OCR Text |
Show Catholic Doctrine on Indulgence A Third Article, Thoroughly Explaining What It Is and What It Is Not. i The Catholic doctrine on the communion com-munion of sairivs and the treasure of j the churcrh was explained in articles I and II respectively. Having formed a clear conception of it. it will not be difficult to understand all that the Catholic church teaches on indulgences. Bearing in mind all that has been said in the two previous articles, we shall now consider what an indulgence is and what it is not. The meaning of the word "indulgence," "indulg-ence," taken in a broad sense, is obvious ob-vious to all. In the Roman law it is a technical term, meaning "forgiveness." "pardon." But in the theological sense, in which we are now considering it. the word has a more restricted meaning. In this sense an indulgence may be defined as "a remission of the temporal punishment which often remains d-ie to sin after the guilt and eternal punishment punish-ment has already been forgiven." A more lengthy definition is given by Amort, who calls an indulgence "a remission re-mission of the punishment which is still due to sin after sacramental absolution, abso-lution, this remission being valid in the court of conscience and before God, and being made by an application of the treasure of the church on the part of a lavvfu! superior." " As is manifest from its definition, an indulgence then implies several points of Cathoiic belief, each of whk-h requires re-quires explanation In order to thoroughly thor-oughly comprehend what exactly an indulgence 7s, as well as what it is not. It "is" a remission of the "temporal" punishment due to sin already pardoned. par-doned. It is "not" a remission of the "eternal" punishment due to sin. It "is" a remission of the punishment. punish-ment. . It is "not" a remission of the "sin." This remission is "not" one which can take effect "before" the sin has been . forgiven, and its-"eternal" punishment, pun-ishment, if a grave sin, but it "can" "after" the sin has been forgiven and the "eternal" punishment incurred by sin, when it is ..a question of any sin by which we lose our right to the kingdom of heaven and which we tall "mortal" sin. An indulgence can 'never be obtained for unforgiven sin. The "guilt" and the "eternal" punishment, if a mortal sin. must first be washed away. The sinner must, therefore, "truly" repent before he can possibly gain an indulgence. Hence, it would not suffice to go through the external formalities of repentance. It would be of no avail to confess the sins if there were not also true sorrow for them, together with a firm purpose of avoiding avoid-ing them for the future. This firm purpose pur-pose is as essential to true sorrow as this sorrow is to the dispositions and the conditions required to gain an indulgence. in-dulgence. How far different, then, is this doctrine from the version given by the enemies of the chiych. who go so far as to assert that an indulgence in the Catholic church means "a permission permis-sion to commit sin"! j An indulgence has nothing to do with forgiving the sin itself, or the eternal punishment incurred by mortal sin. Both the "guilt" and the "eternal" i punishment due to sin have to be atoned for through the merits of Christ. His Passion and Death were sufficient to atone for the sins of the whole world, and. in f?ct. for all possible pos-sible sins. He suffered and died for all and "he would have all men saved." Here it must be carefully born in mind that the fact that Christ did sufficient suf-ficient to satisfy for the sins of the whole world, and for the eternal punishment' pun-ishment' due to all mortal sins, as well as all possible sins and eternal punishment pun-ishment due to them. Is no reason whatever for concluding that, therefore, there-fore, till such sins and punishments actuallv committed, or possible to commit, com-mit, are, therefore, in effect, already atoned for. This is the deplorable error er-ror into which tens of thousands have fallen and are continually falling, outside out-side the Catholic church, in which church alone the "whole" truth can be found. There can be no delusion greater than to believe and say that because "the Lord died for us all." that, therefore, there-fore, "we 'are all saved," "we are all washed in the blood of the Lamb." That is all nonsense. We are nothing of the kind. The atonement and merits of Christ have to be "applied" in each and every case before they can be of any use to the individual. V It is time that Christ did die for us all and that he purchased graces sufficient suf-ficient to cleanse all sin. original and personal, and all possible sin. But without the aid of Scripture, common sense alone can make it perfectly clear that the fact that he purchased all such graces is no reason for holding that, therefore, "we are all cleansed," "we are all saved.'.'x "We are not." We have to get those graces-first. They have to be applied and utilized. 4 It is not because a hungry man will purchase a good dinner an pay for it that, therefore, his hunger is satiated. sat-iated. He may purchase and pay for it ten times over, but he has something some-thing more to do. He shall have to eat it. ' Sotoo. shall we have to "get" the graces purchased by Christ before they can do us any good. How are we to get them and how are they applied? By the means through which he has ordained and by those alone. i The first grace we all require is that wKich can cleanse -us from original sia and make us Christians, children of God and heirs to the kingdom of heaven. heav-en. That grace is conveyed to each and every soul by baptism, and by baptism alone. Consequently, baptism is "absolutely "ab-solutely " necessary in order to be partakers par-takers of the rnerits of Christ; in order or-der to receive the graces which he purchased pur-chased in dying for us all: in a word, in order to be saved. Hence, holy scripture scrip-ture tells us that "unless a man be born again of water and the- Holy Ghost, he cannot enter the kingdom of .heaven." (John IH. 3). Elsewhere it says: "One Lord, one faiih one baptism." bap-tism." (Ephes. iv., o). And again, "H.? that believes and is baptised shall bo saved, he that believes not shall bo j condemned." (Mark xxvi. It is. therefore, clear that we must not only believe in "one faith." but wo ! must also be "baptized" in order to bo j saved. Those who. after baptism, fail int any of those sins 'which exclude from the kingdom of heaven, must also b- cleansed, as common sense alone can tell us. The graces purchased by our Lord must again be 'applied to effect this, and they must be applied into the manner, subject to the conditions, by the means through which alone Christ has promised to give such graces. Thi.-? j is accomplished principally through the I sacrament of penance by a good, sin- I cer3 confession. Yet we find so-calle.l I Christians who deny the obligation of confession and this most beneficial sacrament! The conditions and humiliations of confessing sins to a priest are too un- I palatable to submit to, and the con- I venient way out of the difficulty is to deny the whole thing! I It is no less serious a blunder for f them than their claim to believe "any- I thing they like," etc., and "as much a.- j they like." et.'. instead of submitting and professing "one faith" within '"one . fold" and under "one shepherd." It i.-i true confession is not palatable. ?es, I the truth is not always palatable, but it does not follow that it is no less ttv3 f truth. We now see what the teaching of the I church of God is with regard to "sin" j and the "eternal" punishment clue to mortal sinand how both are atoned for f to the divine justice through the mer- j its of Christ, which arc anil must he applied in each c ase, through the chan- i . nels. the means, ordained by Christ, j and no other, and which are principally f the sacraments of baptism and pen- ance. I Penance is necessary for mortal sins t committed after baptism. Our divino Lord did not say to his apostles and to their successors without a meaning, an object and an obligation "whose sins you shall forgive they are forgiven and whose sins you shall retain they are. I retained." (John, xx, 21). I If we Catholics could see our way to select a creed, a faith of our own in- I stead of "one faith." and if we could f invent a. means to suit our taste of get- ting the graces purchased by the pas- sion of death of our Lord, for our sal- j vation. as our' non-Catholic brethren j do, we should not hesitate much. But we know too well what is at stake. We know it is nothing less than eternal lif I we are striving to gain and eternal j death to avoid: and, therefore, we can- j not afford to cast aside the plain teach- I ing of God's church at such a fearful I cost! Those who, through prejudi , I pride, passion, choose to act otherwise, ' shall have to abide by the conse- Hjliences. s i So far then as regards "sin" and th "eternal" punishment due to mortil f sin, we see that indulgences have noth- I ing to do with forgiving or atoning for j the one or the other, but only with tho ! "temporal" punishment due to sin aft- er the sin has been already pardono-I as well as its "eternal" punishment i whtn the sin is mortal. Many non-Catholics deny that there f is such a thing as "temporal" punish- ment at all. We have abundant proof 1 to the contrary. It has ever been th." teaching of the Catholic church since the clays of the apostles It has at all times been the practice of the church to impose a suitable pen- ance on the penitent after the confes- J sion of his sins. It could not be im- j posed for the'"sins" or to atone for the "eternal" punishment due to grave "' sins. These, as we have seen, are for- given and atoned for by the merits of Christ applied through the sacrament f of penance. The penance imposed i3 j to atone for the ' temporal" punish- ment alone. It is for the same pur- pose the severe canonical penances. J such as kneeling at the church, doors f and soliciting the prayers of the faith- I ful, etc., were imposed in the early age.s . ; of the church. Those who deny the I teaching of the church can find ample proofs from holy scripture. Let us examine one or two. and we shall see that temporal punishment often " re- i main due to sin. St. Faul speaks of some who shall be saved "yet as f through fire." (I Cor. iii, 10). It cannot be "eternal" fire as he could not then have said that they should be saved. I It must, therefore, be "temporal" to I atone for "temporal" punishment. j v Again, "It is a holy and wholesome thought to pray for the dead that they. f may be loosed from their sins." (2 ( Mach. xii, 42). Not from mortal sins . ; or "eternal" punishment, which mortal ' sins deserve. "Out of hell there is n. j redemption." Christ's words at the last . J I confirms this. "Go ye accursed into j 'eternal' fire," etc., not temporal. The "dead" referred to then must mean those whose "venial" sins and "tem-poraV "tem-poraV punishment were not as yet atoned for. If there were no "tempji-ral" "tempji-ral" punishment to be undergone by them it would neither be a holy nor "a '; wholesome" thought, nor would there ; be any object, use or necessity to pray for them at all. The unsatisfied inquirer can find i many other proofs that "temporal" punishment often remains due to sin after its "guilt" and "eternal" punishment punish-ment have been remitted, but the above ; suffices for our present purpose. This "temporal" punishment then is ' what, the church, by virtue of her power pow-er of "loosing" can remit in part or in ; whole by the grant of a "partial" or a "plenary indulgence." C. E. B. |