Where are We in the Timeline of Church History?

5 BC	Jesus is Born (calculated by the fact Herod died in 4 BC, see Matt 2:15, 19; Jesus was born while he was King)[1]
AD 33	Jesus’ Crucifixion, Resurrection, Pentecost[2]
AD 70	Destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem (2nd Temple)
325	Council of Nicaea
451	Council of Chalcedon (Leo the Great involved)
476	Fall of Rome
800	Charlemagne crowned Holy Roman Emperor
1517	Martin Luther’s 95 Theses
1906	Azusa Street Revival (Los Angeles, CA)
1992	Community Life Church planted aka Cornerstone Fellowship Church

I. The Rise of the Papacy

You cannot understand the Reformation without understanding the Roman Catholic Church. And you can’t understand the Roman Catholic Church without understanding the Pope.

The Pope

We begin with the Pope, because there is no Roman Catholic Church without the Pope.

Term: “Papas” was a common term for high church officials. It means “father” and gets used for many people in the Western and Eastern churches. Gonzalez, “Whereas in the West it eventually was reserved for the bishops of Rome, in the East it continued to be used with more liberality.”[3]

Rome and the Rise of Bishops

Rome itself was an important city in the early church: Capital of the Roman Empire and cast a large shadow because of this; Peter and Paul were both associated with the city, and both were martyred there; Paul’s letter to the Romans.

The Rise of bishops and Roman Bishops: In the early church influential pastors in certain cities grew in stature, and other pastors in the city deferred to their leadership and council. These “bishops” were men like Clement bishop of Rome, Ignatius bishop of Antioch, Cyprian bishop of Carthage, and later Augustine the bishop of Hippo (Africa). Strong and influential pastors in cities began to have an implicit leadership position in their respective cities. These were called bishops. Rome had several powerful bishops (like Clement). Roman bishops eventually claimed for themselves a “greater among equals” status.

E.g., Ignatius, Bishop of Antioch around AD 100:

See that you all follow the bishop, even as Jesus Christ does the Father, and the presbytery as you would the apostles; and reverence the deacons, as being the institution of God. Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop. Let that be deemed a proper Eucharist, which is [administered] either by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude [of the people] also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church. It is not lawful without the bishop either to baptize or to celebrate a love-feast; but whatsoever he shall approve of, that is also pleasing to God, so that everything that is done may be secure and valid.
Ignatius, The Epistle of Ignatius to the Smyrnaean

In 381 at the Council of Chalcedon there was a canon passed which said the bishop of Constantinople was “to enjoy the privileges of honour after the bishop of Rome.”[4] This seems to imply the Roman bishop is first among equals for bishops.

Leo the Great

• He argued along these lines in the mid-400s, arguing that disputes between bishops should be brought to him, and an edict by Valentinian III also proclaimed the Roman bishop supreme in the West.[5] He himself was forceful in his theology and rightfully influential.
• Leo the Great (400-461) is bishop of Rome from 440-461. A powerful bishop at a time when the Roman Empire was fading fast.
• In 449 a monk rose up in the east in Constantinople and the archbishop of Constantinople, Flavian. This monk Eutyches (378–454) was claiming that Christ had only one nature—one nature in one person. In other words, his human and divine natures were one single nature. Not good.
• Flavian the archbishop needed help, so he wrote and asked Leo in Rome for assistance. Leo wrote what is called his Tome on June 13, 449. In it he forcefully defended the view that Christ is one person with two natures, one divine and one human. An excerpt:
• Without detriment therefore to the properties of either nature and substance which then came together in one person, majesty took on humility, strength weakness, eternity mortality: and for the paying off of the debt belonging to our condition inviolable nature was united with passible nature, so that, as suited the needs of our case, one and the same Mediator between GOD and men, the Man Christ Jesus, could both die with the one and not die with the other. Thus in the whole and perfect nature of true man was true GOD born, complete in what was His own, complete in what was ours. And by “ours” we mean what the Creator formed in us from the beginning and what He undertook to repair.
  Pope Leo the Great, The Tome of Leo[6]
• Leo a key figure at the Chalcedonian Council near Constantinople in May 451. 520 bishops gathered. Leo argued strongly for the view that Christ is one person with two natures (divine and human). This is reflected in the Chalcedonian Creed.
• But he was more than a theological mind. Attila the Hun came to Rome in 452, and Leo persuaded him not to invade Rome. This event massively increased his stature.

Gregory the Great (540-604)

• Born in a wealthy family, trained as a lawyer.
• Prefect in Rome and gave his fortune to build seven monasteries.
• Became a monk, but sent as representative to Constantinople.
• In 590 Pope Pelagius died and Gregory was chosen to take his place.
• He expanded the power of the Roman bishop significantly through his integrity, commitment to service, organizational skill (common refrain for Roman leaders), preaching constantly, theological writings.
• He was committed to Augustine but not in a helpful manner. When Augustine speculated, Gregory took it as possessing binding authority. Augustine speculated about purgatory, but Gregory turned it into unbreakable doctrine. He argued that grace was resistible. Though the Bible was seen as verbally inspired, he gave an equal place to tradition.
• Liturgical development through what we now call “Gregorian chant.”
• Wrote the Book of Pastoral Care to help priests care for their flocks.

Theological support for the Roman Bishop’s Supremacy

Bishop Cyprian of Carthage (ca 210–258) wrote that Matthew 16:18 establishes the office of bishop. Then,

****Age has followed age and bishop has followed bishop in succession, and the office of the episcopate and the system of the Church has been handed down, so that the Church is founded on the bishops and every act of the Church is directed by these same presiding officers.
Cyprian of Carthage, Epistle 26.1

Bishop Stephen (AD 255) argued in similar fashion from Matthew 16:18. Peter is the rock, and Peter was based in Rome later in his life. Thus, all Roman bishops stand on his shoulders in a unique way.

RESPONSE: This argument is not sound. The person of Peter is important in the early church, and Acts 1–15 bring this out. He preaches the Pentecost sermon, performs early miracles, is involved in the Spirit baptism of Cornelius (the first named Gentile), and has a commanding voice in the council in Jerusalem in Acts 15.

But then...Peter vanishes completely from Acts. Acts 15:7 is the last mention of Peter. Hmm. A strange silence if we are to think of him as the first pope.

More importantly, reading the NT you get no sense anywhere that the government of the church is to include a single figure at the time who at times speaks infallibly, who is to rise above all elders and other apostles and deacons and all churches everywhere. What verse would give you this impression? Certainly Matthew 16:18 falls woefully short to sustain all this architecture.

Papal Infallibility codified

Assumed for centuries

Eventually the tradition surrounding the pope would get codified in 1869 in the doctrine of Papal Infallibility at the First Vatican Council:

Therefore, faithfully adhering to the tradition received from the beginning of the christian faith, to the glory of God our saviour, for the exaltation of the catholic religion and for the salvation of the christian people, with the approval of the sacred council, we teach and define as a divinely revealed dogma that when the Roman pontiff speaks EX CATHEDRA, that is, when, in the exercise of his office as shepherd and teacher of all Christians, in virtue of his supreme apostolic authority, he defines a doctrine concerning faith or morals to be held by the whole church, he possesses, by the divine assistance promised to him in blessed Peter, that infallibility which the divine Redeemer willed his church to enjoy in defining doctrine concerning faith or morals. Therefore, such definitions of the Roman pontiff are of themselves, and not by the consent of the church, irreformable. So then, should anyone, which God forbid, have the temerity to reject this definition of ours: let him be anathema.
First Vatican Council, Chapter IV, “On the Infallible Teaching of the Roman Pontiff” (1869)

The Catholic Church by the end of the early Middle Ages (476–800)

• Polity built on established bishops and a celibate priesthood
• Polity centered on the Pope
• Very developed theology
• Growing monastic movement
• II. Charlemagne and Pope Leo III: “Why Can’t We Be Friends?”

Charlemagne a ruthless and powerful leader of French and expanding territories in the 8^th century. Yet, he was aware he was morally questionable and needed some way to sanitize his reign...

During his rise, Pope Leo III was facing strong opposition in Italy—really strong. They put out his eyes and cut out part of his tongue. He went to King Charlemagne for help.

The solution to both of them was The Holy Roman Empire, an attempt to resurrect the Roman Empire from its death in 476.

On Christmas day, 800, Pope Leo III crowned Charlemagne the “Holy Roman Emperor” with words to fit the occasion were said repeatedly over Charlemagne: “To Charles, the most pious Augustus, crowned by God, the great and peace-giving Emperor, life and victory.”[7]

This gave Leo protection and Charlemagne a way to sanctify his political ambitions. This strange marriage between Pope and Emperor, church and state, is not a new one. Emperors were involved with bishops for most of the significant councils that produced the Ecumenical Creeds (Nicene, Chalcedonian).

In some form or fashion, the “Empire” would endure even into the 1800s. Yet...

These “Emperors” were not like the Emperors of the original Roman Empire. They were kings of local lands and nations who ruled also as a “greater among equals” alongside other European leaders.

As the New World Encyclopedia says, “At no time could the Emperor simply issue decrees and govern autonomously over the Empire.”

Still, if you recall Emperor Charles V was the presiding political figure at Luther’s famous Diet of Worms in 1521. It was in both their interests to see Luther’s views suppressed.

During this era, Emperors and Popes had to dance to together, though sometimes the Emperor and sometimes the Pope had the stronger hand.

Two weapons a Pope could use to keep nations under their thumb:

Excommunication – A pope could simply excommunicate or threaten to excommunicate a monarch. This brought civil leaders into line.

“The interdict”: This was when a Pope forbade the Lord’s Supper to an entire country. Because of the Catholic doctrine of the sacraments, this was a powerful tool. Leaders knew they risked a massive uprising if they did not comply.

III. Thomas Aquinas (1224–1274): The Most Important Catholic Theologian

Augustine isn't a Roman Catholic theologian in the way that Aquinas is. Augustine was part of the early Church Fathers and isn't so distinctly Catholic as Thomist. One historian called Aquinas the "main theological backbone" of the Roman Catholic Church. He was brilliant, prolific, and well worth the time to read even for Protestants. 

Thomas Aquinas (1224-1274).[8] Aquinas influenced the Reformers greatly in his method and theology. “Thomist” is typically the way scholars and ideas are referred to when they are based in Thomas Aquinas.

Called the “Ox of Sicily” for his physical girth, but also the “Angelic Doctor” as one of the great “doctors” of the Roman Catholic Church (alongside other men like Augustine).

His nickname as a schoolboy, however, was “the Dumb Ox,” because his aloof philosophizing did not make him a great student.

He sought to reconcile faith and reason, employing especially Aristotle in this attempt.

His father a knight who served the Emperor of the Holy Roman Empire Frederick II.

When Thomas decided to become a Dominican friar, his family went to great lengths to prevent this—even kidnapping him and holding him hostage until he relented. He didn’t.

As a friar he was mentored by Albert the Great and given an excellent education in Naples, Italy.

Thomas’ great work was the Summa Theologica or “the Summa.”

Estimated to be a million and a half words, triple the size of Calvin’s Institutes.

It covers 2,668 topics, and these are covered by providing a statement, asking questions about it, answering those questions, providing objections, and then responding to those objections.

It is seen as “the main theological backbone” of the Roman Catholic Church, cited over 700 times at Vatican II in the 1960s. Augustine came in second at over 500 times.

As a Reformed Protestant we wouldn’t uphold many of the articles, but this doesn’t mean he isn’t extremely helpful to incorporate into a study.

Thomas was an important figure for the Reformers. Keith Mathison provides a good summary of their attitude toward and use of Thomas:

So, should old Aquinas be forgotten? No. As the contributors to Tabletalk back in 1994 argued, there is much we can learn from Thomas as well as from other pre-Reformation theologians. The theologians of the Reformation learned from him. His discussion of natural theology and natural law, his writings on analogical language about God, his doctrine of the Trinity, and his discussion of the attributes of God provided much food for thought during the era of Reformed orthodoxy. Much of what he said on these subjects was incorporated into the theological systems of the Reformation. The Reformed theologians disagreed with and rejected his doctrine of justification. They also disagreed with much of his sacramental theology, including his doctrine of transubstantiation, but Reformed theologians disagreed also with Martin Luther’s doctrine of the Eucharist without discarding everything Luther wrote.
Keith Mathison, “Should We Read Thomas Aquinas?”[9]

Thomas Aquinas’ arguments for the existence of God

• God is the “prime mover,” the first body which gave motion and energy to all others (development of a view of Aristotle)
• God is the “first cause,” as all things are effects of a prior cause, eventually you get back to the very first of all causes which has no cause.
• God is the “necessary” thing that gives rise to all necessary things which follow (and all possible things that can either exist or not exist).
• God is the truly “perfect” being above which there is nothing more perfect. All things have a degree of perfection, but God is that which has nothing above him in perfection.
• Teleological: God is the final “purpose” for all things. Everything possesses purpose of some kind, and God is that great over-arching purpose for all things.

Interestingly, Thomas at the end of his life had some kind of encounter with God that profoundly affected the 49-year old Friar. He told a friend, “The end of my labors has come. All that I have written appears to be as so much straw after the things that have been revealed to me.” True to his word, he immediately stopped working on the Summa. Providentially, he would die only a few months later.

IV. Catholics with Protestant Leanings: John Wyclif (1328-1384)[10]

As we get closer to the Reformation, signs of opposition

John Wycliff – Oxford educated, felt Pope should be a pastor and shepherd, upheld authority of Scripture, opposed transubstantiation.

“Neither the testimony of Augustine nor Jerome, nor any other saint should be accepted except in so far as it was based upon Scripture.”[11]

More on Wycliffe...

14^th century predecessor to the Reformers

Born in northern England, educated at Oxford (doctoral degree in 1372).

Began rethinking the church’s historic idea of its own authority as supreme over all others, especially civil authorities. He said civil authorities could hold spiritual authorities accountable for their actions.

In 1366 he even wrote a defense for the English Parliament when they would not financially support the Pope.

His critique of the Catholic Church was connected to the disreputable lives of the clergy and especially the pope. He appealed for the model of the poor apostle that he saw in the Bible.

“The pope should be the shepherd of the flock and the preacher who brings men to Christ.”[12]

As his critiques intensified, Catholic Church’s reaction to him intensified. He had protectors in England so he remained active still.

In 1378 he wrote about the Scriptures and said,

Holy Scripture was the highest authority for every believer, the standard of faith and the foundation for reform in religious, political and social life... In itself it was perfectly sufficient for salvation, without the addition of customs or traditions such as canon law, prayers to the saints, fastings, pilgrimages or the Mass.
John Wyclif, Trialogue

In 1380 he wrote against the Lord’s Supper as understood by the Catholics. He rejected transubstantiation.

Eventually he began to argue for the supremacy of the Bible over all teaching of men. Not clear to me how this idea developed in his thinking.

His emphasis on Scripture inspired him to translate Latin Bible into the vernacular. He wrote:

“Neither the testimony of Augustine nor Jerome, nor any other saint should be accepted except in so far as it was based upon Scripture.”[13]

“The New Testament is of full authority, and open to the understanding of simple men, as to the points that be most needful of salvation....He that keepeth meekness and charity hath the true understanding and perfection of all Holy Writ, [for] Christ did not write His laws on tables, or on skins of animals, but in the hearts of men....The Holy Ghost teaches us the meaning of Scripture as Christ opened its sense to His Apostles.”[14]

Men like Wyclif paved the way for Luther but were nowhere near as successful in their efforts as Luther and the 16^th century Reformers.

V. Factors that Facilitated an International Reformation (not Local)

Medieval University System

• Monasteries
• Cathedral Schools to train priests in canon law
• In the 11^th–13^th universities appeared, because need for training was outgrowing the cathedral model.
• Schools like Oxford, Cambridge, others appeared throughout Europe
• It was the university model that produced Thomas Aquinas
• And it was this tradition of education that produced many of the significant early Reformers and the key theological leaders in Europe in the 16^th and 17^th centuries.
• There isn’t a Luther or a Calvin without the Catholic University system.
• In 1516 the Catholic scholar Erasmus produced a definitive Greek New Testament. This, too, changed the landscape massively.

New Technology: Gutenberg’s printing press of mid-1450s brought a dissemination of information not unlike the internet of the 1990s. Facilitated the Reformation ideals being dispersed internationally and abundantly.

New Direction in Scholarship: New passion for “authentic ancient texts,” whether Latin, Greek philosophers, or the Bible in Hebrew and Greek. Erasmus of Rotterdam (1469-1536) arose in this setting, whose ecclectic Greek New Testament did much to set the stage for the Reformer’s passion for sola Scriptura.

VI. The Reformation

How fitting that Catholic monk trained in Augustinian theology at a time when a fresh wave of scholarship was being devoted to the text of the Bible would be the spark to light a million fires throughout Europe and the world.

When the Word of God is placed in the minds and hearts of people there’s no telling what can happen!

VII. The Catholic Response: The Council of Trent (1545-47, 1551-52, 1562-63)

One of the longest lasting effects of the Catholic “Counter-Reformation” is the Council of Trent, a theological response to the rising tide of Protestantism.

Popes generally opposed to councils because of their authority and power. Under Paul III in 1540s, the battle lines between Catholic and Protestant were such that a council in response to the Reformation was required. Convened in Trent with 31 members at first, growing to 213 later. Discussions were held over many years on a number of topics. The dominant doctrinal statement of Rome until “Vatican Council” in 1868, though Trent remains a reliable source of Catholic belief.[15]

Doctrine of Trent

• Self-proclaimed purpose was “the extirpation of heresies and the reform of morals” (1546).

Scripture (1546):

• Affirmed OT and NT, but also Apocrypha (books of Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Maccabees, etc.).
• Interpretation could only be in accordance with “the holy Mother Church” (i.e., Catholic priests, popes)
• Original Sin (1546): paedobaptism forgives the guilt and even power of original sin.

Justification (1547)

• If anyone says that man can be justified before God by his own works, whether done by his own natural powers or through the teaching of the law, without divine grace through Jesus Christ, let him be anathema. (Canon 1)
• If anyone says that the sinner is justified by faith alone, meaning that nothing else is required to co-operate in order to obtain the grace of justification, and that it is not in any way necessary that he be prepared and disposed by the action of his own will, let him be anathema. (Canon 9)
• If anyone says that men are justified either by the sole imputation of the justice of Christ or by the sole remission of sins, to the exclusion of the grace and the charity which is poured forth in the hearts by the Holy Ghost, and remains in them, or also that the grace by which we are justified is only the good will of God, let him be anathema. (Canon 11)
• If anyone says that after the reception of the grace of justification the guilt is so remitted and the debt of eternal punishment so blotted out to every repentant sinner, that no debt of temporal punishment remains to be discharged either in this world or in purgatory before the gates of heaven can be opened, let him be anathema. (Canon 30)

Sacraments (1547 et al)

• Transubstantiation: “By the consecration of the bread and wine a change is brought about of the whole substance of the bread into the substance of the body of Christ our Lord, and of the whole substance of the wine into the substance of His blood. This changed the holy Catholic Church properly and appropriately calls transubstantiation.” (ch. 4)
•  “And inasmuch as in this divine sacrifice which is celebrated in the mass is contained and immolated in an unbloody manner the same Christ who once offered Himself in a bloody manner on the altar of the cross, the holy council teaches that this is truly propitiatory and has this effect, that if we, contrite and penitent, with sincere heart and upright faith, with fear and reverence, draw nigh to God, we obtain mercy and find grace in seasonable aid….The fruits of that blood sacrifice, it is well understood, are received most abundantly through this unbloody one, so far is the latter from derogating in any way from the former.” (ch. 2)

VIII. “Still Catholic...After All These Years”: Second Vatican Council (1962–1965)

Pope John XXIII became Pope in 1958 and immediately called for a Council. This is a big deal. Last one was Vatican I in 1869–1870. Also a big deal because the documents of a council become infallible once a Pope signs off on them. As one Catholic priest said of these Councils, “There is no error in the documents, only in the implementation” (Fr. Christopher Alar). His goal was to confront modernity and its effect on the church.

Sessions were in the fall for four years, 1962–1965.

But...after the first session Pope John died (June 1963). Paul VI elected in his place, and by September the Council was meeting again.

Some of its commitments and declarations

• Mary: Though some cardinals hoped the Church would tone down its Marian devotion, they were outvoted. The Council reaffirmed her perpetual virginity (all of her children born by “immaculate conception”), maintained the view that she was assumed into heaven body and soul upon completing her mission on earth, and they even gave her a new title, “Mother of the Church.”
• Went from saying the church is “a perfect society” or God’s kingdom on earth to speaking more in terms of being a pilgrim people and even a sacrament on earth. It emphasized the church’s obligations to serve throughout the world.
• Officially acknowledged that Eastern Orthodox and Protestant Christians were “separated brethren” (in “imperfect communion”) instead of heretics and schismatics.
• Tried to elevate a spirit of globalism, inspire the laity to service. Lots of emphasis on religious freedom. Spoke against anti-Semitism (changing centuries of verbal attacks on Jews in prayers and liturgies and worse). Called for priests to be involved in social activism as they were able.
• No official doctrine was changed.

Father Christopher Alar, a Catholic priest and historian said the responses to Vatican 2 can be divided into:

• Glad Trad (happy traditionalist, like himself)
• Mad Trad (reject many or most traditions)
• Rad Trad (want no innovations, reject much and sometimes all of Vatican 2)

Not long after Vatican 2, but likely influenced by the kind of change advocated in Vatican 2, another document was published Novus Ordo (1970), which was a recommended liturgy by Pope Paul VI.

• It’s called “the ordinary form” or “the mass of Paul VI” or “novus ordo.”
• It lacked the authority of a Council but it is used widely.
• It does away with Latin and advocates vernacular languages be used.
• The priest faces the congregation—as opposed to facing away the whole time, appropriate for them since the whole mass is another sacrifice offered to God.
• It allows for the blood to be offered to the people and not just the bread.
• It requires a sermon.
• It includes prayers of the people.
• It expands the breadth of Bible readings in the lectionary by creating a 3-year cycle instead of a 1-year cycle.
• Advocates typically expand instruments used, even though officially the organ is the only instrument allowed in a service.

IX. The Modern Catholic Hierarchy

• Pope (one at a time, governs...the world of a billion Catholics)
• Cardinals – A small group of archbishops who choose the Pope. Currently there are 241.
• Bishops / Archbishops – These oversee a diocese, a region with a number of perishes. An archbishop oversees an archdiocese, a bishop over a diocese. An archdiocese is larger. 652 archbishops in the world, about 5,000 bishops.
• Priests – Serve a church/parish. Almost a half-million priests globally
• Catholics – Estimates are that there are 1.3 billion Catholics worldwide.

X. Theology of the Roman Catholic Church

Salvation by works (Catholic) vs. grace (Protestant)

Catholics and Protestants believe “salvation is by grace through faith”—but they mean different things by it!

The difference is what the GRACE does that enables us to be saved.

Catholics believe the grace MAKES us righteous, we then do good works, and then these good works save us.

Protestants believe the grace DECLARES once and forever that we are righteous. This is called “justification.” We are DECLARED righteous, because we are given the righteousness of Jesus and he takes our sinfulness. This is THE GREAT EXCHANGE.

This is why conversations with Catholics can be difficult. We say they believe in a salvation by works, but we believe in a salvation by grace. They say we just don’t understand them. The truth is, we do, and they believe in a salvation by works.

Does this difference matter? Yes.

There is no true assurance or peace for a Roman Catholic. At best they can only hope they will be saved. Because you are saved by good works, you don’t know you have enough until the day of judgment.

Other differences:

The Sacraments: Salvation is presented as through sacraments in the church—not faith and repentance as defined in the New Testament. The key role of Catholic priests is to administer the sacraments, not “preach the word” as Protestant pastors were (are).

Indulgences: For the Catholics, the guilty go to hell, a few righteous go to heaven, and a great many go to Purgatory. This is where God purifies us by fire of remaining sin, so we can be fit for heaven. Indulgences reduce our time in Purgatory—for us or others. But this is a direct rejection of the finished work of Christ, which was “once for all” (Hebrews 10:1-18). Note: Indulgences are still a part of Catholic life. A person can receive reduced punishment for sin (full or partial) by doing something especially sacrificial or holy or religious. But this kind of authority over another person’s judgment and forgiveness isn’t left to us. That is God’s sole power.[16]

From December 1, 2022, at a Catholic website

Plenary Indulgences - General Conditions from https://www.ewtn.com/catholicism/devotions/conditions-13362

The following "General remarks on Indulgences" from Gift of the Indulgence summarizes the usual conditions given in the Church's law (cf. Apostolic Penitentiary, Prot. N. 39/05/I):

1. This is how an indulgence is defined in the Code of Canon Law (can. 992) and in the Catechism of the Catholic Church (n. 1471): "An indulgence is a remission before God of the temporal punishment due to sins whose guilt has already been forgiven, which the faithful Christian who is duly disposed gains under certain prescribed conditions through the action of the Church which, as the minister of redemption, dispenses and applies with authority the treasury of the satisfactions of Christ and the saints".
2. In general, the gaining of indulgences requires certain prescribed conditions (below, nn. 3, 4), and the performance of certain prescribed works ..... [in this case, those granted for the Feast of Mercy]
3. To gain indulgences, whether plenary or partial, it is necessary that the faithful be in the state of grace at least at the time the indulgenced work is completed. [i.e. one must be a Catholic, not excommunicated or in schism.]
4. A plenary indulgence can be gained only once a day. In order to obtain it, the faithful must, in addition to being in the state of grace: have the interior disposition of complete detachment from sin, even venial sin; have sacramentally confessed their sins; receive the Holy Eucharist (it is certainly better to receive it while participating in Holy Mass, but for the indulgence only Holy Communion is required); pray for the intentions of the Supreme Pontiff.
5. It is appropriate, but not necessary, that the sacramental Confession and especially Holy Communion and the prayer for the Pope's intentions take place on the same day that the indulgenced work is performed; but it is sufficient that these sacred rites and prayers be carried out within several days (about 20) before or after the indulgenced act. Prayer for the Pope's intentions is left to the choice of the faithful, but an "Our Father" and a "Hail Mary" are suggested. One sacramental Confession suffices for several plenary indulgences, but a separate Holy Communion and a separate prayer for the Holy Father's intentions are required for each plenary indulgence.
6. For the sake of those legitimately impeded, confessors can commute both the work prescribed and the conditions required (except, obviously, detachment from even venial sin).
7. Indulgences can always be applied either to oneself or to the souls of the deceased, but they cannot be applied to other persons living on earth.

Mary and the Saints: In the Catholic Church, certain heroes and heroines of the faith achieve a special status as “saints.” These “saints” have so many good works in their name they can share some with us. So, if individually we lack sufficient merit to be saved, but we can tap into the excess merit of the saints for assistance.

Nothing rivals the merits of Mary. She is seen as sinless (literally) and as an advocate to God on our behalf. Eventually even her mother was declared to be sinless, in order to protect Mary’s sinlessness. Catholics reject that passages like Matt 13:55–56 teach Jesus had other brothers and sisters. To them it is a wicked and evil idea that Mary would give birth to other sons and daughters. Mary is impressive, no doubt, but not sinless. We don’t need to intervene to God the Father for us—we need only Jesus! “There is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus” (1 Tim 2:5).

The “Hail Mary”
Hail, Mary, full of grace,
the Lord is with thee.
Blessed art thou amongst women
and blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Jesus.
Holy Mary, Mother of God,
pray for us sinners,
now and at the hour of our death.
Amen.

Church has equal authority to the Scriptures: The Roman Catholic Church says the Bible has authority, but that the Bible cannot not be interpreted without the Roman Catholic Church. What the Roman Catholic Church says is true is true, and all else is false. This effectively means the church has equal or even greater authority than the Bible.

XI.Positive Contributions of the Roman Catholic Church

Biblical Manuscripts

• Monasteries preserved them, monks copied them

Theology

• The Reformers differed passionately about some areas of theology, but they also continued much of the theology of the Medieval Catholic Church they were grew up in:
• Revelation, Natural Theology/Law
• The Trinity
• A way of doing theology developed in the rich Medieval tradition—gave them theological skills, vocabulary, authors, traditions to utilize, even when they were critiquing and rebuilding what was given to them by the Catholic Church.

Morality

• The Roman Catholic Church is historically very slow to change. This can be bad (slowness to correct wrong views about salvation and the Mary).
• But this can also be good. Catholics historically have opposed abortion, gay marriage, and other sins that have become tolerated by many so-called Christian denominations.
• Often at a pro-life rally you have conservative Christians and Roman Catholics.
• It is often the case that conservative Protestants and Catholics are “co-belligerents” (Francis Schaeffer). That is, we can stand shoulder-to-shoulder as we fight for causes like ending abortion or opposing gay marriage, etc.

[1] See Dr. Daniel Wallace’s article, https://bible.org/article/birth-jesus-christ.

[2] See Dr. Andreas J. Köstenberger’s article, "April 3, AD 33: Why We Believe We Can Know the Exact Date Jesus Died" (https://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2014/04/april-3-ad-33).

[3] Gonzalez, The Story of Christianity, I:242. 

[4]https://www.papalencyclicals.net/councils/ecum02.htm

[5] Earle E. Cairns, Christianity through the Centuries (Zondervan, 1996), 154.

[6] Available at https://earlychurchtexts.com/public/leo_tome.htm.

[7] Monica Fleener, master’s thesis, “The Significance of the Coronation of Charlemagne,” 2005.

[8] See https://www.worldhistory.org/Thomas_Aquinas/ for much of the following.

[9] Published in the August 2018 issue of Tabletalk and available at https://tabletalkmagazine.com/posts/should-we-read-thomas-aquinas/.

[10] See Ra McLaughlin, “John Wyclif: Morning Star of the Reformation, IIIM Magazine Online, Vol 2 No 32 (August 7 to August 13, 2000).

[11] Ibid., 229.

[12] Cited by Shelley, Plain Language, 226.

[13] Ibid., 229.

[14] Ibid.

[15] Most of this is from Gonzalez, Vol. 2, 119-121.

[16] It’s true the “keys of the kingdom” are given to the church, but this is a much less specific and mathematical power. Preaching the gospel to a person opens the door (turns the key) of salvation to them; a person rejecting our preached gospel is like locking a door of salvation (turning the key to lock it). But this is vastly different from a pope or priest calculating the merit of a given action and then telling us definitively we have achieved a level of forgiveness.