’d for holding my peace. - The Fool in King Lear
Posts: 12010 | From: Gone fishing | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Hawk
Semi-social raptor
# 14289
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Zach82:
As for scriptural warrant...2 Maccabees 12:38-46
Maccabees isn't scripture, it's apocrypha.
[ 14. March 2013, 20:22: Message edited by: Hawk ]
--------------------
“We are to find God in what we know, not in what we don't know." Dietrich Bonhoeffer
See my blog for 'interesting' thoughts
Posts: 1739 | From: Oxford, UK | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
IngoB
Sentire cum Ecclesia
# 8700
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Hawk:
Maccabees isn't scripture, it's apocrypha.
For Protestants, yes. For Roman Catholics, Oriental Orthodox and Eastern Orthodox, 2 Maccabees is a deuterocanonical book.
--------------------
They’ll have me whipp’d for speaking true; thou’lt have me whipp’d for lying; and sometimes I am whipp’d for holding my peace. - The Fool in King Lear
Posts: 12010 | From: Gone fishing | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208
|
Posted
Anglicans read them "for example of life and instruction of manners," and in the Episcopal Church we follow their example by praying for the dead in our liturgy.
[ 14. March 2013, 20:40: Message edited by: Zach82 ]
--------------------
Don't give up yet, no, don't ever quit/ There's always a chance of a critical hit. Ghost Mice
Posts: 9148 | From: Boston, MA | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Rhythm Methodist
Shipmate
# 17064
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
I largely agree, even with that particular comment of the Augustinian friar. However, two points: First, the Church and indeed the world still has St Peter in Rome, and it is a truly marvellous building. Second, in my opinion it should count as something positive before God if one supports the building of a church financially.
I would agree with your two points. It has not been my privilege to visit St. Peter's, but I have no reason to doubt your description. And of course, one should support the building of a church. As the pastor of a smallish congregation, I've been very moved by how freely our fellowship have been giving towards our planned new-build. They know we need to do it, and continue to dig deep because they love the church and want to honour God. I guess we'd disagree about indulgences being a valid way of raising cash for building though - not least because we'd disagree about the legitimacy of teaching purgatory, and the role of payment in curtailing one's time there.
quote:
Originally posted by Zach82:
The fact that uninformed or impious people get indulgences wrong is not an argument against their validity.
Well, it's hardly an argument for their validity! But you do offer that quote from 2 Maccabees, as scriptural warrant for the practice.
I don't want to make too much of the fact that 2 Maccabees is considered apocryphal by Protestant churches, rather than scriptural....each to their own! I would note, though, that there was a significant fluidity of doctrine during this intertestamental period. Judas Maccabees was commended for his actions. Even if his making 'atonement for the dead' was more honourable in motive than efficacious, it was a worthy act. I'm not clear on how much support this concept has scripturally, outside of this incident...or that Maccabees itself offers tenable precedent for purgatory and indulgences in the forms they have been presented.
I would say,that this concept of purgatory (and man's ability to 'buy' people out of it) appears to be something of such import, that one would expect the NT to be shot-through with references, if it were so. I can't think of any NT passages which address this directly - or can realistically form the foundation of this belief - but I'm willing to learn otherwise.
Posts: 202 | From: Wales | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by The Rhythm Methodist:
Well, it's hardly an argument for their validity! But you do offer that quote from 2 Maccabees, as scriptural warrant for the practice.
I don't want to make too much of the fact that 2 Maccabees is considered apocryphal by Protestant churches, rather than scriptural....each to their own! I would note, though, that there was a significant fluidity of doctrine during this intertestamental period. Judas Maccabees was commended for his actions. Even if his making 'atonement for the dead' was more honourable in motive than efficacious, it was a worthy act. I'm not clear on how much support this concept has scripturally, outside of this incident...or that Maccabees itself offers tenable precedent for purgatory and indulgences in the forms they have been presented.
I would say,that this concept of purgatory (and man's ability to 'buy' people out of it) appears to be something of such import, that one would expect the NT to be shot-through with references, if it were so. I can't think of any NT passages which address this directly - or can realistically form the foundation of this belief - but I'm willing to learn otherwise.
I am saying nothing more than that indulgences are a good and pious custom, as evidenced by a very old precedent. But there is no obligation even for Roman Catholics to buy them- they are more of an issue for Protestants than Catholics.
Indulgences are not about buying one's way out of purgatory. They are about making a free offering to God in gratitude for his mercy. No one is saying this system can't be, or isn't, abused. But it is carried out in good faith, and God knows full well who is giving piously and who is giving presumptuously.
--------------------
Don't give up yet, no, don't ever quit/ There's always a chance of a critical hit. Ghost Mice
Posts: 9148 | From: Boston, MA | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
quote:
Originally posted by Hawk:
Maccabees isn't scripture, it's apocrypha.
For Protestants, yes. For Roman Catholics, Oriental Orthodox and Eastern Orthodox, 2 Maccabees is a deuterocanonical book.
We don't even use that term, except as imported from the west. Our OT is still the LXX.
quote:
Originally posted by The Rhythm Methodist:
I don't want to make too much of the fact that 2 Maccabees is considered apocryphal by Protestant churches, rather than scriptural....each to their own!
This is very much the problem with Protestantism.
[ 14. March 2013, 22:22: Message edited by: mousethief ]
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
tclune
Shipmate
# 7959
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Zach82:
No one is saying this system can't be, or isn't, abused.
Truly a marvel of understatement!
--Tom Clune
--------------------
This space left blank intentionally.
Posts: 8013 | From: Western MA | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by tclune:
quote:
Originally posted by Zach82:
No one is saying this system can't be, or isn't, abused.
Truly a marvel of understatement!
--Tom Clune
Personally, I like to think that a goodly portion of the names on plaques around my parish church belonged to kind, well meaning people.
[ 14. March 2013, 22:55: Message edited by: Zach82 ]
--------------------
Don't give up yet, no, don't ever quit/ There's always a chance of a critical hit. Ghost Mice
Posts: 9148 | From: Boston, MA | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras
Shipmate
# 11274
|
Posted
The merits of the passion of Our Lord Jesus Christ, of his most holy Mother and of all the saints, whatsoever good thou hast done or evil endured: be to thee for the remission of thy sins and the increase of grace..." seems a relevant formula to consider. IOW our good deeds and faithfulness under tribulation are also accounted to us for righteousness. Although the traditional formula of absolution is to do explicitly with the forgiveness of sins, the ideas contained therein aren't irrelevant to the theory of ndulgences, which involves the treasury of the merits of Christ and the saints, as well as if our own good works and faithfulness.
As in so much else, my own view is that the best understanding lies in a via media between Pre- Reformation and Reformation theologies.
Posts: 7328 | From: Delaware | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Hawk
Semi-social raptor
# 14289
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Zach82:
quote:
Originally posted by tclune:
quote:
Originally posted by Zach82:
No one is saying this system can't be, or isn't, abused.
Truly a marvel of understatement!
--Tom Clune
Personally, I like to think that a goodly portion of the names on plaques around my parish church belonged to kind, well meaning people.
We'd all like to think that.
I remember walking around a church and reading the inscription on a very impressive tomb, detailing the humility and piousness and love of justice of the occupant. There was a modern information board next to it that explained that the occupant was in fact infamous in the parish for being a vile oppressor of the townsfolk. Just because someone bought an indulgence doesn't mean they were a good person. Often there was a good reason why they felt the need to buy an indulgence.
--------------------
“We are to find God in what we know, not in what we don't know." Dietrich Bonhoeffer
See my blog for 'interesting' thoughts
Posts: 1739 | From: Oxford, UK | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208
|
Posted
quote:
Just because someone bought an indulgence doesn't mean they were a good person. Often there was a good reason why they felt the need to buy an indulgence.
I'm not denying that, as I've already said. I'm just floating the possibility that maybe some of them were not hypocrites.
Everyone thinks buying indulgences hypocritically is bad. Well, except the hypocrites.
[ 15. March 2013, 00:02: Message edited by: Zach82 ]
--------------------
Don't give up yet, no, don't ever quit/ There's always a chance of a critical hit. Ghost Mice
Posts: 9148 | From: Boston, MA | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
IngoB
Sentire cum Ecclesia
# 8700
|
Posted
Just before we get a little too carried away with talking about buying indulgences: they are not really a shopping item. There was a time when the Church gave indulgences for donations to the building of St Peter, with the attendant problems one might expect. But that's hardly what indulgences are "normally" about. For example, here's a currently valid indulgence:
quote:
A partial indulgence is granted to the faithful, who with the veneration due the Divine word make a spiritual reading from Sacred Scripture.
A plenary indulgence is granted, if this reading is continued for at least one half an hour.
Does that sound acceptable to Protestant ears, perhaps? Or how about this one:
quote:
A plenary indulgence is granted to the faithful, who spend at least three whole days in the spiritual exercises of a retreat.
Is that terribly objectionable? And you may not be a liturgically minded person, but is this really so bad:
quote:
A partial indulgence is granted to the faithful, who devoutly recite the hymn Come, Holy Spirit, Creator blest.
A plenary indulgence is granted, if the hymn is recited publicly on the 1st of January and on the feast of Pentecost.
I could go on with this. Of course, there's also stuff a Protestant might not care as much about, like adoring the blessed sacrament or as it were taking a blessing from the newly elected pope. But it really is not a money-making racket.
--------------------
They’ll have me whipp’d for speaking true; thou’lt have me whipp’d for lying; and sometimes I am whipp’d for holding my peace. - The Fool in King Lear
Posts: 12010 | From: Gone fishing | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
In my experience, conservative Reformed circles make a BIG deal about 'Godly character', the importance of reading the Bible etc. Indulgences, to my ears, sound very similar to that. I don't think either Reformed authors or the RCC have the authority to dispense indulgences or say what indulgences consist of, but I certainly think that indulgences have historically been a part of Protestantism and just called something different, 'spiritual discipline' or whatever. Just like Protestants have their own holy Tradition, venerated saints etc. They may use different terms, but the practices remain essentially the same.
--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Laurelin
Shipmate
# 17211
|
Posted
Protestants follow the Jewish canon when it comes to the Old Testament. Just sayin'. . I find the Apocrypha interesting and useful, but wouldn't take any doctrine from it, unlike the 'main body' of Scripture.
Jade ... I don't think that spiritual formation - the spiritual disciplines, Bible reading, regular prayer, etc etc etc - is the same thing as indulgences. Devout Protestants and Catholics alike believe in the importance of a godly character. Devout folk sometimes fail to live up to what they profess - if they care about spiritual integrity, transparency between them and God and others, they will seek to get right with God asap.
Ingo - a three-day retreat sounds like bliss to me, I hope I can schedule a proper retreat some time (I've had tasters in the past). Yes, I know retreats are challenging! - would love to do the Ignatian thing some time.
But indulgences seem like an unnecessary complication to me, an add-on to the all-encompassing sufficiency of the salvation Christ has won for us and the righteousness He imputed to us, even though we don't deserve it.
--------------------
"I fear that to me Siamese cats belong to the fauna of Mordor." J.R.R. Tolkien
Posts: 545 | From: The Shire | Registered: Jul 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
IngoB
Sentire cum Ecclesia
# 8700
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Laurelin:
But indulgences seem like an unnecessary complication to me, an add-on to the all-encompassing sufficiency of the salvation Christ has won for us and the righteousness He imputed to us, even though we don't deserve it.
Nobody forces you to seek indulgences. And the Protestant hang-ups about "deserving" things do not particularly concern me. Yes, we do not deserve salvation. Yes, we cannot earn salvation. That does not mean that all we do is as nothing before God.
--------------------
They’ll have me whipp’d for speaking true; thou’lt have me whipp’d for lying; and sometimes I am whipp’d for holding my peace. - The Fool in King Lear
Posts: 12010 | From: Gone fishing | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Laurelin
Shipmate
# 17211
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
And the Protestant hang-ups about "deserving" things do not particularly concern me.
With all due respect ... doesn't the whole concept of indulgences play right into that whole thing? ![[Confused]](confused.gif) Forever having to shore up spiritual brownie points with God so that we can finally appear before Him, aeons into the future?
I'm not denying that some Protestants can be hung-up. ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif) Indulgences simply strike me as being the Catholic version of the same thing. ![[Help]](graemlins/help.gif) Honest observation. Not wanting to be obnoxious.
I don't deny that I believe some kind of purification is quite possible, after death. Paul hints at it, in that passage I quoted earlier from Corinthians. That process purification may well be instant (of course, once we have died, we are out of time). I don't believe my soul will be languishing in purgatory for yonks. I simply don't. In Christ there is perfect assurance of sins forgiven.
quote:
Yes, we do not deserve salvation. Yes, we cannot earn salvation. That does not mean that all we do is as nothing before God.
On these three vital things we are agreed.
Although I will have to agree to disagree with you on the methodology.
--------------------
"I fear that to me Siamese cats belong to the fauna of Mordor." J.R.R. Tolkien
Posts: 545 | From: The Shire | Registered: Jul 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Moo
Ship's tough old bird
# 107
|
Posted
In the 1950s I was with a group that toured the Franciscan monastery in Washington.
The monk conducting the tour would say in particular places that people could gain an indulgence by saying certain prayers there.
This bothered me a bit, but I was completely turned off when we came to a chapel and he said, "This is a triple-indulgence chapel." It sounded so commercial.
Moo
--------------------
Kerygmania host
---------------------
See you later, alligator.
Posts: 20365 | From: Alleghany Mountains of Virginia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
fletcher christian
Mutinous Seadog
# 13919
|
Posted
So when the Pope granted a plenary indulgence, does that mean that there was an expectation that they had already done three days in spiritual exercises or retreat, or that they would do so after? In addition to that, is it then the belief that this would help them 'get less time in purgatory', or is that too mechanical a way of understanding it?
--------------------
'God is love insaturable, love impossible to describe'
Staretz Silouan
Posts: 5235 | From: a prefecture | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Hawk
Semi-social raptor
# 14289
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
quote:
Originally posted by Hawk:
That is what is so amazing about Grace! And why it is so hard for us to grasp.
Indeed. Now, think about that a bit more. For to be with God, it is not sufficient for God to be OK with you. You must also be OK with God. And perhaps it will take some time for you to come to terms with grace that is so hard to grasp? If you really wronged someone, and you really repented, and you really asked for forgiveness and really received that forgiveness - is that sin really, really gone? In your heart? Or is there perhaps a pain left, a dissonance, a dissatisfaction? When can you forgive yourself? Truly, I say to you, you will never get out till you have paid the last penny. (Matt 5:26) That God has opened the prison door does not mean that you dare to leave your cell. How long after a forgiven adultery until you can look your partner into the eyes as before? A month? A year? A decade? Well, how long after a forgiven sinful life until you dare facing God?
This is about temporal punishment. This is not about the eternal life. One day you will walk through that open door, with every penny paid. But for most of us it isn't going to be easy. Because we sure made a mess of things. And grace is not simply a clean slate, a whitewash. The resurrected Christ bore the marks of his torturous death. Our tears will be dried, not uncried.
A very good post, thank you. It’s really made me think and consider what I believe about this. So apologies for the length as I explore it.
From what I understand, the removal of sin in ourselves, as opposed to being made right with God, is akin to the protestant theology of the difference between justification and sanctification. As I understand it, at the moment of placing one’s trust in Christ, we are saved, justified before God, and given the hope and promise of eternal life in Christ Jesus. However, even after this justification we remain sinful, continuing daily to fail to be holy before our God. Therefore there must be a process of sanctification, of being made perfect, of being made holy so we can appear as a spotless bride before our Lord at the day of Judgement. I believe that no one completes this process before death, as the Bible categorically states that no one is without sin. No matter how long someone has followed God, or how hard they try. At death sanctification is always incomplete.
At this point I think we are largely in agreement. Where we differ is in how the process of sanctification works, and in how our sanctification is finally made complete after death.
Firstly, how does sanctification work? As I am a protestant you must forgive me if I turn to scripture for answers. In the Bible the concept is split into two aspects. Firstly, we are all already sanctified, as in the sense of being set apart for the work of God. The Bible talks about this state of being in the past tense. 1 Cor 1:2 says “to those who have been sanctified in Christ Jesus, saints by calling”. And in 1 Cor 6:11, we read “And such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, and in the Spirit of our God”. And in Heb 10:10, “And by that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all”.
But scripture also talks about being made perfect, the process of becoming holy. 1 Pet 1:15 “But as he who called you is holy, so you be holy in all your conduct”. And in Heb 12:14. “Strive for peace with everyone, and for the holiness without which no one will see the Lord”. Lev 11:44 speaks about this in terms of the difference between consecration, and clean/uncleanness, “I am the LORD your God; consecrate yourselves and be holy, because I am holy. Do not make yourselves unclean”. And in 1 Pet 1:15 “But just as he who called you is holy, so be holy in all you do.” In 2 Cor 7:1 Paul urges “let us purify ourselves from everything that contaminates body and spirit, perfecting holiness out of reverence for God”.
So we are both set aside for God at the beginning of our faith – consecrated to God, as well as made holy, or perfected through our actions. Do the urgings of the Bible encouraging us to be holy in our actions tell us that this process of being perfected is down to us? The Bible is clear that only God can sanctify though, in both aspects of this process. 1 Thess 2:12 “God chose you to be saved through the sanctifying work of the Spirit and through belief in the truth”. And again in 2 Cor 3:18 “And we, who with unveiled faces all reflect the Lord's glory, are being transformed into his likeness with ever-increasing glory, which comes from the Lord, who is the Spirit.” And Heb 9: 14 says: “How much more, then, will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself unblemished to God, cleanse our consciences from acts that lead to death, so that we may serve the living God!” Finally Heb 10:14 ties these two together in an excellent piece of phrasing: “by one sacrifice he has made perfect forever those who are being made holy”.
We have a tension in the Bible, between urging us to sanctify ourselves, and assurances that it is God who sanctifies us. I think this tension can be held together with the concept that it is the Holy Spirit which gives Christians the encouragement, guidance, wisdom and power for us to be able to make our efforts at holiness. Without God, we would be helpless, but in Christ, we can make great efforts in improving ourselves, and becoming more and more Christ-like in our attitudes and actions.
But this should never blind us to the fact that we cannot complete this on our own. It is never by our actions that we are sanctified, but by God’s power and God’s grace. We cannot work our way towards God. If we do everything right, and lead a righteous life, greater even than the examples in scripture of righteous men and women, we will still never be able to see God face-to-face. Even the most righteous prophet of Israel, Moses himself, was only allowed to see God’s back as He passed by, for if he saw God’s face he would surely die. Jacob wrestled with God and came away crippled, Paul met God on the road to Damascus and was blinded just by His radiance and His voice.
If we cannot make ourselves perfect on earth, why will Purgatory be any different? I’m not sure this has ever been explained. Personally I do not believe in conscious existence in the period between death and the resurrection, where all things will be made new. But if you do, then how will mere waiting in conscious contemplation make us holy enough to face God? This doesn’t make any sense to me. Do you think that we are not perfect on earth because we haven’t tried hard enough, or we didn’t have enough time, or there were too many physical distractions? If you believe this then I can understand why you think a couple of millennia hanging around in a celestial waiting room might make a difference. But I don’t think this is a concept that is supported in scripture. We can increase our holiness by our works, in the Spirit’s power. But can we ever make ourselves holy enough to face God? I think not. And no one is made holy enough by waiting or by more time.
How then will our sanctification be made complete? How will we, sinful as we are, face our God? It is a good question. You make a good point that we will not want to face God when we die, even if we know we are saved, we will surely be too ashamed to face Him. But you claim this can be solved by time! I don’t know about you but no amount of years in Purgatory could ever make me ready to face the Holy One in all His sovereign power and awesome glory. I cannot imagine I would ever have the courage or personal holiness to walk through that door into God’s presence under my own power. But again this is where the grace of God does what we cannot. God will raise us up, and glorify us. This is His promise, because this is His right alone. We will be transformed by God. We read this in Col 3:4 “When Christ, who is our Life, shall be manifested, then shall you also with Him be manifested in glory.” And in 1 John 3:2 “Beloved, now we are children of God; and it has not yet been revealed what we shall be, but we know that when He is revealed, we shall be like Him, for we shall see Him as He is”.
How long will this final glorification take? It will take as long as God chooses, since it is a gift of God, and not based on the things we have done, however worthy they were. Read Matt 20:1-6, the parable of the workers in the vineyard. It is extraordinary, and turns our notions of what ‘should’ happen on its head. No matter the time spent in the vineyard, some workers labouring extraordinarily hard under the heat of the sun, each worker receives the same wages. The last shall be first, and the first last, said our Lord. How long was the Prodigal son made to wait outside his father’s house before being brought inside after he was forgiven? I believe that on the day of judgement, when all line up to enter heaven, the saints and martyrs of the Church in all their holiness will stand at the back of the queue waiting while the most worthless sinners of history are welcomed first by the Father with tears of joy and choirs of angels.
Does this mean that God’s grace is a whitewash, a clean slate? I’m afraid so, however it offends our human sense of justice. But we are washed in the blood of Christ, not our own, given spotless new white robes that we did not earn or make. Christ does indeed bear the marks of his sacrifice. He does this so we don’t have to. Because we could not bear it if we tried.
--------------------
“We are to find God in what we know, not in what we don't know." Dietrich Bonhoeffer
See my blog for 'interesting' thoughts
Posts: 1739 | From: Oxford, UK | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Laurelin
Shipmate
# 17211
|
Posted
Hawk ... that was magnificent.
![[Overused]](graemlins/notworthy.gif)
I do believe in a conscious state between death and the Resurrection, personally, although I do not believe that state is Purgatory.
But, hey. Once I've passed on, I won't be in a position to quibble. ![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
--------------------
"I fear that to me Siamese cats belong to the fauna of Mordor." J.R.R. Tolkien
Posts: 545 | From: The Shire | Registered: Jul 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
Terry Pratchett is an atheist, but he writes well about religion I think. In the Discworld occasional reference is made to the idea that you have to walk across a desert when you die. In the novel Small Gods, he tells a story about a rigid theocracy that has all become about the institution to the extent there is only one true believer left - a novice called Brutha. He is really the next prophet, but a Machiavellian figure called Deacon Vorbis believes he himself is going to be the prophet and sets about a war to prove himself - think inquisition with knobs on. Anyway it all gets sorted in the end and Brutha ends up heading the Ominian church until he is a hundred and then he dies.
This is an extract from the end of the last chapter of the book (Death speaks in capitals):
quote:
Brutha's body toppled forward almost gracefully, smacking into the table. The bowl overturned, and gruel dripped down on to the floor.
And then Brutha stood up, without a second glance at his corpse.
"Hah. I wasn't expecting you," he said.
Death stopped leaning against the wall.
HOW FORTUNATE YOU WERE.
"But there's still such a lot to be done . . ."
YES. THERE ALWAYS IS.
Brutha followed the gaunt figure through the wall where, instead of the privy that occupied the far side in normal space, there was . . .
. . . black sand.
The light was brilliant, crystalline, in a black sky filled with stars.
"Ah. There really is a desert. Does everyone get this?" said Brutha.
WHO KNOWS?
"And what is at the end of the desert?"
JUDGEMENT.
Brutha considered this.
"Which end?"
Death grinned and stepped aside.
What Brutha had thought was a rock in the sand was a hunched figure, sitting clutching its knees. It looked paralyzed with fear.
He stared.
"Vorbis?" he said.
He looked at Death.
"But Vorbis died a hundred years ago!"
YES. HE HAD TO WALK IT ALL ALONE. ALL ALONE WITH HIMSELF. IF HE DARED.
"He's been here for a hundred years?"
POSSIBLY NOT. TIME IS DIFFERENT HERE. IT IS . . . MORE PERSONAL.
"Ah. You mean a hundred years can pass like a few seconds?"
A HUNDRED YEARS CAN PASS LIKE INFINITY.
The black-on-black eyes stared imploringly at Brutha, who reached out automatically, without thinking . . . and then hesitated.
HE WAS A MURDERER, said Death. AND A CREATOR OF MURDERERS. A TORTURER. WITHOUT PASSION. CRUEL. CALLOUS. COMPASSIONLESS.
"Yes. I know. He's Vorbis," said Brutha. Vorbis changed people. Sometimes he changed them into dead people.
But he always changed them. That was his triumph.
He sighed.
"But I'm me," he said.
Vorbis stood up, uncertainly, and followed Brutha across the desert.
Death watched them walk away.
It has always appealed to me as an understanding of hell/purgatory.
[ 16. March 2013, 00:15: Message edited by: Doublethink ]
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208
|
Posted
I don't really make a huge system out of purgatory. I just know that it makes me feel better to light candles for my father and pray for him.
--------------------
Don't give up yet, no, don't ever quit/ There's always a chance of a critical hit. Ghost Mice
Posts: 9148 | From: Boston, MA | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
