I didn’t accuse you of “same ol’, same ol’. You do make claims that probably aren’t entirely justified by either the facts of history or current practice.
“In fact, the Catholic position is one held by most people who believe they follow Luther’s principle of sola fides. We are saved by grace alone, by which we have faith, which necessarily leads us to righteous works, and the avoidance of sin.”
While theologians may or may not agree with your summary of Catholic teaching - it certainly seems contrary to the practices of indulgences and penances - the common man of both Luther’s time & this one do not agree. If this means the Catholic position isn’t clear, then maybe Catholic Priests ought to examine what they teach.
The Filipino Catholics I’ve met most certainly believe in salvation by good works. I don’t know what it is called when Filippino Catholics whip themselves, or when it is done in Mexico, but it certainly doesn’t LOOK like forgiveness!
When Henry II donned sackcloth, walked barefoot thru Canterbury while being flogged by monks...he MIGHT have thought himself less than totally forgiven.
Luther’s attack on indulgences, as practiced, exploded across Europe because it resonated with common people’s understanding of common practice.
“In the Sacrament of Penance the guilt of sin is removed, and with it the eternal punishment due to mortal sin; but there still remains the temporal punishment required by Divine justice, and this requirement must be fulfilled either in the present life or in the world to come, i.e., in Purgatory.”
I doubt I’m the only lay person who reads that passage and sees a conflict between “the guilt of sin is removed” and “there still remains the temporal punishment required by Divine justice”. Frankly, it suggests that God needs to grow up. Either forgive, or don’t, but don’t claim to forgive and then punish. It sounds far too close to my wife saying, “I forgive you for what you said. Now go sleep on the couch...”
Psalms 103:
10 He does not deal with us according to our sins,
nor repay us according to our iniquities.
11 For as high as the heavens are above the earth,
so great is his steadfast love toward those who fear him;
12 as far as the east is from the west,
so far does he remove our transgressions from us.
>> While theologians may or may not agree with your summary of Catholic teaching - it certainly seems contrary to the practices of indulgences and penances - <<
Sola Fides is about the means of salvation. Indulgences never have anything to do with salvation. Pennances only ever do when they involve mortal sin, and then they are for reconciliation with the Church Militant (those on Earth).
>> The Filipino Catholics I’ve met most certainly believe in salvation by good works. I don’t know what it is called when Filippino Catholics whip themselves, or when it is done in Mexico, but it certainly doesn’t LOOK like forgiveness! <<
“Self-flagellation” is a suppressed piety in the Catholic church. Worshiping among Filipinos, I’m pretty sure they do not do the practice. (There are some wierd syncretic pagan practices, such as self-crucifixion, which make the news every Easter, but the Catholic Church works hard to put an end to this, since it is pagan, not Christian; I’ve never known of a single instance of it in America, and it would probably make the news, or certain Alex Murphy’s posts if it did.) The intent of self-flagellation is not for salvation or pennance, but for mortification (Rom 8:13, 1 Cor 9:27)
>> Luther’s attack on indulgences, as practiced, exploded across Europe because it resonated with common people’s understanding of common practice. <<
Luther’s attack on indulgences resonated across Europe because it promised to save a lot of princes a lot of money. Supporting the Catholic church meant supporting the war effort. Protestant princes never took up the sword against the Muslim, nor funded such efforts, which is why Protestantism has largely been unheard of in any of the lands which Islam invaded: Spain, Italy, Portugal, the Balkan states, Hungary, Austria, Poland, the Middle East, etc. Zwingli, Luther and Henry imposed their Protestantism from above; only Calvin and the Anabaptists can claim to have had support from the grassroots, and even they were most successful in lands where other Protestant leaders had opposed Catholicism from above (Knox’s Scotland, the Evangelischekirkes of Germany and the Germanic lowlands).
I don’t mean to overstate my case and assert Protestantism had no appeal among the masses, but that it was usually insufficient to gain critical mass or overcome state opposition (France certainly is a case where the state violently opposed Protestantism), unless the leaders of state promoted it, usually for fiscal reasons (Germany, England, Sweden).