Those who attack the Church for its use of indulgences rely upon—and take advantage of—the ignorance of both Catholics and non-Catholics.
What is an indulgence? The Church explains, "An indulgence is a remission before God of the temporal punishment due to sins whose guilt has already been forgiven, which the faithful Christian who is duly disposed gains under certain defined conditions through the Church’s help when, as a minister of redemption, she dispenses and applies with authority the treasury of the satisfactions won by Christ and the saints" (Indulgentarium Doctrina 1). To see the biblical foundations for indulgences, see the Catholic Answers tract A Primer on Indulgences.Myth 7: A person used to be able to buy indulgences.
One never could "buy" indulgences. The financial scandal surrounding indulgences, the scandal that gave Martin Luther an excuse for his heterodoxy, involved alms—indulgences in which the giving of alms to some charitable fund or foundation was used as the occasion to grant the indulgence. There was no outright selling of indulgences. The Catholic Encyclopedia states: "[I]t is easy to see how abuses crept in. Among the good works which might be encouraged by being made the condition of an indulgence, almsgiving would naturally hold a conspicuous place. . . . It is well to observe that in these purposes there is nothing essentially evil. To give money to God or to the poor is a praiseworthy act, and, when it is done from right motives, it will surely not go unrewarded."
Consider the source.
I just completed three research papers on early church figures (I hesitate to use the term "fathers"...). A great deal of info was gleaned from the Catholic Encyclopedia. But I also found an amazing paradox. Figures that history shows were adamantly against many practices of the church, are now considered to be "Saints" who "never" REALLY argued those teachings.
One example is Cyprian of Carthage. He railed against the bishop of Rome taking a position of "supremacy". He taught that the local Bishop should be the focus and that the fellowship of said bishops constituted the unity of the church.
Yet, that isn't what "The Catholic Encyclopedia" says about him.
They explain around his teaching that he didn't really mean what he taught. He did recognize apostolic connections - but to the Bishops, not to one supreme leader (Pope).
So - again, consider the source.
Alway - Catholic or not - any doctrine that conflicts with the Bible is a major problem. Forgiveness of sins is granted by God himself because of the sacrifice of Jesus Christ.
And don't even try the "whatever you bind here on earth will be bound in heaven"... won't work. I have been down that road.