Wednesday, December 05, 2007
The Roman Catholic Church puts on a holiday special
I am a Protestant, the spiritual heir of people who waged war over such Roman Catholic practices as the granting of indulgences. Apparently they were not entirely successful:
Pope Benedict XVI is offering relief from purgatory to Roman Catholics who travel to Lourdes over the next year, the Vatican said yesterday.
Pilgrims to the shrine in south-west France will receive "plenary indulgences" from the Pontiff, which the Church says reduce the time spent being "washed" of sin after death. The indulgences will be available from this weekend until Dec 8, 2008.
The Church teaches that people who do not go directly to heaven must spend time in purgatory, where they can be purified of residual sin.
It is the latest initiative to get more pilgrims to the shrine, famous for the reported healing properties of its water. In August the Vatican opened an airline service offering pilgrims direct flights from Rome to Lourdes.
What is this, some sort of joint venture with the French tourism board?
Here's my question: Why mess around with incentive schemes? They screw up the market. Pretty soon, people are going to want plenary indulgences for, say, a four-hour tour of the Vatican Museum. I think the church should get back to ordering people around. The pope should forthwith issue an encyclical that requires a pilgrimage to Lourdes. You know, like the hajj.
17 Comments:
, atIf this article doesn't pretty much sum it up regarding organized religion, I don't know what does.
, at
This was actually the original purpose of indulgences: perform acts of devotion (pilgrimages) as a way to cleanse your soul of sin. Now, around the beginning of the second millennium, a little scuffle on the Iberian Peninsula between Christians and Muslims wound up screwing the indulgence system up. See, going off to war to aid in the reconquista was also considered a pilgrimage. However, it wasn't very egalitarian, as only the wealthy could really afford the armor and weaponry. Thus, entire towns could be granted indulgences if they pooled their resources to outfit a single pilgrim with the necessary equipment. Next thing you know, anyone who really had anything better to do was getting an indulgence by sponsoring a pilgrim. Eventually, the church just cut out the pilgrim all together and you could buy your way into heaven. That's when Luther got into a snit.
Now, the problem with trying to continue this usage of indulgences in the modern world is that there are things like airline services operated by the Vatican. I mean, for crying out loud, a thousand years ago you literally had to walk a thousand miles to find salvation. Today you take a vacation. Give me a break.
It is crap like this that makes me consider leaving the Church.
Couldn't you just buy a Fiat and call it even?
-David
By commoncents, at Thu Dec 06, 12:11:00 PM:
Great site!
Would you like a Link Exchange with The Internet Radio Network?? At the IRN you can listen for free to over 50 of America's top Talk Shows via Free Streaming Audio!!
http://netradionetwork.com
Given how many people usually die during the haij every year making it mandatory is probably a bad idea.
, atIndulgences? They work on the same principle as carbon credits.
, atYa gotta love organised religion, you can be the most miserable, despicable tyrant, but, in the end, buy your way out of hell and perpetual damnation. Almost want to become a democrat politician....nahhh ,there isn't that much money in the world.
By AB, at Thu Dec 06, 07:16:00 PM:
A Primer on Indulgences
http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/1994/9411fea1.asp
I spent 2 days in Lourdes in July 2005, not as a pilgrim, but instead as a cyclist following the Tour de France. It was a depressing and downright offensive place. Depressing because everywhere you turned, there were the afflicted -- men, women and children -- being wheeled around by nurses in little nurse caps, to and from the shrine. The offensive part was that every little shop was selling plastic water bottles in the image of the Virgin Mary emblazoned with the words "holy water". The idea was to purchase the bottle and then fill it at the shrine. The juxtaposition of sad, sick and/or infirm people whose faith led them to Lourdes with the crass commercialism of the place was sickening. It is a bizarre place.
By Miss Ladybug, at Fri Dec 07, 01:51:00 AM:
Anon 10:11pm~
I've not been to Lourdes. My best friend was able to go through the church choir when we were in high school in Germany. She very much enjoyed being there with other faith-filled people from around the world. All those infirmed people? They have faith that the water might cure them of their infirmity. There are stories of those whose infirmity have disappeared after contact with the water there.
And, I invite you to name one tourist attraction anywhere in the West where local merchants don't try to make a buck off of tacky merchandise. When going to Lourdes, I guess one should plan ahead and bring your own container...
Miss Ladybug - I appreciate your point of view and am not questioning the devotion of the pilgrims. I do believe in miracles also.
Thing is, I expect places like Disneyworld to shill for the tourist dollar. In Lourdes, the "tourist" is a believer who is there seeking their miracle. Little Virgin Mary water bottles seemed to me to be predatory somehow. If it works for the people who go there, fine. But Disney World atmosphere in what is supposed to be a Holy place didn't work for me.
If the Church thinks it is a good idea for people to bring home the water for themselves or others who desire it, why can't the Shrine just give them away?
By Miss Ladybug, at Fri Dec 07, 11:20:00 AM:
I don't know who "owns" the Shrine, and I would hope they don't charge admission (I think The Virgin Mary would not approve...), so how are all those little bottles supposed to be paid for? Putting an image of Mary of the bottles may be tacky to you and me, but others don't agree. I live in Texas, and you can buy tacky devotional candles in tacky candle jars with Our Lady of Guadalupe and Jesus on them. Not my thing, but they obviously sell, or else they wouldn't be there.
By Miss Ladybug, at Fri Dec 07, 11:21:00 AM:
Oh - I forgot to mention that those tacky devotional candles are at the grocery store I use...
, at
The details of religious devotion differ the world over. Some prefer quiet worship without fanfare or decorations, but others prefer crowds and opulence. Some perform actual tests of faith in divine power (like snakes, for instance) and others believe that one should rely on oneself only, using the abilities and hands that God gave them. And some believe that ritually slaughtering an animal is an act of worship, while others feel that saving stray pets from euthanasia is the same.
The variety is astounding. I'm sure if the citizens of Lourdes really didn't like such practices, they'd do something about it.
But this talk of indulgences made me wonder, how far away is the next Crusade?
That would certainly make an interesting premise for a book or movie.
By Diane / "Didi", at Sun Dec 09, 11:16:00 AM:
OK, maybe it's just me, but somehow gaining an "indulgence" so you don't have to spend so much time in Purgatory "washing away your sins" before you can go to Heaven ... would send you to Heaven looking a little dingey ... kind of like the old "ring around the collar".
Don't get me wrong ... I'm a Christian, but I believe in going straight to the source. I don't need some priest to give me an indulgence. Jesus already made me white as snow.
But maybe that's just me.
By TigerHawk, at Sun Dec 09, 11:20:00 AM:
Or maybe, Diane, you're a Protestant.
By Diane / "Didi", at Sun Dec 09, 11:31:00 AM:
Yes, I guess that would be most accurate. I'm Protestant. But still, if someone has to go to Purgatory, it seems like you shouldn't be able to buy your way out, or your heart's not really in it.
But then again, being raised Protestant, I really don't "get" the whole Purgatory doctrine and the part about praying to saints, which (to me) seems totally counter to what the Old Testament teaches.
Again, I have to plead ingnorance.