RE: Edwards Claims His Mega-Mansion is Carbon Neutral
For those who are unaware, in the early part of the Sixteenth Century, Pope Leo X effectively codified the practice of selling indulgences. This practice led Martin Luther to write his 95 theses and thus was born the reformation and the Protestant Church.
In Catholic theology, an indulgence is like an excuse slip from your mother. It allows those who are "in communion with the church" to be excused of venial sins they have committed. Some people believe that the Catholic Church has discarded that part of their theology, but that is not the case. What they have done is to eliminate the sale of indulgences and to crack down on their use as a "get out of jail free" mechanism.
In the church of liberalism, hypocrisy is only a venial sin. In fact, it's not really even that if you don't get caught. The adoption of indulgences by liberals is classic stuff. Liberals continuously demonstrate that they are unable to learn from history and that contrary evidence is no impediment to their goals. The fact that the sale of indulgences nearly destroyed the Catholic church is not a strong reason for them to abandon the sale of their own indulgences, otherwise known as carbon credits.
Gore and Edwards are cartoon characters. It is telling that The Beast in Pants Suits has not jumped on to the carbon indulgences bandwagon. There is little doubt that her mansion in Chappaquiddick is a carbon nightmare, but she's smarter than these two clowns. She doesn't engage in the sappy hand wringing and Chicken Little jingoism. And Hillary's New Negro proves himself to be a quick study as well.
It will be interesting to watch when Hillary's Machine decides the antics of Algore and The Silky Pony are stinking up the Democrat political house too badly. The attendant smackdown should be quite amusing.
In Catholic theology, an indulgence is like an excuse slip from your mother. It allows those who are "in communion with the church" to be excused of venial sins they have committed. Some people believe that the Catholic Church has discarded that part of their theology, but that is not the case. What they have done is to eliminate the sale of indulgences and to crack down on their use as a "get out of jail free" mechanism.
In the church of liberalism, hypocrisy is only a venial sin. In fact, it's not really even that if you don't get caught. The adoption of indulgences by liberals is classic stuff. Liberals continuously demonstrate that they are unable to learn from history and that contrary evidence is no impediment to their goals. The fact that the sale of indulgences nearly destroyed the Catholic church is not a strong reason for them to abandon the sale of their own indulgences, otherwise known as carbon credits.
Gore and Edwards are cartoon characters. It is telling that The Beast in Pants Suits has not jumped on to the carbon indulgences bandwagon. There is little doubt that her mansion in Chappaquiddick is a carbon nightmare, but she's smarter than these two clowns. She doesn't engage in the sappy hand wringing and Chicken Little jingoism. And Hillary's New Negro proves himself to be a quick study as well.
It will be interesting to watch when Hillary's Machine decides the antics of Algore and The Silky Pony are stinking up the Democrat political house too badly. The attendant smackdown should be quite amusing.
posted by Anonymous | 9:39 AM
3 Comments:
You said
"In Catholic theology, an indulgence is like an excuse slip from your mother. It allows those who are "in communion with the church" to be excused of venial sins they have committed. Some people believe that the Catholic Church has discarded that part of their theology, but that is not the case. What they have done is to eliminate the sale of indulgences and to crack down on their use as a "get out of jail free" mechanism."
Good grief that is false. It is apparent you have no idea what an indulgence is.
As to Pope Leo
"the Bull of Pope Leo X proclaiming the Indulgence which afforded Luther a pretext for his apostasy. Leo determined to bring to completion the magnificent Church of St. Peter, commenced by his predecessor, Julius II. With that view he issued a Bull promulgating an Indulgence to such as would contribute some voluntary offering toward the erection of the grand cathedral. Those, however, who contributed nothing shared equally in the treasury of the Church, provided they complied with the essential conditions for gaining the Indulgence. The only indispensable conditions enjoined by the Papal Bull were sincere repentance and confession of sins. D'Aubigne admits this truth, though in a faltering manner, when he observes that "in the Pope's Bull something was said of the repentance of the heart and the confession of the lips."[Vol. I. p. 214.] The applicants for the Indulgence knew well that, no matter how munificent were their offerings, these would avail them nothing without true contrition of heart.
No traffic or sale of Indulgences was, consequently, authorized or countenanced by the Head of the Church, since the contributions were understood to be voluntary. In order to check any sordid love of gain in those charged with preaching the Indulgence, "the hand that delivered the Indulgence," as D'Aubigne testifies, "could not receive the money: that was forbidden under the severest penalties."[Ibid.]"
John Tetzel, a Dominican monk, who had been appointed the chief preacher to announce the Indulgence in Germany, was accused by Luther of exceeding his powers by making them subservient to his own private ends. Tetzel's conduct was disavowed and condemned by the representative of the Holy See. The Council of Trent, held some time after, took effectual measures to put a stop to all irregularities regarding Indulgences and issued the following decree: "Wishing to correct and amend the abuses which have crept into them, and on occasion of which this signal name of Indulgences is blasphemed by heretics, the Holy Synod enjoins in general, by the present decree, that all wicked traffic for obtaining them, which has been the fruitful source of many abuses among the Christian people, should be wholly abolished."[Sess. xxv. Dec. de Indulgentia.]
http://www.catholicapologetics.net/ff-27
Jh
Homer
Louisiana
It's kind of funny. Some Catholics just look embarrassed about them and change the subject, others want to fight you over it. The ones that have the most invested in the whole idea of the infallibility of the Pope are the ones most likely to want to fight.
That is all Catholic propaganda. Luther caught them with their pants around their ankles and they have spent 500 years coming up with excuses.
Post a Comment
<< Home