On Fri, 18 Jul 1997, Stephen J. Harris wrote:
>
> In short, the penitential practices of the medieval church were too
> various and too complex to suppose they were uniformly corrupt in
> allowing an exchange of cash for contrition.
One minor correction to an otherwise most enlightening commentary: it
would have to be "cash for satisfaction," even if one thereby sacrifices
the alliteration. A penitent who lacked contrition (i.e., was insincere
in confessing his sins) would be in big trouble whether he did his penance
(satisfaction) himself or paid someone else to do it. The very reasoning
behind the permitted exceptions (e.g., if you are mentally or physically
incapable of performing the satisfaction) turns on the difference between
internal (contrition) and external (satisfaction). No one can do my
contrition for me but under circumstances, one form of satisfaction
(money) could substitute for another form (pilgrimage, psalm-chanting
etc.) The exceptions are open to abuse, of course, but since they have to
do only with the satisfaction part of the process, they do not represent a
crass effort to "buy" salvation.
Dennis Martin
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|