www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Indulgences

It seems to cut both ways. I took the long road, you took the short one. For this regrettable flourish, I apologize.

Joe however we resolve your question as worded we come to a point of "damned if you do, damned if you don't" - a yes to your inquiry as worded brings on challenges to the ideas of the "Surplus merits" (a somewhat antiquated phrasing I have only found in old texts or recent polemics... and a no opens the floodgates for "See you have backpeddled on this error!"

As I have said before, sans authoritative teaching or counciliar interpretation entity, the issue seems silly to debate. Who is to say Rome is wrong? What council? Which patriarch? Which author interpreting the words of either of the former? (Don't make me bring Alex into this to bring up some embarassingly pro-Western thinking Kievan Baroque canonized Orthodox saint!)

I am happy to clear up as best I can misunderstandings about what the teachings on these matters are from Rome. Anymore, dayslong debates on who is objectively "right" in thier support or objection to such "hot button issues" just doesn't appeal to me.

If debate is desired, and a fruitful outcome is sincerely hoped for, trying to understand who or what has a definative teaching authority for definition seems to be the first and almost only needed debate. All the remaining ancillary pet issues are just sidestepping that issue. IF we come to an understanding about the papacy that mirrors what is taught about Petrine ministry by Rome, debate hardly seems needed. If we come to an understanding THAT teaching is in error, debate seems useless.

I was primarily just interested in getting some clarification about what exactly the doctrine is and what is changeable theological explanation.

Joe

Dearest Elizabeth, Child of God!

You are so very right!

I believe that penances, including the canonical penances, sometimes NEED to be imposed by Father Confessors, especially in a day and age when we come to automatically expect forgiveness of our sins - and then go on and not do anything to avoid committing them in future.

"There is always confession" we hear people say!

I think a balance can be struck here. Personally, if I get a penance - it is in my best interest to fulfill it, period.

If my priest thinks I should be canonically penanced - it's a serious thing!

My grandfather used to confess me (he was a UGCC priest). He would often consider that my most important and deadliest sin was my weak prayer life and so his penance largely consisted in getting me to pray at least three times daily - for several weeks.

He tried to build the habit of regular prayer into me and told me not to stop there.

For me, the indulgenced prayers of reading the bible for half an hour, the rosary and an hour of adoration in Church - they would all help in this regard.

In addition, I do believe that I offended God by my sins, especially when my failure to be prayerful and thus open to God's Grace would have kept me from committing them.

Indulgences were a way to reconcile me further for the damage I have done not only to myself in this way, but also to the Church.

Don't think I could ever, in a lifetime, repair that damage. But I'll pray and perform "works of repentance" and I hope the indulgences I use will make up for what is lacking therein.

That's how I see it from a personal POV.

And I do not compare myself to a holy soul like you. I only ask you to pray for me!

Alex

Dear Joe,

Even St Seraphim of Sarov would often compare the good that we do in God through Christ by the Spirit as a kind of "heavenly bank account" into which we can deposit as much as we can and like for our everlasting enjoyment and happiness.

As we rely on the prayers of the Saints in the Communion of Saints, we can most certainly avail ourselves of all that they have been blessed with and share with and minister to us.

Just as Orthodox monastics could take on another's burden of penance to lessen it, could not the Saints take on some of our burden to perform "works of repentance" that are necessary to both heal the sinfulness within us that Confession forgives (but doesn't necessary heal so that we don't sin in future). There is also the matter of the rupture that our sins cause "publicly" to the Church, the Body of Christ.

We can never be certain that we have achieved a "plenary indulgence." We probably cannot in this life.

By the same token, can we ever be sure that our "works of repentance" have fully healed the breach between ourselves and God and the Church that our sins have caused, have fully healed us spiritually and strengthened us sufficiently for the future temptations?

I don't see how we can. We must pray until our dying breath and repent of our sincs, performing works of repentance always. At the same time, indulgences that assure us that God looks more on our disposition with great Mercy than on the fulfillment of what Divine Law would exact can be an aid to us along the way, much as a fellow layperson or monastic can be who takes on somem of the burden of our works of repentance.

And such can also assist the souls of the faithful departed and help them come closer to God.

Anything more exact than this would make me a Thomist!

Alex

EM, reading through the thread, it wasn't clear to me that this in fact was your objection. But the teaching that Plenary indulgences are difficult to achieve doesn't preclude the idea of a believer in turn still getting a partial indulgence.

As to "And even partial indulgences are probably not granted if someone is not present to the moment and fully attentive to the readings or prayers." Who said that? It leads into your next paragraph... But no one said that.

That you have known "bead counters" who made these errors doesn't change that they are errors.

To say they went to the SSPX to continue to "teach the pre-Vatican II ideas" it would be more accurate to say that having joined the SSPX, they have taken opportunity anew to "teach error that was more common in the pre-Vatican II era". What wasn't the teaching then, isn't the teaching now. What was an error then, is still one today.

Dear Simple,

And there is nothing wrong with bead counting.

Beads are like a trampoline that get us good and ready before we launch upward and soar through the heavens in our prayer and meditation.

I'm still just going up and down with my beads clicking away though . . .

Alex

I am very pro-bead counting, and knot counting for that matter!

Yes, I try to use beads or knots too as an aid to keep focused on God.

Is this a valid definition of indulgence?

the remission before God of the temporal punishment due for sins already forgiven as far as their guilt is concerned.

Dear Recluse,

Yes.

Alex

Dear Elizabeth Maria,

A student of mine once made a joke saying that the rosary was a form of prayer that "seemed to last for five decades . . ."

Would that he would apply such genius to his studies!

Alex

What about the 15 decade Rosary ... now expanded to 20 decades by Pope John Paul II?

What is your question here, EM?

It is a good and pious thing. The Rosary is still 5 decades long, with 4 sets of mysteries to alternate through. Some particularly pious souls may well go through all 20 in a day... Others may never say it at all in their entire lifetime.

I was just expanding on the comment made by Alex about the 5 decade rosary taking 50 years to say. Hypothetically if that were the case, then a 20 decade rosary would take 200 years to complete.

Of course it is a joke, nothing more.

Slightly off topic ...
Have you heard of St. Seraphim of Sarov's Orthodox Rosary?
Historically, there was a group of Dominicans who established a priory in Georgia. They became Orthodox Christians and because they were not wealthy being the order of mendicant friars preachers, could not afford another set of monastic robes. So the tradition was started about the Orthodox white-robed monastics. As you are aware, St. Seraphim wore white monastic robes. Not only that, he adapted the Dominican Rosary and made it Orthodox with 15 decades too.

Another group of Dominicans settled in Constantinople to help resolve the Great Schism but likewise converted to Orthodoxy.

Elizabeth,

Where in Georgia is their monastery?

Joe