St. Peter's Cathedral

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Catholic : One Thread

Hod do good christians justify the selling of indulgences by the Pope to finance the buillding of St. Peter's in Rome? Get into heaven for cash? That's pretty weak.

-- tyler durden (tyler@durden.com), April 14, 2003

Answers

Response to St. Peter's cathedral

The Church does not attempt to justify 16th century administrative abuses in the granting of indulgences. It was an area in need of reformation, and the Church reformed it. However, Protestants do try to justify Luther's rejection of God's Church, an act which has caused nothing but dissention and division in Christianity ever since. Too bad Luther didn't stick around. He could have been part of the reformation - the real reformation, which took place IN the Church, and BY the Church.

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), April 14, 2003.

Response to St. Peter's cathedral

actually, we dont justify it at all, that was pretty weak... which would be why JPII has condemned the selling of plenary indulgences,and furthermore, it isnt really likely that sinners who purchased plenary indulgences ever got into heaven. however, what i want to know is why there are so many protestant denominations that sell plenary indulgences today (Dont believe me? i was watching a service yesterday and saw a guy literally say "if you call in and give money you will be saved and the Lord will forgive you")

-- paul (dontSendMeMail@notAnAddress.com), April 14, 2003.

Response to St. Peter's cathedral

Had Luther's thesis been debated, rather than the Church attempt to force a retraction, the split may have been avoided.

Luther never wanted to leave the Church. The Church excommunicated him.

The selling of indulgences was wrong, wrong, wrong.

Politics had a great deal to do with the split. The Pope was a political monarch at the time and there were major political differences, especially with the German princes.

Oral Roberts, several years ago, said something to the effect that if he did not receive a certain amount of donations, God was going to "call him home".

To me, it is disgusting to see any clergy use their position to gain personal wealth, .ie. Benny Hinn.

The Catholic Church has wealth that I personally would like to see used better, but the priests (pastoral)(where the rubber meets the road) are almost all, relatively, poor servant of God.

Religious Ordered priest almost always take a vow of poverty. Diocesan priets, indeed, live it.

God Bless.

-- john placette (jplacette@catholic.org), April 15, 2003.


Response to St. Peter's cathedral

The issue of monies being paid to the Church was/is a travesty. Taken from old laws of Jews wheres the tribe of Levi was elected as priests and holders of the temble brought many headaches to say the least before the time of Christ.

Luther blew this arrogance of Rome full open and they in their pride and greed continued and still do feed off the backs of the poor.

Tyler the maner has not changed simply the method. Remember Cardinal Spellman of NYC who brought in a brown paper bags protects by Diplomatic Immunity literally millions of dollars of which no accounting was ever brought forth.

Remeber the Catholic Church for all it pissing and moaning regarding monies holds more historical artifacts and other works of arts then any other institution in the world. Per eample The Smithsonian is small potatoes by comparison.

Hold unto you wallet young man as they will take it all as blessing while they enjoy the best of foods health caare and world travels. The average " income " package for that little old parish priest is around 150K.

Of course they do no have monies if they belong to and Order as all personal holding are given tothe community. Now Diocesion priests do not have to take the vow of poverty and many many do very well on the stock market.

Bottom line most if not all go hungry or need to cry for health care.

-- jean bouchard (jeanb@cwk.imag.net), April 16, 2003.


Response to St. Peter's cathedral

Before you condemn Indulgences, I think you all should first try to define what they are and what they are not.

It is entirely likely that what they are per se is not what was going on in Germany - so real abuses were happening. Kinda like marriage being perverted by serial polygamy. You don't solve the problem by just getting rid of the whole sacrament of matrimony because some people misunderstand it! Instead you explain what is right and get people to conform.

Protestants almost always define "Indulgences" as "tickets to heaven bought for money giving people the right or excuse to commit sin."

But this is a strawman argument. If fact, Indulgences were NEVER about buying a license to sin at all! Nor were they technically ever taught to depend on the exchange of money. Those who sold them were wrong. Those who bought them on that understanding of things were also wrong.

According to the Church - both then in the 1500's and now in the 2000's, indulgences are:

"a remission before God of the temporal punishment due to sins whose guilt has already been forgiven, which the faithful Christian who is duly disposed gains under certain prescribed conditions through the action of the Church which, as the minister of redemption, dispenses and applies with authority the treasury of the satisfactions of Christ and the saints." (CCC 1471)

To understand that definition you need to understand that "sin has a double consequence. Grave sin deprives us of communion with God, and therefore makes us incapable of eternal life...On the other hand every sin...entails an unhealthy ATTACHMENT to creatures, which must be purified either here on earth or after death in the state called Purgatory. This purifications frees one from what is called the "temporal punishment" of sin. (cf. CCC 1472)

Thus souls can only get rid of their ATTACHMENT to sins by some post- forgiveness action - including prayer and almsgiving.

All Indulgences require the person to first go to confession, (confessing to God their sins, asking for forgiveness, making amends) and then of praying for others and doing some form of charity towards others (acting unselfishly, opposite of the tendency and attachment to sin which tugs people to act self-centeredly.)

So far from being a "license to sin" or a "ticket to heaven" Indulgences are actually straight forward logical conclusions to what actually happens in the lives of people who convert and strive to be good!

If you want a real "license to sin" or a magical "ticket to heaven" without doing anything you have to look at certain PROTESTANT SECTS who promise eternal salvation - regardless of future sins - just by you making a one-time declaration of faith in Jesus!

Now just as most Protestants "protest" this mis-reading of Luther and Calvin and Zwigli, and rightly so, so should they be careful to not mis-read Catholic doctrine on indulgences.

-- Joe (Joestong@yahoo.com), April 16, 2003.



Response to St. Peter's cathedral

Joe - Thank you for the clarification(s) that were so well put.

-- jean bouchard (jeanb@cwk.imag.net), April 16, 2003.

Response to St. Peter's cathedral

average " income " package for that little old parish priest is around 150K

actually, that number isnt true, it may be where the cost of living is high, but for most priest they are given modest housing, a modest car, and a small living salary with which to purchase necessities and food.

insomuch as the church having alot of artifacts... please recall, the church is the single largest organization in the world. Its numbers amount to more than four times the populace of the united states. it only makes sense that there should be a huge store of artifacts from the years as well. keep in mind that the church has been around for two thousand years, and during that time has collected alot of things merely by virtue of being there. furthermore, most of the relics you speak of only exist by virtue of the fact that the church had them created.

is the idea of buying your way into heaven wrong? yes, but the funding of the church has always been through charity and for people to give money to the church is not wrong.

-- paul (dontSendMeMail@notAnAddress.com), April 17, 2003.


Response to St. Peter's cathedral

Jmj

Jean, you must be putting us on. You must be deliberately posting a series of ridiculous statements, because nobody could accidentally be wrong as much as you are.
Examples of errors and falsehoods in your message:

1. "The issue of monies being paid to the Church was/is a travesty."
No travesty at all -- except in the minds of the envious.

2. "Taken from old laws of Jews wheres the tribe of Levi was elected as priests and holders of the temble brought many headaches to say the least before the time of Christ."
Incorrect. The tribe of Levi was appointed as priests by God himself, and God specified the ways in which they were to be supported for their service. In like manner, God gives men vocations to the Catholic priesthood. Men are not "elected."

3. "Luther blew this arrogance of Rome full open ..."
Rubbish! The money-related sins were not being committed in Rome, nor with the pope's approval.

4. "... and they in their pride and greed continued and still do feed off the backs of the poor. Tyler the maner has not changed simply the method."
This is anti-Catholic manure. Sheer lies. I think that maybe your name is actually "Jean Chick."

5. "Remember Cardinal Spellman of NYC who brought in a brown paper bags protects by Diplomatic Immunity literally millions of dollars of which no accounting was ever brought forth."
I'll probably be able to rip this one up too -- after you put it into understandable English, Jean.

6. "Remeber the Catholic Church for all it pissing and moaning regarding monies holds more historical artifacts and other works of arts then any other institution in the world. Per eample The Smithsonian is small potatoes by comparison."
With vulgar language, you here play the part of Judas Iscariot, complaining about the costly ointment.

7. "Hold unto you wallet young man as they will take it all as blessing while they enjoy the best of foods health caare and world travels."
Another crockful. All giving to the Catholic Church is voluntary.

8. "The average 'income' package for that little old parish priest is around 150K."
Converting from your Canadian dollars, you are claiming that an average parish priest's income is about US$100,000. You are out of your mind. I doubt that such a thing is true even in the wealthiest parishes. Keep in mind that we are talking about the Catholic [Universal] Church, so this discussion is about 400,000 priests in every nook and cranny of the world. I would bet that the average Catholic parish priest's income is actually under US$15,000 worldwide -- and under US$30,000 in the United States.

9. "Now Diocesion [sic] priests do not have to take the vow of poverty and many many do very well on the stock market." 10. "Bottom line most if not all [priests] go hungry or need to cry for health care."
Very good, Jean. You managed to say the exact opposite of what you had in mind. Is that the Ripple talking again?
I hope that you don't post another message, because you might put 20 errors into that one, and correcting you is making me weary -- since it's a full-time job.

Let's face it, pal. The Church teaches dogmas and doctrines that you don't want to believe. The Church teaches you a morality that you don't want to follow. But instead of being honest, joining some other religion, and leaving this forum in peace, you pretend to be Catholic, and you hang around here spewing hatred, left and right, at popes and priests (and loyal laymen like me). Get lost, please.

And may God have mercy on your soul when you go to meet him.
John

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), April 19, 2003.


St Peters Catherdral ROX

-- Emily Kerr (emilys_empire@hotmail.com), June 24, 2003.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ