5 ms·

A Pardoner’s Tale

15 points by diodorus 4y ago

RcouF1uZ4gsC 4y ago
Basically, these indulgences were the medieval version of carbon credits. Pay enough money and you could continue in your lifestyle.
- mjh2539 4y ago
  One of the prerequisites for obtaining the indulgence is complete detachment from sin, even venial sin. Another is being in a state of grace. So, no. There was no "continuing" in your lifestyle.
  - richk449 4y ago
    Is that really true? It seems to contradict the doctrine of original sin - that everyone is born in a state of sin. A complete detachment from sin is not possible, although forgiveness for sins is possible through JC.
    - mjh2539 4y ago
      Yes, that's really true.
    - Thorrez 4y ago
      In Catholic terminology, a complete detachment from sin doesn't mean a lack of temptation, or even that we won't sin in the future. Here are some explanations of what complete detachment from sin means: >The recipient must be free from all attachment to sin, even venial sin. Although a person might still sin, as we all do, or even be inclined to habitual sin, such as using God's name in vain, yet so long as the attachment to the sin or the desire to commit it is absent from the person's soul, he or she would be considered "free from attachment to sin." (If this disposition is in any way less than perfect or if any of the prescribed three conditions are not fulfilled, the indulgence will be only partial.)[1] >To be attached to a sin is to be comfortable in that sin; to return to it again and again without much resistance to the temptation to commit it. It is an addiction, where the desire to commit the sin is stronger than the desire to serve God. In essences, it is serving God with reservation and not with total abandonment.[1] >The requirement for someone to be totally detached from sin needs some explanation. No doubt it is the most difficult condition for obtaining the indulgence. Notably, however, the requirement is not freedom from all sin. Rather, it is freedom from attachment to sin; that is, that there is no sin which the soul is unwilling to renounce. A person should be able to tell if he is fulfilling this condition. An attachment involves a refusal to amend a situation, and a person should be able to tell if he has such an attachment. Sometimes, deep down, we really don’t want to let go of certain sins, be it gossiping or overeating or loafing on the job. This differs from the case of normal human weakness or where a person falls into the same sin many times before overcoming it.[2] [1] https://acatholiclife.blogspot.com/2013/05/free-from-all-attachment-to-sin-gaining.html https://acatholiclife.blogspot.com/2013/05/free-from-all-att... [2] https://spiritualdirection.com/2010/11/18/what-is-total-detachment-from-sin-more-indulgence-clarification https://spiritualdirection.com/2010/11/18/what-is-total-deta...
      - richk449 4y ago
        Thanks for the explanation. I should have figured that the Catholics would have put plenty of thought into each word.
- richk449 4y ago
  Seems like a reasonable analogy. The difference though is in what the money paid is used for. The money paid for carbon indulgences goes to reduce the amount of carbon in the atmosphere, so it actually does allow one to pay their way out of their sin. Catholic indulgences on the other hand didn’t help the buyer at all, since the downside (purgatory) was all made up, and they didn’t help the larger world, since they money was either kept by corrupt sellers or used by the church to wage war.
  - andrepd 4y ago
    No, it's actually a very fit analogy: carbon offset credits are pretty much a sham / marketing tactic.
  - dragonwriter 4y ago
    > Catholic indulgences on the other hand didn’t help the buyer at all, since the downside (purgatory) was all made up Even if purgatory is made up, its worth noting that purgatory is basically an afterlife opportunity to resolve unresolved temporal penalties of sin. At the time of the indulgence scandal, the Catholic Church had significant social power to apply toward resolving those temporal consequences before death, and those temporal penalties were very much not imaginary.
  - danielvf 4y ago
    Overall I understand, and agree with you. But the pendant must point out that the most well known sale of indulgences went to fund the construction of one of the most epic buildings on earth. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Peter%27s_Basilica#Financing_with_indulgences https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Peter%27s_Basilica#Financi...
    - dragonwriter 4y ago
      > But the pendant must point out [...] “Pedant” not “pendant”.
      - dllthomas 4y ago
- ZeroGravitas 4y ago
  I don't like this take. It seems to be climate change denial. Implying that climate change isn't real, and even the "believers" are just playing silly games. Fundamentally, atmospheric GHG emissions are fungible. Market based mechanisms to reduce them efficiently make sense. I'd prefer if climate change denial didn't try to destroy our environment, our political establishments, science and basic economics. It's metastized from a short term con into an all out attack on human civilization.
- BizarroLand 4y ago
  There is nothing new under the sun.

15 points by diodorus 4y ago

Basically, these indulgences were the medieval version of carbon credits. Pay enough money and you could continue in your lifestyle.

mjh2539 4y ago
One of the prerequisites for obtaining the indulgence is complete detachment from sin, even venial sin. Another is being in a state of grace. So, no. There was no "continuing" in your lifestyle.
- richk449 4y ago
  Is that really true? It seems to contradict the doctrine of original sin - that everyone is born in a state of sin. A complete detachment from sin is not possible, although forgiveness for sins is possible through JC.
  - mjh2539 4y ago
    Yes, that's really true.
  - Thorrez 4y ago
    In Catholic terminology, a complete detachment from sin doesn't mean a lack of temptation, or even that we won't sin in the future. Here are some explanations of what complete detachment from sin means: >The recipient must be free from all attachment to sin, even venial sin. Although a person might still sin, as we all do, or even be inclined to habitual sin, such as using God's name in vain, yet so long as the attachment to the sin or the desire to commit it is absent from the person's soul, he or she would be considered "free from attachment to sin." (If this disposition is in any way less than perfect or if any of the prescribed three conditions are not fulfilled, the indulgence will be only partial.)[1] >To be attached to a sin is to be comfortable in that sin; to return to it again and again without much resistance to the temptation to commit it. It is an addiction, where the desire to commit the sin is stronger than the desire to serve God. In essences, it is serving God with reservation and not with total abandonment.[1] >The requirement for someone to be totally detached from sin needs some explanation. No doubt it is the most difficult condition for obtaining the indulgence. Notably, however, the requirement is not freedom from all sin. Rather, it is freedom from attachment to sin; that is, that there is no sin which the soul is unwilling to renounce. A person should be able to tell if he is fulfilling this condition. An attachment involves a refusal to amend a situation, and a person should be able to tell if he has such an attachment. Sometimes, deep down, we really don’t want to let go of certain sins, be it gossiping or overeating or loafing on the job. This differs from the case of normal human weakness or where a person falls into the same sin many times before overcoming it.[2] [1] https://acatholiclife.blogspot.com/2013/05/free-from-all-attachment-to-sin-gaining.html https://acatholiclife.blogspot.com/2013/05/free-from-all-att... [2] https://spiritualdirection.com/2010/11/18/what-is-total-detachment-from-sin-more-indulgence-clarification https://spiritualdirection.com/2010/11/18/what-is-total-deta...
    - richk449 4y ago
      Thanks for the explanation. I should have figured that the Catholics would have put plenty of thought into each word.
richk449 4y ago
Seems like a reasonable analogy. The difference though is in what the money paid is used for. The money paid for carbon indulgences goes to reduce the amount of carbon in the atmosphere, so it actually does allow one to pay their way out of their sin. Catholic indulgences on the other hand didn’t help the buyer at all, since the downside (purgatory) was all made up, and they didn’t help the larger world, since they money was either kept by corrupt sellers or used by the church to wage war.
- andrepd 4y ago
  No, it's actually a very fit analogy: carbon offset credits are pretty much a sham / marketing tactic.
- dragonwriter 4y ago
  > Catholic indulgences on the other hand didn’t help the buyer at all, since the downside (purgatory) was all made up Even if purgatory is made up, its worth noting that purgatory is basically an afterlife opportunity to resolve unresolved temporal penalties of sin. At the time of the indulgence scandal, the Catholic Church had significant social power to apply toward resolving those temporal consequences before death, and those temporal penalties were very much not imaginary.
- danielvf 4y ago
  Overall I understand, and agree with you. But the pendant must point out that the most well known sale of indulgences went to fund the construction of one of the most epic buildings on earth. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Peter%27s_Basilica#Financing_with_indulgences https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Peter%27s_Basilica#Financi...
  - dragonwriter 4y ago
    > But the pendant must point out [...] “Pedant” not “pendant”.
    - dllthomas 4y ago
ZeroGravitas 4y ago
I don't like this take. It seems to be climate change denial. Implying that climate change isn't real, and even the "believers" are just playing silly games. Fundamentally, atmospheric GHG emissions are fungible. Market based mechanisms to reduce them efficiently make sense. I'd prefer if climate change denial didn't try to destroy our environment, our political establishments, science and basic economics. It's metastized from a short term con into an all out attack on human civilization.
BizarroLand 4y ago
There is nothing new under the sun.