The Intermountain Catholic. (Salt Lake City [Utah] ;) 1899-1920, 1904-02-20
ncn-Gatbollt Queries, and Hnswers Cbereto

| ment of mystery must remain when finite man con-
siders the infinite counsels of God Ctlow inconl-
prehensibe arc His judgments and how unsearch-
able His ways" Rom xi. 33), still, reason has an
answer
You have not considered. on the other hand, that
the denial of eternal punishment cannot be recon-
ciled with the justice of God.
VIII you tell me that just God who is the
lawgiver and Lord OF men, can give Ills kingdom to
one guilty of unrepented murder, adultery. seduc-
ton, avarice or drunkenness? That Just God can
give eternal happiness TO who has all his life
long despsed and set at naught His mercy, and who
has died obstinate IN evil!
Man is not mere automaton, nor mere animal
of sense and instinct, nor independent. self
ruling being, but creature created after Gods like
ness and image. with intellect to know the good and
free will to choose it-with sufficient grace always
TO know Gods revelation and to do Gods will. If
such being deliberately abuses these gifts and
graces, refusing to acknowledge his dependence on
God, his Creator and Lawgiver, freely choosing
mere creatures in place of his God, and dies lnso-
lently refusing to fulfill his destiny-can God do
augh to this adorer of self than to leave HIM to his
choice for all eternity? Why, the unrepentant sim
ner would be as out of place in heaven as tramp
amid the luxury of an Inauguration ball. son has
rebelled against his father friend turned traitor
against Friend; creature against his Creator
and yet, forsooh, Jesus Christ the God OF all JUS"
tice must say to the rebel creature that still hates
Him: "Come, We blessed of Ny Father, possess you
the kingdom Matt yxv 34). This is only thought
less sentmentaity which, having lost altogether the
conviction of the malice of SIM refuses to Gods
justice in Furnishing the sinner.
Were not indugences sold by the Catholic church
at the time of the reformation? -
Are not pardons bought for money IN your cnurcn'
have heard it said that in South America absolu-
ton be had beforehand for the most outrageous
crime, if one will only pay the price required
ut is utterly false to assert that it has been
IaIJ +boT Tofh ohuro of
crime could be indulged for any sum of money.
Neither for sins committed, for sins to come,
has money ever been taken an equivalent; for
one no more than the other. On the other hand, it
is quite true that the injury done to the church,
when it happens to be visited with censure (Which
is not a common case) has certainly sometimes
been compensated by the performance of some good
work, and in the number of such works alnsdeeds
and religious offerings are included" (Newman,
present Position of Catholics" Lecture p. 49,
We have stated elsewhere that the ordinary
Protestant notion of an indulgence being pardon
for sin is absolutely false, although to shame
be it said find this calumny voiced by some of
the teachers paid by the state to instruct chill
dren in our high and normal schools. The
ment of Penance Is alone concerned with the pardon
of sin, and in that sacrament money is
be paid, An indulgence has to do merely with the
remission of the temporal punishment of the sinner
already pardoned BY the sacrament Of Penance,
and can never be purchased.
When non-Cathoc remembers that a heartfelt
supernatural sorrow for ali grievous sn with firm
purpose to offend God more, is absolute pre-
requisite for gaining indulgence, how, believing
the Scriptures, he find fault with the Catholic
church for promising the remission of the temporal
punishment reward for good works-among |
which is almsgiving in the name of Christ-per-
formed by those in Gods grace and friendship
Christ told us that the giving of cup of cold |
water in His name would not be without a reward
Mark ix. 40). How, then, Christian find
fault with Pope Leo Y, who in the sixteenth CEN |
5ury by his apostolic power granted, many Popes
and bishops for hundreds of years had done before
lin, not the pardon of SIM but the remission of the
emporal punishment due to those repentant sinners
Who would give aims towards the building of one
'f the greatest temples ever erected in honor Of
Jesus Christ. Pope Leo, the vicar of Jesus Christ
had the right as Moses in the old law, who III
jod's name demanded from the Jews offerings of
sold silver, brass, precious stones, oil, spices, for
he tabernacle.
The Catholic church has never denied that
abuses have existed: that overzeal led preach
rs OF indugences to go beyond the teaching of the
church, or engage in some personal traticking
What thing holy sacred in the world but the avar
ce of men can put price onI Women have sold
heir honor Tor money, fathers have sold their
daughters i'll marriage, respectable Christians have
rafficked in human flesh without blushng, men have
betrayed their country for price, legislatures,
Judges, Jurors, voters, have been frequently bought
lp What then! Would you abolish the jury sys-
EN- or the ballot. or condemn matrimony, because
# the evils of ayarice incident thereto?
Various Popes, from Gregory VII in the elev-
nth century to Leo Y in the sixteenth and many
councils cd Lateran, 4. D. 1889; 1st Lyons, A. d.
245; Vienne, A. D. 1911. and Trent, A. D. 1916
5631 have condemned these abuses The council
# Trent (Sess. XIV: S'Being desirous that the
buses which have crept in, and by occasion of
which the excellent name of indulgences is bias
'hemed by heretics be amended and corrected, or
aims ~. that all evil gains for the obtaining
hereof-whence prolific cause of abuses
mong the Christian people has been derived-be
Tholly abolished
If Luther had merely protested against these
buses, as was his right, he would only have been
ollowing in the footsteps Of Popes bishops and
ouncils But to deny the dogma because of these
buses is about sensible as to advocate free love
ecause of the sad abuses of the marriage bond
revaent today. That he was most oblivious to the
ature, conditions and effects of indulgences his
inety-fve propositions give ample proof, even if
'e did not have his own word for it.
The statement frequently made that Tetzel
romised indulgences without requiring contrition
absolutely without proof, and his supposed ignor-
of the true Catholic doctrine is amply refuted
y his answer to Luther "On Indulgences and
race and his defense of 106 theses against Luther
the occasion of his taking his hcentiate IN the