web analytics

Tag: Philosophy

  • The Ring of Gyges

    The Ring of Gyges

    The Ring of Gyges: Exploring Morality and Invisibility

    What would you do if you could never be caught?

    That’s the challenge posed by The Ring of Gyges, a thought experiment introduced by Plato in The Republic (Book II). It’s not just a magic story. It’s a deep dive into the nature of morality, justice, and human character—a tale that’s as relevant today as it was in ancient Greece.

    The scenario is simple but unsettling: Would you still act morally if no one could see your actions? And if not, what does that say about the real source of our ethics?

    The Story

    Plato tells the story through Glaucon, who challenges Socrates by recounting the myth of Gyges, a shepherd in the service of the king of Lydia.

    One day, after an earthquake, Gyges discovers a cave containing a bronze horse with a dead giant inside. On the corpse’s finger is a mysterious ring. Gyges takes it and soon discovers that he becomes invisible when he turns the ring inward.

    With his newfound power, Gyges seduces the queen, murders the king, and seizes the throne.

    No one holds him accountable. No one knows what he’s done. And that’s the point.

    According to Glaucon, anyone—no matter how just—would act the same if they had such power.

    Glaucon’s Challenge

    Glaucon uses the story to argue that people are only just because of social consequences. We don’t want to be punished. We want approval. But take away those consequences—through a ring of invisibility—and our true selfish nature will emerge.

    He says that justice is a social contract, a mutual agreement among people who fear the consequences of wrongdoing. Strip away that fear, and morality collapses.

    Or does it?

    This is the question Socrates—and Plato—aim to explore throughout the rest of The Republic.

    The Real Ethical Dilemma

    The Ring of Gyges isn’t about fantasy. It’s about temptation. Plato’s challenge is timeless:

    • If you could act without consequences…

    • If you could steal, lie, or cheat with impunity…

    • If you could harm without being caught…

    …would you still choose to be good?

    And if the answer is no, does that mean justice is just a performance?

    Socrates’ Rebuttal

    Socrates doesn’t deny that the ring could corrupt. But he argues that injustice damages the soul of the one who commits it. Even if a person gains power or pleasure through wrongdoing, they suffer internally—through disordered desires, anxiety, or spiritual disharmony.

    In Plato’s vision, justice is not just about external rules. It’s about inner harmony. A just person is aligned with reason, controls their impulses, and lives with peace of mind.

    In this view, morality is its own reward—even if no one is watching.

    Modern Parallels

    The Ring of Gyges has found echoes in countless modern scenarios:

    1. Online Anonymity

    On the internet, many people behave worse under the mask of anonymity—trolling, doxxing, or spreading misinformation. Without accountability, the ring goes digital.

    2. Whistleblowers vs. Corrupt Officials

    When people think they’re untouchable—politicians, executives, even religious leaders—they sometimes act as if the rules don’t apply. Invisibility comes in many forms: legal power, social privilege, or institutional cover.

    3. Surveillance and Ethics

    Debates about government surveillance often raise this question in reverse: If people behave better when they know they’re being watched, is mass surveillance justified?

    Would you prefer a society where people do the right thing because it’s right, or because they’re afraid of being seen?

    The Psychology of Hidden Actions

    Research in psychology supports Plato’s concern. Studies show that **people are more likely to cheat or lie when:

    • They feel anonymous

    • They perceive low risk of detection

    • They think “everyone else is doing it”

    Conversely, people are more ethical when:

    • They reflect on their values

    • They feel watched or accountable

    • They see others acting ethically

    In short, character and context both matter. The ring doesn’t create evil but reveals what’s already there.

    Related Thought Experiments

    • The Trolley Problem: Focuses on moral decision-making with visible consequences. The Ring of Gyges flips that script—what happens when no consequences exist?

    • The Experience Machine: Explores whether pleasure is enough, or if authenticity matters too.

    • Plato’s Allegory of the Cave: Also in The Republic, it contrasts illusion and enlightenment—another journey from shadow to truth.

    These stories all test what it means to live a good life.

    Pop Culture References

    The Ring of Gyges has inspired many fictional works:

    • The One Ring in Tolkien’s Lord of the Rings: Grants invisibility—and slowly corrupts the bearer.

    • H.G. Wells’ The Invisible Man: A scientist turns invisible and descends into madness and crime.

    • Harry Potter’s Invisibility Cloak: Used for both noble and mischievous ends.

    The trope of “power without consequence” is a storytelling staple—and a moral test.

    What Would You Do?

    Here’s the twist: Most people believe they would still act morally. But when tested, the line between who we are and what we do when no one’s watching often blurs.

    The Ring of Gyges forces us to ask:

    • Is morality real, or is it performance?

    • Do we act justly out of principle or out of fear?

    • Who are we when no one is looking?

    It’s easy to say, “I would never,”—but the point is to ask, “What would keep me from doing wrong?”

    Glossary of Terms

    • Justice: Fairness or moral rightness; in Plato’s philosophy, inner harmony between reason, spirit, and desire.

    • Ethics: The study of right and wrong behavior.

    • Social Contract: The idea that society is based on mutual agreements for the common good.

    • Anonymity: The condition of being unknown or unidentifiable—often linked to moral disengagement.

    • Moral Character: The traits or habits that reflect how a person consistently chooses right from wrong.

    Discussion Questions

    1. Would you act differently if you knew no one would ever find out?

    2. What keeps you from doing something wrong: consequences, conscience, or community?

    3. Is morality still meaningful when no one else is affected or aware?

    References and Further Reading

  • The Paradox of Hedonism

    The Paradox of Hedonism

    The Paradox of Hedonism: Why Chasing Happiness Can Leave You Empty

    Happiness. It’s the one thing nearly everyone wants—and yet, the harder we chase it, the more elusive it seems. This odd reality is captured in a philosophical idea known as the paradox of hedonism, which suggests that pursuing pleasure directly often leads to disappointment, not satisfaction.

    It sounds counterintuitive: If you want to be happy, shouldn’t you pursue what feels good? But countless thinkers, from Greek philosophers to modern psychologists, have argued the opposite—that happiness is best achieved as a byproduct, not a goal.

    Let’s unwrap this paradox and explore why joy doesn’t like to be hunted.

    What Is the Paradox of Hedonism?

    Also known as the pleasure paradox, this idea suggests that:

    The more intensely you pursue pleasure or happiness for its own sake, the less likely you are to achieve it.

    Coined by British philosopher Henry Sidgwick in the 19th century and popularized by John Stuart Mill, the concept isn’t just theoretical. It has practical roots in how people live, work, love, and struggle.

    Mill himself put it succinctly:

    “Those only are happy who have their minds fixed on some object other than their own happiness.”

    Ancient Roots: The Greeks Were Onto Something

    The paradox isn’t new. Epicurus, the ancient Greek philosopher often (mis)labeled a hedonist, believed that true pleasure comes from simplicity, moderation, and avoiding pain—not from indulgence.

    • He warned against luxury for its own sake.

    • He taught that peace of mind (ataraxia) was more valuable than bursts of sensory pleasure.

    In short: Don’t chase the high. Cultivate the calm.

    Modern Psychology Agrees

    Today’s psychologists echo these ideas with evidence-based studies:

    1. Happiness as a Side Effect

    Research shows that people who focus too much on being happy often feel worse in the long run. Why?

    • It sets unrealistic expectations.

    • It leads to constant self-monitoring.

    • It increases disappointment when feelings don’t match the goal.

    2. Flow Theory

    Psychologist Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi introduced the concept of flow—a state of intense engagement where time fades and effort feels effortless.

    Ironically, people in flow aren’t thinking about happiness. They’re immersed in something meaningful—and happiness follows.

    3. Self-Determination Theory

    According to this model, intrinsic goals (like connection, mastery, and autonomy) lead to deeper well-being than extrinsic goals (like fame, wealth, or constant pleasure).

    Pursuing meaning leads to satisfaction. Pursuing pleasure alone often does not.

    Real-Life Examples

    You don’t have to be a philosopher to experience this paradox.

    • Romance: The person desperate to find love may come across as clingy or anxious—and sabotage relationships.

    • Leisure: Obsessing over having the perfect vacation can make you miserable when things don’t go exactly as planned.

    • Social Media: Chasing likes, follows, and digital approval might feel rewarding in the moment, but studies show it often undermines long-term well-being.

    The harder you try to feel good, the more you notice when you don’t.

    So What Does Work?

    If direct pursuit is flawed, how do we find happiness? Philosophers and psychologists offer a few detours that work surprisingly well.

    1. Focus on Others

    Volunteering, acts of kindness, and social connection consistently rank high in happiness studies. People who give their time and attention to others often report more personal satisfaction than those who focus solely on themselves.

    2. Engage in Purposeful Work

    Finding “your thing”—a skill, job, or calling that matters—creates structure and pride. Even difficult tasks can yield satisfaction if they’re meaningful.

    3. Cultivate Gratitude

    Regularly reflecting on what’s already good in your life shifts the focus away from what’s missing. This reorientation helps combat the “hedonic treadmill,” where you quickly adapt to new pleasures and want more.

    4. Let Go a Little

    Sometimes, the best path is simply not trying so hard. Mindfulness practices like meditation teach people to accept the moment, not force it to be joyful. Happiness often shows up when you stop demanding it.

    Ethical Dimensions

    The paradox also raises moral questions. Is it selfish to chase personal pleasure above all else? Can a life devoted solely to hedonism be fulfilling—or even moral?

    1. Utilitarianism vs. Egoism

    Utilitarians like Mill believed that seeking the good of others often enhances your own well-being. Egoists, in contrast, prioritize personal gain. The paradox suggests egoism might be self-defeating: chasing happiness alone can make you unhappy.

    2. Virtue Ethics

    From this angle, a good life isn’t one filled with pleasure—it’s one lived with courage, wisdom, and compassion. Happiness is the shadow cast by living well, not the object in the spotlight.

    3. Existentialism

    Philosophers like Viktor Frankl and Albert Camus emphasized meaning over pleasure. Frankl, a Holocaust survivor, famously wrote:

    “Happiness cannot be pursued; it must ensue.”

    In extreme suffering, happiness may be out of reach—but meaning never has to be.

    Cultural Influences

    Western cultures often emphasize personal happiness as a life goal. But other traditions view it differently:

    • Buddhism teaches that desire is the root of suffering—and that clinging to pleasure leads to pain.

    • Confucianism values harmony, duty, and social order above personal gratification.

    • Stoicism advocates cultivating inner resilience rather than chasing external comfort.

    In short: The world’s oldest wisdom traditions don’t glorify pleasure—they guide people beyond it.

    Glossary of Terms

    • Hedonism – The pursuit of pleasure as the highest good.

    • Flow – A psychological state of deep engagement and focus.

    • Ataraxia – A state of serene calmness, especially in Epicurean philosophy.

    • Hedonic Treadmill – The tendency to return to a stable level of happiness despite positive or negative events.

    • Self-Determination Theory – A psychological framework highlighting the importance of autonomy, competence, and relatedness.

    Discussion Questions

    1. Have you ever experienced the paradox of hedonism in your own life?

    2. Should happiness be a goal, or a side effect of something else?

    3. How might our culture’s emphasis on pleasure impact our moral development?

    References and Further Reading

    • Sidgwick, Henry. The Methods of Ethics, 1874.

    • Mill, John Stuart. Utilitarianism, 1863.

    • Csikszentmihalyi, Mihaly. Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience.

    • Frankl, Viktor. Man’s Search for Meaning, 1946.

    • Psychology Today – “Why Chasing Happiness Doesn’t Work”

  • Martin Luther’s 95 Theses

    Martin Luther’s 95 Theses

    Martin Luther’s 95 Theses: The Start of the Protestant Reformation

    Martin Luther’s 95 Theses didn’t just challenge a religious practice—they cracked the foundation of the Catholic Church’s authority and launched the Protestant Reformation. Nailed (or mailed) on October 31, 1517, the 95 Theses questioned the legitimacy of selling indulgences and ignited a global reform movement.

    What Were Martin Luther’s 95 Theses?

    Martin Luther’s 95 Theses, officially titled Disputation on the Power and Efficacy of Indulgences, were a series of academic statements that challenged the Catholic Church’s teachings, particularly its practice of selling indulgences.

    Written in Latin, the document wasn’t a public protest but a formal call for scholarly debate. Luther, a theology professor at the University of Wittenberg, aimed to address corrupt practices he believed misled faithful Christians.

    Key term: An indulgence was a certificate sold by the Church promising forgiveness of sins and reduced time in purgatory.

    Why Did Martin Luther Write the 95 Theses?

    In 1517, a Dominican friar named Johann Tetzel aggressively marketed indulgences across German territories. His famous line, “As soon as a coin in the coffer rings, the soul from purgatory springs,” perfectly captured what Luther found so wrong.

    Luther believed that salvation came by faith alone (sola fide), not by purchasing forgiveness. He argued that the pope had no authority to sell divine grace and that true repentance could not be bought.

    Key Events and Dates in Martin Luther’s 95 Theses

    ???? October 31, 1517

    Luther likely mailed his 95 Theses to Archbishop Albrecht of Mainz and may have also posted them on the door of All Saints’ Church in Wittenberg, following academic custom. This symbolic act is now recognized as the start of the Protestant Reformation.

    ???? December 10, 1520

    Luther burned the papal bull Exsurge Domine, which had ordered him to recant under threat of excommunication.

    ???? January 3, 1521

    Pope Leo X officially excommunicated Martin Luther via the decree Decet Romanum Pontificem.

    ???? April 17–18, 1521

    Luther appeared before the Diet of Worms, a formal assembly of the Holy Roman Empire. When asked to recant, he allegedly declared, “Here I stand, I can do no other.”

    How the Printing Press Helped Spread the 95 Theses

    While Luther intended the theses for internal academic discussion, unauthorized German translations quickly circulated—thanks to the printing press, invented by Johannes Gutenberg in the mid-1400s.

    Within weeks, copies of Luther’s theses had spread throughout Germany. Within months, they had reached most of Europe. The Reformation went viral by 16th-century standards.

    Was the 95 Theses Event Really a Protest?

    Yes and no. The tone of the 95 Theses was academic and respectful, not rebellious. Luther didn’t originally seek to leave the Church but to correct what he saw as abuses. He addressed the pope directly and used Church-approved debate methods. But once the controversy gained public traction, the Church’s backlash radicalized Luther and his supporters.

    Legacy of Martin Luther’s 95 Theses

    The 95 Theses didn’t just launch a religious reformation—they reshaped European history. The movement led to:

    • The creation of Lutheranism and other Protestant denominations

    • The Counter-Reformation and the Council of Trent

    • Translation of the Bible into the vernacular (German)

    • Centuries of religious conflict and political upheaval

    Today, the event is commemorated every October 31st as Reformation Day, particularly in Germany and among Protestant communities worldwide.

    Quick Facts About Martin Luther’s 95 Theses

    FactDetail
    Date PostedOctober 31, 1517
    LocationWittenberg, Saxony (Holy Roman Empire)
    Original LanguageLatin
    Full TitleDisputatio pro declaratione virtutis indulgentiarum
    Number of Theses95
    Target of CriticismIndulgences and papal authority
    Historical OutcomeSparked the Protestant Reformation

    Out of love for the truth and from desire to elucidate it, the Reverend Father Martin Luther, Master of Arts and Sacred Theology, and ordinary lecturer therein at Wittenberg, intends to defend the following statements and to dispute on them in that place. Therefore he asks that those who cannot be present and dispute with him orally shall do so in their absence by letter. In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, Amen.

    1. When our Lord and Master Jesus Christ said, “Repent” (Mt 4:17), he willed the entire life of believers to be one of repentance.
    2. This word cannot be understood as referring to the sacrament of penance, that is, confession and satisfaction, as administered by the clergy.
    3. Yet it does not mean solely inner repentance; such inner repentance is worthless unless it produces various outward mortification of the flesh.
    4. The penalty of sin remains as long as the hatred of self (that is, true inner repentance), namely till our entrance into the kingdom of heaven.
    5. The pope neither desires nor is able to remit any penalties except those imposed by his own authority or that of the canons.
    6. The pope cannot remit any guilt, except by declaring and showing that it has been remitted by God; or, to be sure, by remitting guilt in cases reserved to his judgment. If his right to grant remission in these cases were disregarded, the guilt would certainly remain unforgiven.
    7. God remits guilt to no one unless at the same time he humbles him in all things and makes him submissive to the vicar, the priest.
    8. The penitential canons are imposed only on the living, and, according to the canons themselves, nothing should be imposed on the dying.
    9. Therefore the Holy Spirit through the pope is kind to us insofar as the pope in his decrees always makes exception of the article of death and of necessity.
    10. Those priests act ignorantly and wickedly who, in the case of the dying, reserve canonical penalties for purgatory.
    11. Those tares of changing the canonical penalty to the penalty of purgatory were evidently sown while the bishops slept (Mt 13:25).
    12. In former times canonical penalties were imposed, not after, but before absolution, as tests of true contrition.
    13. The dying are freed by death from all penalties, are already dead as far as the canon laws are concerned, and have a right to be released from them.
    14. Imperfect piety or love on the part of the dying person necessarily brings with it great fear; and the smaller the love, the greater the fear.
    15. This fear or horror is sufficient in itself, to say nothing of other things, to constitute the penalty of purgatory, since it is very near to the horror of despair.
    16. Hell, purgatory, and heaven seem to differ the same as despair, fear, and assurance of salvation.
    17. It seems as though for the souls in purgatory fear should necessarily decrease and love increase.
    18. Furthermore, it does not seem proved, either by reason or by Scripture, that souls in purgatory are outside the state of merit, that is, unable to grow in love.
    19. Nor does it seem proved that souls in purgatory, at least not all of them, are certain and assured of their own salvation, even if we ourselves may be entirely certain of it.
    20. Therefore the pope, when he uses the words “plenary remission of all penalties,” does not actually mean “all penalties,” but only those imposed by himself.
    21. Thus those indulgence preachers are in error who say that a man is absolved from every penalty and saved by papal indulgences.
    22. As a matter of fact, the pope remits to souls in purgatory no penalty which, according to canon law, they should have paid in this life.
    23. If remission of all penalties whatsoever could be granted to anyone at all, certainly it would be granted only to the most perfect, that is, to very few.
    24. For this reason most people are necessarily deceived by that indiscriminate and high-sounding promise of release from penalty.
    25. That power which the pope has in general over purgatory corresponds to the power which any bishop or curate has in a particular way in his own diocese and parish.
    26. The pope does very well when he grants remission to souls in purgatory, not by the power of the keys, which he does not have, but by way of intercession for them.
    27. They preach only human doctrines who say that as soon as the money clinks into the money chest, the soul flies out of purgatory.
    28. It is certain that when money clinks in the money chest, greed and avarice can be increased; but when the church intercedes, the result is in the hands of God alone.
    29. Who knows whether all souls in purgatory wish to be redeemed, since we have exceptions in St. Severinus and St. Paschal, as related in a legend.
    30. No one is sure of the integrity of his own contrition, much less of having received plenary remission.
    31. The man who actually buys indulgences is as rare as he who is really penitent; indeed, he is exceedingly rare.
    32. Those who believe that they can be certain of their salvation because they have indulgence letters will be eternally damned, together with their teachers.
    33. Men must especially be on guard against those who say that the pope’s pardons are that inestimable gift of God by which man is reconciled to him.
    34. For the graces of indulgences are concerned only with the penalties of sacramental satisfaction established by man.
    35. They who teach that contrition is not necessary on the part of those who intend to buy souls out of purgatory or to buy confessional privileges preach unchristian doctrine.
    36. Any truly repentant Christian has a right to full remission of penalty and guilt, even without indulgence letters.
    37. Any true Christian, whether living or dead, participates in all the blessings of Christ and the church; and this is granted him by God, even without indulgence letters.
    38. Nevertheless, papal remission and blessing are by no means to be disregarded, for they are, as I have said (Thesis 6), the proclamation of the divine remission.
    39. It is very difficult, even for the most learned theologians, at one and the same time to commend to the people the bounty of indulgences and the need of true contrition.
    40. A Christian who is truly contrite seeks and loves to pay penalties for his sins; the bounty of indulgences, however, relaxes penalties and causes men to hate them — at least it furnishes occasion for hating them.
    41. Papal indulgences must be preached with caution, lest people erroneously think that they are preferable to other good works of love.
    42. Christians are to be taught that the pope does not intend that the buying of indulgences should in any way be compared with works of mercy.
    43. Christians are to be taught that he who gives to the poor or lends to the needy does a better deed than he who buys indulgences.
    44. Because love grows by works of love, man thereby becomes better. Man does not, however, become better by means of indulgences but is merely freed from penalties.
    45. Christians are to be taught that he who sees a needy man and passes him by, yet gives his money for indulgences, does not buy papal indulgences but God’s wrath.
    46. Christians are to be taught that, unless they have more than they need, they must reserve enough for their family needs and by no means squander it on indulgences.
    47. Christians are to be taught that they buying of indulgences is a matter of free choice, not commanded.
    48. Christians are to be taught that the pope, in granting indulgences, needs and thus desires their devout prayer more than their money.
    49. Christians are to be taught that papal indulgences are useful only if they do not put their trust in them, but very harmful if they lose their fear of God because of them.
    50. Christians are to be taught that if the pope knew the exactions of the indulgence preachers, he would rather that the basilica of St. Peter were burned to ashes than built up with the skin, flesh, and bones of his sheep.
    51. Christians are to be taught that the pope would and should wish to give of his own money, even though he had to sell the basilica of St. Peter, to many of those from whom certain hawkers of indulgences cajole money.
    52. It is vain to trust in salvation by indulgence letters, even though the indulgence commissary, or even the pope, were to offer his soul as security.
    53. They are the enemies of Christ and the pope who forbid altogether the preaching of the Word of God in some churches in order that indulgences may be preached in others.
    54. Injury is done to the Word of God when, in the same sermon, an equal or larger amount of time is devoted to indulgences than to the Word.
    55. It is certainly the pope’s sentiment that if indulgences, which are a very insignificant thing, are celebrated with one bell, one procession, and one ceremony, then the gospel, which is the very greatest thing, should be preached with a hundred bells, a hundred processions, a hundred ceremonies.
    56. The true treasures of the church, out of which the pope distributes indulgences, are not sufficiently discussed or known among the people of Christ.
    57. That indulgences are not temporal treasures is certainly clear, for many indulgence sellers do not distribute them freely but only gather them.
    58. Nor are they the merits of Christ and the saints, for, even without the pope, the latter always work grace for the inner man, and the cross, death, and hell for the outer man.
    59. St. Lawrence said that the poor of the church were the treasures of the church, but he spoke according to the usage of the word in his own time.
    60. Without want of consideration we say that the keys of the church, given by the merits of Christ, are that treasure.
    61. For it is clear that the pope’s power is of itself sufficient for the remission of penalties and cases reserved by himself.
    62. The true treasure of the church is the most holy gospel of the glory and grace of God.
    63. But this treasure is naturally most odious, for it makes the first to be last (Mt. 20:16).
    64. On the other hand, the treasure of indulgences is naturally most acceptable, for it makes the last to be first.
    65. Therefore the treasures of the gospel are nets with which one formerly fished for men of wealth.
    66. The treasures of indulgences are nets with which one now fishes for the wealth of men.
    67. The indulgences which the demagogues acclaim as the greatest graces are actually understood to be such only insofar as they promote gain.
    68. They are nevertheless in truth the most insignificant graces when compared with the grace of God and the piety of the cross.
    69. Bishops and curates are bound to admit the commissaries of papal indulgences with all reverence.
    70. But they are much more bound to strain their eyes and ears lest these men preach their own dreams instead of what the pope has commissioned.
    71. Let him who speaks against the truth concerning papal indulgences be anathema and accursed.
    72. But let him who guards against the lust and license of the indulgence preachers be blessed.
    73. Just as the pope justly thunders against those who by any means whatever contrive harm to the sale of indulgences.
    74. Much more does he intend to thunder against those who use indulgences as a pretext to contrive harm to holy love and truth.
    75. To consider papal indulgences so great that they could absolve a man even if he had done the impossible and had violated the mother of God is madness.
    76. We say on the contrary that papal indulgences cannot remove the very least of venial sins as far as guilt is concerned.
    77. To say that even St. Peter if he were now pope, could not grant greater graces is blasphemy against St. Peter and the pope.
    78. We say on the contrary that even the present pope, or any pope whatsoever, has greater graces at his disposal, that is, the gospel, spiritual powers, gifts of healing, etc., as it is written. (1 Co 12[:28])
    79. To say that the cross emblazoned with the papal coat of arms, and set up by the indulgence preachers is equal in worth to the cross of Christ is blasphemy.
    80. The bishops, curates, and theologians who permit such talk to be spread among the people will have to answer for this.
    81. This unbridled preaching of indulgences makes it difficult even for learned men to rescue the reverence which is due the pope from slander or from the shrewd questions of the laity.
    82. Such as: “Why does not the pope empty purgatory for the sake of holy love and the dire need of the souls that are there if he redeems an infinite number of souls for the sake of miserable money with which to build a church?” The former reason would be most just; the latter is most trivial.
    83. Again, “Why are funeral and anniversary masses for the dead continued and why does he not return or permit the withdrawal of the endowments founded for them, since it is wrong to pray for the redeemed?”
    84. Again, “What is this new piety of God and the pope that for a consideration of money they permit a man who is impious and their enemy to buy out of purgatory the pious soul of a friend of God and do not rather, beca use of the need of that pious and beloved soul, free it for pure love’s sake?”
    85. Again, “Why are the penitential canons, long since abrogated and dead in actual fact and through disuse, now satisfied by the granting of indulgences as though they were still alive and in force?”
    86. Again, “Why does not the pope, whose wealth is today greater than the wealth of the richest Crassus, build this one basilica of St. Peter with his own money rather than with the money of poor believers?”
    87. Again, “What does the pope remit or grant to those who by perfect contrition already have a right to full remission and blessings?”
    88. Again, “What greater blessing could come to the church than if the pope were to bestow these remissions and blessings on every believer a hundred times a day, as he now does but once?”
    89. “Since the pope seeks the salvation of souls rather than money by his indulgences, why does he suspend the indulgences and pardons previously granted when they have equal efficacy?”
    90. To repress these very sharp arguments of the laity by force alone, and not to resolve them by giving reasons, is to expose the church and the pope to the ridicule of their enemies and to make Christians unhappy.
    91. If, therefore, indulgences were preached according to the spirit and intention of the pope, all these doubts would be readily resolved. Indeed, they would not exist.
    92. Away, then, with all those prophets who say to the people of Christ, “Peace, peace,” and there is no peace! (Jer 6:14)
    93. Blessed be all those prophets who say to the people of Christ, “Cross, cross,” and there is no cross!
    94. Christians should be exhorted to be diligent in following Christ, their Head, through penalties, death and hell.
    95. And thus be confident of entering into heaven through many tribulations rather than through the false security of peace (Acts 14:22).