^{page 129 note 1} The principal authorities before me are the following:

I.—de Lara, Alonso Perez, Compendio de las tres Gracias de la Santa Cruzada, Subsidio y Excusado. Written in 1610Google Scholar, evidently as a working guide for officials employed in the Cruzada, this work consists principally of instructions, blanks, and forms, which must have been furnished for the purpose by the Commissioner-General. In the license to print, the Bishop of Gaëta, the examiner appointed by the Royal Council to pronounce upon the book, says of it: “tiene mucha erudicion y doctrina necessaria, assi para la buena pratica de los ministros de las tres Gracias, como para la sana intelligencia dellos y consuelo de los fieles.” My edition is that of Lyons, 1757, the date of which shows how long it continued to be an authority.

II.—P. Ludovici Nogueira S. J. Expositio Bullœ Cruciatœ Lusitaniœ concessœ. Written in 1685Google Scholar, and printed with the authority of the Provincial of the Society of Jesus, it is pronounced in the authorization “pium, doctum, eruditione plenum, et necessarium.” In its 580 folio pages every possible question connected with the Cruzada is exhaustively discussed in the ingenious dialectics so dear to casuists. My edition is that of Cologne, 1744.

III.—P. Francisci Ceyro S. J. Opusculum Morale de Sulla Cruciata. Written in 1722Google Scholar, and printed with the license of the General of the Jesuits and of the Archbishop of Lisbon. The author was Professor of Moral Theology at Coimbra. My edition is that of Lisbon, 1743.

For the scrupulous censorship exercised over all books printed by Jesuit fathers see Constitutiones Societatis Jesu, P. III. c. I, P. VII. c. 4 (Ed. Antverpiæ, , 1635, pp. 118, 281)Google Scholar; Regulœ Provincialis. No. 60 (Antverpiæ, 1635, p. 46)Google Scholar; Congregationis Generalis XI. 12 18, 22Google Scholar; RegulœRevisorum (Bullæ, Decreta, Canones, etc. Soc. Jesu, Antverpiæ, 1665, pp. 176, 181, 365–372)Google Scholar.

IV.—D. Antonio Salces, Presbitero, Explicacion de la Bula de la Santa Cruzada, Madrid, 1881Google Scholar. This is printed with the approbation of the Cardinal Archbishop of Toledo, Commissioner-General of the Cruzada, who pronounces it “muy útil para difundir entre los fieles los conocimientos, hoy tan ignorados, de las gracias y privilegios que se conceden á los que adquieren el citado documento pontificio.”

^{page 130 note 1} D'Argentré, Collect. Judic, de novis Erroribus, I. II. 307, 355. In the German vernacular:

Sobald das Geld im Kasten klingt

Die Seele aus dem Fegfeuer springt.

^{page 130 note 2} de Lara, Perez, p. 30Google Scholar.—“Y que consigan indulgencia y plenaria remission de todos sus pecados, por manera de ayuda y sufragio, porque libres de las penas de Purgatorio vayan sin impedimento alguno donde tendrán muy especial cuydado de rogar por quien tanto bien y limosna les hizo. Y por quanto vos —— distes los dichos dos reales por el anima de —— y recebistes en vos esta Bula, es otorgada al anima por quien distes essa cantidad las gracias y indulgencia plenaria sobredichas.” (Bula del Hospital de la Concepcion.)

The modern price of the indulgence of the Cruzada is three reals, equivalent to about fifteen cents of our money. Anciently it was two reals. The question of the value of the older Spanish coins is intricate. I can only say here that the maravedí in the sixteenth century was no longer a coin, but a unit of account. There were 34 maravedís to the real and nearly II reals to the ducat (Saez, Monedas de Enrique IV., Madrid, 1805, p. 471). The comparison between gold and silver coins is further complicated by the change in the relative values of the precious metals, which in the fifteenth century was as I to 7½, or less than half what it is at present.

^{page 131 note 1} Nogueira, , p. 525Google Scholar. The limitless power of the papacy in distributing the treasure of salvation accumulated by the merits of Christ and of the saints, is defined by Clement VI. in the well-known bull Unigenitus.—“Quern quidem thesaurum, non in sudario depositum, non in agro absconditum, sed per Beatum Petrum cceli clavigerum ejusque successores suos in terris vicarios commisit fidelibus salubriter dispensandum: et propriis et rationabilibus causis, nunc pro totali, nunc pro partiali remissione pœnæ temporalis pro peccatis debitæ, tarn generaliter quam specialiter, prout cum Deo expedire cognoscerent, vere pœnitentibus et confessis misericorditer applicandum.” (Extrav. Commun. Lib. V. Tit. ix. c. 2.)

The mere fact that the pope exercised the power was held to be sufficient evidence that he possessed it, to doubt which was heresy and sacrilege. Nogueira says (pp. 8–9): “Sancti Pontifices ab hinc pluribus annis ut vidimus Bullam concesserunt: ergo illam possunt concedere … ergo etiam ex eo quod sæpius SS. Pontifices actu Bullam concesserunt, nefas, temerarium vel hæreticum erit dicere quod illam concedere non valeant. … Et esset instar sacrilegii dubitare de dispensatione postquam S. Pontifex semel dispensavit.”

Nogueira, (p. 525)Google Scholar explains for us clearly the difference between the remission of punishment granted by an indulgence when applied to the living or to the dead.—“S. Pontifex concedendo indulgentias fidelibus viventibus illos liberat a pœnis pro suis peccatis debitis juridica potestate et per modum absolutionis; quia directam in illos habet potestatem: Defuncti autem detinentur in carceribus, nempe in Purgatorio, sub alterius potestate, nempe Dei; et sic in illos S. Pontifex non habet potestatem; offert tamen Deo ex Thesauro Ecclesiæ, pro anima alicujus in Purgatorio detenti, æquivalentem satisfactionem, et sic, illam animam adjuvando, dicitur illam juvare per modum solutionis aut suffragii; non vero per modum absolutionis.”

^{page 132 note 1} Addis and Arnold's Catholic Dictionary, p. 441.

^{page 132 note 2} de Lara, Perez, p. 12Google Scholar.—“Para ganar las indulgencias que su Santidad concede por la Bula de la Santa Cruzada, y en otros jubileos, siempre requiere que esten contritos y confessados, mediante lo quai se alcança la remission de la culpa, y por la indulgencia de la pena, se dice, quedan absueltos de culpa y pena.” This is the doctrine laid down by Leo X. in his bull Cum postquam, 9 11 1518Google Scholar, in reply to the attacks of Luther. He orders, under pain of excommunication, removable only by the Holy See, all to believe “Romanum pontificem.… culpam scilicet et pœnam pro actualibus peccatis debitam, culpam quidem mediante sacramento pœnitentiæ, pœnam vero temporalem pro actualibus peccatis secundum divinam justitiam debitam, mediante ecclesiastica indulgentia, posse pro rationalibus causis concedere eisdem Christifidelibus qui caritate jungente membra sunt Christi, sive in hac vita sint sive in purgatorio, indulgentias ex superabundantia meritorum Christi et sanctorum, ac tam pro vivis quam pro defunctis apostolica auctoritate indulgentiam concedendo, thesaurum meritorum Jesu Christi et sanctorum dispensare, per modum absolutionis indulgentiam ipsam conferre, vel per modum suffragii illam transferre consuevisse. Ac propterea omnes tam vivos quam defunctos, qui veraciter omnes indulgentias hujusmodi consecuti fuerint, a tanta temporali pœna, secundum divinara justitiam pro peccatis suis actualibus debita liberari, quanta concessæ et acquisitæ indulgentiæ æquivalet.”—Le Plat, Monumentt. Concil. Trident. II. 23.

^{page 132 note 3} The first Bula de la Santa Cruzada, conceded to Henry IV. of Castile in 1457 by Calixtus III., granted absolutions á culpa éd pena (Barrantes, Ilustraciones de la Casa de Niebla, Lib. VII. cap. viii.—Memorial Histórico Español, X. 169). When Brianda de Bardaxí was tried for Judaism by the Inquisition of Saragossa in 1490, among the evidences of her orthodoxy which she offered were a “Bulla de la Cruzada in favorem Briandæ,” and an “Absolutio et concessio indulgentiæ a culpa et pœna” (MSS. Bib. Nationale de France, fonds espagnol, No. 80, fol. 49).

It was doubtless an indulgence of this kind which Boniface IX. conceded to Milan in 1391, “nella medesima forma ch'era in Roma, che ciascuno nel dominio del Visconte, se ancho non fusse contrito ne confesso, fosse assoluto di ogni peccato,” by visiting five churches for ten days and offering at the Duomo two-thirds of what a pilgrimage to Rome would cost, of which two-thirds went to the fabric of the Duomo and one-third to the pope.—Corio, Historie Milanese, P. III. ann. 1391.

Boniface even invented a farther method of speculation, by withdrawing indulgences which he had sold and then selling them again. “Invaluit enim per hanc occasionem simoniaca pravitas tempore suo, et plenariæ indulgentiæ ad quæstum omnibus fere pœnitentibus dabantur, ita ut ex eorum numerositate vilesceret clavium auctoritas, opusque fuerit ut Bonifaciusmet illas revocaret; quibus revocatis Herum eas concedere aggressus est.”—Vita Boniface PP. IX. (Muratori Scriptt. R. Ital. III. II. 832).

^{page 133 note 1} de Lara, Perez, p. 12Google Scholar; Nogueira, , p. 2Google Scholar; Ceyro, § xii.

^{page 133 note 2} Villalon, , in his Exortacion á la confession, Córdova, 1546Google Scholar, says: “Á cada paso vereys multitud de confesores nescios, imprudentes y muy vanos, los quales por cobdicia de un miserable interés se entremeten en este negocio del confessar con tanta liberalidad como si tratassen hazer zapatos ó otra cosa que muy menos fuesse” (de Castro, Alfonso, Protestantes Españoles, Cadiz, 1851, p. 38Google Scholar). Thus the higher authorities sold indulgences assuming that the subaltern priests would prevent the wicked from taking unfair advantage, and the confessor naturally made the most out of what was left to him.

^{page 133 note 3} de Lara, Perez, p. 12Google Scholar; Nogueira, , p. 3Google Scholar. It is true that in this there was the saving clause “con tanto que moram contritos e antes confessados no tempo determinado pella Igreja, que por confiar nesta graça nam fossem mas negligentes” (Nogueira, , p. 6Google Scholar.).—Cf. Ceyro, § vii., No. 22.

^{page 133 note 4} Ceyro, , p. 9Google Scholar.—“Quamvis per plenariam indulgentiam remittatur omnis pcena in Purgatorio luenda, et per consequens pcenitens istam indulgentiam lucrans nullius maneat reus pcenæ pro qua satisfacturus sit in Purgatorio; attamen confessarius debet aliquam pœnitentiam imponere tali pœnitenti, ut sacramentum maneat integrum, quia indulgentiæ non substituuntur pro pœnitentia sacramentali. Occasione tamen indulgentiæ plenariæ sunt imponendæ leves pœnitentiæ, etiam pro gravibus peccatis.”

^{page 134 note 1} de Lara, Perez, p. 24.Google Scholar—“E assi mismo te absuelvo de todos tus pecados crimines y excesses, que aora à mi se han confessado, y de los que confessarias si à tu memoria occurriessen aunque sean tales que la absolucion dellos, como dicho es, à la Santa Sede Apostolica pertinezcan: otorgote plenaria indulgencia y cumplida remission de todos ellos y de las penas que por ellos eras obligado à padecer en la otra vida: In nomine Patris et Filii et Spiritus Sancii, Amen.”

In the formula of an indulgence granted in 1547 for the benefit of the Hospital de la Concepcion of Salamanca there is a further provision that if the confession was made in fear of death and the penitent recovered, the indulgence was not exhausted and could be used again.— “Y si desta enfermedad en que estás Dios por su misericordia te escaparé, sea te reservada esta indulgencia para el verdadero articulo de morte” (Ib. p. 28).

^{page 134 note 2} Pii PP. V. Bull. Quam plenum, 2 Jan., 1570 (Mag. Bullar. Roman. T. II. p. 324, Ed. Luxemb.). “Non pauci fluctuantes et infirmi, veniæ facilitate inducti, ad peccandum procliviores fiunt, quando tot et tantorum delictorum remissionem, certo et vilissimo pretio acquirire posse confidant.”

^{page 135 note 1} Salces, p. 187.— “Que puede ser absuelto por la Bula él que pecó en confianza de la Bula; de tal suerte que no pecara si no esperase ser absuelto en virtud de ella.”

Paul II., in 1469, recognized and stated the danger that purchasers of indulgences might be rendered more reckless and inclined to sin, but his only remedy was to except certain offences from the benefit of indulgences and reserve them for absolution by the pope himself (Pauli PP. II. Bull. Etsi Dominici gregis.—Extrav. Commun. Lib. V. Tit. ix. c. 3); but this was soon abandoned, and the indulgences of the sixteenth century, as we have seen, covered the reserved cases.

^{page 135 note 2} de Lara, Perez, pp. 22–24Google Scholar. This indulgence further shows the incredible laxity with which remission of purgatory was promised. If the purchaser of the scapular would, on the Saturday before Palm Sunday and the feasts of St. John the Evangelist (Dec. 27th) and St. John de Porta Latina (May 6th), stand in front of the sacrament and recite the penitential psalms or five Paternosters and Ave Marias, he could on each day release from purgatory a soul at his selection, besides acquiring plenary indulgence for himself.

The indulgence granted to the Hospital de la Concepcion in 1547 entitled the purchaser, for two reals, not only to plenary absolution once a year and again on his death-bed, but to liberate a soul from purgatory once a year by reciting five Paternosters and Ave Marias on the feast of St. James, July 25th, (de Lara, Perez, p. 28Google Scholar).

^{page 136 note 1} de Lara, Perez, p. 25Google Scholar.—“Iten, que qualquier cofrade desta santa cofradia y hermandad que muriere teniendo en las manos la candela vendita de la dicha cofradia, en honor de la Virgen sacratissima, gane plenaria remission è indulgencia de todos sus pecados, con tal condicion que à lo menos una vez aya rezado el Rosario ò Psalterio de nuestra Señora antes de la muerte.”

The indulgences of the Holy Trinity and Confraternity of the Rosary of the Virgin were long-lived. They were condemned by a decree of the Sacred Congregation of Indulgences, Sept. 18, 1668, which had to be repeated March 7, 1678. This seems to have sufficed for the indulgence of the Rosary, but that of the Trinity was more persistent, and required for its suppression several more decrees—of April 29, 1716, Dec. 22, 1718, and Oct. 5, 1734.—Decreta Authentica Sacræ Congregat. Indulgentiarum, Nos. 4, 14, 35, 40, 71 (Collection des Décrets Authentiques des Sacrées Congregations Romaines, Paris, 1868).

^{page 136 note 2} Theoretically, the Church erects a lofty standard for those seeking the priceless boon of salvation through the sacrament of penitence. The distinction between attritio and contritio, and the requisition of a dispositio congrua ad pœnitentiam (cf. Pet. Lombard. Sententi. Lib. IV. Distt. XVI. XVII.—Th. Aquinæ Summ. Supplem. Q. I. Artt. 2, 3; Q. II. Artt. I, 2.—Th. Aquin. super Libb. Sententt. Lib. IV. Dist. XVII. Q. II. Ari. 2.—Concil. Trident. Sess. XIV. De Pœnitent.), if strictly enforced, would go far to justify its claim thai indulgences are a powerful stimulus for the regeneration of the sinner. Unfortunately, the men who managed the business recognized that purchasers would be few if the people were taught that an indulgence was useless save to him who had reached so high a plane, and the records in Spain show how discreetly these speculations of Ihe leclure-room were suppressed in the publication and sale of the bulls.

For the scholastic debate on the questions involved see Reusch, Der Index der verbotenen Bücher, II. 531 sqq.

^{page 136 note 3} de Lara, Perez, p. 19.Google Scholar

^{page 137 note 1} Nogueira, , p. 24.Google Scholar

^{page 137 note 2} Nogueira, , p. 46Google Scholar.—“Certum est non esse simoniam dare pecuniam pro Bulla et illius privilegiis. Ratio est quia ea pecunia non datur tanquam pretium rei spiritualis, sed ut eleemosyna ordinata ad rem spiritualem.”

^{page 137 note 3} Pii PP. V. Bull. Quam plenum (Mag. Bullar. Roman. T. II. p. 324, Ed. Luxemb.).—“Cum igitur inter cetera scandala etiam Simoniæ pravitas redoleat.”

^{page 137 note 4} Nogueira, , p. 46.Google Scholar

^{page 137 note 5} Ceyro, , p. 8Google Scholar. Ceyro adds that a strumpet who pays for one with the wages of her sin has the benefit of it.

^{page 137 note 6} Ceyro, , p. 7.Google Scholar

^{page 138 note 1} Salces, , p. 420Google Scholar.—“Es muy común el decir que la Bula se compra. Este palabra envuelve un error notable, tratándose de estas materias. La Bula se toma, no se compra, porque las gracias spirituales no se venden. Lo que se da por ella no es precio sino limosna.”

^{page 138 note 2} Pii PP. V. Bull. Etsi Dominici gregis (Mag. Bullar. Roman. II. 229). It is probably on the strength of this bull that Catholic writers assume that “eleemosynary indulgences” have long been forbidden by the Church.— Green, Indulgences, Sacramental Absolutions, etc., in reply to the charge of Venality, London, 1872, pp. 104, 132.

^{page 138 note 3} Clement. PP. VIII. Bull. Quœcumque (Mag. Bull. Rom. III. 183).

^{page 138 note 4} Benedicti PP. XIV. Bull. Quoniam inter (Benedicti XIV. Bullar. I. 320, Ed. Prati, 1846).

^{page 138 note 5} Pietro d'Onofri, Spiegazione della Bolla della S. Crociata, Napoli, 1768. In this case the limosina was fixed at 26 grana and 3 cavalli (Ib. p. 99).

^{page 138 note 6} It required prolonged reformatory effort and increasing enlightenment to suppress the profitable abuses which had covered mediaeval Europe with a countless number of chartered privileges, exploited to the utmost in trading upon the popular eagerness for salvation. Notwithstanding the vigorous war fare waged upon them by Pius V. (1566–1572) many yet remained, of which a weeding out was attempted in 1635. In 1669, Clement IX. created the Sacred Congregation of Indulgences with full power to correct abuses (Bull. In ipsis pontificatus.—Mag. Bullar. Roman. V. 283). The Congregation went vigorously to work, sweeping away many of the old indulgences, and promptly suppressing new unauthorized ones as they arose. See Decret., Authent. Sacræ Congr. Indulgentt. Nos. 4, 14, 16, 31, 35, 40, 41, 44, 47, 57, 71, 76, 88, 92.

Various classes of indulgences were put on the Index Librorum Prohibitorum by Benedict XIV. in 1758 (Index Benedicti PP. XIV. Romæ, 1758, pp. xxxiv.–v.), and specifically in the body of the Index (p. 136) are condemned six Spanish indulgences stated to be granted by the popes in 1681, 1684, 1685, 1686, and 1692. The decree condemning them was issued May 23, 1696, but curiously enough they are not in the Index printed in Rome in 1704. They are all retained in the Index of Leo XIII. (pp. 160, 161, Romse, 1887), where on p. 160 the date of the decree is erroneously given as 1669.

^{page 139 note 1} Janssen, Geschichte der deutschen Volkes, B. II., p. 75 (Ed. 1886),— “Niemanden ohne die in der päbstlichen Ablassbulle verkündete Gnade zu entlassen denn es wurde, nicht weniger das Heil der Christglaubigen, als der Nutzen des Baues der Peterskirche gesucht.”

^{page 139 note 2} Janssen, loc. cit.—“geizigen Commissarien, Monich und Pfaffen, die so unverschämt davon gepredicht … und mehr auffs Geld dann auf Beicht, Reu und Leid gesetzt.”

^{page 139 note 3} Concil. Trident. Sess. XXV.

“Ea vero quæ ad curiositatem spectant, vel turpe hierum sapiunt, tanquam scandala et fidelium offendicula prohibeant” (Decr. de Purgatorio).

“Abusus vero quæ in his irrepserunt et quorum occasione insigne hoc indulgentiarum nomen ab hæreticis blasphematur, emendalos et correctos cupiens, præsenti decreto generaliter statuit [sacrosancta synodus], pravos quæstus omnes pro his consequendis, unde plurima in Christiano populo abusuum causa fluxit, omnino abolendos esse” (Decr. de Indulgentt.).

^{page 140 note 1} Nogueira, , p. 7Google Scholar.—Francisco de Medina, Vida del Cardenal Pedro Gonzalez de Mendoza (Memorial Histórico Español, T. VI. p. 159).—Barrantes, Ilustraciones de la Casa de Niebla, Lib. VII. c. xviii. (Ibid. T. X. p. 169).

^{page 141 note 1} Gachard, Correspondence de Charles-Quint et d'Adrien VI., Bruxelles, 1859, p. 260. Bishop Hefele (Der Cardinal Ximenes, Ed. 1851, p. 433) is pleased to attribute the opposition of Ximenes to the publication of Leo X.'s indulgences for St. Peter's to his objection to seeing the discipline of the church enervated by the remission of repentance and punishment. As Ximenes made no resistance to the Cruzada, his repugnance was evidently a financial dislike to seeing the funds diverted from the royal treasury to Rome.

^{page 142 note 1} Gachard, Correspondence etc., pp. cix., ex., 48, 49, 51, 61, 170, 171, 177, 181, 189, 190, 259, 260, 261. Yet from a law of 1522, the Cruzada would seem to be in full operation under the same elaborate organization as we find sub sequently (Novísima Recopilacion, Lib. II. Tit. xi. ley I). From the complaints of the Córtes, as we shall see hereafter, the business was doubtless carried on in spite of the papal refusal.

^{page 142 note 2} Balan, Monumenta Sseculi XVI., Oenoponte, 1885, p. 30.

^{page 143 note 1} Gachard, Correspondence, etc., pp. 221, 224, 227.

^{page 143 note 3} de Lara, Perez, p. 5Google Scholar.—Michele Soriano, Relazioni Venete, Serie I. T. III. p. 340.—Paolo Tiepolo, Ibid. T. V. p. 22.—Cabrera, Histori de Felipe II., Lib. I. c. ix.

^{page 143 note 3} de Lara, Perez, p. 5.Google Scholar

^{page 143 note 4} Pii PP. V. Bull. Etsi Dominici gregis, 8 Febr., 1567 (Mag. Bullar. Roman. II. 228; Septimi Decretal. Lib. III. Tit. xv. c. I).

^{page 144 note 1} Leonardo Donato, Relazioni Venete, Serie I. T. VI. p. 380.

^{page 144 note 2} Leonardo Donato, the Venetian envoy at the time, says that if the Turks had sent some galleys and troops to Spain, instead of declaring war against Venice, they would have kindled a conflagration which it would have been difficult to quench (loc. cit., p. 408). The Spanish court was fully alive to the danger (Janer, Condición Social de los Moriscos, pp. 56 sqq.; cf. Memorial Histórico Español, T. III. pp. 55–58).

^{page 145 note 1} It was probably in preparation for this that Philip issued, Nov. 20, 1569, a Pragmatica requiring all bulls, graces, indulgences, pardons, etc., to be examined and approved by the Ordinary of the diocese and the Commissioner-General of the Cruzada before publication (Novísima Recopilacion, Lib. II. Tit. iii. ley 5). As soon as the concession of the Cruzada expired, doubtless the innumerable old privileges of the kind which had been suspended by it were held to be revived, threatening that little would be left to be gleaned by Philip's device of episcopal indulgences.

^{page 145 note 2} de Lara, Perez, pp. 30–33Google Scholar.—Pii PP. V. Bull. Quam plenum, 2 01, 1570Google Scholar. (Mag. Bull. Roman. T. II. p. 323.; Septimi Decretal. Lib. III. Tit. xv. c. 2).

Perez de Lara describes the graces of the episcopal indulgence as “tan limitadas y tan desiguales à las que se conceden por la bula de la Santa Cruzada.”

^{page 146 note 1} Donato, Leonardo, loc. cit.—Perez de Lara, p. 6.Google Scholar

^{page 146 note 2} Leonardo Donato, loc. cit.—Paolo Tiepolo (1563), Ibid. T. V. p. 25. —de Lara, Perez, p. 22Google Scholar.

^{page 147 note 1} Nogueira, , Prolog., p. 7Google Scholar. Nogueira states that Manuel obtained a bull in 1505 from Julius II., and in 1507 from Leo X. The latter is a self-evident error: the bull was procured in 1514 (Osorii de Rebus Emmanuelis Lib. IX. Ed. 1574, fol. 299 b). Osorius says that the king applied for one in 1505, but does not record the result (Ib. Lib. IV. fol. 122 a).

^{page 147 note 2} de Lara, Perez, pp. 12, 13.Google Scholar

^{page 147 note 3} de Lara, Perez, p. 12Google Scholar.—“Su Santidad en las dichas palabras à culpa è à pena quiere decir que no solamente los confessores los pueden absolver de la culpa, como pueden mediante la contricion y confession de los penitentes, sino tambien de la pena devida en satisfacion de los pecados à la justicia divina.”

^{page 148 note 1} de Lara, Perez, pp. 69, 70Google Scholar.

In the Indies, where the indulgences ran for two years in place of one, the price to Spaniards, from the viceroys down to individuals worth 10,000 pesos, was two pesos (16 reals), and for others one peso, or 8 reals, except monks, friars, beggars, and serving-men, for whom it was two reals—to be paid in coin or bullion, where they were to be had. Indians could settle with the equivalent in merchandise; their caciques paid one peso, the rest two reals (de Lara, Perez, p. 81Google Scholar).

In Portugal, Nogueira, (p. 45)Google Scholar in 1685 states that the price was regulated not by the station of the purchaser but by his wealth. All, whether ecclesiastics or laymen, and their wives, enjoying more than 400 milreis of income, paid an esmola or “alms” of three tostoens (teston = 100 reis); those having between 200 and 400 milreis paid two tostoens. All others paid four vintens (the vinten being 20 reis), except children, servants, slaves, laborers, beggars, Franciscans, and Carmelites, for whom the price was two vintens. The same scale of prices is given by Ceyro in 1722 (p. 7).

The modern equivalent of the milreis is $1.10.

^{page 148 note 2} de Lara, Perez, p. 18Google Scholar.— “Y finalmente en todos los casos que los vivos ganan por si y para si la indulgencia de la Bula de la Santa Cruzada, referidos arriba en el titulo de las indulgencias de la Santa Cruzada, haciendolos en favor de algun anima de purgatorio, el alma alcança la indulgencia y queda libre de las penas de purgatorio, y va à gozar de la ultima retribucion que es la gloria.”

^{page 148 note 3} de Lara, Perez, p. 78Google Scholar. — “Las animas de los fieles difuntos que están padeciendo, en las penas de Purgatorio … puedan salir dellas y vayan à gozar de Dios nuestro Señor y de su gloria eterna.”

^{page 148 note 4} de Lara, Perez, p. 70Google Scholar. In Portugal the price of the bula de difuntos was half a tostaõ, or 50 reis (Nogueira, , p. 45Google Scholar).

In view of this moderate cost of so priceless a benefit, it should not have been necessary for the Archbishop of Santiago, as Commissioner-General of the Cruzada, in 1755, to call the attention of the pious to the immense number of righteous souls which could, by means of the Cruzada, be liberated at a trifling expense—à bien poca costa (Salces, , p. 80).Google Scholar

^{page 149 note 1} de Lara, Perez, p. 18Google Scholar.

“Ergo dum certus non sis quod nec damnati nec beati sint, orare pro eis non differas: quia, ut supra diximus, bonis tuis non indigent qui beati sunt, et mali non obtinent, quia damnati sunt … etsi non proficiet eis qui beati vel damnati sunt, oratio in sinu nostro convertetur.”—Pseudo-Augustin, ad Fratres in Eremo Serm. XLIV.

^{page 149 note 2} de Lara, Perez, pp. 15–17Google Scholar.—This endeavor to make prostitutes pay a share of their gains, in order to quiet their consciences as to the rest, is not wholly creditable to the administration of the Cruzada. Thomas Aquinas had long before shown that such gains could be lawfully retained (Summa, Sec. Sec. Q. LXII. art. 5 ad 2; Q. LXVII. art. 2 ad 2).

^{page 150 note 1} Paolo Tiepolo, Relazioni Venete, Serie I. T. V. p. 23.—de Lara, Perez, p. 86Google Scholar.

^{page 150 note 2} Pragmaticas y altres Drets de Cathalunya, Lib. I. Tit. ix. cap. 3, § 3, 8 (Barcelona, 1589, pp. 25, 26).

^{page 150 note 3} Ibid. Lib. I. Tit. ix. cap. 2, § I, 4 (p. 25).

^{page 150 note 4} de Lara, Perez, pp. 20, 28Google Scholar.—In the Indies the charge for dispensations for marriage within the prohibited degrees was four or eight ounces of silver, according to circumstances; to Indians it was half-price. For “irregularities” of those in holy orders it was four ounces, unless the case was very grave, when it was eight (Ib. p. 62).

^{page 151 note 1} Novísima Recopilacion, Lib. II. Tit. xi. ley 7.—In 1547 the Catalonian Córtes prayed Philip II, not to allow inquisitors to serve as delegate commissioners, and he promised compliance, except in cases where it appeared necessary (Constitutions de Cathalunya, Lib. I. Tit. vii. cap. I.—Barcelona, 1588, p. 29).

^{page 151 note 2} de Lara, Perez, pp. 12, 78Google Scholar.—In the indulgence of the Spanish bishops in 1570, the license to eat eggs, cheese, etc., during fasts was limited to cases of necessity, with permission of the confessor (Ib. p. 32).

^{page 151 note 3} Relazioni Venete, Serie I. T. VI. p. 379.

^{page 151 note 4} de Lara, Perez, p. 67Google Scholar.

This was the permanent shape of the preaching, after the bulls were regularly granted for six years. In the earlier period, when the concessions were for three years, Paolo Tiepolo tells us, in 1563, that, to make them more profitable, they were divided into three parts. The indulgences sold during the first year were known as bulas de suspension, because they contained a clause suspending for three years all other indulgences; those for the second year were called bulas de composicion, because they recited the privilege of compounding for illicit gains; those for the third year were termed bulas de repredicacion, because they returned to the first year's indulgences, with some additional graces to render them more attractive. Tiepolo alludes to the matter as a thing peculiar to Spain, showing that by this time such sales of indulgences had been abandoned in Italy (Relazioni Venete, Serie I. T. V. pp. 22–5). In 1525, Gasparo Contarini had described it as similar to the Italian “confessionali,” and only dwells upon the greater rigor with which, in Spain, the people were forced to purchase (Ibid. T. II. p. 41).

^{page 152 note 1} de Lara, Perez, p. 5Google Scholar; Nogueira, , p. 3Google Scholar. As late as 1542 a royal cédula recites that “nuestro M. S. P. ha nombrado por comisario generale y executor al M. R. en Cristo P. Cardenal de Sevilla” (Alcubilla, , Códigos de España, Madrid, 1886, p. 908Google Scholar).

^{page 152 note 2} Pragmaticas y altres Drets de Cathalunya, Lib. i. Tit. ix. cap. I, 2, 5 (pp. 23, 24, 27). Both Perez de Lara (p. 7) and Salces (p. 381) commence the list of Commissioners-General in 1525, with Francisco de Mendoza, successively Bishop of Zamora, Oviedo, and Palencia, who was probably the earliest in the records preserved in the office of the Cruzada.

^{page 152 note 3} de Lara, Perez, p. 7Google Scholar; Nogueira, , p. 4Google Scholar. Yet in the Indies the inquisitors, in 1607, are still ordered to assist (de Lara, Perez, p. 55).Google Scholar

^{page 152 note 4} Pragmaticas, etc., de Cathalunya, Lib. I. Tit. ix. cap. 2; cap. 4, § 3, cap. 5 (pp. 24, 27). The Córtes made King Ferdinand swear to supplicate and obtain from the pope certain reforms demanded (Ib, cap. 3, § 6).

^{page 153 note 1} Paolo Tiepolo, Relazioni Venete, Serie I. T. V. p. 25.

^{page 154 note 1} de Lara, Perez, pp. 36, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 105–7Google Scholar.

On complaint of the Córtes of Catalonia, in 1512, Bishop Ribera, the Commissioner-General, abandoned the claim for free quarters and free victuals, and ordered the officials to pay fair prices (Pragmaticas, etc., de Cathalunya, Lib. I. Tit. ix. cap. 2, § 3), but this, like other reforms, seems to have been short-lived.

^{page 154 note 2} de Lara, Perez, pp. 37, 66Google Scholar. In 1554 a regulation of Philip II. limits the preachers to the Orders of St. Dominic, St. Francis, and St. Augustin, except in cathedral churches, where the chapters had the right of selection (Novísima Recopilacion, Lib. II. Tit. xi. ley 7); but a cédula of Philip III., in 1608, includes also the Orders of Merced, Carmen, Trinidad, and Minims (de Lara, Perez, p. 37).Google Scholar

^{page 155 note 1} de Lara, Perez, pp. 33–4, 66, 67, 69.Google Scholar

^{page 155 note 2} de Lara, Perez, pp. 19, 21.Google Scholar

^{page 155 note 3} de Lara, Perez, p. 75Google Scholar.

This was not to be understood as prohibiting the charitable from making donations unsolicited for pious uses, provided they did not believe that they thus obtained the benefits of indulgences.—Pragmaticas, etc., de Cathalunya, Lit. I. Tit. ix. cap. I.

^{page 156 note 1} de Lara, Perez, pp. 55, 64, 69, 80.Google Scholar

^{page 156 note 2} de Lara, Perez, p. 73.Google Scholar

^{page 156 note 3} de Lara, Perez, pp. 55, 61, 64, 83.Google Scholar

^{page 156 note 4} Ceyro, , p. 8.Google Scholar

^{page 157 note 1} Novísima Recopilacion, Lib. III. Tit. xi., ley g—Perez de Lara, pp. 96–102.

^{page 157 note 2} de Lara, Perez, pp. 94, 95Google Scholar. The grant to Calderon authorized him to charge an increased price for the blanks, showing how futile was the pretext that the profits were to be used for the war with the Infidel.

^{page 158 note 1} Relazioni Venete, Serie I. T. II. p. 41. This, as we have seen above (p. 141), was considerably less than the profits from the bulls for St. Peter's.

^{page 158 note 2} Relazioni, Serie I. T. II. p. 196.

^{page 158 note 3} Relazioni, Serie I. T. V. p. 25.

^{page 158 note 4} Relazioni, Serie I. T. VI. p. 378.

^{page 158 note 5} Relazioni, Serie I. T. V. p. 233. He further informs us that in 1575 the royal revenues from the three ecclesiastical “graces,” the Cruzada, the Ser vicio, and the Escusado, which all passed through the hands of the Commis sioner-General, amounted to 2,400,000 ducats (Ibid. p. 243, cf. p. 264).

^{page 158 note 6} Relazioni, Serie I. T. V. p. 391.

^{page 159 note 1} Relazioni, Serie I. T. III. p. 363; T. V. pp. 37, 169, 240, 294.

^{page 159 note 2} Relazioni, Serie I. T. V. pp. 137, 169, 312, 464; T. VI. p. 457.

^{page 159 note 3} Relazioni, Serie I. T. V. p. 24.

^{page 160 note 1} Relazioni, Serie I. T. V. pp. 25, 449.—“E sono le piú sicure che abbia questa corona.”

^{page 160 note 2} de Lara, Perez, pp. 21, 53, 54, 61.Google Scholar

^{page 160 note 3} Vicente de la Fuente, Historia Eclesiástica de España, T. III. p. 277. That Cardinal Hoscoso had some ground for his assertion is visible in the fruitless efforts made by Philip IV. in 1644 and 1647 to restrain the rapacity of his tax-collectors, who oppressed the people and enriched themselves.—Autos Acordados, Lib. III. Tit. ix. Auto 4 (Ed. 1775, pp. 367–73).

^{page 161 note 1} Nueva Recopilacion, Lib. i. Tit ix. ley i.

^{page 161 note 2} C. Arandens, ann. 1472 e. xiii. (Aguirre, Collect. Max. Concil. Hispan. V. 347.)

^{page 161 note 3} Nueva Recopilacion, Lib. I. Tit. x. ley I.

^{page 161 note 4} Pragmaticas, etc, de Cathalunya, Lib. I. Tit. ix. cap. 2, 3, 4 (pp. 24–7). The reforms asked for by the Catalans were granted by Leo X. in 1516, in the bull Pastoris afficii (Ib. p. 20).

^{page 162 note 1} Relazioni, Serie I., T. II., pp. 41, 42.—“Ora veramente s'usa ciò una grandissima crudeltà e tirannide verso quei poveri contadi e popolo minuto; imperoché quando si predicano queste bolle tutti sono sforzati di andar alla predica, e quelli che colle buone non le vogliono torre, li sforzano tante fiate andare alla predica, che li poveri uomini per non perdere affatto d'attendere alii mestieri e al vivere loro, le togliono per forza, e cosi si cavano questi danari.”

^{page 162 note 2} Novísima Recopilacion, Lib. II. Tit. xi. ley 6.

In 1547 the Córtes of Catalonia petitioned Philip II. to put an end to the mutiplication of feast-days and other abuses of the commissioners—“revocats tots abusos fins lo die present fets” (Constitutions de Cathalunya, Lib. I. Tit. vii. cap. I.—Barcelona, 1588, p. 19).

The Council of Trent, during its first convocation, in 1546, sought to meet the general popular abhorrence of the quœstuarii by prohibiting their preaching. In 1562 it went further; it denounced them and their ways as an incurable scandal and forbade their existence in future; indulgences were only to be published by the Ordinary, assisted by two members of the chapter (C. Trident. Sess. V. De Reform, c. ii.; Sess. XXI. De Reform, c. x).

The Council of Trent was promptly received in Spain, but its commands on this point were wholly disregarded and the popes made no objection.

^{page 163 note 1} Novísima Recopilacion, Lib. II. Tit. xi. ley 8.—“Y hacen otros fraudes en gran deservicio de Dios nuestro Señor, y en daño de los fieles cristianos.”

^{page 163 note 2} Relazioni, Serie I. T. V. p. 24.

The Venetian envoy was moderate in his description of the processes em ployed. In 1555, Dr. Diego Perez, professor of canon law in Salamanca, is much more outspoken:—“Isti quæstores spe lucri maximas extorsiones, violationes, et inductiones non vere sæpe, solent facere: et sic involuntarii et coacti ut in plurimum, præsertim agricultores rustici fateri, vidimus eos recipisse, quod dolendum est de ipsis quæstoribus” (Gloss, in Ordenanzas Reales, Lib. I. Tit. viii. ley 2). No layman could serve as a “quæstor” (Ibid.).

^{page 163 note 3} Relazioni, Serie I. T. VI. p. 380.

^{page 164 note 1} Relazioni, Serie I. T. VI. p. 391. — “Una cosa molto grave a quei miseri popoli.”

^{page 164 note 2} de Lara, Perez, p. 103.Google Scholar

^{page 164 note 3} Pragmaticas, etc., de Cathalunya, Lib. I. Tit. ix. cap. 4, § 4 (p. 27).

^{page 164 note 4} Ibid. § 6.—Novís. Recopilacion, Lib. II. Tit. xi. ley 6.

The complaints of the abuse of excommunication by the tribunal of the Cruzada, recorded by Carlos II. in 1677, 1678, and 1691, refer to its functions in collecting the imposts on the clergy, known as the Subsidio and the Escusado, and not to its dealings in indulgences (Autos Acordados, Lib. IV. Tit. i. Auto 4, Cap. 12, 13).

^{page 165 note 1} Novísima Recopilacion, Lib. II. Tit. xi. ley 8.

^{page 165 note 2} de Lara, Perez, pp. 103, 104.Google Scholar

^{page 166 note 1} de Lara, Perez, pp. 74, 75Google Scholar. These provisions were in pursuance of a law of Charles V., issued as early as 1524, to diminish the vexations suffered by the people. In addition he was obliged to forbid the collection of these debts by the process of excommunication (Novísima Recopilacion, Lib. II. Tit. xi. ley 6). Charles II. had to issue a somewhat similar law in 1677 (Autos Acordados, Lib. I. Tit. x. Auto 3).

^{page 166 note 2} de Lara, Perez, p. 94.Google Scholar

^{page 166 note 3} Nueva Recopilacion, Lib. I. Tit. x. leyes 8, 9; Novísima Recopilacion, Lib. II. Tit. xi. leyes 2, 3, 4, 5. The dates of these laws range from 1494 to 1713, showing how long the struggle continued between the secular courts and the Cruzada.

^{page 167 note 1} Magnum Bullarium Roman. T. VIII. pp. 203, 210, 213 (Ed. Luxemb.).

^{page 167 note 2} Ceyro, Prœfat.

^{page 168 note 1} Autos Acordados, Lib. I. Tit. x. Auto 7; Lib. VI. Tit. xiv. Autos 2, 4.

^{page 168 note 2} Novísima Recopilacion, Lib. II. Tit. xi. leyes il, 12.

^{page 168 note 3} Novísima Recopilacion, Supplem., Lib. II. Tit. xi. leyes 1–5.—“Para que … haga que se conserve en todo su explendor la dignidad de un objeto tan sagrado.”

^{page 168 note 4} Pii PP. IX., Bull. Dum infidelium (Salces, , pp. 387sqq.).Google Scholar

^{page 169 note 1} Salces, , pp. 69–71Google Scholar.—“Esta indulgencia es total, plenaria ó plenísima, es decir, es la remisión ó relajación de toda la pena temporal debida por los pecados.”

A decree of the Sacred Congregation of Indulgences, December 17, 1870, states that in concessions of plenary indulgence for the living, it is customary to limit them to those who, truly penitent, have confessed and received the sacrament; no one, not in a state of grace, can receive a plenary indulgence, and in addition to this it is necessary to confess and receive the sacrament. Salces, however, tells us that for the plenary indulgence of the Cruzada it is sufficient to be in a state of grace, through perfect contrition without confession (pp. 130, 131). It will be remembered that in the seventeenth century the necessity of the state of grace was argued away.

^{page 169 note 2} Salces, , pp. 72, 73.Google Scholar

^{page 169 note 3} Salces, , p. 76Google Scholar.—“La indulgencia que aquí se concede es plenaria y total, por la qual el alma á quien se aplica la Bula se libra de las penas del Purgatorio; es un sufragio que iguala á todas las penas que en él debia pagar; es, en expresión del Señor Comisario, un autentico finiquito.”

^{page 169 note 4} Salces, , pp. 76, 79.Google Scholar

^{page 170 note 1} Salces, , p. 79.Google Scholar

^{page 170 note 2} Salces, , p. 82.Google Scholar

^{page 170 note 3} Bull. Dum infidelium, § xiii. (Salces, , p. 393).Google Scholar

^{page 170 note 4} Ibid. p. 388.

^{page 170 note 5} Salces, , p. 328Google Scholar. In a royal decree of October 30, 1873, it is said: “que los productos de Cruzada han de ser destinados á suplir la dotacion destinada al culto divino, ó, si es posible, á satisfacerla” (p. 332).

The Spanish peseta and céntimo are nearly equivalent to the French franc and centime.

^{page 171 note 1} Salces (p. 333) excuses himself for giving these details “para sacar á la mayor parte de los fieles del error en que están de que á la limosna ó producto de las Bulas no se da el destino y aplicación tan santo.”

^{page 171 note 2} Salces, , p. 39.Google Scholar

^{page 171 note 3} Salces, Prologo.—“Tesoro del que se aprovechan los españoles católicos que son celosos de su salvación; pero que son pocos en comparación de los que hacen de él poco aprecio, mirándole con indiferencia.”