Posted on 10/18/2019 3:39:19 AM PDT by ealgeone
In case no one has ever actually read what Luther wrote. Some additional background is available at the link provided.
******
Out of love for the truth and from desire to elucidate it, the Reverend Father Martin Luther, Master of Arts and Sacred Theology, and ordinary lecturer therein at Wittenberg, intends to defend the following statements and to dispute on them in that place. Therefore he asks that those who cannot be present and dispute with him orally shall do so in their absence by letter. In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, Amen.
1. Our Lord and Master Jesus Christ, in saying, "Repent ye, etc.," intended that the whole life of his believers on earth should be a constant penance.
2. And the word "penance" neither can, nor may, be understood as referring to the Sacrament of Penance, that is, to confession and atonement as exercised under the priest's ministry.
3. Nevertheless He does not think of inward penance only: rather is inward penance worthless unless it produces various outward mortifications of the flesh.
4. Therefore mortification continues as long as hatred of oneself continues, that is to say, true inward penance lasts until entrance into the Kingdom of Heaven.
5. The Pope will not, and cannot, remit other punishments than those which he has imposed by his own decree or according to the canons.
6. The Pope can forgive sins only in the sense, that he declares and confirms what may be forgiven of God; or that he doth it in those cases which he hath reserved to himself; be this contemned, the sin remains unremitted.
7. God forgives none his sin without at the same time casting him penitent and humbled before the priest His vicar.
8. The canons concerning penance are imposed only on the living; they ought not by any means, following the same canons, to be imposed on the dying.
9. Therefore, the Holy Spirit, acting in the Pope, does well for us, when the latter in his decrees entirely removes the article of death and extreme necessity.
10. Those priests act unreasonably and ill who reserve for Purgatory the penance imposed on the dying.
11. This abuse of changing canonical penalty into the penalty of Purgatory seems to have arisen when the bishops were asleep.
12. In times of yore, canonical penalties were imposed, not after, but before, absolution, as tests of true repentance and affliction.
13. The dying pay all penalties by their death, are already dead to the canons, and rightly have exemption from them.
14. Imperfect spiritual health or love in the dying person necessarily brings with it great fear; and the less this love is, the greater the fear it brings.
15. This fear and horror - to say nothing of other things - are sufficient in themselves to produce the punishment of Purgatory, because they approximate to the horror of despair.
16. Hell, Purgatory, and Heaven seem to differ as perfect despair, imperfect despair, and security of salvation differ.
17. It seems as must in Purgatory love in the souls increase, as fear diminishes in them.
18. It does not seem to be proved either by arguments or by the Holy Writ that they are outside the state of merit and demerit, or increase of love.
19. This, too, seems not to be proved, that they are all sure and confident of their salvation, though we may be quite sure of it.
20. Therefore the Pope, in speaking of the perfect remission of all punishments, does not mean that all penalties in general be forgiven, but only those imposed by himself.
21. Therefore, those preachers of indulgences err who say that, by the Pope's indulgence, a man may be exempt from all punishments, and be saved.
22. Yea, the Pope remits the souls in Purgatory no penalty which they, according to the canons, would have had to pay in this life.
23. If to anybody complete remission of all penalties may be granted, it is certain that it is granted only to those most approaching perfection, that is, to very few.
24. Therefore the multitude is misled by the boastful promise of the paid penalty, whereby no manner of distinction is made.
25. The same power that the Pope has over Purgatory, such has also every bishop in his diocese, and every curate in his parish.
26. The Pope acts most rightly in granting remission to souls, not by the power of the keys - which in Purgatory he does not possess - but by way of intercession.
27. They preach vanity who say that the soul flies out of Purgatory as soon as the money thrown into the chest rattles.
28. What is sure, is, that as soon as the penny rattles in the chest, gain and avarice are on the way of increase; but the intercession of the church depends only on the will of God Himself.
29. And who knows, too, whether all those souls in Purgatory wish to be redeemed, as it is said to have happened with St. Severinus and St. Paschalis.
30. Nobody is sure of having repented sincerely enough; much less can he be sure of having received perfect remission of sins.
31. Seldom even as he who has sincere repentance, is he who really gains indulgence; that is to say, most seldom to be found.
32. On the way to eternal damnation are they and their teachers, who believe that they are sure of their salvation through indulgences.
33. Beware well of those who say, the Pope's pardons are that inestimable gift of God by which man is reconciled to God.
34. For the forgiveness contained in these pardons has reference only to the penalties of sacramental atonement which were appointed by men.
35. He preaches like a heathen who teaches that those who will deliver souls out of Purgatory or buy indulgences do not need repentance and contrition.
36. Every Christian who feels sincere repentance and woe on account of his sins, has perfect remission of pain and guilt even without letters of indulgence.
37. Every true Christian, be he still alive or already dead, partaketh in all benefits of Christ and of the Church given him by God, even without letters of indulgence.
38. Yet is the Pope's absolution and dispensation by no means to be contemned, since it is, as I have said, a declaration of the Divine Absolution.
39. It is exceedingly difficult, even for the most subtle theologists, to praise at the same time before the people the great wealth of indulgence and the truth of utter contrition.
40. True repentance and contrition seek and love punishment; while rich indulgence absolves from it, and causes men to hate it, or at least gives them occasion to do so.
41. The Pope's indulgence ought to be proclaimed with all precaution, lest the people should mistakenly believe it of more value than all other works of charity.
42. Christians should be taught, it is not the Pope's opinion that the buying of indulgence is in any way comparable to works of charity.
43. Christians should be taught, he who gives to the poor, or lends to a needy man, does better than buying indulgence.
44. For, by the exercise of charity, charity increases and man grows better, while by means of indulgence, he does not become better, but only freer from punishment.
45. Christians should be taught, he who sees his neighbor in distress, and, nevertheless, buys indulgence, is not partaking in the Pope's pardons, but in the anger of God.
46. Christians should be taught, unless they are rich enough, it is their duty to keep what is necessary for the use of their households, and by no means to throw it away on indulgences.
47. Christians should be taught, the buying of indulgences is optional and not commanded.
48. Christians should be taught, the Pope, in selling pardons, has more want and more desire of a devout prayer for himself than of the money.
49. Christians should be taught, the Pope's pardons are useful as far as one does not put confidence in them, but on the contrary most dangerous, if through them one loses the fear of God.
50. Christians should be taught, if the Pope knew the ways and doings of the preachers of indulgences, he would prefer that St. Peter's Minster should be burnt to ashes, rather than that it should be built up of the skin, flesh, and bones of his lambs.
51. Christians should be taught, the Pope, as it is his bounden duty to do, is indeed also willing to give of his own money - and should St. Peter's be sold thereto - to those from whom the preachers of indulgences do most extort money.
52. It is a vain and false thing to hope to be saved through indulgences, though the commissary - nay, the Pope himself - was to pledge his own soul therefore.
53. Those who, on account of a sermon concerning indulgences in one church, condemn the word of God to silence in the others, are enemies of Christ and of the Pope.
54. Wrong is done to the word of God if one in the same sermon spends as much or more time on indulgences as on the word of the Gospel.
55. The opinion of the Pope cannot be otherwise than this:- If an indulgence - which is the lowest thing - be celebrated with one bell, one procession and ceremonies, then the Gospel - which is the highest thing - must be celebrated with a hundred bells, a hundred processions, and a hundred ceremonies.
56. The treasures of the Church, whence the Pope grants his dispensation are neither sufficiently named nor known among the community of Christ.
57. It is manifest that they are not temporal treasures, for the latter are not lightly spent, but rather gathered by many of the preachers.
58. Nor are they the merits of Christ and of the saints, for these, without the Pope's aid, work always grace to the inner man, cross, death, and hell to the other man.
59. St. Lawrence called the poor of the community the treasures of the community and of the Church, but he understood the word according to the use in his time.
60. We affirm without pertness that the keys of the Church, bestowed through the merit of Christ, are this treasure.
61. For it is clear that the Pope's power is sufficient for the remission of penalties and forgiveness in the reserved cases.
62. The right and true treasure of the Church is the most Holy Gospel of the glory and grace of God.
63. This treasure, however, is deservedly most hateful, for it makes the first to be last.
64. While the treasure of indulgence is deservedly most agreeable, for it makes the last to be first.
65. Therefore, the treasures of the Gospel are nets, with which, in times of yore, one fished for the men of Mammon.
66. But the treasures of indulgence are nets, with which now-a-days one fishes for the Mammon of men.
67. Those indulgences, which the preachers proclaim to be great mercies, are indeed great mercies, forasmuch as they promote gain.
68. And yet they are of the smallest compared to the grace of God and to the devotion of the Cross.
69. Bishops and curates ought to mark with eyes and ears, that the commissaries of apostolical (that is, Popish) pardons are received with all reverence.
70. But they ought still more to mark with eyes and ears, that these commissaries do not preach their own fancies instead of what the Pope has commanded.
71. He who speaks against the truth of apostolical pardons, be anathema and cursed.
72. But blessed be he who is on his guard against the preacher's of pardons naughty and impudent words.
73. As the Pope justly disgraces and excommunicates those who use any kind of contrivance to do damage to the traffic in indulgences.
74. Much more it is his intention to disgrace and excommunicate those who, under the pretext of indulgences, use contrivance to do damage to holy love and truth.
75. To think that the Popish pardons have power to absolve a man even if - to utter an impossibility - he had violated the Mother of God, is madness.
76. We assert on the contrary that the Popish pardon cannot take away the least of daily sins, as regards the guilt of it.
77. To say that St. Peter, if he were now Pope, could show no greater mercies, is blasphemy against St. Peter and the Pope.
78. We assert on the contrary that both this and every other Pope has greater mercies to show: namely, the Gospel, spiritual powers, gifts of healing, etc. (1.Cor.XII).
79. He who says that the cross with the Pope's arms, solemnly set on high, has as much power as the Cross of Christ, blasphemes God.
80. Those bishops, curates, and theologists, who allow such speeches to be uttered among the people, will have one day to answer for it.
81. Such impudent sermons concerning indulgences make it difficult even for learned men to protect the Pope's honor and dignity against the calumnies, or at all events against the searching questions, of the laymen.
82. As for instance: - Why does not the Pope deliver all souls at the same time out of Purgatory for the sake of most holy love and on account of the bitterest distress of those souls - this being the most imperative of all motives, - while he saves an infinite number of souls for the sake of that most miserable thing money, to be spent on St. Peter's Minster: - this being the very slightest of motives?
83. Or again: - Why do masses for the dead continue, and why does not the Pope return or permit to be withdrawn the funds which were established for the sake of the dead, since it is now wrong to pray for those who are already saved?
84. Again: - What is this new holiness of God and the Pope that, for money's sake, they permit the wicked and the enemy of God to save a pious soul, faithful to God, and yet will not save that pious and beloved soul without payment, out of love, and on account of its great distress?
85. Again: - Why is it that the canons of penance, long abrogated and dead in themselves, because they are not used, are yet still paid for with money through the granting of pardons, as if they were still in force and alive?
86. Again: - Why does not the Pope build St. Peter's Minster with his own money - since his riches are now more ample than those of Crassus, - rather than with the money of poor Christians?
87. Again: -Why does the Pope remit or give to those who, through perfect penitence, have already a right to plenary remission and pardon?
88. Again: - What greater good could the Church receive, than if the Pope presented this remission and pardon a hundred times a day to every believer, instead of but once, as he does now?
89. If the Pope seeks by his pardon the salvation of souls, rather than money, why does he annul letters of indulgence granted long ago, and declare them out of force, though they are still in force?
90. To repress these very telling questions of the laymen by force, and not to solve them by telling the truth, is to expose the Church and the Pope to the enemy's ridicule and to make Christian people unhappy.
91. Therefore, if pardons were preached according to the Pope's intention and opinion, all these objections would be easily answered, nay, they never had occurred.
92. Away then with all those prophets who say to the community of Christ, "Peace, peace", and there is no peace.
93. But blessed be all those prophets who say to the community of Christ, "The cross, the cross," and there is no cross.
94. Christians should be exhorted to endeavor to follow Christ their Head through Cross, Death, and Hell,
95. And thus hope with confidence to enter Heaven through many miseries, rather than in false security.
M. D. XVII
Examples of faith with works. Certainly didn’t provide evidence that Luther was right.
Read James 2
So. You can quote the scripture, but miss the point that God does not does not judge on what our hearts deserve, but what our works deserve.
Again, many follow man’s truth and not God’s truth.
Actually, He said this...continuing to illustrate the need to go to the Scriptures in dealing with the Roman Catholic:
Honor your father and your mother, that your days may be prolonged in the land which the LORD your God gives you. Ex 20:12 NASB
The intent of this passage was to honor your earthly father and mother. Notice the words are not in caps as you did. Even the official Bible of Roman Catholicism doesn't put them in caps.
the Blessed Mother is our spiritual mother and the Mother of God.
And again the need for context.
Here is what Luke actually recorded.
48“For He has had regard for the humble state of His bondslave; For behold, from this time on all generations will count me blessed. Luke 1:48 NASB
Will count in the Greek is a verb. It is NOT a title as Roman Catholicism tries to falsley claim. We honor her and pray to her and all the holy ones. Ephesians 6:18
Scripture never records Mary as being the "mother of God". That only came about in 431 at the Council of Ephesus where they were debating the nature of Christ. The resulting "mother of God" from that Council was to give clarity to the nature of Christ....not to honor Mary as Rome has wrongly asserted.
Mary is not our "spiritual mother".
Roman Catholics try to claim Jesus gave Mary to everyone based on John 19:27.
However, if Rome's priests studied the Greek they'd know this is not the case.
The Greek word used here for own is ἴδια. It conveys the following meaning:
2398 ídios (a primitive word, NAS dictionary) – properly, uniquely one's own, peculiar to the individual. 2398 /ídios ("uniquely one's own") is "stronger than the simple possessive pronoun ('own'). This emphatic adjective means 'private, personal' " (WS, 222).
This was a private matter. Mary was placed in John's care. Nothing more. Nothing less.
To attempt to read back into the passage something else is eisegesis.
As far as Mary helping Jesus in our salvation.
Again...no.
Only He was beaten.
Only He was cursed.
Only He wore a crown of thorns.
Only He was crucified.
Only He was resurrected.
Only Jesus.
17“For this reason the Father loves Me, because I lay down My life so that I may take it again. 18“No one has taken it away from Me, but I lay it down on My own initiative. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up again. This commandment I received from My Father.” John 10:17-18 NASB
******
We honor her and pray to her and all the holy ones. Ephesians 6:18
And again context is key here. In the passage dealing with spiritual warfare in Ephesians 6:10-20, Paul begins the section as follows:
10Finally, be strong in the Lord and in the strength of His might.
In these verses the emphasis is on relying upon God in spiritual warefar.
The verse you cited, 6:18 is this.... With all prayer and petition pray at all times in the Spirit, and with this in view, be on the alert with all perseverance and petition for all the saints,
No where in this passage is Paul suggesting we pray TO anyone other than God.
In fact, no where in the NT are we ever given instruction to pray to anyone other than to God. Though I will give you credit for being honest in saying Roman Catholics pray TO Mary....something many of your fellow RCs have denied on these forums.
When Jesus was in the Garden, did He seek out Mary for council? Nope.
He went to the Father.
1Jesus spoke these things; and lifting up His eyes to heaven, He said, “Father, the hour has come; glorify Your Son, that the Son may glorify You, 2even as You gave Him authority over all flesh, that to all whom You have given Him, He may give eternal life. 3“This is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent. 4“I glorified You on the earth, having accomplished the work which You have given Me to do. 5“Now, Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was. John 17:1-5
Just before this He told the disciples the following:
23“In that day you will not question Me about anything. Truly, truly, I say to you, if you ask the Father for anything in My name, He will give it to you. John 16:23
Again, Jesus points to the Father in matters of prayer.
The false writings I posted from Roman Catholic writers previously stands in contradiction of the words of the Son....that is the writings of the Roman Catholics writers are false...as is your assertion as to whom we are to pray to and who is our advocate.
When the disciples asked Jesus to teach them to pray....what did He teach them? The consecration prayer to Mary?
Nope.
The Hail Mary? Nope.
He taught them this:
9“Pray, then, in this way: ‘Our Father who is in heaven, Hallowed be Your name. 10‘Your kingdom come. Your will be done, On earth as it is in heaven. 11‘Give us this day our daily bread. 12‘And forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors. 13‘And do not lead us into temptation, but deliver us from evil. [For Yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever. Amen.’] 14“For if you forgive others for their transgressions, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. 15“But if you do not forgive others, then your Father will not forgive your transgressions. Matt 6:9-15
All prayer is directed to the Creator....not the created.
Scripture is clear on this.
********
The Blessed Mother without sin is closer to God than the rest of us and helped Jesus in our salvation.
Nope.
You think proximity matters in terms of how God hears us?
Again, this shows a lack of understanding of exactly what He has done for us. Paul notes:
13For He rescued us from the domain of darkness, and transferred us to the kingdom of His beloved Son, 14in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins. Colossians 1:13-14
As far as Mary being sinless....well, we've about beat that one so much I won't go into detail but suffice to say the Roman Catholic position contradicts both Old and New Testaments but also violates its own "unanimous consent" among the ECFs as there is NO unanimous consent on this issue among the ECFs.
for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, Romans 3:23
When they sin against You--for there is no one who does not sin--and You become angry with them and deliver them to an enemy who takes them as captives to his own land, whether far or near, 1 Kings 8:46
Surely there is no righteous man on earth who does good and never sins. Ecclesiastes 7:20
******
Jesus is our judge, and the Blessed Mother is our advocate who pleads our cause.
Wow. The blasphemy against the Son and Spirit is unbelievable. I really cannot believe you wrote this. You're a trained Roman Catholic priest....right?
The Holy Spirit is our Advocate as is Jesus.
The believer does not come under judgment in the sense of being judged for Heaven or Hell.
18“He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. John 3:18 NASB
******
Christians can learn this from Mary (as they can others in the NT).
She was obedient to God. Luke 1:38
She knew the Scriptures. Luke 1:46-55
She recognized God as her Savior Luke 1:47
She gave praise to the Lord. Luke 1:46 She had faith in her Son. Jn 2:5
My friend, you've missed the point.
Again, many follow man’s truth and not God’s truth.
You just described Roman Catholicism in a nutshell.
Amen!
Many try to ignore or dispute the teachings of Jesus Christ as He directed His visible Catholic Church “Go therefore , and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, until the end of the age.” Matthew 28:19-20
Many have rejected or distorted some of the teachings of Jesus in the form of invisible churches without authority. So the protestant churches have many “individual or denominational interpretation of the teachings of Jesus versus an interpretation of an authoritative church based on two thousand years of unbroken developing biblical, apostolic, and patristic tradition and theology.” (Dave Armstrong)
May you be open to God’s truth and learn to accept it, whereas many at Capernaum (as have many today) rejected Jesus “I am the living bread that came down from Heaven, whoever eats this bread will live forever; and the bread that I will give is my flesh for the life of the world.” Matthew 6:51
“Beloved, so not trust every spirit but test the spirits to see if they belong to God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world.” 1John 4:1
Yet Rome is guilty of the charge you level.
Prayers to Mary and other created beings.
Allowing believers to believe the words of apparitions promising the avoidance of the eternal fire if a piece of cloth is worn.
The false notion of purgatory.
The false claim that you must be baptized for salvation but when it's not available a non-biblical "baptism of desire" is created.
Having to Believe that it's a sin if you miss certain "holy days of obligation."
Having to believe that you must believe Mary was Immaculately conceived.
Having to believe that she was ever virgin.
Belief she was assumed into Heaven.
That during the Mass the priest calls Jesus down from Heaven to be re-sacrificed over and over again.
That undefined "sacred tradition" is equal to Scripture.
There are more errors in Rome. But these illustrate how far Rome has departed from the Scriptures.
Many have rejected or distorted some of the teachings of Jesus in the form of invisible churches without authority. So the protestant churches have many “individual or denominational interpretation of the teachings of Jesus versus an interpretation of an authoritative church based on two thousand years of unbroken developing biblical, apostolic, and patristic tradition and theology.” (Dave Armstrong)
2000 years of unbroken tradition?? LOL. That's comical. Rome has added so much to the New Testament it's practically unrecognizable today.
Roman Catholics like to charge Christian churches with with "individual or denominational interpretatioins" when some in their own denomination do not recognize the authority of the current pope.
Some reject any pope occurring after 1958. Do you?
When asked for the definitive teaching on various passages in the NT the Roman Catholic can only point to around 10-40 depending on the source. Imagine that....the claim of being the church for 2000 years and Rome has only dogmatically defined a handful of verses. You'd think after 2000 years they would have these explained by now.
May you be open to God’s truth and learn to accept it, whereas many at Capernaum (as have many today) rejected Jesus “I am the living bread that came down from Heaven, whoever eats this bread will live forever; and the bread that I will give is my flesh for the life of the world.” Matthew 6:51
There is no Matthew 6:51 in the NT. Perhaps you mean John 6:51?
Yet Rome continues to have the wrong emphasis on this passage.
The unbelieving Jews were the ones asserting the eating/drinking flesh and blood.
Jesus was talking about faith/belief in Him.
I have placed my trust in Christ.
I concur with Peter's answer.
67So Jesus said to the twelve, “You do not want to go away also, do you?” 68Simon Peter answered Him, “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have words of eternal life. 69“We have believed and have come to know that You are the Holy One of God.” John 6:67-68
Luther’s actual last words:
https://www.wls.wels.net/rmdevser_wls/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/ToppeDeathbed.pdf
The Smalcald Articles:
http://www.stpaulserie.org/The%20Smalcald%20Articles%20and%20the%20Treatise.pdf
“buying indulgences”
Do you actually know what the Church’s traditional teaching is regarding indulgences and how and indulgence works according to traditional Church teaching?
Yep. And I know it's not found in the New Testament.
“Yep. And I know it’s not found in the New Testament.”
1. So what if it isn’t found in the New Testament? Is it required to be found in the New Testament? If so, demonstrate by what authority it is.
2. You’ve misrepresented what the Church traditionally teaches about indulgences and how they are obtained. Or else clearly state what the Church teaches, so that Catholics may agree that you do know, before you assert that indulgences aren’t this or that.
1. So what if it isn’t found in the New Testament? Is it required to be found in the New Testament? If so, demonstrate by what authority it is.
The authority of God in that He gave the church His written word. The ECFs knew this and appealed to Scripture for what they believed to be "tradition".
IF Scripture is not the final authority then what is? The opinion of man?
IF Scripture is not the final authority then there is nothing to measure teachings against for accuracy. It was one of the primary reasons the early church put together the canon.
You’ve misrepresented what the Church traditionally teaches about indulgences and how they are obtained. Or else clearly state what the Church teaches, so that Catholics may agree that you do know, before you assert that indulgences aren’t this or that.
The Roman Catholic church was selling indulgences. That is history. You may not like it, but those are the facts.
Where in the New Testament is it written that a decision rendered by the Church must be found in the New Testament in order to be authoritative?
Scripture was written by man under God’s authority. You would like to artificially impose that no man has God’s authority (consistent with the concept of the abomination of desolation). According to you, only ink on paper has God’s authority. You thus put God in your (opinion of man - you being the man) box.
Besides, the New Testament states that Jesus did far more than was ever written down. Do you then presume to be innocent in assuming that the Church has passed nothing of those particular sacred teachings on?
Regarding selling indulgences, it is written that love covers a multitude of sins. Yet to a protestant it is not an act of charity to beautify a building dedicated to God’s glory and praise?
St. Peter’s First Letter, chapter 4, verse 8 says,
“But before all things have constant mutual charity among yourselves: for charity covereth a multitude of sins.”
No wonder the gathering places of the new church (Modern “Catholicism”) and that of Protestants (versus traditional Catholicism) tend to look more like a library or public school building than a place for the gathering of the faithful.
Yes. It is agreed Jesus did a whole bunch more...so much so that, per John, "And there are also many other things which Jesus did, which if they were written in detail, I suppose that even the world itself would not contain the books that would be written." John 21:25 NASB
*****
Regarding selling indulgences, it is written that love covers a multitude of sins. Yet to a protestant it is not an act of charity to beautify a building dedicated to God’s glory and praise?
You're justifying the selling of indulgences to the poor to get their loved one's souls out of purgatory????
*****
No wonder the gathering places of the new church (Modern “Catholicism”) and that of Protestants (versus traditional Catholicism) tend to look more like a library or public school building than a place for the gathering of the faithful.
You do realize the early ekklesia met in people's houses....right? You were aware of that?? Right??
Brother, hate to break it to you....I see a multitude of opinions among Roman Catholics on just these threads.
Some say Francis is not a valid pope....do you say he's valid?
Some say there hasn't been a pope since 1958. Perhaps you're one of those?
Some say the RCC should only be pre-Vatican II...some say Vatican II is ok. What say you?
These are just the starters.
Can you point us to the dogmatic declarations of each verse in the New Testament?
Let's make this easy and just say give us the dogmatic rendering of each verse in Jude.
LOL....I know you can't. And you post this dribble in a foolish attempt to disparage non-Roman Catholics.
Might want to get that speck out of your eye.
I posted what the Roman Catholic church had authorized.
Depending on the time, the position has changed like much of Roman Catholicism.
The forgotten thesis #96. What me worry?
“... the selling of indulgences to the poor to get their loved one’s souls out of purgatory”
Indulgences are in a wide variety of forms. The poor have other means available besides the only one that you wish to discuss.
“You do realize the early ekklesia met in people’s houses....right? You were aware of that?? Right??”
What does that have to do with the beautiful structures that were also built for the faithful? Priests offer the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass in peoples’ houses even today when necessary.
Indulgences are in a wide variety of forms. The poor have other means available besides the only one that you wish to discuss.
Indulgences are a non-biblical false teaching of Rome.
The blood of Christ either forgives the sin or it doesn't.
>> “You do realize the early ekklesia met in people’s houses....right? You were aware of that?? Right??”<<
What does that have to do with the beautiful structures that were also built for the faithful? Priests offer the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass in peoples’ houses even today when necessary.
Those "beautiful" structures were built upon a false promise.
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.