Sin and Indulgences

Catholic Exchange ^ | November 11, 2003 | Grace MacKinnon

[Dajjal]

I don't see the construct of purgatory in either of the citations.

That's too bad.

Does 2 Maccabees also glorify suicide ?
Is this G-d's Word ?

Well, I don't see either Ptolomy Macron's or Razia's suicides as being glorified. Ptolomy was kind toward the Jews, but despaired when his friends called him a traitor. While Razia had tried to keep a life "pure in the Jews' religion," he was too proud to "suffer abuses unbecoming his noble birth." But his prolonged "noble birth" death scene is so embarrassing, it's almost funny. You cut it off too short by ending with verse 41.

41 Now as the multitude sought to rush into his house, and to break open the door, and to set fire to it, when he was ready to be taken, he struck himself with his sword:
42 Choosing to die nobly rather than to fall into the hands of the wicked, and to suffer abuses unbecoming his noble birth.
43 But whereas through haste he missed of giving himself a sure wound, and the crowd was breaking into the doors, he ran boldly to the wall, and manfully threw himself down to the crowd:
44 But they quickly making room for his fall, he came upon the midst of the neck [the space between the buildings].
45 And as he had yet breath in him, being inflamed in mind he arose: and while his blood ran down with a great stream, and he was grievously wounded, he ran through the crowd:
46 And standing upon a steep rock, when he was now almost without blood, grasping his bowels with both hands, he cast them upon the throng, calling upon the Lord of life and spirit, to restore these to him again: and so he departed this life.

Rather than suffer and die upright as a martyr at the hands of others, he opts for a "noble" death by his own hand. He fails with the sword, fails with the leap, spews blood and guts on all nearby, and in the end is pitifully calling on the Lord to bring him back to life.

[SoothingDave]

Why then did Peter say in Acts 10 that everyone who believes in the L-rd receives forgiveness of sins You're confusing the how for the what. Sins are forgiven and the effect of sin is also removed from us. Do you expect to have your sins forgiven and not be changed in the process?

SD

[SoothingDave]

Sorry, some of that got lost.

Why then did Peter say in Acts 10 that everyone who believes in the L-rd receives forgiveness of sins?

Probably because everyone who believs in the Lord receives forgiveness of sins.

You're confusing the how for the what. Sins are forgiven and the effect of sin is also removed from us. Do you expect to have your sins forgiven and not be changed in the process?

SD

[The Bard]

Paul's whole life was the earning of indulgences.

Chapter and Verse please? I don't deny that Paul had difficult times, but I would like to see where the Bible tells us his life was spend earning indulgences...

[RobbyS]

You have to know what an indulgence is first. In simple terms, it is spending your life doing good deeds, devoting your life to the Lord and to your neighbor.

[TotusTuus]

I don't deny that Paul had difficult times, but I would like to see where the Bible tells us his life was spend earning indulgences...

Late to the game today. I'm only good for one quick post today.

Bearing in mind that the doctrine of indulgences only involves remittance of temporal (not eternal) punishment still due to sin (not the forgiveness of the actual sin itself), and also bearing in mind that this doctrine is linked, Biblically and (Sacred) Traditionally, with other doctrines such as the communion of Saints, purgatory, vicarious satisfaction, the authority of the Church given by Christ to bind and loose, etc., the perspective should not be to treat the Holy Scriptures as a "look-up" manual or dictionary on a doctrine such as this. That is, this concept is scattered throughout Scripture in established principles. Another question to ask, is where does Scripture positively deny this doctrine? In attempting an answer you'll find that it doesn't. Just as belief and formulation of the doctrine of the Blessed Trinity requires forming interpretive conclusions from the narrative text of Holy Scripture, so too with the doctrine of indulgences. In both cases, the terms do not exist in the text, nor do the formulated definitions - as definitions - as you might find in a catechism book. Also bear in mind that the very Scriptures themselves were composed and ratified under inspiration of the Holy Spirit within the context of the living, active Church which Christ founded and Whose founding is recorded in said Scriptures. They must be interpreted in light of Her living Tradition as the same Holy Spirit continually guides Her.

But for one quick quote from Scripture to answer 'Bard's question, we have St. Paul in his epistle to the Colossians, in I believe the first chapter (yes, verse 24), writing (or dictating is probably more correct) concerning his own works:

"Who now rejoice in my sufferings for you, and fill up those things that are wanting of the sufferings of Christ, in my flesh, for his body, which is the Church, ..."

There are other "quotes". More importantly, there is the whole body of Scripture. Since all Scripture must conform with itself, all passages must be interpreted within light of hte others. A good action, "work", of a person living in the state of Grace (the life of God in us), can not only be meritorious (for the person in union with God alone), but also contain expiation (in union with Christ, of course). In this quote, not only does St. Paul assume that, he offers it on behalf of others, namely the Church.

This one passage shows clearly the principles of indulgences as understood and used by the Church (a few minor historical abuses by some in the past notwithstanding). A thread like this could easily become a Bible study in connecting the doctrines I mentioned earlier together.

[RobbyS]

Xorrection: it is the assurance you get that if you spend your life doing good deeds and devoting your life and to your neighbor in a spirit of penetence for your sins.