Eucharist;" or in case the penitents were "in danger of death," in which case they were, on recovery, to conclude their time of penance; or sometimes" when intercession was made in favour of the repenting sinner by persons justly possessing influence with the Pastors of the Church;" or in fine, when penitents obtained letters of recommendation to mercy from the martyrs imprisoned for the name of Jesus Christ. In all these cases the Church mitigated the penances which had been imposed on sinners, and restored them to Communion. Without doubt, innumerable proofs of all this may be brought from the Fathers and the Councils; but it can be of no avail to the advocates of Indulgences in the Romish sense of the term. For be it remembered, that according to Romanists, an Indulgence is the remission of temporal penalties due to remitted sin. The sin is therefore pardoned and absolved before the Indulgence can be obtained. But in all the instances ever cited from the primitive ages, the Indulgence was a necessary preliminary to absolution: absolution was only granted in consequence of Indulgence; and therefore these ancient Indulgences were not remissions of temporal penalties due to absolved or remitted sin. This is conclusive against your doctrine of Indulgences.

The truth is, that Indulgences were always in primitive times regarded simply as relaxations of x Wiseman, Controv. Lectures, ii. p. 77-81.

penances imposed for sins, either by way of remission or by commuting them for some less penances. No one ever thought of regarding them as remissions of temporal penalties due to God's justice for remitted sins. Maldonatus has stated, that the Indulgences granted by the Roman Pontiffs themselves always profess to remit the "enjoined penance." They do not themselves pretend to remit the temporal penalties due to God's justice for remitted sin; nor to relieve souls in Purgatory. These latter uses of Indulgences are merely the inventions of Theologians, which are not sanctioned either by the doctrines of antiquity, or by the form of Indulgences themselves.

But there is another essential difference between Romish Indulgences and those of primitive times. It is admitted by Romanists that Indulgences refer to the remission of sactisfactions due for sin; but it has been proved in a former letter, that according to the doctrine of Scripture, Antiquity, and the Roman Church herself, satisfactions are not merely for the temporal penalties remaining due to sin, but for its guilt and eternal penalties"; consequently Indulgences do not refer merely to the remission of its temporal penalties, but to that of its guilt (culpa)

y Maldonatus, de Sacramentis, tom. ii. p. 18. It is said that this clause has been omitted in modern grants of Indulgences; doubtless because it too plainly shewed the real and ancient objects of those remissions.

z Letter iv. p. 18-37.

and eternal penalties; and therefore if they follow the remission of sin, they are null and void.

The practice of the ancient Church having always been to grant Indulgences as a preliminary to Absolution, it remains to be considered how this discipline has come to be entirely reversed by the Roman Church, which now makes Absolution a preliminary to Indulgences.

Indulgences then in the sense of remissions or commutations of Canonical Penances, had been found in the time of the Crusades most effective instruments, in influencing the actions of Christians to such works as were thought highly beneficial to the Popes, and to the Church generally. But about the same time, notions were growing up amongst Latin theologians which led to a change of practice with regard to Absolution and Indulgences. "At the same time," says Fleury," the practice was introduced of giving Absolution, even after secret penitence, immediately after confession and satisfaction imposed and accepted: whereas in antiquity it was not given unless at the end, or at least after a great part of the penance had been accomplished. This change was founded on the reasonings of the scholastic doctors, that external Absolution ought not to be refused to him who, (one should believe,) had already received it internally from God, in virtue of the contrition which he appeared to have in his heart." Tournely speaks of this custom Fleury, Discours iv. sur l'Hist. Eccl. § 15.

a

as introduced in the eleventh or twelfth cen

tury'.

The immediate effect of this on Indulgences was twofold. First, it made Absolution precede them, instead of being preceded by them as formerly. Secondly, as the guilt and eternal punishment were believed to be removed by contrition and Absolution, Satisfactions or Penances were believed only to be for temporal punishments; and Indulgences, being remissions of those Satisfactions, were considered to act only on temporal punishments likewise. And thus the present Romish practice and doctrine were introduced, in opposition to those of primitive times.

These are not merely my statements: they are those of Morinus, one of your most learned and celebrated authors-whose authority on questions of this nature is indisputable. He actually fixes the date of your doctrine of Indulgences, as not more ancient than the twelfth century.

Having thus briefly refuted the pretences on which the doctrine of Indulgences is advocated by Romanists, and shewn its origin; it remains to adduce some further arguments in opposition to this error.

First then, the doctrine of Indulgences as taught by you and commonly received by Romanists, has

Tournely, Tractatus de Pœnitentia, tom. ii. p. 36. Tournely proves, p. 42, &c. that while public penitence was in use, Sacramental Absolution from sins was given after satisfaction had been completed.

c Morinus De Pœnitentia, lib. x. cap. 22.

never been defined by any Council; for even the Council of Trent affirms nothing on the subject except that Indulgences are useful; and does not assert that they are remissions of temporal penalties due to remitted sin.

Secondly, the Eastern Church, and the ancient societies of the Nestorians and Monophysites in the East, are strangers to the Romish doctrine and practice in regard to Indulgences.

Thirdly, the doctrine of Indulgences is so far from contributing to Christian sanctity, that it is very injurious to it in several respects.

In my first Letter it was alleged, that "Indulgences are made to take the place which Scripture and Tradition assign only to considerations connected with the eternal state; that they are presented to the consciences and hopes of your people, to influence them to the performance of duties which ought only to be urged on the motives of the love and fear of Gode." I stated that "your confraternities, your charitable and religious works of all kinds, are virtually dependent on them." You

d Cum potestas conferendi Indulgentias à Christo Ecclesiæ concessa sit; atque hujusmodi potestate, divinitùs sibi traditâ, antiquissimis etiam temporibus illa usa fuerit: sacro-sancta synodus Indulgentiarum usum Christiano populo maximè salutarem, et sacrorum conciliorum auctoritate probatum in Ecclesia retinendum esse docet et præcipit: eosque anathemate damnat, qui aut inutiles esse asserunt, vel eas concedendi in Ecclesia potestatem esse negant &c. Conc. Trid. Sessio xxv.

e Letter i. p. 29.

f Ibid. p. 32.