or where an obex is have such boni motus as may remove it See him Ibid. Dist 14. q. 2. 3ly Ex opere operato In opposition not only to merit but any disposition at all in the receiver i. e. so that no disposition though necessary as a causa sine quâ non to the effect or as to removing some obstacles that may hinder it yet is the efficient or instrument at all actually conferring or immediatly conveying the Sacramental Grace but this is solely the opus operatum of the Sacrament And of this speaks the Eighth Canon of the Council of Trent * Sess 7. nor hath Cassander applied any other sense to it as this Author pretends he hath ‖ p. 209. The words are Si quis dixerit per ipsa novae legis Sacramenta ex opere operato non gratiam sed solam fidem divinae promissionis ad gratiam conscquendam sufficere Anathema sit against that proposition of the Reformers mentioned by Soave p. 264. That by the Sacraments Grace is not given in vertue of the administration of them called Opus Operatum but that it sufficeth for obtaining such Grace only to believe the promise of it and against those Reformed Propositions set down before by him p. 233. That the Sacraments are not necessary but men may attain the effect of them by Faith only And That the Sacrament hath never given Grace or remission of sins but only the faith of the Sacrament In which Eighth Canon the Council affirms Solam fidem non sufficere not as if Faith were altogether needless to such Sacramental effect for therefore it saith non solam but not it alone suffieicnt without the Sacrament without it i. e. as it solely ex opere operato conferring the Grace to which Faith also at the same time necessarily pre-disposeth 4ly Ex opere operato in opposition to any dispositions as necessary at all in the subject but then these School-men do mean of Infants not of Adulti because in all these last there is an Obstacle of Mortal sin to be removed and this cannot possibly be so without the dispositions of Faith and Repentance 5ly Ex opere operato In opposition to the Sacraments of the Old Testament in which Grace is said to be received from the disposition of the Suscipient called opus operantis which was then signified also by these Sacraments but not conferred The contrary whereof is verified in the Sacraments of the New § 30 Now if things be found as they are here related I desire his Protestant Reader would consider with what integrity this Author doth affirm p. 202. this to be the Doctrine of the Roman Church That the efficacy of Sacraments doth not depend upon the preparation of the receiver but the bare administration or the external work done Again p. 203. That the Sacraments of the new Law do confer grace ex opere operato i. e. by the thing it self without any dependence therein upon the internal motion or preparation of mind in him that doth partake of them Again how faithfully he deduceth from Bellarmine saying That the Catholicks do not wholly exclude preparations in the receiver but only ab efficientia from the efficiency of the Sacramental Grace p. 204. That the Efficacy of the Sacraments which as I understand him is their actual producing such an effect in conferring grace doth not at all depend upon the qualification of the receiver Again ‖ p. 206. That the preparation of our minds for the use of the Sacraments is unnecessary For if grace saith he be effectually conferred by the force of the bare external action which is acknowledged by them all what need can there be of a due preparation of mind by the exercise of Faith Prayer Repentance c From all which his conclusion is that the Roman Doctrine obstructs the sincerity of Devotion In all which expressions if this Author means that according to the Roman Doctrine no qualification or disposition in the Suscipient is the instrument that effects or confers the Sacramental Grace it is true but nothing to his purpose or to his conclusion drawn from it viz. That such Doctrine obstructs Devotion But if he means that such disposition is not the efficient cause of such Grace and therefore it is not necessary at all to the effect as his words sound it is indeed much to his purpose and infers his conclusion but is most untrue For many things are necessary to an effect besides the efficient cause thereof To make use of an instance himself mentions Fire is the only efficient of the burning of wood not the driness of the matter yet is driness in the wood as well as heat in the fire necessary to the effect And one may as truly argue in this as he doth in the other If the burning be effectually i.e. efficiently wrought by the fire what need can there be of dryness in the matter Or the efficacy i. e. the efficiency of the fire in its burning doth not at all depend on the qualification of the matter or such qualification concurrs not to the efficiency therefore such qualification is to such effect no other way necessary § 31 Secondly Consider with what truth he relates p. 206. That Catholicks when saying the internal disposition of mind is necessary to reremove impediments do not mean by this internal disposition the exercise of Faith Prayer Repentance c. by no means saith he when as Bellarmin in that Chapter this Author cites and therefore read saith the expresly contrary and that six or seaven times over to this purpose Opus operatum excludere fidem motum internum ab efficientiâ gratiae Sacramentalis non tamen excludere simpliciter fidem motum internum or in other places fidem paenitentiam ita ut Sacramenta ut ipsi calumniantur conferant gratiam accipientibus ea sine side sine internâ conversione cordis But saith he they mean That there be no mortal sin unconfessed Now such mortal sin may be confessed without Faith or Repentance or any other disposition to remove the obstacle of such mortal sin And next That saith he there be no actual opposition in the will to the Sacrament which he explains thus As for instance when he is going to be baptized he resolves with himself that he will not be baptized or while he is baptizing that he will not believe in the Father Son and Holy Ghost Thus he Now if any reflect on what we have proved before is this ingenuous dealing Is not this writing Controversies for Ladies for Women for Laicks and such as cannot or from a contrary interest will not make a search into the truth of his Relations See again what fidelity he useth p. 209. after his rejecting the common Doctrine of the Roman Authors to search that of the Roman Church rather in the Council of Trent in his citing of the Eighth Canon of the Seventh Session thereof to this purpose
That it affirms the Sacraments to confer Grace ex opere operato so as to render Faith or other dispositions in the receiver needless and mean while concealing one half of the Canon that plainly shews the contrary Si quis dixerit per ipsa novae Legis Sacramenta ex opere operato non conferri gratiam so farr he repeats it sed solam fidem divinae promissionis ad gratiam consequendam sufficere this he omits and the Sola is not at all considered by him As if from the Catholicks saying Sola fides non justificat he should prove that they hold Faith not necessary at all to Justification What this Canon opposetli and how it is distinguished from the Twelfth I think I have given a satisfying account before ‖ § 29. Yet after this see with what a strange confidence he concludes p 211. I dare now appeal saith he to the most indifferent Judg whether what I objected to them concerning the efficacy of Sacraments whether the minds of the receivers of them be prepared or no were not so far from being a calumny that there is not so much as the least mistake in it if the doctrine of the Council of Trent be embraced by them Thus he Tergens os suum dicit non sum operatus malum § 33 Bellarmin and the Roman Writers affirm that this truth That the Sacraments are the instrumental cause of conferring Grace is Divine Revelation and Bellarmin spends two Chapters in producing the Scriptures that evidence it and so saith That the particular way or manner of their conferring Grace is a thing not necessary to be determined or understood no more than that of the Trinity is or of several other Articles of Faith Yet Here see p. 204. how solicitous this Author is to be informed of the manner as if the whole issue of the business depended on this whether the Sacraments be physical or moral causes whether by a power inherent or assistant whether they produce Grace or only the union of it c. and how candidly he declaims against the imposing such absurd unreasonable and unintelligible things to be believed and brings in the Alcoron and his wit-conferring Cap to be admitted with the like credulity But takes no notice that such effect is proved or pretended by these Catholick Authors to be Divine Revelation which they will not allow to the Alcoran or to his Cap nor shews he the falsity of such an assertion in the disproving of their Texts urged for it § 34 The Roman Doctors affirm that so one be in the state of Grace and so have the habit of Charity and consequently that also of Devotion an actual or sensible devotion provided he use his best endeavour to be so devout is not necessarily required for receiving the benefit of the Sacrament and the reason is given by them because this indeed seems too rigorous and would cause too many scruples in mens minds concerning the preparation of a right devotion See this matter thus stated by Arnauld's Adversary ‖ Arnauld de la freq Communion part 3. c. 1. who is held to speak the most diminutively of a necessary preparation This is the Doctrine of the Saints saith he that a man that hath not the devotion and fervor of Charity he desireth but seems tepid to himself is not obliged therefore to abstain from the Communion provided he endeavour his best to excite himself to devotion and humbly presents himself in hope of benefit thereby And again c. 9. One often thinks he hath no Devotion and yet ceaseth not to have it True Devotion is not a certain facility to apply ones self to it and a contentment that one resents from it but it is an effective will and desire to please God Now the Communicant here being required by these Doctors to be in the state of Grace and to use his best endeavour to be also actually and sensibly Devout see how ingenuously this Author conceals these two circumstances and chargeth on them the admitting persons to the benefit of the Sacraments that are impenitent and void of any Devotion p. 207. If want of devotion saith he doth not hinder Grace being received what arguments can men use to perswade persons to it who will undergo so strict an examination of himself and endeavour to raise his mind to a due preparation for the participation of Sacraments if he knows before hand that he shall certainly receive Grace by the Sacraments without it i. e. without an endeavour to raise his mind to a due Devotion But what Roman Doctor reacheth this Again p. 211. Whether one have any Devotion or no he is sure of Grace if he doth but partake of their Sacraments and need not trouble himself much about Devotion since his work may be done without it Never any Doctrine was certainly better contrived for the satisfaction of impenitent Sinners than theirs is representing the indevout and the impenitent as the same the indevout through infirmity or through neglect appearingly or really all included § 35 The like integrity this Author useth in his relation concerning Extreme Vnction and its effect p. 212. where he saith Not so much as the use of Reason is required for the effect of the blessed Sacrament of Extreme Vnction And then descants ‖ p. 213. A hard case for those who dye in mortal Sin for if they could but express any sign of contrition by the motion of an eye or a finger all were well enough and they are sure to receive Grace And p. 214. To make all sure at last the Exereme Vnction very sweetly conveys grace into them whether they be sensible or not Whereas in candid and serious dealing instead of jesting he ought to have represented the Roman Doctrine thus 1. That for the Application of this Sacrament the use of Reason in the Suscipient is not necessarily required if the person immediatly before when having the use of Reason appeared Contrite and desired it ‖ See before §. 27 And 2. That all such persons only as have that true and acceptable contrition known only to God whereof they give external signs do receive Grace or the effect of this Sacrament but no other Let this suffice for the Third Point § 36 IV. For the Fourth Point The easiness in the Roman Church 4. Of the Eternal Punishment of Sin not easily changed into a Temporal by this feat of the Sacraments ex opere operato remitting sin and conferring Grace to change the Eternal punishment of sin which is surely remitted with the sin it self into a temporal one or to change Hell-torments into those of Purgatory and then the easiness of getting out of these too with a little money or friends See Rom. Idol p. 185 186. The contrary of this viz. That the procuring the pardon of Mortal Sin committed after Baptisme and consequently of the eternal punishment thereof these two being alwaies remitted together is no such easie thing hath
such temporal punishments avertitible or removable by some penal works of our own and our greater suffering from God changed into those lesser from our selves See in Jona 3.10 compared with 7 and 8. c. 1 King 21.29 2 Chron. 12.6 7. 33.12 13. 2 King 7.1 compared with 2 King 6.30 1 Cor. 11.31 32. I have quoted here the more Texts to shew that Gods Mercy ordinarily includes also some personal satisfaction in some part at least to his Justice Justitia pax osculatae sunt Miseri cordiam judicium cantabo tibi Domine that he may be both loved and feared They are taught therefore that a true Contrition in the subject the requisites of which see before § 10. c. is still presupposed to the benefit of any Indulgence and that he who hopes any gain thereby must also if in Mortal sin by the Sacrament of Penance render himself first in the state of Grace Contritis Confessis being the Condition on the part of the indulged expressed or implyed in all Indulgences § 49 As for the ordinary expression in these Indulgences promising a remission of their sins the first of this Authors hard Questions who asks how it consists with this Doctrine of Indulgences their respecting not the fault but the temporal punishment thereof it is answered long since by Bellarmin ‖ De Indulg l. 1. c. 7. and it were well if this Author with his old objections would communicate to his Protestant Readers the Catholicks old Answers and to the Catholick Readers his own Reply to them Id propterea dici quod indulgentia conjungitur ordinarie cum confessione Sacramentali facit ut qui per Sacramentum Paenitentiae which is received as a preparation for the Indulgence fuit absolutus a culpâ per Indulgentiam absolvatur a paenâ and that the Indulgences speak of the remission of sins quoad paenam or as Suarez * De Indulg Disp 50. §. 1. Absolvit a culpâ paenâ non quia Indulgentiae utramque tollat sed quia ut habeat effectum debet supponere remissam culpam ipsa complet totius paenae remissionem § 50 Things standing thus to what end hath this Author sought out and cited some testimonies of Roman Writers One saying ‖ p. 525. That after Indulgences were grown common many men did abstain less from evil actions A second That they were only profitable to the Idle and Wicked A third That true Christian piety was destroyed by them and that all manner of wickedness did spring from thence and that men were affraid of committing no kind of sin when at so cheap a rate they could purchase a remission of them A fourth That let men do what wickedness they will by them they shall be free from punishment c. besides all his own invective stuff from pag. 415. to p. 499. or § 3. to § 8. where he would perswade his Reader that the Roman Indulgences countenance the impenitent to a continuance in their sins or promise to them any the least relief as to their pardon I say what mean all these impertinences when as Indulgences belong to none but just persons and none but the already penitent and reformed as Catholicks are generally taught are at all concerned in or succoured by them And it must be by a most Gross and highly-Culpable ignorance if any heretofore have so far mistaken the Churches constant Doctrine of Indulgences as to imagine the least good from them as to their Salvation if they either still continued in any Mortal sin or afterward returned to it and if the pardon of such sin were not first procured from God by a sincere repentance There is saith this Author ‖ p. 497. after his learned Collection of old Indulgences one odd condition implied in some of these Prayers he ought to have said in all called being in the state of Grace the want of which may hinder the effect from them but a due Confession with Absolution will at any time put a man into it But by his leave there is another odd Condition besides which Catholicks call Contrition or Repentance and what Catholicks mean by it may be seen before § 10. and 23 which this Author according to his wonted candor hath left out and without which his due Confession and Absolution signifie nothing and if they have this indeed also to put them in the state of Grace much good may they have of their Indulgence for also Protestants and this Author hold this Contrition or Repentance of such a strange vertue that they admit all into the state of Grace though unabsolved or unconfessed by it alone § 51 What means then such a Tragical clamour against Roman Indulgences as nourishing and licensing mens sins and as sold dear and greedily bought i. e. with almes and other pious works on this account and at last deceiving the purchaser whereas suppose them all utterly to fail and to be meer frauds they cannot be said to fail to any such unpenitent Sinners they fail only to those that however this bargain as they call it proves are already in Gods Grace and favour and the state of Salvation and to whom perhaps the very granting such Indulgence by reason of their diligent preparation for it was the occasion of bringing them into such a state and Indulgences fail to these for nothing more but what the same Indulgences pretend to give viz. the remission of some temporal punishment upon which failing follow some dilation perhaps of the possession of their future bliss whilst their Contrition Confession and the pious Work they do for such an Indulgence are forth-coming forth their reward But Protestants denying any such temporal punishment to remain after remission of the sin consequently must affirm that Catholicks gain much by what they do and lose nothing at all by what they are promised though the Indulgence utterly fail them § 52 2ly As Catholicks are taught that a right disposition is necessary in the Penitent so that for the Indulgence is also necessary a just cause or motive of granting it and some way proportionable to the quality of the penance that is relaxed by it i. e. a cause prudently estimated more acceptable to God and sooner procuring the application of our Lords satisfactions for the remitting of such punishment of sin than such penances would be Nothing is more obvious than this in Catholick Authors and upon this ground the saying of one Pater Noster or giving the Almes of a penny or the like is not thought by them a sufficient cause where is no other motive thereof for the Church-Governours thereupon to concede a plenary Indulgence Neither is it here pretended that all past Indulgences of Popes or others that may be produced have always therefore necessarily had or included such a cause neither are Popes maintained infallible in their judgment herein Quia per indiscretas atque super fluas and cur indiscâ—etae superstuae saith
Bellarmin * De Indul l 1. c. 12. nisi quia ot osae manes irritae sunt quas quidam Ecclaesiarum Praelati facere non verentur claves Ecclesiae contemnuntur paenitentialis satisfactio enervatur decerninus c. Thus Innocentius 3. long ago in the great Lateran Council ‖ Can. 62. And Sixtus 4. having been somwhat Prodigal in this kind recalled many Indulgences formerly conceded by him See Extravag Commun l. 5. tit 9. c. 5. And so Clement 8. effusas nimis Indulgentiarum concessiones restringere aggressus est saith Baronius * A D. 147. And of the possibility of the failing of the Pope himself somtimes in this sufficiency of the cause thus speaks a Jesuite ‖ Sua ez De Indulg Disp 56. §. 3. Quamvis Pontifex expresse declararet se moveri propter talem causam quam reputat sufficientem ad tantam indulgentiam concedendam non esset infallibile vel causam esse talem vel quod consequens est totam indulgentiam esse validam Quia talis declaratio Pontisicis non est de doctrinâ ad sidem pertinente sed de quodam facto particulari quod ad prudentiam spectat in quo Pontisex non habet infallibilem assistentiam Spiritus Sancti sed in his tantum quae ad doctrinam sidei morum spectant And again Quamvis Pontifex existimet aut declaret talem causam subesse nihilominus decipi potest quia quoad hoc prudentiâ existimatione humanâ gubernatur possetque etiam humano affectu moveri Thus Suarez comparing the Popes dispensing in Penances with that in vows And thus Estius ‖ In. 4. Sent. Dist 20. §. 9. Si nullâ rationabili causâ movente Pâ—ntifex vel Episcopus Indulgentiam concederet existimandum non est eam alicujus efficaciae seu valoâ—is fore What a many Jests and Sarcasmes now hath this unserious Writer lost here in playing upon the Pope's infallibility in this matter the chief common-place of Protestants when seeking quarrels perhaps content to seem ignorant herein that he may shew wit Though mean while the Christian Humility and Obedience in the Subjects of this Church is far from distrusting the prudence or fidelity especially of this their chief Pastor assisted with so wise a Council in his dispensing these favours and far from weighing and discussing whether the cause of such promulgation be sufficient or no Which as it is a thing of difficult resolution where many circumstances are to be considered that are not so well known to Subjects and such cause not expressed or not totally in the Indulgence for the pious work may be diverse from the cause or motive of the promulgation of such a pardon ‖ See Suarez De Indulg Disp 56. §. 3 as I say it seems to be a matter of difficult resolution so the assurance thereof as I shall shew by and by is of little consequence § 53 As for Indulgences their Valent quantum sonant the sonant is to be understood not of that sense which an illiterate person not well instructed may possibly take them in but with those commonly-known limitations or suppositions belonging to them and particularly those now mentioned Valent quantum sonaent 1 To persons rightly prepared and 2 if passed upon a just and sufficient cause which are or ought to be common praecognita to all that make use of them Scarce any promise passed amongst men but includes some condition which being well known is thought not necessary to be expressed And when we find Remission in the Scriptures promised in several places to Faith to Almes to the Sacrament to the love of God to our For giving our Neighbours sins against us c. I hope we may rightly say these Texts valent quantum sonant and that the Holy Ghost in them intends no fraud and yet some other Conditions must be understood which are commonly known and learnt from other Scriptures without which none of these Texts rigidly and singly taken are true and valid If then some particular Indulgences upon the defect of some condition requisite to their validity should fail at least in part of what they promise yet as rashly and untruly as uncivilly doth our Author therefore pronounce the Promulgator a Cheat Because one may possibly be mistaken without a design to deceive and this Author himself when in a calmer temper may discover a Medium between speaking a truth and cheating Otherwise it will follow that himself also in all he saith is either infallible or a Cheat. § 45 3ly They are taught that though perhaps there should be some invalidity in an Indulgence by reason of some defect in the cause as to the full effect thereof yet is not the Indulgence therefore totally invalid any pious cause whatever serving for a partial effect and so that it would prove an oversight in any Christian to lose this benefit And if the releasment of some temporal punishment by the omitting our penances and the Indulgences failing of its full effect be not had yet 1st Some other pious work enjoyned by the Indulgence is performed which hath its reward 2ly Whilst some part of such temporal punishment that remains so uncompounded for may retard for some time ones future bliss yet his preparation to render himself in the state of Grace and so capable of the benefit of the Indulgence how dimuinitive soever this be may be of much more consequence to him than is such punishment uncancelled whilst it secures the main business i. e. his Salvation and this way he gains much more by the Indulgence than he loseth another 3ly It is also very considerable that the Penances now a-days remitted by Indulgences are such as are due indeed to Gods Justice and these as great as ever yet most of them are not now imposed as formerly they have been and so we should have as much omitted such a quantity of these Penances as is not enjoyned which is the most without as with our receiving an Indulgence for them And so indeed it is but a small penance that the most do forbear by gaining an Indulgence and as much temporal punishment we may think would remain unsatisfied for without such Indulgence granted to us as now we become answerable for by any defect in it and so if we have no gain by it neither is there any great loss I mean from our neglects in doing penance upon the security of the Indulgence But 4ly No loss there is but a sure gain by it if we take care both to perform all our penances enjoyned in these latter times not so burdensome nor bearing any porportion to those prescribed by ancient Canons and also to gain the Indulgence by doing the pious works it enjoyns for that wherein our penances performed may fall short of the satisfaction due If any then shall urge here that it is difficult to know the true validity of an Indulgence or the sufficiency of its cause I
a multitude of Credends here accuse her silence reservedness So Doctor Taylor observes in his Disswasive * c. 1 §. 3. p. 39. That because the Doctrines were so dangerous uncertain invidious by the advice of the Bishop of Modena the Council of Trent left all the Doctrines all the Cases of Conscience quite alone and slubbered or better passed over the whole matter in this Question in general and recommendatory terms That they established no Doctrine neither curious nor incurious nor durst they i. e. the Council bold enough in other matters decree the very Foundation of this whole matter the Churches Treasure And so all this our Author's Questions about this Treasure which amount to Ten of the Fifteen Queries he proposeth p. 518 c. and saith That when be once seeth those Questions satisfactorily answered he may then think better of our Doctrine are beside the purpose and to be cancell'd if he intends only to encounter the professed Doctrine of the Roman Church But we on the other side say That these men deal not fairly who for defending their discession from the Church of Rome and from the Communion of their Fore-Fathers urge such Doctrines as none in staying in this Communion are obliged to maintain and that the less this Church hath determined or required our assent to in this point the more freely may any holding what ever seems to him the most probable submit to her Decrees and hath the less cause to accuse or reproach her § 40 All then that the Council hath stated and asserted in this matter is this ‖ See Con. Trid. Sess 25. Deer de Indulg as Doctor Holden F. Veron and others have observed who have endeavour'd for the frustrating such Discourses as these to sever points of Faith from School-Opinions Indulgentias conferendi potestatem ab ipsomet Christo Ecclesiae concessam fuisse at que hujusmodi potestate antiquissimis etiam temporibus Ecclesiam usam fuisse Hunc usum Christiano populo esse maxime salutarem Sacrorum Conciliorum authoritate probatum in Ecclesiâ retinendum Fosque Anathemate Synodum damnare qui aut inutiles esse asserunt aut eas concedendi in Ecclesiâ potestatem esse negant This is all the Council hath determined And upon this F. Veron in his Rule of Catholiek Faith ‖ c. 17. justly contends That no more ought to be proposed to separatists to be believed than what the profession of the Catholick Faith and the General Councils engage them to That it is sufficient to render one a true Child of the Church if he submit to these and that other Questions wherein the Council is silent are impertinencies and digressions § 41 Now because the Council in this her Decree we see defends her present Doctrine and Practice by that of Ancient times and by what is approved in former Councils if we look into Antiquity concerning this matter we may there easily discover thus much 1. That severe and long Penances were then imposed on greater sinners some way proportionable to their faults and these not only for satisfaction of the Church and the Scandal many times given to it in publick sins but chiefly for the Satisfaction of Gods Justice and appeasing his wrath for Reconciliation unto Him Remission of their sins and Eternal punishment due thereto and for begetting in them a true and solid Repentance and Contrition for their Sin and so for saving their Souls For which I refer the Reader to what hath been said before § 16. and the many testimonies of the Fathers collected by Morinus De Paenitent l. 3. c. 11 12 and l. 10. c. 24. To which effects these Penances were esteemed very advantageous and though not as to all of them any proper Satisfactions yet a means very beneficial for perfecting the Sinner's Repentance and Sorrow for sin and procuring the application to them of the Merits and Satisfactions of Christ Gods Mercy and Justice still accompanying one another as in respect of Christs sufferings and satisfactions paid for our sins by Him so in respect of some temporal sufferings of our own either freely offered and tendered by our selves or if not Prevented by these inflicted on us by God to such a degree as seemeth meet to his Divine Majesty § 42 2. We may find That there were then somtimes Indulgences granted of such Penances all or part to some Persons thought rightly qualified for them upon certain just causes of a greater advancement of piety and Gods Glory and Service thereby either in respect of such Persons private or some other publick and greater good Which cause was thought a sufficient motive for such a relaxation and prevalent with God for ratifying such indulgent act of the Church-Governors to whom our Lord hath committed in his stead the power of binding and loosing Sinners whereby the same punishment of sin due to the Divine Justice is presumed to be remitted by God to persons if being as they appear sufficiently contrite upon such Indulgence granted as would have been upon the Penances performed for else if such punishment in Gods Court and not only that of the Church had not been taken away by them the Indulgence conceded as a favour would have been really much to the Penitents loss whilst after it those heavier punishments remaine to be inflicted on and undergone by them from which their much easier Penances if not indulged would have discharged them And so this power of the Keys would have been rather to Destruction than Edification § 43 To come to some Instances Such was St. Paul's Indulgence or Remission in the person of Christ as he saith ‖ 2 Cor. 2.10 or by the Commission of Quorum remiseritis * Jo. 20.23 of part of the Penance that was formerly imposed by him upon the incestuous Corinthian as for the scandal given to the Heathen and the Church so also chiefly for the saving of his Soul 1 Cor. 5.5 Yet such remission of them was not without several just Motives inciting the Apostle thereto and which he judged more acceptable to God so more effectual for procuring the application of Christs Merits for this Sinners pardon than the remainder of his Penance had it been fulfilled Such as were the gratifying the Intercessions for this person of the Saints in Corinth and preventing their apprehensions of the Apostles too great severity the excessive sorrow and confusion appearing already in the Penitent and least perhaps through a despondency of mind he should throw off the Christian Faith and abandon himself to vice in all which the Apostle saw Satans wiles See 2 Cor. 2.6 7 11. § 44 Such again were the Indulgences used in the Primitive times upon several judged by them just causes moving the Church-Governors thereto either for the private good of the Penitent or publick of Religion 1st Such anciently were in respect of the private good of the Penitent 1. An extraordinary diligence and fervour in their performing
Penance producing in them a great reformation c. and so this seeming sufficient for quitting the remainder of their debt in the Indulgment of whom was also a publick good intended that so the negligent might hereby be excited to like fervor upon hopes of like favour 2. The pusillanimity or weakness or temptations of the Penitent whereby it was feared that he might through despair sink under the burden laid upon him or throw it off his shoulders revolt to Heresie or Gentilisme 3. In times of great persecution the better fitting and arming of the Penitent for Martyrdome by his receiving a reconcilement to God and the Church and after it the Holy Communion and the same also was done in his being exposed to any other eminent danger of death by sickness or otherwise in which necessity Absolution and the Eucharist were administred though the Penance unfinished As still the inability of any further doing Penance to such persons as are supposed contrite and otherwise well disposed at the hour of death is thought a sufficient ground of an Indulgence 4. Somtimes also some Heroical Act of the Penitent was accepted instead of further Penance As persons returned from Heresie were usually received into the Church upon easie terms and without exacting from them the Penances due to so great a sin both for other reasons tending to advancement of true Religion and for the great Confusion such persons exposed themselves to in the publick confessing and renouncing their former Opinions and professing of that Faith they had before censured and condemned Errors that prejudice our understanding being with much more difficulty acknowledged by us than those Sins that are only the exorbitancies of our Passions So somtimes the Lapsed after their having denied Christ in their returning boldly to confess and suffer for him were for this indulged all the Penance imposed for their former lapse ‖ See Morinus l. 9 c. 14. 2. Again Such Causes or Motives in respect of the publick good anciently was the honouring of Martyrs i. e. such who had already suffered loss of goods limbs tortures for the Christian profession or were imprisoned and destined to such tortures in conceding Indulgencies of their Penance to such persons for whom these petitioned or gave their commendatory Letters or Tickets and for whom these Martyrs promised their Intercessions with God and this done by the Church to shew the power and value which she believed such sufferings and intercessions to have with God and hereby also to encourage many others to Martyrdom Such also was the preventing of the growth of Schismes and the enlarging of the Catholick Faith in the receiving of Hereticks usually into the Church with much indulgence and not clogging them with such great Penances as such a Crime deserved ‖ Ibid. l. 9. c. 8. to encourage more to come in and prevent their further infecting of others § 45 Now a strict correspondence to such ancient customs have the latter times of the Church observed in their continuing of Indulgences in these two principal points 1. that such Indulgence be to a person rightly disposed by Repentance so far as the Church can judg of it otherwise without this as no remission of Sin so no reason to expect such divine relaxation of punishment to a yet impenitent Sinner And 2. next That there be a just and weighty Cause for granting it else it would quite ruine the Churches Discipline and abuse the power she is intrusted with to remit the Penance and expect that God should withdraw such punishments and change that ordinary course of his justice by which he makes men sensible of his hate to Sin upon any light and frivolous Motives which may daily occurr That there be a cause I say not exactly the same alwaies with those ancient forementioned a thing not necessary for the Ancient also we see were various but just still and judged proportionable to the quality of the Indulgence as theirs was In latter times then after a much remisser imposing of Penances for great crimes than was anciently because of the hardness of mens hearts and a reluctance to receive or bear them When once Commutations of Penances were become more in use and Absolution frequently in great offences also was joyned immediatly with Confession and the Penance deferred till afterward In these latter times I say such Causes have been a setting the Penitent instead of such Penances declined by him which though now not enjoyned yet now are as much as anciently due from him as to the satisfying of the Divine justice upon some other acts of piety or devotion more willingly performable by him and these especially such as by their tending to some publick and eminent good may be more acceptable to God and proportionable to the relaxation of such Penances Such as are the enjoyning of Almes Prayers Fasts c. for averting some imminent Judgment or danger from the Church for the conquering of Infidels and the Churches Enemies such was the recovery of the Holy Land for converting of Hereticks for relief of the Poor in some time of great distress for the building of Churches Hospitals or other pious Benefactions where much necessity of them And among the rest this motive not the least considerable mentioned also by Bellarmin De Indulgent l. 2. c. 18. namely an excitement of the people to Contrition and Confession to Prayers and doing Penances now when they reject these any way proportionable to their faults and as satisfactions of the Divine Justice at least for the gaining of the Indulgences which are by them supposed a much easier relief the procurement of which Indulgences hath been much used by many wise and Holy Prelates as namely by St. Carlo Borromeo to this purpose and Ipso usu constat saith Suarez gratiam favorem Indulgentiarum multum conferre ad Spiritualem profectum fidelium Disp 49. §. 1. ut melius ac frequentius a peccatorum vinculis liberentur That men that are not already in the state of Grace may by their preparation for the benefit of the Indulgence be brought thereto and so after a remission of the Eternal punishment by their Contrition and the power of the Keys be also by this favour upon some pious work discharged of the temporal or at least of some part thereof § 46 In these two things therefore 1 a worthy person to be indulged 2 and a just cause of such indulgement the present use of Indulgences runs parallel with the ancient And then the present difference which is confessed between the latter and former times 1. One that the former were Indulgences of Penances enjoyned the present of the self-same Penances in the same measure due to Gods justice and to be paid now as much as then for obtaining from him a relaxation from such punishment but for the Penitents indisposition after a long desuetude of such a practice not enjoyned now as formerly 2. The other that those were usually granted to