Dear Mister Freder,
On January 1, 1967, Pope Paul VI issued the Apostolic
Constitution on the Revision of Indulgences. The text is found
translated in Flannery's "Vatican Council II" 1981 edition, vol.
I, pp. 62-77. This is a fairly complete theological and
historical treatise, and easily available.
"The Teaching of Christ: A Catholic Catechism for Adults" (ed.
Wuerl, R. Lawler, and T. Lawler), pp. 421-422, says:
"The Church believes that there are "temporal punishments" for
sin. This means that the just and merciful God requires that the
penitent sinner atone for his sins; he will receive punishment
for them either in this life or after death in purgatory, unless
he has taken punishment upon himself by deeds of penance.
That there are temporal punishments for sin is evidenced
throughout the long history of Israel in all that it suffered for
its infidelities, especially in its captivity. The sins of
individuals have similar consequences. Moses is forgiven his
doubt, but because of it he is not permitted to enter the
Promised Land. David is forgiven his adultery, but the desired
child of the sinful union does not survive. Temporal punishment
persists even in death. Thus we read in the Second Book of
Maccabees of the value of praying for the dead (cf. 2 Macc.
12:43-46). St. Paul indicates there is purification beyond death
(cf. 1 Cor. 3.10-15).
Penitents, then, must complete their penitential acts by making
some satisfaction for their sins, by doing a "penance" imposed by
the priest. The penance imposed in earlier days was often severe.
Today the penance is usually the recitation of certain prayers
assigned by the priest to the penitent. "The kind and extent of
the satisfaction should be suited to the personal condition of
each penitent so that each one may restore the order which he
disturbed and through the corresponding remedy be cured of the
sickness from which he suffered. Therefore, it is necessary that
the act of penance really be a remedy for sin and a help to
renewal of life." Our sins are more serious than we realize, and
our deeds of penance are often slight. To assist us in our
frailty, the Church also makes possible indulgences for the
faithful. An indulgence is a remission before God of all (plenary
indulgence) or part (partial indulgence) of the temporal
punishment due to sins that have already been forgiven.
The principle underlying indulgences is as old as the Church. It
is based on the doctrine of the Mystical Body of Christ. All
members of this Body, St. Paul wrote (cf. 1 Cor. 12:21-26),
should contribute to the well-being of an ailing member. Fully
aware of the infinite and decisive value of Christ's atoning
death, Paul rejoiced that his own sufferings could benefit the
Christians of Colossae, and he added: "In my flesh I complete
what is lacking in Christ's afflictions for the sake of His Body,
that is, the Church" (Col. 1.24). The Church teaches that in
virtue of authority given it by Christ, it may grant to sinners
who have already received forgiveness of their sins a share in
the merits of Christ and the saints, so that the burden of
temporal punishment due for sins may be removed or lightened.
To gain an indulgence, one must say the prayer or do the good
deed to which the Church attaches the indulgence, be in the state
of grace, and have the proper intention. By a kind of a spiritual
leverage as it were, a relatively slight act of piety on the part
of the individual brings upon him a great mercy." (Code of Canon
Law, canon 996).
On the Indulgence Controversy between Luther and the indulgence
preacher Tetzel, P. DeLetter writes (Encylopedic Dictionary of
Religion, p. 1796): "Luther did challenge ... Tetzel's doctrine
on indulgences ... on four points: 1) that an indulgence
guarantees salvation; 2) that money given immediately frees a
soul from purgatory; 3) that through an indulgence the worst sins
were forgiven; and 4) that Tetzel's indulgence freed from all
guilt and punishment."
We are comfortably removed from the heat of that ancient
controversy, and can clearly see that Tetzel may have been a good
fund-raiser -- more's the pity -- but he was an abysmally poor
theologian. In fact, in all four of Luther's objections, Luther
was right and Tetzel wrong. We may note here that in 1567, Pope
Pius V "completely abrogated indulgences associated with the
taking of collections" (EDR, p. 1798).
Your pastor did not issue or grant the indulgence on the occasion
you mention. Only the Pope or, in some cases, the diocesan
bishop can do that. Your pastor only announced that the
indulgence was available.
I am not amused at the remark comparing an indulgence to a
lottery. It is my understanding that a person of good breeding
does not mock another's religion nor make fun of things he does
not understand. In this day of "political correctness", maybe we
should suggest that people who don't understand our religion are
"doctrinally challenged".
Sincerely in Christ,
Father Mateo
- Glory be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit -
-- | CIN (619-449-6030) Fido: (1:202/1613) http://www.cin.org/cin | St. Gabriel Gift & Book Nook: http://www.stgabriel.com/gabriel