INDULGENCES
and Why they
Remain Vital to us Today
How
many of us indeed, all
of us have at one time or another said, Ah ... would that I had
never done that! Could I only go back in time!
Confucius, in one of his well known Analects,
summarized it best: "What is said cannot be unsaid." How true. What
is more, in so many, many ways, what is done cannot be undone ...
We are prisoners of our past and Time,
the stern warden, it appears, has thrown away the key.
We are prisoners to what we have said
and to what we have done. In spite of all our longing and despite
every reparation we have done what we have done and said what we have
said. And we know it! And even this we cannot unknow.
However much we have amended our lives
or corrected our ways, we cannot escape what we have done and what we
have said. They are deeds and words indited, chiseled as it were, in
a ledger of adamantine stone that we understand as the truthful history
of our lives.
For all our blithe protestations that,
we have moved on, moved beyond them, they remain withal the secret
burden in our hearts, the darkest closets in our memories in fearfully
remote corners of our minds. In the dark watches of the night they often
return to us, or totally unbidden, come to us as we walk down the street.
Indeed, even the prophet says,
I
know my iniquity, and my sin is always before me.
(Psalm 50.5)
|
And yet the same prophet
tells us that,
If thou,
O Lord, wilt mark iniquities: Lord, who shall stand it.
For with thee there is merciful forgiveness.
(Psalm 129.3)
|
In light of this undeniable reality, how
are we to understand the forgiveness of God afforded us
in Holy and Sacramental Confession? On the one hand God forgives
our sins ... while on the other He retains our punishment ... How is
that the forgiveness extended to our sins does not extend to
the punishment due sin? More simply put, does not forgiveness
of the act entail remission of the punishment? In a word,
no.
Justice and Satisfaction for Sin
First
of all, not every sin is susceptible to restitution in
the way, say, that the sin of stealing $100 can be rectified (not
undone ...) by repaying the $100 to the person from whom it was
stolen. This sinful act can be remediated by simply restoring what was
wrongly taken. A lie can be redressed by telling the truth. However,
this clearly is not the case with the sins of adultery and murder ...
among many others. We cannot, of ourselves, restore, rehabilitate, or
redress every sin. We cannot bring to life whom we have murdered.
We cannot restore our virginity or that of another. We may be forgiven
such sins but there is no path to restitution. This is to say that we
cannot make satisfaction for them.
In such cases a commensurable privation,
or punishment, is the only satisfaction possible in justice
and God is just (however frequently and conveniently overlooked).
That justice is a good is indisputable. Were it not, then injustice
would be good and no one reasonable will argue this. God, then, Who
is perfect, and perfectly good, cannot be wanting in any good,
and we have agreed that justice is an indefeasible good. There is, in
a word, no incongruity between God's goodness and God's justice. In
fact, the two are both mutual and reciprocal. The notion of punishment,
then, in no way derogates from God as good and God as just.
Since justice demands the atonement of
sin, the punishment justly due sin must be satisfied either in this
life or in the next. It appears inescapable. Satisfaction in this life
is generally held by the Saints and Doctors of the Church to be less
rigorous than the satisfaction exacted in the life to come. In this
life or the next, justice will be satisfied.
But since all things are possible to God,
why cannot the punishment due sin be commuted also? Since God
is all good and all loving as well as just would He not make
this at least possible? The answer to this question is precisely the
point of this article.
The KEY to Understanding that All
Things are Possible to God
The answer is yes.
To understand this, let us look at an
analogy in secular life. The President of the United States, (or the
Governor of any State) is granted the power of Executive Clemency, or
the power to commute the sentence due in justice to an individual
guilty of a crime ... even a capital offense. He exercises this
power ex meru motu, or of his own accord, and independent
of the sentence or penalty already delivered by a Court of Justice.
This power is accorded him by Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution.
The question implicit in the exercise
of this power is this: why would the President of the United States
be granted by the Constitution of the United States this power to
entirely commute the sentence delivered by a court that demands, and
would exact, justice if he was never intended to exercise it? In other
words, why would any power be given any individual if it were never
intended that the power so granted be exercised? The question, really,
is rhetorical: it would be absurd to do so. Are we agreed?
Let us then look at Indulgences and the
power to grant them by the Pope. It is a power explicitly granted him
by no less an authority than Christ Himself in Sacred Scripture:
And
I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I
will build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail
against it. And 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 shalt loose on earth, it shall be loosed
also in Heaven.
(St. Matthew 16.18-19)
|
Let us re-frame the question
we initially asked relative to Executive Clemency in the state of secular
affairs: why would the Pope be granted by Christ Himself this power
to entirely commute the demands of justice if he was never intended
to exercise it? In other words, why would the Pope be given this power
if Christ never intended that the power so granted be exercised? Once
again, such an assumption is absurd. If such power resides in the President
of the United States through the Constitution a fortiori ...
that is to say, with greater force still, does the power to grant Plenary
Indulgences reside in the Pope through Christ.
This is, literally,
the KEY to understanding Indulgences: the key
to Kingdom of Heaven given to Peter with a commission of such profound
authority that, Christ tells Peter,
whatsoever
thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in Heaven:
and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth, it shall be loosed also
in heaven.
Peter, the Pope, has power
that extends to Heaven itself, such that it is eo ipso ratified
by God Himself in Peters pronouncing it!
The State of Innocence Regained: undoing
the done and unsaying the said
In acquiring a Plenary Indulgence one
effectively regains the state of Baptismal Innocence. It is a stunning
realization and an unspeakable gift! It is nothing less than life
absolutely anew in Christ! All that we had done in the way of sin has,
through the Power of the Keys of Peter, been undone; all that had been
said, is unsaid. They cease to be. Within our lives in Christ, these
things no longer exist and never occurred. They have been totally abrogated,
canceled, expunged, through the pronouncement of Peter which is
ipso facto ratified in Heaven itself!
In beginning this article, we had expressed
the universal lamentation: Ah ... would that I had never
done that! Could I only go back in time! You cannot go back in
time. But what you have done can, after all and to our amazement
be undone. But not of ourselves. This prerogative belongs to
Peter, to the Pope, alone to undo what we have done, to unsay what
we have said. He has the power because he has been given the power
and he was given that power by Christ with a purpose and to an end.
And Peter the Pope exercises this power, and is being faithful to
this commission, in granting Plenary Indulgences to the Faithful under
stipulations that he himself determines. And when he does it is instantly
ratified in Heaven!
Do you wish be truly, totally,
free of the burden of your sins? Of the penalties in justice
demanded of them, and which, in all likelihood and with good reason,
you fear when pondering the hour of your death ... and what lies beyond?
Christ has spoken much of this.
But He also spoke to Peter and through
Peter, to us. A Plenary Indulgence the forgiveness of all the sins
of your entire life, and the punishment due in justice for them,
is held out to you by God ... in the hands of Peter. 1
Why the Gaining of a Plenary indulgence
for Oneself is not a Selfish Act
First
we must understand two fundamental and extremely important features
about the dogma and doctrine of Plenary Indulgences:
-
The benefits
of an indulgence can be applied to oneself.
-
Or they can
be applied in the way of suffrage for the souls of the dead: We
can ask God to grant the benefits of the indulgence that we claim
(under very specific stipulations outlined in the
Indulgentiarum Doctrina)
to the soul of one we love who has died with a clear understanding
that the graces offered through the indulgence are God's Alone to
give as He wills. In other words, He may very well accept your petition
that the indulgence be granted to the specific person for whom you
offer it. But we can never contravene, or violate, the free will
of God; it is Gods prerogative to apply the indulgence that
you offer to any soul Whom He chooses! It may be a soul in
far greater need of the indulgence than the soul for whom you intended
it. That soul then gains the merits of the indulgence you
have claimed, rather than the soul for whom you petitioned. The
indulgence is never lost, nor obtained in vain; it is, rather, granted
according to the most holy will of God: for the person on whose
behalf you offer it, or for another soul to Whom He chooses
to apply its merits. Ultimately, God Alone knows upon whom He chooses
to confer the merits of the indulgence that you have obtained. God
is not heedless of our hearts. He knows the love and faith that
motivates your offering of an indulgence for one who has been dear
to you in this life. God honors and answers specific prayers that
we place in humility and trust before Him. We know this. Holy Scripture
is senseless apart from it. Whatever our intention, some soul,
is granted that extraordinary grace, and goes to Heaven at once,
beholding the very face of God! One day you will know whom, and
it will be the person you have loved ... or another that will greet
you in the company of Angels and Saints and reveal it to you. In
either case your own joy will be overwhelming!
It
has been asked: Is
it not selfish for me to apply the indulgence to myself, when I could
have obtained it for another?
No. And this is
why: First we must remember Christ's admonition to us to remove the
beam from our own eye before we attempt to remove it from the eye of
another (St. Matthew 7.5). Holy Mother Church has always taught that
our first obligation in the way of salvation and holiness,
is to ourselves! We must pray for ourselves first
before we can pray for others, seek to be holy ourselves before attempting
to lead others to holiness. We must seek to be perfect even as our Father
in Heaven is perfect (St. Matthew 5.48) until we can say with Saint
Paul, I live, now not I; but Christ liveth
in me. (Gal. 2.20). Such a soul is surely heard by God in
every petition, yes? This is not to say that contrite sinners are not
heard by God. We have the parable of the Publican and the Pharisee to
testify to this (Saint Luke 18.10-14). It nevertheless remains that
one free from sin and living in a state of grace is both pleasing to
God and heard by Him. Within such a soul God sees His own Son, as Saint
Paul tells us above. The stain of sin has been washed away, revealing
the unmarred, unblemished, imago Dei (the image of God)
in which it was created and in which there is no contrariety to God;
in a word, a soul conformed to Christ Jesus.
So what?
When you yourself, for yourself,
have obtained the graces and merits of a Plenary Indulgence that abrogates
all temporal punishment and places you in a state of grace, conformed
to God and free of sin together with its just punishment, you are then
prepared to pray for others, to intercede for others. Your prayer
is more efficacious because it is no longer simply you who plead,
but Christ Jesus within you! Jesus answered,
and said to him: If any one love me, he will keep my word, and my Father
will love him, and we will come to him, and will make our abode with
him. (St. John 14.23). In other words, through the Plenary
Indulgence that you have claimed for yourself you have been cleansed
of all the detritus of sin and every impediment before God and are
then enabled to more efficaciously pray for others! It is quite the
opposite of selfishness: it is the impetus born of selfless love to
pray more effectively for others who have entrusted to you their
own intentions, asking that you pray for them!
Do you think it presumptuous that the
prayer of one who has obtained for himself the graces and merits
of a Plenary Indulgence is more efficacious than the prayer of one who
has not? Does it offend your democratic instincts that all should
be heard equally by God, irrespective of their lives? The Parable of
the Publican and the Pharisee is a beautifully inverse paradigm. Democratically,
we vote for the Pharisee who is blameless and has the credentials,
even as we abhor his self-righteousness (as God does, as well). The
Publican has no credentials; just a list of the very reasons God should
not hear him, but imploring God's mercy nonetheless. We know who walked
away justified before God: the Publican who prayed, unlike the Pharisee
who also prayed but not both!
God heard the prayers of the Patriarch
Joseph but not those of his eleven brothers. Moses and Joshua
were allowed into God's very Presence but not Aaron or Levi. God heard
and answered the prayers of Moses, but not of the grumbling Israelites.
The list of examples of God answering the prayers of the just over the
prayers of the unjust are innumerable. The point is that God hears
all our prayers but is especially inclined to answer the prayers
of those who have spurned sin, the world, the flesh, and the devil
those who have washed their robes in the Blood of the Lamb. In our own
day, who among us would presume that our own prayers were as likely
to be answered as those of, say, Saint Padre Pio to whom people flocked
to present their own petitions to God? Indeed, why do we come to the
holy Nun, Friar, Monk, or Priest to assist us with their prayers? Why,
indeed, to the Saints at all? It is because throughout history we have
recognized the extraordinary efficaciousness of the prayers of the holy
(who, incidentally, never acknowledge themselves to be so) on our own
behalf. Who has not petitioned another they deem holy to present their
own needs to God, confident that God will answer because such
a one cleansed of sin, ever striving against it, and pleasing to God
will be heard and answered? And one becomes so eminently through
a Plenary Indulgence first gained for themselves in order to assist,
through the love of Christ and neighbor, those who come to them in need,
seeking their intercession before the God Who knows them sees and
hears His very Son within them to Whom they have conformed their
lives in contradiction to the world that never knew Him.
This is no selfish act simply to the end
of ones own sanctification at which one stops, much like the Pharisee
in the parable, satisfied that they have obtained salvation for themselves
and heedless of the salvation of others. It is acquired precisely
for the sanctification of others because once it is acquired
for oneself it is subsequently, and all the more efficaciously, offered
for others. So understood it is the ultimate act of the virtue of Spiritual
Mercy (as distinct from acts of Corporal Mercy) in which the self, as
the imago Dei, authentically reflects God Who is perfect in mercy.
In a word, one becomes like unto God in reflecting and enacting
the mercy we find in God Himself. Indeed, in so doing we find fulfilled
the promise of Christ:
Blessed
are the merciful, for they shall find mercy. (Saint
Matthew 5.7)
Geoffrey K.
Mondello
Editor
Boston Catholic Journal
Printable
PDF Version
Click here for the Official Indulgentiarum Doctrina
on the Promulgation of Sacred Indulgences in English
___________________________________________
1 Of
course, the forgiveness extended by God for any sin and under
all circumstances, presupposes and thus requires perfect Contrition,
or sorrow, for the sins committed together with the resolute amendment
to sin no more. Any petition to God for forgiveness of sins that is
not accompanied by genuine sorrow is, in conspect Dei, that is
to say, before God, an act of presumption and insolence, not reverence;
and in the Holy Confessional constitutes the grave sin of blasphemy,
such that the sinner leaves the Confessional, not only without absolution
(even if the priest has pronounced it), but more guilty than when he
entered it. Sorrow for sin is indispensable to its forgiveness.
Totally Faithful to the Sacred
Deposit of Faith entrusted to the Holy See in Rome
Scio
opera tua ... quia modicum habes virtutem, et servasti verbum
Meum, nec non negasti Nomen Meum
I
know your works ... that you have but little power, and
yet you have kept My word, and have not denied My Name.
(Apocalypse
3.8)
Copyright © 2004 - 2024 Boston Catholic
Journal. All rights reserved. Unless otherwise stated, permission
is granted by the Boston Catholic Journal for the copying
and distribution of the articles and audio files under the
following conditions: No additions, deletions, or
changes are to be made to the text or audio files in any
way, and the copies may not be sold for a profit. In the
reproduction, in any format of any image, graphic, text,
or audio file, attribution must be given to the Boston Catholic
Journal.
|
|