Pleniary indulgances : they're baaack!

[bosco]

fair enough, but just creating a hierarchy for church ministry and or government is not sinful, then; just the abuse of it.

 

[Selene]

While your post seems factual, at the time of the inquisition, the church of Rome was no simple religious institution, but wielded temporal power over the remnants of the old Roman empire: The church crowned kings. The invasion of the Ottoman turks into Europe polarized the continent into religious factions. And the invasion of Spain by the Moors of north Africa was more of the same. The inquisition in Spain was a weapon of the Spanish royalty in their war against the Moors (known as the reconquista) which officially ended in 1492 with the expulsion of "the jews". While the war was fought for about 900 years and was primarily waged to expell the Moors from the territory now known as Andalusia, the native jews of Spain were also considered a threat to the power of the monarchy. The colonization of the Americas wasn't only about grabbing the land of heathens, but it also was about encouraging "undesirables" to leave europe. Its convenient to divide the actions of the church from the actions of the governments, but both serve the social purposes of organizing the people of the land into managable groups. Both provide guidance and purpose to the extent that men are willing to accept their authority. Both derive their authority from God (according to scripture), but derive their substance from the local population. The "seperation of church and state" is a contrivance of men designed to divide powers between two authorities which are both in reality subject to One. In the US, the intent of the authors of our constitution was to further divide "the authority" over the public between three branches of government, to create more distance between men and absolute power. I'm not overly familiar with church heiarchy in the Roman Catholic faith, but the fact that there is a heirachy and a retained priesthood demonstrates that the RC church also has a structure designed to distance men from their creator. Jesus came to tear down "the wall of seperation," not only that which exists between peoples, but primarily that seperation between God and man that was the consequence of sin. In the sacrifice of His flesh and blood upon the cross, Jesus satisfied God's righteous requirement that sin be judged, and He satisfied it against Himself in the person of His Son, in fulfillment of His covenant oathes. Now since God loves us enough to give Himself in the person of His Son, to die in our place, in our behalf, and to remove that seperation between men and God, do you think that He intended the institutionalization of the church with its heirachy and levels of seperation between Himself and men? Heirarchy and ordered structure are the norm in this world and were ordained by God, but Jesus revealed a heirarchal structure in God's kingdom that is the opposite of that of the world. The least shall be called the greatest. The Master is the servant of all. Is this really what we see in this rebellious world? I heard one "priest" say that Pope Benedict was displaying great humility in resigning his office, in "stepping down" from such lofty position, but isn't it the Lord who humbles the man in his infirmaties? There is a day coming when all hypocracy will end and aristocracy will cease, but we haven't seen it yet.

While it is true that the Church has crowned kings in the past, the Church has also excommunicated kings. In other words, the Church and the governments has clashed against each other. So, while the governments of Europe was enslaving the inhabitants of the New World, it was the Church who stood against their enslavement, but the letters of the Popes to the governments were ignored. For example, in 1435, almost 60 years BEFORE Columbus landed in the Americas Pope Eugene IV issued a scathing attack on slavery in his papal bull Sicut Dudum. In this document, he addressed the situation that was developing in the newly-colonized Canary Islands. He stated in his bull:

[The colonists[ have deprived the natives of their property or turned it to their own use, and have subjected some of the inhabitants of said islands to perpetual slavery, sold them to other persons and committed other various illicit and evil deeds against them.....Therefore We....exhort through the sprinkling of the Blood of Jesus Christ shed for their sins, once and all, temporal princes, lords, captains, armed men, barons, soldiers, nobles, communities and all others of every kind among the Christian faithful of whatever state, grade or condition, that they themselves desist from the aforementioned deeds, cause those subject to them to desist from them, and restrain them rigorously. And no less do we order and command all and each of the faithful of each sex that, within the space of fifteen days of the publication of these letters in the place where they live, that they restore to their earlier liberty all and each person of either sex who were once residents of said Canary Islands....who have been made subject to slavery. These people are to be totally and perpetually free and are to be let go without the exaction of any money. If this is not done, when the fifteen days have passed, they incur the sentence of excommunication ipso fact.

According to this bull, the keeping and taking of slaves by Catholics involves an immediate, automatic excommunication. But this was ignored by the government despite that the king himself was Catholic.

As for the indulgences that you mentioned in your OP, the abuses of the indulgences only occurred in parts of Germany where Martin Luther was. It was not worldwide. Fifty years before Martin Luther complained of the selling of indulgences, it was already made clear by the Church that the selling of indulgences was a sin. The teachings of the Church have already been set. However, the Catholic people don't always follow the teachings of the Church. We are all sinners. Should that be any surprise? When a Catholic becomes a king of his country, even he has shown to not follow the teachings of his Church.

It was actually God who ordered the hierarchy of the Church ministry and even the hierarchy of the government because He was the one who built the Church and instituted the government in the first place. The hierarchy of God's kingdom is similar to the ones here on earth, which is the reason why He instituted these types of hierarchies in the first place and told us to be obedient to authority. God put parents in charge (another hierarchy) and told children to honor their mothers and fathers. If one cannot honor their mothers and fathers on earth, how can one honor God. If one cannot obey their Church leaders, how can one obey God who called them to be Church leaders in the first place? He set this hierarchy in place to prepare us for His kingdom.

 

[michaelvpardo]

fair enough, but just creating a hierarchy for church ministry and or government is not sinful, then; just the abuse of it.

God is certainly a god of order as well as One of justice. Order implies a hierarchy of sorts, but the hierarchy of "the church" was defined in terms of "the body":
11 And He Himself gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers, 12 for the equipping of the saints for the work of ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ, 13 till we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ; 14 that we should no longer be children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, in the cunning craftiness of deceitful plotting, 15 but, speaking the truth in love, may grow up in all things into Him who is the head—Christ— 16 from whom the whole body, joined and knit together by what every joint supplies, according to the effective working by which every part does its share, causes growth of the body for the edifying of itself in love. Ephesians 4:11-16

The passage from chapter 4 of Ephesians gives a hierarchy of sorts, but also suggests that such a hierarchy is a temporary one even as Paul similarly identifies the law as a tutor whose purpose was to bring us to Christ:
24 Therefore the law was our tutor to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith. 25 But after faith has come, we
are no longer under a tutor. 26 For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus. Galatians 3:24-26

The purpose of the law was to bring us to Christ and God's purpose within the body is to renew us in His own image in the person of His Son. There isn't much of hierarchy in son ship, only patriarchy and filial devotion. The problem with a large church is that hierarchy seems to surrender itself to bureaucracy and aristocracy. The great sin of the church, like that of men, is distancing the head, and making itself the authority:

8 “Therefore hear this now, you who are given to pleasures, Who dwell securely, Who say in your heart, ‘I am, and there is no one else besides me; I shall not sit as a widow, Nor shall I know the loss of children’; 9 But these two things shall come to you
In a moment, in one day: The loss of children, and widowhood. They shall come upon you in their fullness Because of the multitude of your sorceries, For the great abundance of your enchantments. Isaiah 47:8-9

This last passage from Isaiah is addressing Babylon and not the church, but the warnings of scripture are there for our benefit, not for the benefit of the world, and they are there so that we may be warned not to be caught up in her judgments:
4 And I heard another voice from heaven saying, “Come out of her, my people, lest you share in her sins, and lest you receive of her plagues. 5 For her sins have reached to heaven, and God has remembered her iniquities. Revelation 18:4-5

 

[SilenceInMotion]

Pleniary indulgances : they're baaack!

...they never went anywhere to come back lol

Indulgences are old news. It's always been a Church thing- you can pay an indulgence to absolve some of your venial sins, and by extension spend less time in Purgatory.

And you can pay an indulgence anytime, the Church just has set days to handle it all in one fell swoop. In the case of the OP, the Church is simply holding special events for those who can't afford to pay indulgences. They will do things like that every once in a while simply out of the works of grace.

 

[aspen]

sim - the RCC does not charge people money to get out of purgatory - that is the sin of simony! You need to review your Catechism.

 

[Axehead]

sim - the RCC does not charge people money to get out of purgatory - that is the sin of simony! You need to review your Catechism.

I think SIM spoke the truth, and Aspen spoke what is presented to the world outside of the RCC.

The RCC presents God as the big "deal broker" in the sky.

 

[aspen]

well Ax, i think you will have to provide some proof.

 

[Axehead]

well Ax, i think you will have to provide some proof.

Ok, SIM are you misleading all of us. Can you prove what you just said in post #24 or are you just terribly mistaken?

 

[SilenceInMotion]

Pope Benedict brought back indulgences by money, as an alternative to other works.

For something to be considered simony, it must deal with either sacraments or otherwise salvific dealings. It's a bit of stretch to call even sole payment for the reduction of Purgatory simony, let alone it merely being issued as an alternative.

Purgatory is not damnation, it is a temporal purge for one's venial sins.

 

[Axehead]

Pope Benedict brought back indulgences by money, as an alternative to other works.

For something to be considered simony, it must deal with either sacraments or otherwise salvific dealings. It's a bit of stretch to call even sole payment for the reduction of Purgatory simony, let alone it merely being issued as an alternative.

Purgatory is not damnation, it is a temporal purge for one's venial sins.

Ok, we'll if SIM's comments can be confirmed, then you have your proof Aspen.

By the way, SIM, I did not know that about Ratzinger/Benedict.

 

[JB_Reformed Baptist]

The teachings of the Church never allowed or justified murder. Just as indulgences never went away, the teachings of the Church have NEVER changed. It has always remained the same. Catholics doing bad things on their own is their own doing. I'm sure you also have people in your own church who also commit sinful things??

Yeah right. You must be willfully ignorant of church history. Wait a minute the RCC probably controls that as well. LOL

 

[SilenceInMotion]

Indulgences were banned by the Church in the 16th century due to it's potential for abuse. Some clergy were extorting others and venturing into simony. Indulgences are back, but under the pretense of being an alternative work. Paying money is not the only way to recieve indulgences, and is unlawful to demand money as the only work by canon law.

 

[excubitor]

...they never went anywhere to come back lol

Indulgences are old news. It's always been a Church thing- you can pay an indulgence to absolve some of your venial sins, and by extension spend less time in Purgatory.

And you can pay an indulgence anytime, the Church just has set days to handle it all in one fell swoop. In the case of the OP, the Church is simply holding special events for those who can't afford to pay indulgences. They will do things like that every once in a while simply out of the works of grace.

Seems like a lot of people making things up as they go along here.
The Council of Trent forebade the purchase of indulgences, however indulgences can be gained in many other ways which do not involve cash. For example by saying various prayers, reading the scriptures, going on pilgrimages etc.

30 minutes of scripture reading gets a plenary indulgence which in my opinion is an absolute bargain.
Its all explained in The Enchiridion of Indulgences

 

[ericrun]

Indulgences were banned by the Church in the 16th century due to it's potential for abuse. Some clergy were extorting others and venturing into simony. Indulgences are back, but under the pretense of being an alternative work. Paying money is not the only way to recieve indulgences, and is unlawful to demand money as the only work by canon law.

Indulgences were not banned. I received an indulgence by walking through the four holy doors in Rome in August 2000. Can you point to somewhere that the church is granting indulgences for money?

 

[michaelvpardo]

Indulgences were not banned. I received an indulgence by walking through the four holy doors in Rome in August 2000. Can you point to somewhere that the church is granting indulgences for money?

wow. I'm curious, what made the 4 doors holy?

 

[ericrun]

wow. I'm curious, what made the 4 doors holy?

They enter the four great basilicas of Rome: St. Peters, St. Paul Outside the Walls, St. Mary Major, and St. John Lateran, but are only opened during jubilee years for the purpose of earning the indulgence that comes by walking through them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holy_door

 

[excubitor]

The indulgence is not gained by walking through the doors alone. That is just symbolic of the completion of the entire pilgrimage which is completed upon walking through the doors. Pilgrimages are pious practices of a thousand years of Christians who would travel to holy sites such as Jerusalem and on the way would spend their time in prayer, singing hymns as the traveled on the perilous and difficult journey. A pilgrimage is a type for our journey through life dealing with all the perils and struggles of the journey with our minds fixed upon the holiness of heaven where we will finally rest. Going through the doors into the great cathedral at the end of the long journey is like a foretype of our passing through the gates of heaven into the throne room of God.

It is difficult to convey the spiritual benefits of a pilgrimage to someone who has never been on one. I thoroughly recommend it as a wonderful spiritual boost. It strengthens us for our long journey in this life and helps fix our hope on the goal of our journey which is to be with the Lord in heaven.

If the Pope wants to encourage Christians to go on pilgrimages then he is doing nothing different to what the church leaders from the most ancient times have done, to encourage Christians to go to these holy places to refresh in their minds the stories of the Bible and of the lives of the early saints who paved the Christian way for us with the blood of their martyrdom.