What Are Indulgences?
Catechism of the Catholic Church
X. INDULGENCES
1471 The
doctrine and practice of indulgences in the Church are
closely linked to the effects of the sacrament of
Penance.
What
is an indulgence?
"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."
"An indulgence is partial
or plenary according as it removes either part or all of
the temporal punishment due to sin." The faithful can
gain indulgences for themselves or apply them to the
dead.
The punishments of sin
1472 To
understand this doctrine and practice of the Church, it
is necessary to understand that sin has
a double consequence. Grave sin
deprives us of communion with God and therefore makes us
incapable of eternal life, the privation of which is
called the "eternal punishment" of sin. On the other
hand every sin, even venial, entails an unhealthy
attachment to creatures, which must be purified either
here on earth, or after death in the state called
Purgatory. This purification frees one from what is
called the "temporal punishment" of sin. These two
punishments must not be conceived of as a kind of
vengeance inflicted by God from without, but as
following from the very nature of sin. A conversion
which proceeds from a fervent charity can attain the
complete purification of the sinner in such a way that
no punishment would remain.
1473 The
forgiveness of sin and restoration of communion with God
entail the remission of the eternal punishment of sin,
but temporal punishment of sin remains. While patiently
bearing sufferings and trials of all kinds and, when the
day comes, serenely facing death, the Christian must
strive to accept this temporal punishment of sin as a
grace. He should strive by works of mercy and charity,
as well as by prayer and the various practices of
penance, to put off completely the "old man" and to put
on the "new man."
In the Communion of
Saints
1474 The
Christian who seeks to purify himself of his sin and
to become holy with the help of God's grace is not
alone. "The life of each of God's children is joined in
Christ and through Christ in a wonderful way to the life
of all the other Christian brethren in the supernatural
unity of the Mystical Body of Christ, as in a single
mystical person."
1475 In the
communion of saints, "a perennial link of charity exists
between the faithful who have already reached their
heavenly home, those who are expiating their sins in
purgatory and those who are still pilgrims on earth.
Between them there is, too, an abundant exchange of all
good things." In
this wonderful exchange, the holiness of one profits
others, well beyond the harm that the sin of one could
cause others. Thus recourse to the communion of saints
lets the contrite sinner be more promptly and
efficaciously purified of the punishments for sin.
1476 We also call
these spiritual goods of the communion of saints the
Church's
treasury, which is "not the sum total of the
material goods which have accumulated during the course
of the centuries. On the contrary the 'treasury of the
Church' is the infinite value, which can never be
exhausted, which Christ's merits have before God. They
were offered so that the whole of mankind could be set
free from sin and attain communion with the Father. In
Christ, the Redeemer himself, the satisfactions and
merits of his Redemption exist and find their efficacy."
1477 "This
treasury includes as well the prayers and good works
of the Blessed Virgin Mary. They are truly immense,
unfathomable, and even pristine in their value before
God. In the treasury, too, are the prayers and good
works of all the saints, all those who have followed in
the footsteps of Christ the Lord and by his grace have
made their lives holy and carried out the mission the
Father entrusted to them. In this way they attained
their own salvation and at the same time cooperated in
saving their brothers in the unity of the Mystical
Body."
Obtaining indulgence
from God through the Church
1478 An
indulgence is obtained through the Church who, by virtue
of the power of binding and loosing granted her by
Christ Jesus, intervenes in favor of individual
Christians and opens for them the treasury of the merits
of Christ and the saints to obtain from the Father of
mercies the remission of the temporal punishments due
for their sins. Thus the Church does not want simply to
come to the aid of these Christians, but also to spur
them to works of devotion, penance, and charity.
1479 Since the
faithful departed now being purified are also members of
the same communion of saints, one way we can help them
is to obtain indulgences for them, so that the temporal
punishments due for their sins may be remitted.
-- from
the Catechism of the Catholic Church, II.ii.2#4.
Indulgences
from the Catholic Encyclopedia
of 1910.
The word indulgence (Latin indulgentia, from indulgeo,
to be kind or tender) originally meant kindness or
favor; in post-classic Latin it came to mean the
remission of a tax or debt. In Roman law and in the
Vulgate of the Old Testament (Isaiah 61:1) it was used
to express release from captivity or punishment. In
theological language also the word is sometimes employed
in its primary sense to signify the kindness and mercy
of God. But in the special sense in which it is here
considered, an indulgence is a remission of the temporal
punishment due to sin, the guilt of which has been
forgiven. Among the equivalent terms used in antiquity
were pax, remissio, donatio, condonatio.
WHAT AN INDULGENCE IS NOT
To facilitate explanation, it may be well to state what
an indulgence is not. It is not a permission to commit
sin, nor a pardon of future sin; neither could be
granted by any power. It is not the forgiveness of the
guilt of sin; it supposes that the sin has already been
forgiven. It is not an exemption from any law or duty,
and much less from the obligation consequent on certain
kinds of sin, e.g., restitution; on the contrary, it
means a more complete payment of the debt which the
sinner owes to God. It does not confer immunity from
temptation or remove the possibility of subsequent
lapses into sin. Least of all is an indulgence the
purchase of a pardon which secures the buyer's salvation
or releases the soul of another from Purgatory. The
absurdity of such notions must be obvious to any one who
forms a correct idea of what the Catholic Church really
teaches on this subject.
WHAT AN INDULGENCE IS
An indulgence is the extra-sacramental remission of the
temporal punishment due, in God's justice, to sin that
has been forgiven, which remission is granted by the
Church in the exercise of the power of the keys, through
the application of the superabundant merits of Christ
and of the saints, and for some just and reasonable
motive. Regarding this definition, the following points
are to be noted:
In the Sacrament of Baptism not only is the guilt of
sin remitted, but also all the penalties attached to
sin. In the Sacrament of Penance the guilt of sin is
removed, and with it the eternal punishment due to
mortal sin; but there still remains the temporal
punishment required by Divine justice, and this
requirement must be fulfilled either in the present life
or in the world to come, i.e., in Purgatory. An
indulgence offers the penitent sinner the means of
discharging this debt during his life on earth.
Some writs of indulgence--none of them, however,
issued by any pope or council (Pesch, Tr. Dogm., VII,
196, no. 464)--contain the expression, "indulgentia a
culpa et a poena", i.e. release from guilt and from
punishment; and this has occasioned considerable
misunderstanding (cf. Lea, "History" etc. III, 54 sqq.).
The real meaning of the formula is that, indulgences
presupposing the Sacrament of Penance, the penitent,
after receiving sacramental absolution from the guilt of
sin, is afterwards freed from the temporal penalty by
the indulgence (Bellarmine, "De Indulg"., I, 7). In
other words, sin is fully pardoned, i.e. its effects
entirely obliterated, only when complete reparation, and
consequently release from penalty as well as from guilt,
has been made. Hence Clement V (1305-1314) condemned the
practice of those purveyors of indulgences who pretended
to absolve" a culpa et a poena" (Clement, I. v, tit. 9,
c. ii); the Council of Constance (1418) revoked (Sess.
XLII, n. 14) all indulgences containing the said
formula; Benedict XIV (1740-1758) treats them as
spurious indulgences granted in this form, which he
ascribes to the illicit practices of the "quaestores" or
purveyors (De Syn. dioeces., VIII, viii. 7).
The satisfaction, usually called the "penance",
imposed by the confessor when he gives absolution is an
integral part of the Sacrament of Penance; an indulgence
is extra-sacramental; it presupposes the effects
obtained by confession, contrition, and sacramental
satisfaction. It differs also from the penitential works
undertaken of his own accord by the repentant sinner --
prayer, fasting, alms-giving -- in that these are
personal and get their value from the merit of him who
performs them, whereas an indulgence places at the
penitent's disposal the merits of Christ and of the
saints, which form the "Treasury" of the Church.
An indulgence is valid both in the tribunal of the
Church and in the tribunal of God. This means that it
not only releases the penitent from his indebtedness to
the Church or from the obligation of performing
canonical penance, but also from the temporal punishment
which he has incurred in the sight of God and which,
without the indulgence, he would have to undergo in
order to satisfy Divine justice. This, however, does not
imply that the Church pretends to set aside the claim of
God's justice or that she allows the sinner to repudiate
his debt. As St. Thomas says (Suppl., xxv. a. 1 ad 2um),
"He who gains indulgences is not thereby released
outright from what he owes as penalty, but is provided
with the means of paying it." The Church therefore
neither leaves the penitent helplessly in debt nor
acquits him of all further accounting; she enables him
to meet his obligations.
In granting an indulgence, the grantor (pope or
bishop) does not offer his personal merits in lieu of
what God demands from the sinner. He acts in his
official capacity as having jurisdiction in the Church,
from whose spiritual treasury he draws the means
wherewith payment is to be made. The Church herself is
not the absolute owner, but simply the administratrix,
of the superabundant merits which that treasury
contains. In applying them, she keeps in view both the
design of God's mercy and the demands of God's justice.
She therefore determines the amount of each concession,
as well as the conditions which the penitent must
fulfill if he would gain the indulgence.
VARIOUS KINDS OF INDULGENCES
An indulgence that may be gained in any part of the
world is universal, while one that can be gained only in
a specified place (Rome, Jerusalem, etc.) is local. A
further distinction is that between perpetual
indulgences, which may be gained at any time, and
temporary, which are available on certain days only, or
within certain periods. Real indulgences are attached to
the use of certain objects (crucifix, rosary, medal);
personal are those which do not require the use of any
such material thing, or which are granted only to a
certain class of individuals, e.g. members of an order
or confraternity. The most important distinction,
however, is that between plenary indulgences and
partial. By a plenary indulgence is meant the remission
of the entire temporal punishment due to sin so that no
further expiation is required in Purgatory. A partial
indulgence commutes only a certain portion of the
penalty; and this portion is determined in accordance
with the penitential discipline of the early Church. To
say that an indulgence of so many days or years is
granted means that it cancels an amount of purgatorial
punishment equivalent to that which would have been
remitted, in the sight of God, by the performance of so
many days or years of the ancient canonical penance.
Here, evidently, the reckoning makes no claim to
absolute exactness; it has only a relative value.
God alone knows what penalty remains to be paid and
what its precise amount is in severity and duration.
Finally, some indulgences are granted in behalf of the
living only, while others may be applied in behalf of
the souls departed. It should be noted, however, that
the application has not the same significance in both
cases. The Church in granting an indulgence to the
living exercises her jurisdiction; over the dead she has
no jurisdiction and therefore makes the indulgence
available for them by way of suffrage (per modum
suffragii), i.e. she petitions God to accept these works
of satisfaction and in consideration thereof to mitigate
or shorten the sufferings of the souls in Purgatory.
WHO CAN GRANT INDULGENCES
The distribution of the merits contained in the treasury
of the Church is an exercise of authority (potestas
iurisdictionis), not of the power conferred by Holy
orders (potestas ordinis). Hence the pope, as supreme
head of the Church on earth, can grant all kinds of
indulgences to any and all of the faithful; and he alone
can grant plenary indulgences. The power of the bishop,
previously unrestricted, was limited by Innocent III
(1215) to the granting of one year's indulgence at the
dedication of a church and of forty days on other
occasions. Leo XIII (Rescript of 4 July. 1899)
authorized the archbishops of South America to grant
eighty days (Acta S. Sedis, XXXI, 758). Pius X (28
August, 1903) allowed cardinals in their titular
churches and dioceses to grant 200 days; archbishops,
100; bishops, 50. These indulgences are not applicable
to the souls departed. They can be gained by persons not
belonging to the diocese, but temporarily within its
limits; and by the subjects of the granting bishop,
whether these are within the diocese or outside--except
when the indulgence is local. Priests, vicars general,
abbots, and generals of religious orders cannot grant
indulgences unless specially authorized to do so. On the
other hand, the pope can empower a cleric who is not a
priest to give an indulgence (St. Thomas, "Quodlib.",
II, q. viii, a. 16).
DISPOSITIONS NECESSARY TO GAIN AN INDULGENCE
The mere fact that the Church proclaims an indulgence
does not imply that it can be gained without effort on
the part of the faithful. From what has been said above,
it is clear that the recipient must be free from the
guilt of mortal sin. Furthermore, for plenary
indulgences, confession and Communion are usually
required, while for partial indulgences, though
confession is not obligatory, the formula corde saltem
contrito, i.e. "at least with a contrite heart", is the
customary prescription. Regarding the question discussed
by theologians whether a person in mortal sin can gain
an indulgence for the dead, see PURGATORY. It is also
necessary to have the intention, at least habitual, of
gaining the indulgence. Finally, from the nature of the
case, it is obvious that one must perform the good works
-- prayers, alms deeds, visits to a church, etc. --
which are prescribed in the granting of an indulgence.
For details see "Raccolta".
AUTHORITATIVE TEACHING OF THE CHURCH
The Council of Constance condemned among the errors of
Wyclif the proposition: "It is foolish to believe in the
indulgences granted by the pope and the bishops" (Sess.
VIII, 4 May, 1415; see Denzinger-Bannwart,
"Enchiridion", 622). In the Bull "Exsurge Domine", 15
June, 1520, Leo X condemned Luther's assertions that
"Indulgences are pious frauds of the faithful"; and that
"Indulgences do not avail those who really gain them for
the remission of the penalty due to actual sin in the
sight of God's justice" (Enchiridion, 75S, 759), The
Council of Trent (Sess, XXV, 3-4, Dec., 1563) declared:
"Since the power of granting indulgences has been given
to the Church by Christ, and since the Church from the
earliest times has made use of this Divinely given
power, the holy synod teaches and ordains that the use
of indulgences, as most salutary to Christians and as
approved by the authority of the councils, shall be
retained in the Church; and it further pronounces
anathema against those who either declare that
indulgences are useless or deny that the Church has the
power to grant them (Enchridion, 989). It is therefore
of faith (de fide) that the Church has received from
Christ the power to grant indulgences, and that the use
of indulgences is salutary for the faithful.
BASIS OF THE DOCTRINE
An essential element in indulgences is the application
to one person of the satisfaction performed by others.
This transfer is based on three things: the Communion of
Saints, the principle of vicarious satisfaction, and the
Treasury of the Church.
(1) The Communion of Saints
"We being many, are one body in Christ, and every one
members one of another" (Romans 12:5). As each organ
shares in the life of the whole body, so does each of
the faithful profit by the prayers and good works of all
the rest-a benefit which accrues, in the first instance,
to those who are in the state of grace, but also, though
less fully, to the sinful members.
(2) The Principle of Vicarious Satisfaction
Each good action of the just man possesses a double
value: that of merit and that of satisfaction, or
expiation. Merit is personal, and therefore it cannot be
transferred; but satisfaction can be applied to others,
as St. Paul writes to the Colossians (i, 24) of his own
works: "Who now rejoice in my sufferings for you, and
fill up those things that are wanting of the sufferings
of Christ, in my flesh, for his body, which is the
Church," (See SATISFACTION.)
(3) The Treasury of the Church
Christ, as St. John declares in his First Epistle (ii,
2), "is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours
only, but also for those of the whole world." Since the
satisfaction of Christ is infinite, it constitutes an
inexhaustible fund which is more than sufficient to
cover the indebtedness contracted by sin, Besides, there
are the satisfactory works of the Blessed Virgin Mary
undiminished by any penalty due to sin, and the virtues,
penances, and sufferings of the saints vastly exceeding
any temporal punishment which these servants of God
might have incurred. These are added to the treasury of
the Church as a secondary deposit, not independent of,
but rather acquired through, the merits of Christ. The
development of this doctrine in explicit form was the
work of the great Schoolmen, notably Alexander of Hales
(Summa, IV, Q. xxiii, m. 3, n. 6), Albertus Magnus (In
IV Sent., dist. xx, art. 16), and St. Thomas (In IV
Sent., dist. xx, q. i, art. 3, sol. 1). As Aquinas
declares (Quodlib., II, q. vii, art. 16): "All the
saints intended that whatever they did or suffered for
God's sake should be profitable not only to themselves
but to the whole Church." And he further points out
(Contra Gent., III, 158) that what one endures for
another being a work of love, is more acceptable as
satisfaction in God's sight than what one suffers on
one's own account, since this is a matter of necessity.
The existence of an infinite treasury of merits in the
Church is dogmatically set forth in the Bull "Unigenitus",
published by Clement VI, 27 Jan., 1343, and later
inserted in the "Corpus Juris" (Extrav. Com., lib. V,
tit. ix. c. ii): "Upon the altar of the Cross", says the
pope, "Christ shed of His blood not merely a drop,
though this would have sufficed, by reason of the union
with the Word, to redeem the whole human race, but a
copious torrent. . . thereby laying up an infinite
treasure for mankind. This treasure He neither wrapped
up in a napkin nor hid in a field, but entrusted to
Blessed Peter, the key-bearer, and his successors, that
they might, for just and reasonable causes, distribute
it to the faithful in full or in partial remission of
the temporal punishment due to sin." Hence the
condemnation by Leo X of Luther's assertion that "the
treasures of the Church from which the pope grants
indulgences are not the merits of Christ and the saints"
(Enchiridion, 757). For the same reason, Pius VI (1794)
branded as false, temerarious, and injurious to the
merits of Christ and the saints, the error of the synod
of Pistoia that the treasury of the Church was an
invention of scholastic subtlety (Enchiridion, 1541).
According to Catholic doctrine, therefore, the source
of indulgences is constituted by the merits of Christ
and the saints. This treasury is left to the keeping,
not of the individual Christian, but of the Church.
Consequently, to make it available for the faithful,
there is required an exercise of authority, which alone
can determine in what way, on what terms, and to what
extent, indulgences may be granted.
THE POWER TO GRANT INDULGENCES
Once it is admitted that Christ left the Church the
power to forgive sins (see PENANCE), the power of
granting indulgences is logically inferred. Since the
sacramental forgiveness of sin extends both to the guilt
and to the eternal punishment, it plainly follows that
the Church can also free the penitent from the lesser or
temporal penalty. This becomes clearer, however, when we
consider the amplitude of the power granted to Peter
(Matthew 16:19): "I will give to thee the keys of the
kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon
earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever
thou shaft loose on earth, it shall be loosed also in
heaven." (Cf. Matthew 18:18, where like power is
conferred on all the Apostles.) No limit is placed upon
this power of loosing, "the power of the keys", as it is
called; it must, therefore, extend to any and all bonds
contracted by sin, including the penalty no less than
the guilt. When the Church, therefore, by an indulgence,
remits this penalty, her action, according to the
declaration of Christ, is ratified in heaven. That this
power, as the Council of Trent affirms, was exercised
from the earliest times, is shown by St. Paul's words (2
Corinthians 2:5-10) in which he deals with the case of
the incest man of Corinth. The sinner had been excluded
by St. Paul's order from the company of the faithful,
but had truly repented. Hence the Apostle judges that to
such a one "this rebuke is sufficient that is given by
many" and adds: "To whom you have pardoned any thing, I
also. For what I have pardoned, if I have pardoned any
thing, for your sakes have I done it in the person of
Christ." St. Paul had bound the guilty one in the
fetters of excommunication; he now releases the penitent
from this punishment by an exercise of his authority --
"in the person of Christ." Here we have all the
essentials of an indulgence.
These essentials persist in the subsequent practice
of the Church, though the accidental features vary
according as new conditions arise. During the
persecutions, those Christians who had fallen away but
desired to be restored to the communion of the Church
often obtained from the martyrs a memorial (libellus
pacis) to be presented to the bishop, that he, in
consideration of the martyrs' sufferings, might admit
the penitents to absolution, thereby releasing them from
the punishment they had incurred. Tertullian refers to
this when he says (Ad martyres, c. i, P.L., I, 621):
"Which peace some, not having it in the Church, are
accustomed to beg from the martyrs in prison; and
therefore you should possess and cherish and preserve it
in you that so you perchance may be able to grant it to
others." Additional light is thrown on this subject by
the vigorous attack which the same Tertullian made after
he had become a Montanist. In the first part of his
treatise "De pudicitia", he attacks the pope for his
alleged laxity in admitting adulterers to penance and
pardon, and flouts the peremptory edict of the "pontifex
maximus episcopus episcoporum". At the close he
complains that the same power of remission is now
allowed also to the martyrs, and urges that it should be
enough for them to purge their own sins -- sufficiat
martyri propria delicta purgasse". And, again, "How can
the oil of thy little lamp suffice both for thee and
me?" (c. xxii). It is sufficient to note that many of
his arguments would apply with as much and as little
force to the indulgences of later ages.
During St. Cyprian's time (d. 258), the heretic
Novatian claimed that none of the lapsi should be
readmitted to the Church; others, like Felicissimus,
held that such sinners should be received without any
penance. Between these extremes, St. Cyprian holds the
middle course, insisting that such penitents should be
reconciled on the fulfillment of the proper conditions.
On the one hand, he condemns the abuses connected with
the libellus, in particular the custom of having it made
out in blank by the martyrs and filled in by any one who
needed it. "To this you should diligently attend", he
writes to the martyrs (Ep. xv), "that you designate by
name those to whom you wish peace to be given." On the
other hand, he recognizes the value of these memorials:
"Those who have received a libellus from the martyrs and
with their help can, before the Lord, get relief in
their sins, let such, if they be ill and in danger,
after confession and the imposition of your hands,
depart unto the Lord with the peace promised them by the
martyrs" (Ep. xiii, P.L., IV, 261). St. Cyprian,
therefore, believed that the merits of the martyrs could
be applied to less worthy Christians by way of vicarious
satisfaction, and that such satisfaction was acceptable
in the eyes of God as well as of the Church.
After the persecutions had ceased, the penitential
discipline remained in force, but greater leniency was
shown in applying it. St. Cyprian himself was reproached
for mitigating the "Evangelical severity" on which he at
first insisted; to this he replied (Ep. lii) that such
strictness was needful during the time of persecution
not only to stimulate the faithful in the performance of
penance, but also to quicken them for the glory of
martyrdom; when, on the contrary, peace was secured to
the Church, relaxation was necessary in order to prevent
sinners from falling into despair and leading the life
of pagans. In 380 St. Gregory of Nyssa (Ep. ad Letojum)
declares that the penance should be shortened in the
case of those who showed sincerity and zeal in
performing it -- "ut spatium canonibus praestitum posset
contrahere (can. xviii; cf. can. ix, vi, viii, xi, xiii,
xix). In the same spirit, St. Basil (379), after
prescribing more lenient treatment for various crimes,
lays down the general principle that in all such cases
it is not merely the duration of the penance that must
be considered, but the way in which it is performed (Ep.
ad Amphilochium, c. lxxxiv). Similar leniency is shown
by various Councils--Ancyra (314), Laodicea (320),
Nicaea (325), Arles (330). It became quite common during
this period to favor those who were ill, and especially
those who were in danger of death (see Amort, "Historia",
28 sq.). The ancient penitentials of Ireland and
England, though exacting in regard to discipline,
provide for relaxation in certain cases. St. Cummian,
e.g., in his Penitential (seventh century), treating
(cap. v) of the sin of robbery, prescribed that he who
has often committed theft shall do penance for seven
years or for such time as the priest may judge fit, must
always be reconciled with him whom he has wronged, and
make restitution proportioned to the injury, and thereby
his penance shall be considerably shortened (multum
breviabit poenitentiam ejus). But should he be unwilling
or unable (to comply with these conditions), he must do
penance for the whole time prescribed and in all its
details. (Cf. Moran, "Essays on the Early Irish Church",
Dublin, 1864, p. 259.)
Another practice which shows quite clearly the
difference between sacramental absolution and the
granting of indulgences was the solemn reconciliation of
penitents. These, at the beginning of Lent, had received
from the priest absolution from their sins and the
penance enjoined by the canons; on Maundy Thursday they
presented themselves before the bishop, who laid hands
on them, reconciled them with the Church, and admitted
them to communion. This reconciliation was reserved to
the bishop, as is expressly declared in the Penitential
of Theodore, Archbishop of Canterbury; though in case of
necessity the bishop could delegate a priest for the
purpose (lib. I, xiii). Since the bishop did not hear
their confession, the "absolution" which he pronounced
must have been a release from some penalty they had
incurred. The effect, moreover, of this reconciliation
was to restore the penitent to the state of baptismal
innocence and consequently of freedom from all
penalties, as appears from the so-called Apostolic
Constitutions (lib, II, c. xli) where it is said: "Eritque
in loco baptismi impositio manuum"--i.e. the imposition
of hands has the same effect as baptism (cf. Palmieri,
"De Poenitentia", Rome, 1879, 459 sq.).
In a later period (eighth century to twelfth) it
became customary to permit the substitution of some
lighter penance for that which the canons prescribed.
Thus the Penitential of Egbert, Archbishop of York,
declares (XIII, 11): "For him who can comply with what
the penitential prescribes, well and good; for him who
cannot, we give counsel of God's mercy. Instead of one
day on bread and water let him sing fifty psalms on his
knees or seventy psalms without genuflecting .... But if
he does not know the psalms and cannot fast, let him,
instead of one year on bread and water, give twenty-six
solidi in alms, fast till None on one day of each week
and till Vespers on another, and in the three Lents
bestow in alms half of what he receives." The practice
of substituting the recitation of psalms or the giving
of alms for a portion of the fast is also sanctioned in
the Irish Synod of 807, which says (c. xxiv) that the
fast of the second day of the week may be "redeemed" by
singing one psalter or by giving one denarius to a poor
person. Here we have the beginning of the so-called
"redemptions" which soon passed into general usage.
Among other forms of commutation were pilgrimages to
well-known shrines such as that at St. Albans in England
or at Compostela in Spain. But the most important place
of pilgrimage was Rome. According to Bede (674-735) the
"visitatio liminum", or visit to the tomb of the
Apostles, was even then regarded as a good work of great
efficacy (Hist. Eccl., IV, 23). At first the pilgrims
came simply to venerate the relics of the Apostles and
martyrs; but in course of time their chief purpose was
to gain the indulgences granted by the pope and attached
especially to the Stations. Jerusalem, too, had long
been the goal of these pious journeys, and the reports
which the pilgrims gave of their treatment by the
infidels finally brought about the Crusades. At the
Council of Clermont (1095) the First Crusade was
organized, and it was decreed (can. ii): "Whoever, out
of pure devotion and not for the purpose of gaining
honor or money, shall go to Jerusalem to liberate the
Church of God, let that journey be counted in lieu of
all penance". Similar indulgences were granted
throughout the five centuries following (Amort, op.
cit., 46 sq.), the object being to encourage these
expeditions which involved so much hardship and yet were
of such great importance for Christendom and
civilization. The spirit in which these grants were made
is expressed by St. Bernard, the preacher of the Second
Crusade (1146): "Receive the sign of the Cross, and thou
shalt likewise obtain the indulgence of all thou hast
confessed with a contrite heart (ep. cccxxii; al.,
ccclxii).
Similar concessions were frequently made on
occasions, such as the dedication of churches, e.g.,
that of the old Temple Church in London, which was
consecrated in honor of the Blessed Virgin Mary, 10
February, 1185, by the Lord Heraclius, who to those
yearly visiting it indulged sixty days of the penance
enjoined them -- as the inscription over the main
entrance attests. The canonization of saints was often
marked by the granting of an indulgence, e.g. in honor
of St. Laurence 0'Toole by Honorius III (1226), in honor
of St. Edmund of Canterbury by Innocent IV (1248), and
in honor of St. Thomas of Hereford by John XXII (1320).
A famous indulgence is that of the Portiuncula (q.v.),
obtained by St. Francis in 1221 from Honorius III. But
the most important largess during this period was the
plenary indulgence granted in 1300 by Boniface VIII to
those who, being truly contrite and having confessed
their sins, should visit the basilicas of Sts. Peter and
Paul (see JUBILEE).
Among the works of charity which were furthered by
indulgences, the hospital held a prominent place. Lea in
his "History of Confession and Indulgences" (III, 189)
mentions only the hospital of Santo Spirito in Rome,
while another Protestant writer, Uhlhorn (Gesch. d.
Christliche Liebesthatigkeit, Stuttgart, 1884, II, 244)
states that "one cannot go through the archives of any
hospital without finding numerous letters of
indulgence". The one at Halberstadt in 1284 had no less
than fourteen such grants, each giving an indulgence of
forty days. The hospitals at Lucerne, Rothenberg,
Rostock, and Augsburg enjoyed similar privileges.
ABUSES
It may seem strange that the doctrine of indulgences
should have proved such a stumbling-block, and excited
so much prejudice and opposition. But the explanation of
this may be found in the abuses which unhappily have
been associated with what is in itself a salutary
practice. In this respect of course indulgences are not
exceptional: no institution, however holy, has entirely
escaped abuse through the malice or unworthiness of man.
Even the Eucharist, as St. Paul declares, means an
eating and drinking of judgment to the recipient who
discerns not the body of the Lord. (1 Corinthians
11:27-29). And, as God's forbearance is constantly
abused by those who relapse into sin, it is not
surprising that the offer of pardon in the form of an
indulgence should have led to evil practices. These
again have been in a special way the object of attack
because, doubtless, of their connection with Luther's
revolt (see LUTHER). On the other hand, it should not be
forgotten that the Church, while holding fast to the
principle and intrinsic value of indulgences, has
repeatedly condemned their misuse: in fact, it is often
from the severity of her condemnation that we learn how
grave the abuses were.
Even in the age of the martyrs, as stated above there
were practices which St. Cyprian was obliged to
reprehend, yet he did not forbid the martyrs to give the
libelli. In later times abuses were met by repressive
measures on the part of the Church. Thus the Council of
Clovesho in England (747) condemns those who imagine
that they might atone for their crimes by substituting,
in place of their own, the austerities of mercenary
penitents. Against the excessive indulgences granted by
some prelates, the Fourth Council of the Lateran (1215)
decreed that at the dedication of a church the
indulgence should not be for more than year, and, for
the anniversary of the dedication or any other case, it
should not exceed forty days, this being the limit
observed by the pope himself on such occasions. The same
restriction was enacted by the Council of Ravenna in
1317. In answer to the complaint of the Dominicans and
Franciscans, that certain prelates had put their own
construction on the indulgences granted to these Orders,
Clement IV in 1268 forbade any such interpretation,
declaring that, when it was needed, it would be given by
the Holy See. In 1330 the brothers of the hospital of
Haut-Pas falsely asserted that the grants made in their
favor were more extensive than what the documents
allowed: John XXII had all these brothers in France
seized and imprisoned. Boniface IX, writing to the
Bishop of Ferrara in 1392, condemns the practice of
certain religious who falsely claimed that they were
authorized by the pope to forgive all sorts of sins, and
exacted money from the simple-minded among the faithful
by promising them perpetual happiness in this world and
eternal glory in the next. When Henry, Archbishop of
Canterbury, attempted in 1420 to give a plenary
indulgence in the form of the Roman Jubilee, he was
severely reprimanded by Martin V, who characterized his
action as "unheard-of presumption and sacrilegious
audacity". In 1450 Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa, Apostolic
Legate to Germany, found some preachers asserting that
indulgences released from the guilt of sin as well as
from the punishment. This error, due to a
misunderstanding of the words "a culpa et a poena", the
cardinal condemned at the Council of Magdeburg. Finally,
Sixtus IV in 1478, lest the idea of gaining indulgences
should prove an incentive to sin, reserved for the
judgment of the Holy See a large number of cases in
which faculties had formerly been granted to confessors
(Extrav. Com., tit. de poen. et remiss.).
Traffic in Indulgences
These measures show plainly that the Church long before
the Reformation, not only recognized the existence of
abuses, but also used her authority to correct them.
In spite of all this, disorders continued and
furnished the pretext for attacks directed against the
doctrine itself, no less than against the practice of
indulgences. Here, as in so many other matters, the love
of money was the chief root of the evil: indulgences
were employed by mercenary ecclesiastics as a means of
pecuniary gain. Leaving the details concerning this
traffic to a subsequent article (see REFORMATION), it
may suffice for the present to note that the doctrine
itself has no natural or necessary connection with
pecuniary profit, as is evident from the fact that the
abundant indulgences of the present day are free from
this evil association: the only conditions required are
the saying of certain prayers or the performance of some
good work or some practice of piety. Again, it is easy
to see how abuses crept in. Among the good works which
might be encouraged by being made the condition of an
indulgence, alms giving would naturally hold a
conspicuous place, while men would be induced by the
same means to contribute to some pious cause such as the
building of churches, the endowment of hospitals, or the
organization of a crusade. It is well to observe that in
these purposes there is nothing essentially evil. To
give money to God or to the poor is a praiseworthy act,
and, when it is done from right motives, it will surely
not go unrewarded. Looked at in this light, it might
well seem a suitable condition for gaining the spiritual
benefit of an indulgence. Yet, however innocent in
itself, this practice was fraught with grave danger, and
soon became a fruitful source of evil. On the one hand
there was the danger that the payment might be regarded
as the price of the indulgence, and that those who
sought to gain it might lose sight of the more important
conditions. On the other hand, those who granted
indulgences might be tempted to make them a means of
raising money: and, even where the rulers of the Church
were free from blame in this matter, there was room for
corruption in their officials and agents, or among the
popular preachers of indulgences. This class has happily
disappeared, but the type has been preserved in
Chaucer's "Pardoner", with his bogus relics and
indulgences.
While it cannot be denied that these abuses were
widespread, it should also be noted that, even when
corruption was at its worst, these spiritual grants were
being properly used by sincere Christians, who sought
them in the right spirit, and by priests and preachers,
who took care to insist on the need of true repentance.
It is therefore not difficult to understand why the
Church, instead of abolishing the practice of
indulgences, aimed rather at strengthening it by
eliminating the evil elements. The Council of Trent in
its decree "On Indulgences" (Sess. XXV) declares: "In
granting indulgences the Council desires that moderation
be observed in accordance with the ancient approved
custom of the Church, lest through excessive ease
ecclesiastical discipline be weakened; and further,
seeking to correct the abuses that have crept in . . .
it decrees that all criminal gain therewith connected
shall be entirely done away with as a source of grievous
abuse among the Christian people; and as to other
disorders arising from superstition, ignorance,
irreverence, or any cause whatsoever--since these, on
account of the widespread corruption, cannot be removed
by special prohibitions--the Council lays upon each
bishop the duty of finding out such abuses as exist in
his own diocese, of bringing them before the next
provincial synod, and of reporting them, with the assent
of the other bishops, to the Roman Pontiff, by whose
authority and prudence measures will be taken for the
welfare of the Church at large, so that the benefit of
indulgences may be bestowed on all the faithful by means
at once pious, holy, and free from corruption." After
deploring the fact that, in spite of the remedies
prescribed by earlier councils, the traders (quaestores)
in indulgences continued their nefarious practice to the
great scandal of the faithful, the council ordained that
the name and method of these quaestores should be
entirely abolished, and that indulgences and other
spiritual favors of which the faithful ought not to be
deprived should be published by the bishops and bestowed
gratuitously, so that all might at length understand
that these heavenly treasures were dispensed for the
sake of piety and not of lucre (Sess. XXI, c. ix). In
1567 St. Pius V canceled all grants of indulgences
involving any fees or other financial transactions.
Apocryphal Indulgences
One of the worst abuses was that of inventing or
falsifying grants of indulgence. Previous to the
Reformation, such practices abounded and called out
severe pronouncements by ecclesiastical authority,
especially by the Fourth Council of the Lateran (1215)
and that of Vienne (1311). After the Council of Trent
the most important measure taken to prevent such frauds
was the establishment of the Congregation of
Indulgences. A special commission of cardinals served
under Clement VIII and Paul V, regulating all matters
pertaining to indulgences. The Congregation of
Indulgences was definitively established by Clement IX
in 1669 and reorganized by Clement XI in 1710. It has
rendered efficient service by deciding various questions
relative to the granting of indulgences and by its
publications. The "Raccolta" (q.v.) was first issued by
one of its consultors, Telesforo Galli, in 1807; the
last three editions 1877, 1886, and 1898 were published
by the Congregation. The other official publication is
the "Decreta authentica", containing the decisions of
the Congregation from 1668 to 1882. This was published
in 1883 by order of Leo XIII. See also "Rescripta
authentica" by Joseph Schneider (Ratisbon, 1885). By a
Motu Proprio of Pius X, dated 28 January, 1904, the
Congregation of Indulgences was united to the
Congregation of Rites, without any diminution, however,
of its prerogatives.
SALUTARY EFFECTS OF INDULGENCES
Lea (History, etc., III, 446) somewhat reluctantly
acknowledges that "with the decline in the financial
possibilities of the system, indulgences have greatly
multiplied as an incentive to spiritual exercises, and
they can thus be so easily obtained that there is no
danger of the recurrence of the old abuses, even if the
finer sense of fitness, characteristic of modern times,
on the part of both prelates and people, did not deter
the attempt." The full significance, however, of this
"multiplication" lies in the fact that the Church, by
rooting out abuses, has shown the rigor of her spiritual
life. She has maintained the practice of indulgences,
because, when these are used in accordance with what she
prescribes, they strengthen the spiritual life by
inducing the faithful to approach the sacraments and to
purify their consciences of sin. And further, they
encourage the performance, in a truly religious spirit,
of works that redound, not alone to the welfare of the
individual, but also to God's glory and to the service
of the neighbor.
Written by W.H. Kent. Transcribed by Charles
Sweeney, S.J.
The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume VII. Published 1910.
New York: Robert Appleton Company. Nihil Obstat, June 1,
1910. Remy Lafort, S.T.D., Censor. Imprimatur. +John
Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York
Bibliography
BELLARMINE, De indulgentiis (Cologne, 1600); PASSERINI,
De indulgentiis (Rome, 1672); AMORT, De origine......indulgentiarum
(Venice, 1738); BOUVIER, Traité dogmatique et pratique
des indulgences (Paris, 1855): SCHOOFS, Die Lehre vom
kirchl. Ablass (Munster, 1857); GRONE, Der Ablass, seine
Gesch. u. Bedeutung (Ratisbon, 1863). |
