SACRAMENTALS

Indulgences

by Paul S. Czarnota

The storm of the Protestant Revolt ignited from the doctrine of indulgences. Martin Luther charged at first that indulgences were mere reductions in canonical penances. Later, he asserted that indulgences were not found in Scriptures. Tradition could not be appealed to, as the Bible, for him, is the only source of Revelation. Further, Luther asserted that salvation is a matter of faith alone; works, including indulgences, are superfluous and thus malign the redemptory work of Jesus. Thus, the core of Protestantism strikes at this doctrine.

It is no coincidence that indulgences touched off this reaction. Indulgences had become synonymous with abuse and corruption. Yet the Council of Trent confirmed indulgences as belonging to the deposit of faith. History shows only the seeds of the doctrine present in the early Church. But the doctrine flowered in time, being reaffirmed most recently by Popes Paul VI and John Paul II. The life of the Church parallels, in a microcosm, the doctrine of indulgences. Therefore, a study of the development of the Church's teaching and the reform of her practices concerning indulgences can give insight into both Church history and the most important event of the second millennium.

The Doctrine Defined

Broadly, indulgence is found as a sub-topic of eschatology. More directly, indulgences relate to sin, both in its effects and in its remission. Even more particularly, the doctrine and practice of indulgences in the Church are closely linked to the effects of the sacrament of Penance.1 For a clear understanding of the Catholic teaching of this doctrine, a brief description of sin and the sacrament of Penance is required.

The Church has always taught that there is a double consequence to sin.2 Sins so great that they deprive us God's friendship and separate us from Him are called, alternately, mortal sins, grave sins, deadly sins.3 Sins of a lesser moment are termed venial sins.4 The Catechism of the Catholic Church, drawing on the pronouncements of the Council of Trent, teaches that every sin entails an unhealthy attachment to creatures, which must be purified either here on earth, or after death in the state called Purgatory.5

That same Council taught that Baptism effects the remission of all punishments, both eternal and temporal.6 For sin committed after Baptism, the Christian must seek the sacrament of Penance for healing of the eternal punishments. In the sacrament of Penance, the remission of eternal punishment is necessarily found, but temporal punishments for sins are not always completely remitted.7 Therefore, the temporal punishments remaining must also be expiated. While on earth, humans may expiate sin by the sorrow, trials and miseries of life, and supremely also, death.8 If such punishments are not expiated during this life, these will be expiated in the next life, in Purgatory.9 Thus, Christians need to seek purification constantly, through both the sacraments and their sufferings of God's punishments, which are just and merciful.10

But the Church does not view sin as merely an individualistic occurrence, a matter only between the sinner and God. Every sin does immense harm to the sinner and to the community of men.11 For this reason, confession occurs between penitent and priest. Also, God imposes punishments upon man to purify the soul, strengthen the holiness of the moral order and restore full majesty to God's glory.12 Since all men commit at least venial and daily sins,13 all need God's mercy to set them free from sin's penal consequences.14 This understanding flows from the related idea of the Communion of Saints.15

By the hidden and kindly mystery of God's will a supernatural solidarity reigns among men. A consequence of that is that one man's sins affect all others. But correspondingly one man's holiness can also benefit all others. Just as through Adam, sin and its effects blighted all future generations, through the God-Man Jesus Christ all men find salvation and forgiveness. In recognizing Christ's saving work, Christians from the start have attempted to immerse themselves in Christ's love and imitate His sufferings. There was the conviction that help could be given to others to obtain salvation from God who is the Father of mercies.16 Thus, the Church has understood this supernatural link of Christ the Head with the members of His Mystical Body to form a treasury of merits, which the Church can draw upon to apply to various souls who seek His mercy and friendship.

The treasury so conceived comprises three components. First are the merits of the sufferings of Jesus Christ. These are of infinite value. Next, there are the merits and prayers of the Blessed Virgin Mary. These, though not infinite, are immense and unfathomable in value before God. Finally, the prayers and good works of all the saints who are united with Christ contribute to this treasury. Thus, it can be seen that this treasury of the Church is such that it is inexhaustible and related to what is holy, not to any material goods. Further, it fosters a means of unity between the Church triumphant in Heaven, the Church militant here on earth, and the Church suffering in Purgatory, allowing the merits of the first to help both the second and the third groups by the actions of the second group.17

Thus, by way of this explanation, we arrive at what we may define as 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.18 Just as the Church has the ability to convey infinite grace of God in the sacraments, the Church, by virtue of the power of the keys given by Christ to St. Peter and his successors, may also remit the temporal punishments, analogous to the pardoning power given to secular officials. Thus, the full power to grant indulgences resides with the pope, who has full power of jurisdiction in the Church. This power is shared, by the measure of the pope's disposition, with the bishops of the Church19 and to those to whom this is expressly conceded by law.20

An indulgence extended by the Church and gained by the faithful may be of two degrees: plenary or partial. A plenary indulgence is the remission of all temporal punishment. A partial indulgence is the remission of a portion of the temporal punishment, that is, something less than all temporal punishment.21 It is for the competent authority granting the indulgence to state whether the indulgence to be gained is to be partial or plenary.

Indulgences In Church History

Indulgences by name were not known in the early Church. This does not mean that the principles underlying it were denied or not practiced. Rather, this doctrine is one that the Church found to be part of the deposit of faith given her by Our Lord. The seeds of this can be seen in the penitential practice of the Church.

Sacramental confession was known and practiced since the Church's inception. The steps involved in the sacrament are very familiar to Catholics today, with one exception. First, the penitent confessed his sins to a priest or a bishop. Second, the penitent received absolution. Finally, the confessor counseled the penitent as to penances. If the sins demanded only private penance, the confessor-priest imposed it. If the case required public penance, then the penitent was sent to the bishop for imposition of the penances. This last step was reserved for serious sins, such as adultery, idolatry, murder, and fornication, to name a few.22

Such serious sinners were required to pass through four stages of penance. The first stage was referred to as the wailers,23 since the penitents had to stand outside the doors of the churches, asking the Christians going in to pray for them, while they were in sackcloth and ashes. After a period of this, the penitent advanced to the class of hearers. These penitents were allowed into the narthex of the church, but not inside with the congregation. Thus, they could hear the Word of God, which would help their change of heart. The third stage was that of the kneelers. Now inside the church, the penitent knelt in the back of the church throughout the liturgy. Finally, the last stage was the standers. These penitents could participate in almost all parts of the liturgy, save they could not receive the Eucharist and could not bring the gifts up to the altar.

After the fourth stage was completed,24 the penitent received a reconciliation.25 This was a short service where the bishop, usually, presided and laid hands upon the penitent. The punishment was declared satisfied, and the penitent was restored to full communion in the Church and before God. Oftentimes, the merits of the Savior were invoked as supplementing the penances performed. Thus, the reconciliation acted as we today would recognize the operation of a plenary indulgence.

A number of factors indicate the operation of this reconciliation as a plenary indulgence. First, although the bishop usually presided at this ceremony, it could be delegated to a priest or even a deacon. The deacons were never recognized as ministers of sacramental Confession; this was an extra-sacramental service. Additionally, the Church in imposing canonical penances was not stating that the penances performed actually, of their own merit alone, blotted out the punishment due. The Church could not know if that debt had been satisfied by the penances themselves, since these depend upon the disposition of the individual soul to receive the grace and convert. Rather, it was relied upon that the Blood of Jesus supplied was what lacking in each case. The Church desired to restore Her children to their pristine state that they enjoyed right after Baptism. Thus, the sacrament of Penance developed the canonical penances and the process of reconciliation to achieve that laudable goal.26

Another practice of the early Church that indicated the acceptability of indulgences was the Libellus Martyrum.27 This practice arose when souls who fell into public sins sought the help of the martyrs. These penitents, of their own accord, sought out the heroic Christians in jail and asked to share in their merits. These Christians, seeking to imitate Christ, agreed. To verify the agreement, a slip of paper or other indicia was given to the penitent by the martyr-to-be. After the death of the martyr, the penitent presented the evidence of the union of the penitent and the merits of the saint. The bishop would then grant the reconciliation immediately, uniting the merits of Our Lord to the saints' merits and the penance performed, and re-admit the penitent to the Church28

Another practice that often acted as an indulgence in theory, if not in name, was the practice of the pilgrimage.29 Penitents and other Christians often sought through faith to travel to Rome, site of so many events of the Faith. At times, penitents came to Rome to beg a reduction of the canonical penalties imposed upon them. The souls under such penances oftentimes felt overwhelmed by this task, and would be tempted to lose hope. Very often, the pope would commute the penance,30 or at least send the penitent back with a request from the pope to the local bishop instructing the bishop to reduce the penance.31 This was done, in part, due to the hardships involved in the pilgrimage, which showed faith and suffering. Therefore, as an indication of zeal, this served to reduce the penance, as had other such practices of reducing penalties when the heart was generous and contrite in embracing the penance. Such reductions can be seen in the councils of the Church.32

Another practice was the substitution of penances, also called redemptions, in individual cases. This was allowed, at the discretion of a bishop,33 where frailty prohibited the corporal punishments. In such cases, the recitation of prayers or the giving of alms to the poor was allowed as a substitution.34 Although this practice of redemption of penance could not be properly termed an indulgence, since one penance was substituted for another, the practice of saying prayers or giving alms would become commonplace in later practiced indulgences.35

It was a known practice in the early Church to put off Baptism until the deathbed.36 This was in part due to rigorous canonical penances, and in part to the fear of falling back into the sins of the former life, offending God, and staining oneself. Likewise, after the zeal of the first centuries waned, confession was put off until the deathbed, so that a life of penance was forestalled with the hope of a dying reconciliation and remission of punishment. These factors led the Church to abolish the canonical penalties, so that Her children did not take such a foolish risks with their souls. Rather, it was better that friendship with God be reestablished for the serious sinner with time spent in Purgatory, rather than an eternity in Hell.

As the first ten centuries of the Christian era passed, there were no indications of an indulgence being present, as we would practice the doctrine. But by the eleventh century, many examples can be cited.37 It appears that practice may have developed at the local level first, rather than with any papal policy. This hearkens to the Fourth Lateran Council, which criticized the practices of some local bishops. But with time, the Church and particularly the Popes recognized this as a legitimate practice, based upon the doctrines of the faith. Further, it marked a shift in the practice of what was the forerunner of indulgences. Previously, these were granted on an individualistic basis. Now, in the eleventh century and after, general grants, available to all, could be attained to remit temporal punishments by visiting churches, making pilgrimages and giving alms.

A lengthy discussion of how abuses crept up in this practice is not necessary, as those are properly well-known. However, the opponents of the Church oftentimes chastise the practice of indulgences as having no redeeming features, either spiritually or temporally.38 This is a slander. Abuses arose, but it can be shown that indulgences led to great improvements for the medieval society by the formation of the infrastructure lacking therein.

Examples of this construction founded upon the generosity of repenting Christians include many of the great cathedrals of Europe, the paintings and sculptures adorning the interior of these churches, hospitals, schools, leper houses, roads, bridges, harbors and other fortifications.39 These indulgences extended to those who worked on the projects, who donated money, even at times who did works at the institutions, such as visit the sick or dowering poor girls.

Although the opportunity of abuse existed, and came to pass, it must be noted that great piety was encouraged by this. One testimony of this is given by a Protestant scholar on an indulgence preached in Berne, Germany: "We are led to the conclusion that the vigorous moral preacher during the short time of his stay exercised an unusual influence and that he conveyed in no small degree to wider circles of the Bernese that desire for serious moral conduct in the public life that had moved the City Council to invite him."40

Two practices must be noted, if only briefly. These are the Christian Jubilee and the Crusades. In the Old Testament, the Jews were bound to celebrate every fiftieth year the deliverance of the Israelites from slavery in Egypt.41 Debts were forgiven, slaves freed and other such practices were known. The first Catholic Jubilee can be found in 1300, marked with special pilgrimages to Rome. In the fifteenth century, the practice was observed every twenty-five years.42 Attached to these celebrations are jubilee indulgences. Such indulgences became widely known, and are still practiced today. Also, confessors are given special privileges with regards to the penitents.43

The Crusade originally sought to recapture the Holy Lands.44 This gives an early example of a plenary indulgence for doing God's work. But the abuses attendant to this are well seen in hindsight. Such are the abuses that our current Pope felt the need to issue an apology for the crimes committed by the impious who joined the Crusades. Thus, such practices, though licit, are not followed due to dangers known to follow them.

It followed that Martin Luther came to prominence and the Protestant Revolt began. Luther began his attack on indulgences with the abuses, which is just enough. Later, he claimed that indulgences effected no remission of temporal punishment, but rather only worked as a substitution of penances, with the penances serving to reduce or expiate the penalty.45 Luther quickly moved past this to attack the very existence of Purgatory, by rounding out that sola fide allows the Christian to claim Christ's merits, and be made worthy of Heaven. Thus, the abuses of the doctrine of indulgences offered a chance to the Reformers to attack more central doctrines of the Church, such as the role of Tradition and the reliance on Scripture alone, but in a manner that would start with what appeared to be surely wrong. Clearly, Luther had moved far beyond defined Catholic teaching, and the Protestant Revolt never looked back at the doctrine which started so momentous a movement. For her part, the Church repented of the many abuses that occurred in her practices, including indulgences. The Council of Trent affirmed that indulgences were a part of the deposit of faith, with anathema attached.46 Reforms were initiated, and the trafficking in monies for indulgences were stopped. Now, spiritual works, such as visits to churches, certain prayers and devotions, and other such works were the objects indulged.

In time, indulgences became divided into categories.47 One already mentioned is that of plenary and partial. Partial indulgences would always have attached thereto a number of days, months, years or quarantines of the remittance. This did not relate to the punishment abated in Purgatory; rather, it was intended to relate the practice of the Tridentine and post-Tridentine period to the canonical penances of the early Church. The special term "quarantine" means "forty days." It referred to penance done during Lent, which was esteemed most highly.

Two other divisions of indulgences are related. One such division of indulgences was that of general and particular. A general indulgence was that available to all the faithful. Particular indulgences would be those restricted to a certain time, such as a Eucharistic Congress, or to a certain place, such as those granted by a diocesan bishop for his flock. Related to this is the division of indulgences into perpetual and temporary. Those indulgences that do not continue, such as those of the Jubilee Year, are considered temporary. Those which also occur only for a period of the year, such as visiting a cemetery to pray for the dead in the octave after All Souls' Day, are also considered temporary. Perpetual indulgences are those always available, such as for praying the Rosary.

Another division of indulgences that developed was by the manner in which the indulgence was to be gained. These could be personal, real or local. Personal indulgences are those granted to a physical person or to a corporate person, such as a religious congregation or association.

Real indulgences are those attached to some tangible or portable item. This division would include medals, crucifixes, Rosaries, and the like. Local indulgences are those attached to a particular place, such as those associated with the Station Churches of Rome.

Finally, a division is noted between indulgences for the living and for the dead.48 Now, the Church taught explicitly that indulgences could be gained for oneself, or for any soul in Purgatory. However, no indulgence can be gained by sufferage for another living person.

One other characteristic development in indulgences after the Trent definition was the proliferation of plenary indulgences. Although canon law by the early twentieth century would affirm that only one plenary indulgence could be gained per day, save a second at the moment of death,49 the number of plenary indulgences grew, it seemed, exponentially. The official manual of indulgences of this period, The Raccolta, grew in size to about 700 pages. Thus, while the book offered a true treasury of wonderful prayers, the sheer volume could tend to lead some faithful to concentrate on the gaining of an indulgence instead of loving of God and hating sin.

The next and most recent movement in this doctrine occurred after Vatican II. The Council Fathers had called for a revision of the Sacraments and the sacramentals, and indulgences are classified with the latter. Thus, Pope Paul VI issued the Apostolic Constitution on the Revision of Indulgences, Indulgentiarum doctrina, on January 1, 1967.50 The esteem of this document is attested to by its inclusion, in fact nearly comprising, in the section on indulgences in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, issued under Pope John Paul II.

In addition to explaining the doctrine in wonderfully detailed and fatherly tones, as well as acknowledging past abuses and the teaching of the Council of Trent, Pope Paul proceeds to enunciate reforms to make the practices of the doctrine simplified and to recommend the use of this gift to the Christians of the modern era. The reforms abolished some of the divisions developed since Trent. Particularly, the divisions of "real", "local" and "personal" were eliminated.51 Also, the practice of attaching days and years of canonical penance was abrogated, as the practice was indiscernible to the average Catholic.52

Concerning plenary indulgences, several norms were announced. The number of plenary indulgences was severely curtailed, to emphasize how precious these grants are. The attendant conditions for gaining a plenary indulgence were clarified to be three, in addition to the actual indulged act: sacramental Confession, receiving of Holy Eucharist, and prayers for the Pope. Additionally, to emphasize that the indulgence was effected by the action of the penitent, a plenary indulgence could only be received if the penitent had no attachment to sin. If this was imperfect, or one of the other three conditions was not met, then a partial indulgence is gained in proportion to one's turning toward God. Sufferage in plenary for the dead is gained at any church on the day of November 2.53

An important point to note is that the new Enchiridion of the indulged works, which the Pope ordered, would contain therein a revoking of the previously indulgenced works.54 Thus, many works formerly indulgenced were now not so enriched. This practice was common, and can be found in The Raccolta. But it is of note, as it stresses the action of indulgences as being that of the power of the keys, held by St. Peter's successors.

Are Indulgences Scriptural?

Space precludes a detailed look at this topic. Yet, it is at the core of Luther's objections, and many Protestants, if not all, still repeat this charge today. Accordingly, a brief look at this is necessary.

James Akin outlines seven principles which he asserts evidence the Scriptural soundness of the doctrine of indulgences.55 First, sin results in guilt and punishments. This, of course, parallels the Catholic understanding perfectly. Akin cites Isaiah 13:11, among other verses, to attest to this dual nature of sin. Second, punishments are both temporal and eternal. The punishments for original sin are cited to support this principle. Third, temporal penalties may remain when a sin is forgiven. The story of David and the punishments he incurred for adultery with Bathsheba is cited as an example of both components being present, and God forgiving the eternal punishment, damnation, but sustaining the temporal punishment, the death of the son of the sinful intercourse. Fourth, God blesses some people as a reward to others. Akin cites God's promise to bless Abraham's descendants. In the New Testament, it can be seen in the example of the Canaanite woman asking Jesus for the healing of her child in Matthew 15:22-28. Fifth, God remits temporal penalties suffered by some as a reward to others. Akin cites the punishments that should have started upon Solomon being withheld because of his father, David. Principle 6 is that God remits temporal punishments through the Church. Akin cites the ability of the Church to remit the eternal punishment. If the Church can achieve that through God, remission of the temporal punishment is not beyond her authority. Finally, Principle 7 is that God blesses dead Christians as a reward to living Christians. Akin cites several New Testament passages.

These principles underscore the nature of the family of God, and the way in which the actions of one member affects all members. Further, it shows that Scripture clearly does support the practice of indulgences, and that the doctrine has roots both in Tradition and Scripture. Yet his article underscores the underlying conflict of the Reformers, who no doubt rejected some, if not all, of these Scriptural references as inapplicable. This begs the question of who actually possesses authority in the Church, and the ability to properly interpret the Bible. This ultimately is the matter which crystallized the Reformers in separation from the historic Church of Christ, serving to show, in miniature, the effects of the Protestent Revolt by the study of this one doctrine.

Conclusion

Indulgences are an example of what Frank Sheed referred to when he alluded to God not preventing man from making logical insights from revealed mysteries. From the power of the keys and the sacrament of Penance did the Church receive from her bridegroom the authority to remit punishments, both temporal and eternal. As Cardinal Fisher noted, "Faith, whether in Purgatory or in Indulgences, was not so necessary in the Primitive Church as now. For then love so burned, that every one was ready to meet death for Christ. Crimes were rare, and such as occurred were avenged by the great severity of the Canons."56 In her solicitude to keep all her children from hell, the Church relented upon the canonical penances, which kept some souls from the sacraments. Thus, she recognized her ability to apply the merits of Jesus and the saints to fill in and remit punishments. The works permitted were abused, and this was regrettable. But Indulgences stand today as a part of the deposit of the faith, and a valuable avenue for all Christians who avail themselves of them. Truly, by practice of indulgences and a study of their developments, one can draw closer to Our Savior, and see His hand working in love for our union with Him.

Paul S. Czarnota is a lawyer in Detroit, Michigan.

1 Catechism of the Catholic Church. English Edition. (New Hope, KY: Urbi et Orbi Communications, 1994), no. 1471.

2 Ibid, no. 1472.

3 Spirago, Francis. The Catechism Explained. Ed. by Richard Clarke, S.J. Reprint of 1921 edition of Benziger Brothers. (Rockford, Ill.: TAN Books & Publishers, Co., 1993). p. 456.

4 Ibid.

5 Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1472.

6 Ott, Ludwig. Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma. Ed. by James Bastible. Translated by Patrick Lynch. Reprint of 1955 edition by Mercier Press. (Rockford, Ill.: TAN Books & Publishers, Inc., 1974). p. 355.

7 Ibid, p. 437.

8 Paul VI, Indulgentiarum doctrina. 2.

9 Ibid.

10 Cf. Ibid.

11 Ibid.

12 Ibid.

13 See James 3:2.

14 Paul VI, 3.

15 Ibid, Chapter II.

16 There is a story in the Acts of the Martyrs St. Perpetua and St. Felicity concerning a vision of St. Perpetua, who saw here brother move from a place of suffering to a place of comforted. One report of the story may be found in Newman, John Henry. An Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine. Reprint of 1878 edition. (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 1989).

17 Paul VI, Indulgentiarum doctrine, Chapter II.

18 Canon 992 of the Code of Canon Law. Latin-English Edition. Translation under the Canon Law Society of America. Second Ed. (Washington, DC: Canon Law Society of America, 1983). See also Catechism of the Catholic Church, no. 1471, citing Paul VI, Indulgentiarum doctrina, Norm 1.

19 Glenn, Paul J. A Tour of the Summa. Reprint of 1960 edition of B. Herder Book Co. (Rockford, Ill.: TAN Books & Publishers, Inc., 1978). p. 412.

20 Enchiridion of Indulgences. Auth. English Ed. Translated by William T. Barry, C.SS.R. (New York: Catholic Book Publishing Co., 1969). p. 22, Norm 8. It is noted that "bishops" is construed to include, and this construction is supported by other norms of indulgences, metropolitans, patriarchs, major archbishops and cardinals.

21 Cf. Barton, John M.T. Penance and Absolution. Vol. 51 of the Twentieth Century Encyclopedia of Catholicism. (New York: Hawthorne Books & Publishers, 1964). p. 150.

22 Lepicier, Alexis. Indulgences: Their Origin, Nature & Development. Third Eng. Ed. (New York: Benziger Brothers, 1928). pp. 145-156.

23 The common names for each of these classes is taken from a recent article, "The Fathers Know Best: Penance". This Rock. Vol. 6, No. 12. (December 1995). p. 39.

24 It should be noted that the entire process of canonical penance took years to complete, and some local churches required lifelong penances for crimes such as fornication.

25 Hagedorn, Francis E. General Legislation on Indulgences. (Washington, DC: Catholic University of America, 1924). p. 7.

26 Ibid.

27 Lepicier, pp. 204-206. Hagedorn, pp. 21-25.

28 It is of note that bishops were at times suspicious of this practice, as verification was difficult to impossible.

29 Hagedorn, pp. 30-33.

30 Lepicier, p. 307.

31 Hagedorn, p. 32.

32 Examples cited at Lepicier, p. 230-231.

33 History does note some substitutions were accomplished, unauthorized, by the penitents themselves. This practice was condemned.

34 Lepicier, p. 238.

35 A first finding of approval for the practice, when done by a confessor and not the penitent himself, is found at the Synod of Tribor in 895. Hagedorn, p. 29.

36 A famous case is that of the Emperor Constantine.

37 Lepicier, p. 281. Cf. Hagedorn, p.33.

38 Lepicier, pp. 426-435.

39 Paulus, Nikolaus. Indulgences as a Social Factor in the Middle Ages. Trans. by J. Elliot Ross. (New York: Devin-Adair Company, 1922).

40 Paulus, p. 33.

41 Hardon, John A. Modern Catholic Dictionary. (New York: Doubleday, 1980). p. 298-99.

42 Ibid.

43 The Maryknoll Catholic Dictionary. Compiled and edited by Albert J. Nevins. (New York: Dimension Books, 1965). p. 314.

44 Lepicier, pp. 324-349.

45 Lepicier, p. 438.

46 The Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent. Translated by H. J. Schroeder, O.P. Reprint of 1941 Edition. (Rockford, Ill.: TAN Books & Publishers, Inc., 1978). Session XXI, pp. 253-254.

47 Hagedorn deals with this in details, used herein, at pp. 64-71.

48 Barton, pp. 151-152.

49 The Raccolta. Official Ed. (Powers Lake, N.D.: Marian House, 1957).

50 I have used both translations from Vatican Council II: The Conciliar and Post Conciliar Documents. Gen. Ed. Austin Flannery, O.P. Rev. Edition. Vol. 1. (Northpost, New York: Costello Publishing Co., 1988), and Enchiridion of Indulgences. Auth. English Ed. Translated by William T. Barry, C.SS.R. (New York: Catholic Book Publishing Co., 1969), which seem in concurrence.

51 Paul VI, Indulgentiarum doctrina, Norm 12.

52 Ibid., norm 4.

53 Ibid., norms 7, 15.

54 Ibid., norm 13.

55 Akin, James. "A Primer on Indulgences". This Rock. Vol. 5, No. 11. (November 1994). pp. 13-21.

56 Newman, p. 390.