Dist. 20, Part 2, Art. 1, Q. 2
by St. Bonaventure
Source text: Public Domain Mark 1.0. English translation/apparatus/encoding: CC BY-NC 4.0, Wroot Press.
https://bonaventure.wrootpress.com/browse/4/d/20/q/bon-sent-IV-d20-p2-a1-q2
----------------------------------------
### Question II. *Whether a relaxation of satisfaction can be made.*

Secondly it is asked whether a relaxation of satisfaction can be made. And that it can, seems [shown]:

1. Because the universal Church accepts these relaxations; but it is established that she does not err: therefore they are truly made. *Proof of the minor*: thus it was said to Peter in Luke twenty-two: *I have prayed for thee, Peter, that thy faith fail not*; it is established that this was said to Peter in the person of the Church; but Christ *was heard in all things on account of his reverence*: therefore also in this. And if so, the universal Church is not deceived nor errs.

2. Likewise, in second Corinthians chapter two: *For if I have pardoned anything to you, [I have done it] in the person of Christ*; the Gloss: « As if Christ had pardoned it »; but if Christ truly pardons, it is truly pardoned: therefore what the Apostle pardoned was truly pardoned and relaxed. But the Supreme Pontiff is not of lesser power than Paul: therefore etc.

3. Likewise, Augustine in the book *On Penitence*: « It is to be believed that all the prayers of the Church and the almsdeeds and works of justice come to the aid of one who acknowledges his death unto conversion »: if therefore the works of the Church avail, then satisfactory goods, which are in the ecclesiastical unity, avail toward satisfying: therefore it seems that he to whom it pertains to distribute these can aid sinners and so diminish satisfaction and thereby pardon and relax.

4. Likewise, Christ pardoned to many not only the fault, but also the punishment, as is evident in the adulterous woman; but God left the plenitude of power in the Church: therefore also the power of relaxing and pardoning.

**On the contrary:**
1. Isaiah forty: *Her iniquity is forgiven, she hath received of the Lord's hand double*: therefore it seems that the punishment, unto perfect remission, must be doubled, not relaxed.

2. Likewise, upon that text of second Timothy chapter two: *He cannot deny himself*; the Gloss: « Which he would do, if he did not fulfill his words »: therefore it is necessary that the Lord fulfill his words; but he himself foretold in Deuteronomy twenty-five: *According to the measure of the sin shall the manner of the stripes be*: therefore it is necessary to be punished just as the sinner deserved: therefore nothing can be relaxed.

3. Likewise, by *reason* it seems: To bring forth worthy fruits of penance is in a divine precept, from which

no mere man can absolve; but to bring forth worthy fruits is, according to the magnitude of the crime, to make satisfaction magnificently: therefore it seems that it is not permitted to anyone of the Church to diminish anything of it: therefore neither to make nor to receive any relaxation.

4. Likewise, an inferior cannot absolve from a punishment to which a superior binds; but God, in remitting the fault, binds to a certain temporal punishment: therefore it seems that no man can remit anything of it: therefore etc.

### Conclusion

> A relaxation of punishment can be made, which avails not only in the forum of the Church, but also in the forum of God.

**I respond:** It must be said that relaxations are made and can be made, but *in what manner* they can be made, various [authors] suggest to us in various ways.

1. For some, distinguishing the forum of God and the forum of the Church, have said that relaxations of this kind are not made nor understood with respect to the forum of God, but with respect to the forum of the Church. And this they understand thus. The sacred canons assess grave and long penances for mortal sins, as for one mortal sin seven years or more, according as it is graver; which punishment is so grave that scarcely or never could anyone perform it, and few would be found who would be willing. Therefore the rectors of the Church established that penances be imposed according to discretion, and they established that relaxations be made of the remainder; which they were also able to do, since it was a human constitution, and in a human constitution a man can dispense and temper; which dispensation is not unfittingly called a kind of *relaxation*. — But nevertheless this opinion, although it seems to posit relaxations, more truly does away with them; because, if they relax in such a way that God does not relax, it is rather to be judged a *deception* than a true *relaxation*, and it can be called rather *cruelty* than *piety*, while by diminishing penance here it draws [one] in the future to graver torments.

Therefore it must be said otherwise, that that relaxation avails not only in the forum of the Church, but also in the forum of God, because God holds as pardoned what is thus pardoned. — Now the manner of understanding how it can be made is this. It must be presupposed that we obtain *the good* from a threefold merit, namely from *proper* merit and from the merit of the *head* and from the merit of *ecclesiastical unity*. And that this is so, is manifest in itself: because *each one* merits for himself by the grace which he has; that *Christ* merited for us, no one doubts, except one who lacks faith; that the *Church* merits for us, and her merits [do so], is evident through the aforesaid word of Augustine and through that which he himself subjoins: « No one can worthily do penance whom the unity of the Church does not sustain ». That word is the word of Augustine in the book *On Penitence*.

In this way, just as the merit of *obtaining the good* is threefold, so [is] the merit of *being freed from evil*: namely *proper* merit, and this is the merit of our contrition; and through this we merit to be freed from eternal punishment, so that these two are together, as in the Angels grace and glory. — In the second mode, the merit of *Christ*, and this works in the Sacraments and the power of the keys; and through this part of the punishment is remitted. — In the third mode there is the merit of *ecclesiastical unity*, and through it remission is still made. And so according to the threefold merit a threefold pardon of punishment is made, so that thus *mercy runs together with justice*; and in each there is a commutation of the greater into the less. Hence eternal punishment is first changed into *temporal* in the remission of the fault; secondly the temporal [punishment], great and beyond [one's] strength, is commuted into a punishment fitting to [one's] strength in the *priest's absolution*; thirdly indeed the punishment, to which one is held by the *judgment of the Church*, is commuted still into a lesser one in relaxation, and for the other remainder the merits of the Church make satisfaction, so that in nothing is justice prejudiced.

1. 2. To that, then, which is objected, that the punishment is doubled, and that according to the measure of the offense ought also to be the manner of the stripes: it must be said that — as was touched upon above, when treatment was made of baptism, that our sin was sufficiently punished, when Christ underwent the punishment for us and set forth his punishment for us and made it ours — we are judged to be sufficiently punished, whether as to the *doubleness* in soul and in flesh, or as to the measure of the bitterness of the punishment; similarly it is to be understood in the matter at hand, that the penalties which are in the *Church* and which are *of supererogation*, come to the aid of him for whom the relaxation is made, so that God may reckon satisfaction as made to himself.

3. To that which is objected, that one is held to bringing forth worthy fruits of penance; it must be said that to bring forth worthy fruits of penance is twofold, namely *truly* and *interpretatively*. And he is said to bring forth worthy fruits of penance who has, not only through his very self, but also through another's suffrage, a sufficient price to pay the debt.

4. To that which is objected, that an inferior does not absolve from that to which a superior binds; it must be said that he does not absolve by pardoning altogether, but by paying for him out of the ecclesiastical treasury. — Or it can be said that an inferior can absolve from that to which a superior binds, if authority for this has been given to him by the superior, as is evident; and such authority was given by Christ to the rectors of the Church.

---