Section I. On the Notion, Existence, and Division of Indulgences

I. Notion. An indulgence is the remission before God of temporal punishment due for sins which, as far as guilt is concerned, have already been blotted out, which ecclesiastical authority grants from the treasury of the Church outside the sacrament, for the living by way of absolution, for the departed by way of suffrage (canon 911).

It is said:

1. Remission of temporal punishment; but not of guilt, whether mortal or venial; nor of eternal punishment, but only temporal punishment.

2. Before God. This is clear both from proposition 19 of Luther condemned by Leo X: "Indulgences are of no value for those who truly gain them for the remission, before divine justice, of punishment due for actual sins;"² and from the authentic declaration of Pius VI issued against propositions 40 and 41 of the Synod of Pistoia.³

Besides this, indulgences are worth as much before God as the Church expresses in her words; so that, for example, a plenary indulgence of itself remits all temporal punishment, and an indulgence, for example, of one year of itself is worth only as much as one year of penance would be worth, passed according to the penitential canons, independently of the devotion or fervor of the subject. The reason is that "the quantity of the effect follows the quantity of its cause. But the cause of the remission of punishment in indulgences is nothing except the abundance of the merits of the Church, which is sufficient for expiating the whole punishment; but the devotion, or labor, or gift of the one receiving the indulgence, or the cause for which the indulgence is given, is not the effective cause. Hence the quantity of the remission ought not to be proportioned to any of these things, but to the merits of the Church, which always superabound" (St. Thomas, Supplement, q. 25, a. 2). "Nor in this is too great a market made of the mercy of God, as some say; nor is derogation made from divine justice, because nothing of the punishment is remitted, but the punishment of one is reckoned to another" (St. Thomas, cited place).

3. Due for sins which, as far as guilt is concerned, have already been blotted out. For while the guilt remains, the punishment corresponding to it cannot be remitted. But once guilt has been remitted, not necessarily every temporal punishment is remitted.

4. Ecclesiastical authority, since to it alone belongs disposing of the common treasury. Who are the subjects of this power is explained in n. 494.

5. From the treasury of the Church. By the treasury of the Church is understood the accumulation of satisfactions of the Saints, both those reigning in heaven and those dwelling on earth, which they did not apply to others. Namely, to every good work proceeding from grace there belongs a threefold value: meritorious, insofar as, when the other conditions have been fulfilled, it confers a right to a just reward; impetratory, insofar as it has the force of obtaining goods from God by supplication; satisfactory, insofar as by reason of the difficulty of the work itself and at least by reason of the reluctance of our nature, it can satisfy the injured justice of God. Now the satisfactions of Christ, certainly of infinite value, and likewise the satisfactions of the saints, insofar as they were neither necessary for blotting out their own punishment nor applied by them to other persons, constitute, as it is called, the treasury of the Church.

6. Outside the sacrament; by which indulgence is distinguished from the remission of punishment which is made by the power of the keys in the sacrament of Penance.

7. Grants for the living by way of absolution, for the departed by way of suffrage. Namely:

a) An indulgence granted to the living is a judicial act by which the Church definitively applies the satisfactions of Christ and the Saints to her subjects in substitution for the temporal punishment still due for guilt that has been remitted. Therefore it is made by way of absolution, or is a quasi-absolution; but it is not a pure and simple absolution, because it has payment attached, insofar as it applies to the faithful satisfactions rendered by others. Hence St. Thomas says: "One who receives indulgences is not, simply speaking, absolved from the punishment due, but it is given to him so that he may pay the debt" (Supplement, q. 25, a. 1, ad 2).

b) An indulgence for the departed - over whom the Church lacks jurisdiction - involves the Church, from her power of administering her treasury, offering - or granting the one gaining the indulgence the right of offering in her name - to God the satisfactions of Christ and the Saints, praying to Him that He will accept them in substitution for the punishment to be paid by the departed. Hence an indulgence of this kind is valid only by way of suffrage.

From what has been said it follows that an indulgence granted to the living, when the things to be observed have been observed, has an infallible effect. But as regards the effect with respect to the departed, it is disputed whether or not it is infallible. Some affirm, because God, by the very fact that He gave the Supreme Pontiff the power of granting indulgences for the departed, seems also to have bound Himself by a promise to apply indulgences to them. Others deny this, or at least think that the application of the whole value, and to the designated souls, is not infallible, because such a divine promise is not proved in any way. For the power of the Church to grant indulgences for the departed involves only the competence of offering to God for the departed the spiritual treasury entrusted to herself, that is, to the Church. But a competence of this kind does not prove a divine promise of accepting what is offered. The response of the Sacred Congregation of Indulgences, dated July 28, 1840, taken in its obvious sense, favors this opinion: "By an indulgence of a privileged altar, if the mind of the one granting and the use of the power of the keys are considered, there is to be understood a plenary indulgence which immediately frees the soul from all the punishments of purgatory. But if the effect of the application is considered, there is to be understood an indulgence whose measure corresponds to the good pleasure and acceptance of divine mercy" (St. Alphonsus, VI, 534, under 10).

¹ Cf. Beringer-Steinen, Die Ablässe; Fanfani, De indulgentiis: manuale theoretico-practicum; Stein, De indulgentiis lucrandis.

² Denzinger-Bannwart, n. 759.

³ Denzinger-Bannwart, n. 1540 and 1541.

II. Existence of indulgences. The existence of indulgences must be admitted if it is proved: 1. that there exists in the Church a treasury of satisfactions which in itself suffices for blotting out before God the temporal punishment due for sins; 2. that these satisfactions are applicable to the faithful; 3. that the Church enjoys the power of applying them. Now:

1. There exists in the Church a treasury of satisfactions which in itself suffices for blotting out before God the temporal punishment due for sins. This follows from the propositions of Luther condemned by Leo X. For, as we noted above, in proposition 19 he condemned Luther's doctrine which teaches that indulgences are not of value for the remission, before divine justice, of punishment due for actual sins; and in proposition 17 the same Supreme Pontiff condemns this: "The treasures of the Church, from which the Pope gives indulgences, are not the merits of Christ and of the Saints."¹ Hence there exists in the Church a treasury of satisfactions which in itself suffices for blotting out before God the temporal punishment due for sins. Besides this, the existence of such a treasury is clear from the superabundant and infinite satisfaction which belongs to the works of Christ, as being a divine Person, and which He offered to God the Father for us.

2. The said satisfactions are applicable to the faithful. This is clear from the condemned propositions cited; as regards the satisfactions of Christ, it is furthermore clear from the work of redemption, by which the Savior satisfied God for us; as regards the superabundant satisfactions of the Saints, it follows from the dogma of the communion of Saints, by virtue of which a mutual participation of goods is had in the Church.

3. The Church enjoys the power of applying them; this is proved in Section II.

¹ Denzinger-Bannwart, n. 757.

III. Division of indulgences. Indulgences are chiefly divided:

1. Into plenary and partial, according as of themselves they wholly or partially remit the punishment due for sins. Now when an indulgence is granted, for example, of one year, the sense is that so much punishment is remitted to someone as would be remitted to him if for a year he performed the penance once customarily imposed for sins according to the canons (St. Alphonsus, VI, 535). By quarantines, however, which are sometimes attached to years - for example, an indulgence of seven years and seven quarantines - there is not understood some time beyond the years themselves, but that part of the year in which a harder penance was prescribed, namely the time of Lent.

2. Into personal, local, and real, according as they are granted only to certain persons, for example religious or members of a confraternity; or are affixed to certain places, for example to a church or altar, that is, to their pious visitation, etc.; or are attached to certain things, for example rosaries, medals, etc., that is, to the pious use of them.

3. Into temporary and perpetual, according as they are granted in perpetuity or only for a definite time.

4. Into indulgences for the living only, for the departed only, and for both the living and the departed.

Corollary I. From what has been said it follows how deservedly canon 911 states that indulgences are to be held in great esteem, and that their use - which is of faith¹ - is most salutary. For indulgences, besides remitting temporal punishment, stir the faithful to contrition and other salutary works, since they are not granted except to penitents and under definite conditions.

Corollary II. Those who make gain from indulgences are guilty of simony (vol. I, n. 621); indeed, by canon 2327 they are punished ipso facto with excommunication simply reserved to the Apostolic See.

¹ Council of Trent, session 25, Decree on Indulgences.