Replies

You wrote:

“Sorry, but history says otherwise.”

No, it does not. I have a PhD in history and studied this for years.

“Read the 95 Theses.”

I have. Many times. It offers no evidence for the claim that was made.

“Do a google, there are many sources which historically document the RCC sold indulgences.”

Wrong. There are no original sources at all that show that. In other words, there plenty of morons today who make the claim that the Catholic Church sold indulgences but no one, ever, anywhere, at any time, EVER, has been able to show one scrap of evidence that the Catholic sold indulgences. All anyone has been able to show is that Catholics violated canon law and illegally sold indulgences. What I am saying is irrefutably true. I have researched it endlessly and every single person I have ever challenged to present evidence of the Catholic Church selling indulgences has failed each and every single time to present any such evidence at all. You will fail too. You might even know you’ll fail. Maybe that’s why you’re not offering any evidence yourself.

“But worse than indulgences was the following official statement of the RCC (Council of Trent, Session VI, Canon 12) “If anyone says that justifying faith is nothing else than trust in God’s mercy, which remits sin for Christ’s sake, or that it is this trust alone which justifies us, let him be damned.””

Nothing wrong with telling the truth. Without repentance there is no salvation. Trusting in Jesus without repenting of your sins will not save you. If you don’t turn your heart to God there can be no genuine trust in Him. Did you ever even think of that?

I don’t think you know as much as you apparently think you do.

In other words, there plenty of morons today who make the claim that the Catholic Church sold indulgences but no one, ever, anywhere, at any time, EVER, has been able to show one scrap of evidence that the Catholic sold indulgences. All anyone has been able to show is that Catholics violated canon law and illegally sold indulgences. What I am saying is irrefutably true. I have researched it endlessly and every single person I have ever challenged to present evidence of the Catholic Church selling indulgences has failed each and every single time to present any such evidence at all.

Well, Popes aren't bound by canon law in the first place, so that is irrelevant. Nevertheless:

It is sufficient to say here, that Sixtus IV., in 1476, definitely connected the payment of money with indulgences, and legislated that, by fixed sums paid to the papal collectors, persons on earth may redeem their kindred in purgatory. Thus for gold and silver the most inveterate criminal might secure the deliverance of a father or mother from purgatorial pain, and neither contrition nor confession were required in the transaction.¹⁷⁵⁹ Lea, III. 595 sq., and the instructions of Albert, abp. of Mainz, quoted by Brieger, nec opus est, quod contribuentes pro animabus in capsam sint corde contriti et ore confessi.
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/hcc5.ii.xvi.vii.html

You have a PhD in history and you don't know that in 1517 Pope Leo X (who spent money like Obama) offered indulgences for those who gave alms to rebuild St. Peter's Basilica in Rome?

In 1567 St. Pius V canceled all grants of indulgences involving any fees or other financial transactions.
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07783a.htm<

Do you controvert the fact that in 1517 Pope Leo X offered indulgences for those who gave alms to rebuild St. Peter's Basilica in Rome?

Cordially,