[Sca-cooks] lent, wine, indulgences, de Nola

[Laura C. Minnick]

At 05:18 PM 1/20/2004, you wrote:

>--- "Laura C. Minnick" <lcm at efn.org> wrote:
> > On indulgences- you can't get an indulgence for
> > something you haven't done
> > yet- it is only for sins already committed. You
> > must confess the sin and be
> > forgiven- it is the punishment that you are
> > avoiding by the indulgence.
> > *and* it can only be done for venial sins, not
> > mortal. What an indulgence
> > does essentially is to reduce your punishment
> > in purgatory- gets you 'time
> > off for good behavior' :-)
> >
> > Thus endeth the lesson. :-)
> >
> > 'Lainie
>
>Well that was the original intent.  But during
>the Reformation, indulgences _were_ being sold
>for future sins, sometimes unspecified future
>sins, if you paid enough money.  They were also
>selling indulgences for dead relatives, so they
>could escape purgatory.  This whole subject was
>one of the things that ticked Martin Luther off
>and lead eventually to the Reformation.

Not quite. It involves some hair-splitting though (and sounds uncomfortably 
like a certain former president). There is a remarkably wonderful website 
at:http://www.cin.org/users/james/files/indulgen.htm that gives the 
straight skinny on indulgences. In particular, it has this to say (about 
3/4 or the way down):


Myth 6: A person can buy indulgences.

The Council of Trent instituted severe reforms in the practice of granting 
indulgences, and, because of prior abuses, "in 1567 Pope Pius V canceled 
all grants of indulgences involving any fees or other financial 
transactions" (Catholic Encyclopedia). This act proved the Church's 
seriousness about removing abuses from indulgences.

Myth 7: A person used to be able to buy indulgences.

One never could "buy" indulgences. The financial scandal around 
indulgences, the scandal that gave Martin Luther an excuse for his 
heterodoxy, involved alms- indulgences in which the giving of alms to some 
charitable fund or foundation was used as the occasion to grant the 
indulgence. There was no outright selling of indulgences. The Catholic 
Encyclopedia states: "[I]t is easy to see how abuses crept in. Among the 
good works which might be encouraged by being made the condition of an 
indulgence, almsgiving would naturally hold a conspicuous place. . . It is 
well to observe that in these purposes there is nothing essentially evil. 
To give money to God or to the poor is a praiseworthy act, and, when it is 
done from right motives, it will surely not go unrewarded."

There is quite a bit more. Suffice it to say, there were abuses. There 
still are, for other things. But the presence of abuses does not negate the 
official doctrinal stance.

I'd have more interesting stuff, however the books I would be looking for 
are... 180 miles away. As usual. *poo*

'Lainie
___________________________________________________________________________
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president ... right or 
wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to 
the American public." -- Teddy Roosevelt, 1918