>Pay $1 to have 1 sin forgiven.
>Pay $2 to have 2 sins forgiven
>Pay $100 to have 100 sins forgiven
>Pay $1,000 to have 1,000 sins forgiven
Should Catholics bring back Indulgences?
>Pay $1 to have 1 sin forgiven.
>Pay $2 to have 2 sins forgiven
>Pay $100 to have 100 sins forgiven
>Pay $1,000 to have 1,000 sins forgiven
I want a watch that detects if I have sinned and automatically wires indulgences to the church
I was about to say, with modern technology you should just be able to make an online account with your church that keeps track of your sins and your indulgences.
The indulgence subscription you proposed also sounds handy
They still have indulgences, but you get them by going to certain places and doing certain things (like crawling up specific set of stairs on your knees). Of course, the Church still expects a "donation" to take part in these activities.
I read about that, every Catholic diocese has a shrine where you can do that. How many Catholics know about that?
>How many Catholics know about that?
Catholics were also offered an indulgence which involved following the Pope on Twitter, for time off purgatory. This was in headlines globally, but I'm sure most Catholic probably prefer to pretend it never happened (like they do with the widespread Catholic abuse of children).
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/vatican-get-time-off-in-purgatory-by-following-pope-on-twitter/
The Roman Church is such a disgusting sham. Amazing that people continue to fall for this satanic system to this day.
Why does Jesus give rules for fasting?
>Why does Jesus give rules for fasting?
Because you are supposed to Fast.
>it was believed a mass celebrated in their honour would lessen their time in pergatory.
The Roman Catholics *invented* Purgatory.
It is not really scriptural.
Non-Romans don't really believe it exists
GOD wants us to humble ourselves enough to get on our Knees, bow down and Ask HIM for forgiveness.
Jesus is our true Priest!
indulgences don't forgive sins
they are part of penance, they relieve temporal punishment for venal sins
don't listen to protestants, they lie about basically everything related to Catholicism because they need to be holier than thou to justify their own autism
>they are part of penance, they relieve temporal punishment for venal sins
So pay a dollar to spend a year less in purgatory
Yes. Now you get it.
Indulgences were never a real problem. Protties get real hung up on it for some reason, but seem to forget that in the time of Luther it was simony that was the real problem.
I literally never see protestants complaining about simony, it makes me think.
>Indulgences were never a real problem
Paying money to get a Quick-Pass Express into Heaven seems like a problem.
What's wrong with penance?
Okay buddy, but if you don't sell your house and your car and your belongings right now you have no business quoting that verse.
I mean, unless you are simply dying to hypocrite yourself.
>it's okay for the church to hoard billions off desperate people because you have a home
This is why people don't go to mass anymore. Tick tock tick tock.
Did you know the Catholic Church builds hospitals and schools?
"The Catholic Church is the largest non-government provider of health care services in the world.[1] It has around 18,000 clinics, 16,000 homes for the elderly and those with special needs, and 5,500 hospitals, with 65 percent of them located in developing countries.[2] In 2010, the Church's Pontifical Council for the Pastoral Care of Health Care Workers said that the Church manages 26% of the world's health care facilities.[3]"
"The Catholic Church is the largest non-governmental provider of education and medical services in the world.[1]"
Yes. How does that make it OK to teach people heaven is only for the rich?
That's a deliberate mischaracterization of Catholic teaching on indulgences. In fact that's actually an understatement, you're just making things up.
Heaven is for the saints, full stop.
How do you become a saint if your sins aren't forgiven?
Indulgences don't forgive sins.
Repentance and penance are two different things.
Sainthood is defined as IIRC being in a perpetual state of grace, it is the attainment of spiritual perfection. Saints aren't made, they are recognized.
>Repentance and penance are two different things.
Not for Catholics they're not.
They are explicitly different for Catholics.
Repentance comes before penance by necessity, you cannot be penitent if you are not repentant.
Repentance is a state of being, something you can feel. Penance is something you do as a result.
Oh so now it's salvation by faith alone?
You seem kind of hostile. Read some of Jesus' parables on works, like the Talents or the Two Sons.
We don't earn Christ's sacrifice. He opened the door to life for all who can walk with him freely, and he is the only one who could have done it.
But the way to life is narrow, and few find it. The way is open, but you still have to go to him through fire and tribulations of the world.
... So yes.
lol no
you don't seem to get it, so I'm going to spell it out for you
faith is one of the charismatic gifts of the Holy Spirit corresponding to particular members of the body of Christ, like tongues or healing
this is all outlined unambiguously in 1 Corinthians 12
claiming salvation is through faith alone is like claiming salvation is through tongues alone, or prophecy alone, or healing alone
that chapter even says explicitly that faith is not given to everyone
8 For to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; to another the word of knowledge by the same Spirit;
9 To another faith by the same Spirit; to another the gifts of healing by the same Spirit;
10 To another the working of miracles; to another prophecy; to another discerning of spirits; to another divers kinds of tongues; to another the interpretation of tongues:
it's not just one thing, it's all of them working in unison within the body of the Church
this is really basic stuff, but most protestants just ignore it because of their presuppositions
So you need to have your sins forgiven to be saved, which you want only the rich to be able to.
What part about "indulgences don't forgive sin" aren't you getting?
You can literally just ask for an indulgence, you get one a day maximum. The Catholics banned paying for indulgences in the 16th century ffs.
Like, your polemics are literally more than 400 years behind the times.
Oh no an indulgence, literally the worst thing ever. How DARE the Pope try to reach more people directly.
You know, it's often those who are quickest to point fingers who are guilty and seeking to deflect suspicion elsewhere.
You're hyper focusing on something literally nobody else gives a single fuck about and thinking you've dealt the ultimate hammer blow to the foundations of the Great Whore. Get a grip.
or try addressing the obvious conflict between Sola Fide and 1 Corinthians 12 outlined here
I don't think it's bad to begin with. That's your assumption, I'm just correcting misinformation.
I could care less if someone wants to paypig to get out of saying the rosary or volunteering at a soupkitchen, there are much bigger problems I need to concern myself with.
I do agree with the decision to ban payments for indulgence though.
>What part about "indulgences don't forgive sin" aren't you getting?
The part where it's not stupid bullshit you made up.
No you need to follow the Church too, if you don't your faith is degenerate because it's incomplete + contradictory cause numerous of prots attack the Church Jesus made while claiming being follower of him.
So yeah you can have something you call ""faith"" but it's just some messed up believe you made in your brain for making a religion who go in your way relying on Old and New Testaments background to try to hold your mental illness.
so maybe take your meds ?
>Yes. How does that make it OK to teach people heaven is only for the rich?
Never taught that.
Your own interpretation about a situation you don't understand as your own protestant bible interpretation.
One Saint-Barthelemy was not enough.
It makes no sense. Why would god dare if someone pays money?
>teaching the exact, surgically-accurate, complete, utter and total opposite of Mark 10:25 was never a real problem
How comically absurd would your beliefs have to get before you stop for a second and wonder if you're the bad guy?
>He thinks that makes it better
>simony is defined by William Blackstone as "obtain[ing] orders, or a licence to preach, by money or corrupt practices"
Paying for a licence to preach eh? Hmm, I wonder who could be doing that. Let's boot up the old search engine and have a look at "licence to preach".
Oh wait, it's all protestants offering free online ordination and licences to preach for ten bucks a pop.
>Curious how much it costs to get ordained and become a wedding officiant? Learn about free online ordination with American Marriage Ministries, how to purchase ministry credentials, government minister registration, and resources for training and supplies.
Fascinating.
>Every day, thousands of people who feel so-called choose to get ordained online through online churches like the Universal Life Church and are given the aforementioned legal privileges immediately by virtue of their ordination. These people are then empowered to take control of their own spiritual life!
>Ordinations from the Universal Life Church are free of cost, are valid for life, and never need to be renewed. Minister's licenses cost very little, especially when you think about what you can legally do with them. The various branches of the Universal Life Church provides these documents for different prices, but they generally cost around $10. This price makes our minister's license a great deal, especially when you consider that you can use it to legally perform a wedding for friends or family members (among other kinds of ceremonies).
>For each ministerial level of licensure, new applicants are required to complete this credentialing training course to obtain ministerial license with the United Pentecostal Church International. Each credentialing level includes 10 training courses.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism
why are you so mad though?
Whataboutism is an American term to dismiss legitimate hypocracy
>$2 bill in the bag
wtf lmao
>2 dollar
>5 dollar
>2 euro and 150 euro cent
Is this AI?
No it's euros
we give the lord our best
you should do the same
>murder someone
>pay $1
7 But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees coming to his baptism, he said to them, “You brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the wrath to come? 8 Bear fruit in keeping with repentance. 9 And do not presume to say to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham as our father,’ for I tell you, God is able from these stones to raise up children for Abraham. 10 Even now the axe is laid to the root of the trees. Every tree therefore that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.
>Bear fruit in keeping with repentance.
>Every tree therefore that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.
Do you WANT a second reformation?
Kissing the scapular gives you 500 days indulgence according to one of the Popes no?
How fucking Hebraic. The apple doesn't fall too far from the tree.
39
On the following day, since the task had now become urgent, Judas and his companions went to gather up the bodies of the fallen and bury them with their kindred in their ancestral tombs.
40
But under the tunic of each of the dead they found amulets sacred to the idols of Jamnia, which the law forbids the israelites to wear. So it was clear to all that this was why these men had fallen.
41
They all therefore praised the ways of the Lord, the just judge who brings to light the things that are hidden.
42
* Turning to supplication, they prayed that the sinful deed might be fully blotted out. The noble Judas exhorted the people to keep themselves free from sin, for they had seen with their own eyes what had happened because of the sin of those who had fallen.
43
He then took up a collection among all his soldiers, amounting to two thousand silver drachmas, which he sent to Jerusalem to provide for an expiatory sacrifice. In doing this he acted in a very excellent and noble way, inasmuch as he had the resurrection in mind;
44
for if he were not expecting the fallen to rise again, it would have been superfluous and foolish to pray for the dead.
45
But if he did this with a view to the splendid reward that awaits those who had gone to rest in godliness, it was a holy and pious thought.
46
Thus he made atonement for the dead that they might be absolved from their sin.
>SOLA FIDE
>SOLA SCRIPT- ACK!!
>
>39
>On the following day, since the task had now become urgent, Judas and his companions went to gather up the bodies of the fallen and bury them with their kindred in their ancestral tombs.
>40
>But under the tunic of each of the dead they found amulets sacred to the idols of Jamnia, which the law forbids the israelites to wear. So it was clear to all that this was why these men had fallen.
>41
>They all therefore praised the ways of the Lord, the just judge who brings to light the things that are hidden.
>42
>* Turning to supplication, they prayed that the sinful deed might be fully blotted out. The noble Judas exhorted the people to keep themselves free from sin, for they had seen with their own eyes what had happened because of the sin of those who had fallen.
>43
>He then took up a collection among all his soldiers, amounting to two thousand silver drachmas, which he sent to Jerusalem to provide for an expiatory sacrifice. In doing this he acted in a very excellent and noble way, inasmuch as he had the resurrection in mind;
>44
>for if he were not expecting the fallen to rise again, it would have been superfluous and foolish to pray for the dead.
>45
>But if he did this with a view to the splendid reward that awaits those who had gone to rest in godliness, it was a holy and pious thought.
>46
>Thus he made atonement for the dead that they might be absolved from their sin.
-- What book is this from?
2 Maccabees
ez
>inb4 that's not a real book
says who
>2 Maccabees
>ez
>>inb4 that's not a real book
>says who
LOL
I kind of figured.
BTW All books are real, but some are fiction.
I don't claim to know definitively ether way on these Maccabees books.
Thanks for the Reply Anon.
You're welcome.
2 Maccabees was written by a 2nd century BC israelite who was fluent in Koine Greek for reasons related to Alexander the Great. It's not "fiction", he didn't make it up. He just talks about prays for the dead and large monetary donations to the Temple in Jerusalem in the religious context of the Second Temple period, that's all.
Makes perfect sense to me.
2nd Maccabees was considered part of the canon until Luther removed it since it btfod him on purgatory and indulgences. The 66 book canon was the reformers coping and adopting, literally, the israelite's canon
>2nd Maccabees was considered part of the canon until...
Pope Gregory the Great said that the Maccabees were not canonical (An Exposition on the Book of Blessed Job, Book 19, Chapter 34).
The Catholic church only declared that the apocrypha was to be considered infallible Scripture in April 1546 (Council of Trent).
The Old Testament is a threefold canon, made up of the Tanakh, which is the Law (Torah), the Writings (Nevi’im), and the Prophets (Ketuvim). These were laid up in the Temple.
The apocryphal writings were not considered to be part of this threefold canon, and were therefore not laid up in the Temple. They were not considered to be holy. They were known to be a separate body of text from the Holy Scriptures. This is why the apocrypha was never declared to be Scripture until 1546.
>since it btfod him on purgatory and indulgences.
The "prayers for the dead" in Maccabees are for people who have committed a mortal sin (idolatry) so it cannot even be defended by Catholic standards.
2 Maccabbees was declared canonical during the Synod of Hippo and the Council of Carthage in the year 400. It's canonicity is upheld by the Oriental churches, who had been out of communion with Rome for 1000 years before Trent.
Why do you even bother peddling such obvious and easily revealed lies? You know they aren't true, and they make you and your position look terrible.
NO
Absolutely Not!
That is a SIN
Read Acts and see what Paul thought about offering or receiving money for God's Favor, or Spiritual Gifts..
It is WRONG!
and yes, Popes sin.
The Vatican should make a gacha game. You roll to unlock various qt anime styled saint girls. You draw a cross on the screen with your finger to roll.
Nah, lootboxes would revitalize Catholicism with zoomers. Pray the rosary enough times and a lootbox drops which you can open to forgive a random number of sins.
They paid to have mass said in their name and it was believed a mass celebrated in their honour would lessen their time in pergatory.
"The Catechism of the Catholic Church describes an indulgence as "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 all of the saints"."
>a remission before God of the temporal punishment due to sins whose guilt has already been forgiven
>sins whose guilt has already been forgiven
>guilt has already been forgiven
I can no longer meaningfully tell the difference between a protestant and a troll. They both say the same things.