Treasure House of Merit

Ever hear of the Roman Catholic concept of "indulgences"? It was one of the main complaints in Luther's 95 Theses. It was absolutely confirmed by Pope Paul VI in 1967. In short, it is the idea that it is possible to obtain on behalf of others full or partial remission of temporal punishment of sin on the basis of the merits of Christ and the merits of the Saints. This pool of merit is referred to as "The Treasure House of Merit". It includes, of course, the merits of Christ. We're good with that. Beyond that, it includes "the merits which they [the brethren who have gone to sleep in the peace of Christ] have won on earth through the one Mediator between God and man, Jesus Christ." The idea seems to be this: Having fully satisfied God's just demands, there are those who have exceeded those just demands and have provided good deeds "through ... Christ" that need not be applied to them, but can be applied to others who are lacking. (Luther complained largely because the Church was selling these indulgences -- distributing merit from the Treasure House of Merit on the basis of cash payments.)

The concept isn't solely Roman Catholic. I would suggest that most people believe in the concept of "good enough". That is, while perfection is certainly unattainable, there is a point of "good enough" and anyone who reaches that point (wherever it is) is okay with God. I think it's probably a bell curve kind of thing. You know. There are those at the top who are really, really, really good, but not many. They would include folks like Mother Theresa, Gandhi, Jesus ... you know, people who throw off the curve. They get an "A". There are those at the bottom who are horrible. The first name that would spring to mind there would, of course, be Hitler, but there are more, I'm sure. They get an "F". Most of us fall in between. So anything above, say, a "C" is "passing" and you'll get to heaven okay. If you go above a "C", well, now you're just wasting your "goodness". I mean, sure, if you want to, go right ahead, but there's no real need for it, right?

In Luke 17, Jesus speaks of the relationship of master and servant. The servant is expected to do what the master asks. The master is not expected to serve the servant. Jesus said of an obedient servant, "Does [the master] thank the servant because he did what was commanded? So you also, when you have done all that you were commanded, say, 'We are unworthy servants; we have only done what was our duty'" (Luke 17:9-10). It is this concept that makes me wonder to where the notion of "merit" comes from at all. I would suspect it is a case of lowering the standard. The demand of the Master is perfection. "You therefore must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect" (Matt 5:48). Anything less is failure (an "F"). Anything more is, well, quite impossible. There is no "110%". The coach that tells his team to "give 110%" isn't dealing with reality. And anyone arriving at perfection has no more to offer in terms of "merit" -- anything over and above. It is simply what is expected by the master and engenders no thanks from God. It only makes them "unworthy servants".

We have a problem, you and I. We tend to think, like so many, that "I'm not so bad. I'm certainly not as bad as Hitler. I'm not as bad as that drug fiend on the news or that woman who neglected her baby until the poor little thing died. In fact, sometimes I can be pretty good ... in fact, really good. Oh, maybe it's not often, but it's certainly enough." That, my friends, is a failure of standards. There is no merit. There is no thanks from God. And we are, at best, unworthy servants.