The treasury of merits: the common opinion, its foundation, and Thomas and Bonaventure

These things premised, it remains to see more expressly what the prelate’s formula means: "I remit to you so much time of indulgence for sins"; and it is commonly said that by virtue of such an indulgence you will suffer so much time less in purgatory. And this can be understood in two ways: either that the indulgence has as much efficacy as so much time of penance in this wayvia / patria: the way / the homeland has as regards the state of purgatory; or secondly that by so much 551you will suffer more briefly in the punishment of purgatory. And this gloss is more pertinent to the teachingsentencia: CONTEXTUAL: teaching / sentence of the decretists and more conformable to their sayings, (as is clear in De penitenciis et remissionibus, chapter Quod autem) at the words "But you will ask what it means".¹ And the foundation of this teaching is taken from this fantastic imagining. For it is supposed, first, that there are supererogated merits of the saints, and especially of Christ, in heaven, infinite in number and value, beyond what is required for their blessedness; and all these are called the spiritual treasury of the churchecclesia: church, laid up in its headcaput: head.² It is supposed, secondly, that the lord popepapa: pope, since he is vicar of Christvicarius Christi: vicar of Christ on earth, has full power of distributing that treasury to the faithful, but as much as he pleases, more or less; and it is not lawful to doubt that the power of imparting these spiritual suffragessuffragia: suffrages remains continually unexhausted, since otherwise Christ would have failed in giving the power of the keys to his vicar here on earth.³ Thirdly, it is said that when the pope or his bishop dispenses to subjects from this treasury, exchangingcommutacio; commutare: exchange; to exchange the merit of a blessed one in place of the merit by which the sinner would merit remission of sin, then he grants indulgence, more or less. And on this foundation these are said to sell their sins and those to buy them, even for money; and the people has been seduced by an impossible and groundless barter, for the sake of the pomp and the gain to be acquired by the priest.⁴ And Saint Thomas seems to assent to this teaching, on the fourth book of the Sentences, distinction 20, question 5523: "It is granted by all," he says, "that indulgences avail something, since it would be impious to say that the church does anything in vain. But some say that they do not avail to absolve from the liability to the punishment which one merits in purgatory according to the judgment of God, but avail to loose from the obligation by which the priest has bound the penitent to some punishment, or to which he is also appointed by the statutes of the canons. But this opinionopinio: opinion does not seem true: first, because it is expressly against the privilegeprivilegium / privilegiare / privilegiacio: privilege / to privilege / privileging given to Peter, that what he remitted on earth should be remitted in heaven; hence the remission which is made as to the court of the church avails also as to the court of God. Again, the church making an indulgence of this kind would harm more than help, since it would remit them to heavier punishments, namely those of purgatory, by absolving from enjoined penances."⁵ And the deduction is manifestly clear, since according to the opinion an indulgence does nothing toward remission in purgatory; but with the indulgence withdrawn, one would work in the fullness of penance toward remission in purgatory, which would be infinitely more excellent than any remission of the penance of the way. Therefore on this view every indulgence would hinder the fruit of penance and be harmful; therefore the canonists prudently say that an enjoined penance 553for sin is not to be dropped on account of indulgences; nor would indulgences of many thousands of years have colourcolor (non est color): colour (a plausible ground) as to the bare mitigation of penance here on the way, since we are certain that so great a penance would not be undergone even by Methuselah here on the way.⁶ "Therefore," says the doctor, "it must be said otherwise: that indulgences avail both as to the court of the church and as to the judgment of God, and as to the remission of the punishment remaining after contrition, confession and absolution, whether it was enjoined or not. Now the reason why they can avail is the unity of the mystical bodycorpus Christi misticum: the mystical body of Christ, in which many in works of penance have paid out beyond the measure of their debts, and have also patiently borne many tribulations unjustly, by which a multitude of punishments could be expiated, if they were owed to them. Of which merits so great is the plenty that they exceed all punishment owed to those now living, and especially on account of the merit of Christ; which, though it works in the sacraments, yet its efficacy is not shut up in the sacraments, but by its infinity it exceeds the efficacy of the sacraments.⁷ Therefore, since one can make satisfaction for another, and the saints in whom a superabundance of works of satisfaction is found did such works not determinately for this man who needs remission (for otherwise he would obtain remission without any indulgence), or they were done in common for the whole church, as the apostle says that he fills up those things that are wanting to the passion of Christ in his body for the church, to which he writes, Corinthians 1: so the aforesaid merits, though they are common to the whole church," yet the pope distributes them unequally, as those "that are common to some multitude are distributed to the individuals of the multitude according to the judgment 554of him who presides over the multitude. Hence, if anyone should obtain remission of punishment as though another had made satisfaction for him, so that the satisfaction of another is distributed to him by one who is able"; so it is to be judged of indulgences.⁸

Again, the doctor Bonaventure, on the same distinction, question 2, first rejects the opinion on indulgences which says that they avail only for the court of the church militantecclesia militans / triumphans / dormiens: the church militant / triumphant / sleeping, and so not for the court of the church triumphant. "If," he says, "the prelate relaxes and God does not relax, then it is deception rather than relaxation, cruelty rather than pietypietas / pie: piety / piously." And it is clear that it would not be dispensation but rebellion. Therefore, to exclude fallacyfallacia: fallacy from the church of Christ, he says that an indulgence can be made thus: "We obtain good," he says, "from a threefold merit, namely from our own merit, from the merit of the head, and from the merit of the church’s unity. And corresponding to this threefold merit of obtaining good there is a threefold merit of being freed from evil: namely our own merit, for example the merit of contrition, by which we merit to be freed from eternal punishment and to be enrolled for everlasting joys, so that these two are together, as grace and glory in the angels."⁹