The penitential discipline of the ancient church was very severe in its treatment of a large class of scandalous offences; and in the canonical punishments or penances (which from a very early date began to be determined with considerable precision) time , was always a prominent element. But a certain power of showing leniency (φιλανθρωπία) or the reverse, in the way of shorteniιg or lengthening the prescribed duration of the period during which ecclesiastical penance was to be done, was always left to the discretion of the bishop. An early and explicit proof of this is found in the fifth canon of the council of Ancyra (314). This discretionary leniency was sometimes, as appears from the writings of Cyprian, granted by the bisho » on the intercession of those who were witnessing for the truth in prison; sometimes also at the instance of the civil magistrate. The episcopal power was occasionally exercised, not only in a shortening of the canonical duration of the penance, but in some mitigation of the nature of the penalty itself (Syn. Ancyr., can. 2). We find indications at a very early period that some of the minor ecclesiastical offences could be readily and canonically atoned for by almsgiving (Aug., De Fid. et. Op., c. 19); thus gradually arose, by steps which can readily be conjectured, a regular system of commutations (redemtiones, commutationes), set forth in “libri penitentiales,” offering striking analogies to the provisions made by the various criminal codes by which the Theodosian was supplanted throughout Europe. In the Penitential of the Greek Theodore of Canterbury, for example (690), which is to be found in Migne’s Patrologia, a canonical fast of days, weeks, or years may be redeemed by saying a proportionable number of psalms, or by paying an adequate fine. For more than four centuries this work held a position of great authority all over Europe. At the time of the crusades, to go to Palestine and take part in the struggle against the infidel was held to be a work of such extraordinary merit as to render unnecessary any other penitential act on the part of the sinner who engaged in it. Thus at the council of Clermont, held under Urban II. (1095), it was decreed “iter illud pro omni poenitentia reputetur.” The great schoolmen were the first to reduce to a theory the praxis which had gradually thus sprung up within the Western Church. That theory may be said to resolve itself into the two positions—(1) that, after the remission of the eternal punishment due for sin, there remains due to the justice of God a certain amount of temporal pain to be undergone, either before death in this world, or after death in purgatory; (2) that this pain may be remitted by the application of the superabundant merits of Christ and of the saints out of the treasury of the church, the administration of which treasury is the prerogative of the hierarchy. A characteristically elaborate statement and defence of these theses will be found in the supplement to the Summa of Thomas Aquinas (p. 3, qu. 25) and in the Summa of Alexander Halesius (p. 4, qu. 23, art. 2, membr. 5). In their Tridentine form they occur in sess.

6, can. 30, and sess. 14, can. 12-14. · With these passages must be compared the condemnation of the synod of Pistoia by Pius VI. in 1794.

Indulgences are either general or particular, i.e., either open to the whole church or confined to particular localities. The most general of all is that which is proclaimed in the year of jubilee. Indulgences again are either plenary or non-plenary, the former being a total remission of all the temporal punishment which may have been incurred by the recipient. It must carefully be borne in mind that, in Roman Catholic orthodoxy, indulgence is never absolutely gratuitous, and that those only can in any circumstances validly receive it who are in full communion with the church, and have resorted to the sacrament of penance, in which alone, after due contrition and confession, provision is made for the remission of the graver penalty of sin. The doctrine of indulgences, however, is singularly open to misunderstanding; and in its practical applications it has too often been used to sanction the most flagrant immorality, The scandalous abuses connected with the “pardoner’s” trade, and in particular the reckless conduct of the hawkers of the papal indulgence granted to those who should contribute funds for the completion of St Peter’s, Rome, were, as is well known, very prominent among the proximate causes of the Protestant Reformation. In the 14th article of the Church of England the doctrine of the “thesaurus meritorum” or “thesaurus supererogationis perfectorum” is by implication rejected; and in art. 22 “the Romish doctrine concerning purgatory and pardons” is expressly condemned. It is hardly necessary to add that “the power of the keys” is inseparable from the idea of a church, and that in this power is plainly involved a certain discretion as to the time and manner in which discipline shall be administered. This discretion is claimed by every organized body of Christians.

See Amort, De Origine, Progressu, Vαlore, et Fnιctu Indulgentiarum, Vienna 1735; and Hirscher, Die Lehre vom Ablass Tübingen, 1844.