Reims Against Rome, Propositions · Proposition 26
XXVI. Propoſition. That Confeſsion, commonly called Auricular, or Sacramentall, is of neceſsitie.
THey meane hereby, a ſecret confeſſion onelyonly to the Prieſt alone, of all, at leaſt mortall ſinnes, particularly reciting them, with all circumſtances thereof, as they committed them in thought, word and deed: and that without this, there is no remiſſion of ſinne.
This wee deny to be of neceſſitie. But they affirme it to bee ſuch an ordinance of Chriſt, as not onelyonly hee which doth condemne and contemne it; but whoſoeuer doth neglect or omit the ſame when he may hauehave it, cannot be ſaued.
Confuted by their owne Bible.
I. It affordeth no commandement, or any example hereof, either in the Old Teſtament, or in the New, that any ſhould goe to a Prieſt ſecretly, and make confeſſion after this manner to him. Therefore this is no diuine ordinance neceſſary to Saluation.
II. Promiſes of mercy and forgiueneſſe are made to the confeſſion of ſinnes, not mentioning the particular enumeration of them to a Prieſt, 1. Ioh. 1. 9. Prou. 28. 13. Therefore there is pardon without this burthenſome ordinance, which is maintained ſo ſtrictly among the Romaniſts, that thereby the Prieſts may tyrannize ouer the conſciences of the poore Lay-Catholiques, and further ſerue their owne turnes for politique ends.
III. There are examples of ſuch as obtained pardon. Firſt, by confeſſion onelyonly to God, as Dauid himſelfe witheſſeth in Pſal. 32. 5, 6. Secondly, by making onelyonly a generall confeſſion,Pſal. 32. 5, 6. as Dauid did, 2. Sam. 12. 13. This wee ſee alſo to be ſo in the Publicanes confeſſion, Luk. 18. 13, 14. in Zacheus confeſſion, Luk. 19. 8, 9. in the Prodigall ſons confeſſion, Luk. 15. 21. and thirdly, by onelyonly hearty contrition, without any vocall confeſſion at all, as in the example of that Woman, which with teares waſhed Chriſts feet, Luk. 7. 38.
Therefore this comming to a Prieſt, and numbring vp ſinnes in particular, is not abſolutely neceſſarie to obtaine pardon of them.
Contraried by Antiquitie.
Auguſt. Confeſſ. lib. 10. cap. 3. What hauehave I to doe with men, that they ſhould heare my confeſſions, as though they were able to heale all my ſores?
Nectarius the Biſhop of Conſtantinople put it downe, andLocrat. lib. 5. ca. 19. Zozom. …. 7. c. 16. Tripart. hiſt. l. 9. c. 35. Niceph. lib. 12. cap. 28. all the Biſhops in the Eaſt, and their Churches: which they neuer would hauehave done, had it beene the ordinance of God, and neceſſarie for all times and people.
Chryſoſtome, hom. 2. in Pſal. 50. who was after Nectarius, ſaith, I will thee not to confeſſe thy ſinnes to thy fellow-ſeruant (meaning the Prieſt:) confeſſe them vntounto God that may heale them.
And in Hom. 22. ad popul. Antiochen. ſaith further, This is wonderfull in God, that hee not onelyonly forgiueth vsus our ſinnes: but neither doth diſcloſe them, nor make them knowne, neither doth he enforce vsus to come forth and tell them: hee requireth no more, but that we ſpeak to him alone, and to him alone confeſſe our faults. This Father held it then, not of neceſſitie to goe to a Prieſt.
For more teſtimonies, ſee the late and learned booke of Biſhop Vſher, vponupon this point; hee citeth Chryſoſt. Auſtin, the Egyptian Abbot, Baſil, Ambroſe, Maximns; Taurinenſis, Greg. Nyſſen, Origen, Nectarius, Clem, Alexandrinus, Laurence, Biſhop of Nouaria. Theodore an Archbiſhop of Canterbury.
Gainſaid by themſelues.
The Canon Law ſaith, de poen. D. 5. in poenit. Gloſſa. It was taken vp, onelyonly by a certaine tradition of the Church, and not by any authoritie of either the Old, or New Neſtament.
Panormitan. ſuper 5. de poen. & remiſſ. ca. omnes vtriuſ que ſaith, that hee findeth no manifeſt authoritie, that euer God or Chriſt commanded vsus to confeſſe our ſinnes to a Prieſt.
Petrus Oxonienſis the Diuinity Reader at Salamanca, taught publikely, that it had a beginning from a poſitiue law of the Church, and not from the Law of God.
Beatus Rhenanus in the Argument of Tertul. de poenit. thatCaranza in Sixto 4 Ouand. 4. d. 16. Pro. 2. this priuy kinde of Confeſſion was euer commanded by God, ſaith he, we reade not.
Eraſmus in annot. ad Epiſt. Hieronymi ad Oceanum de obitu Fabiolae, telleth vsus, that in Saint Ieromes time, (foure hundred yeeres after Chriſt) ſecret confeſſion of ſinnes was not ordained.
Bellar. lib. 3. de poenit. cap. 1. acknowledgeth, that Rhenanus and Eraſmus beleeued that this ſecret confeſſion was not inſtituted, nor commanded by God, nor in vſe in the Ancient Church. And theſe were as two learned Papiſts, as euer were. And therefore their teſtimonie is of no ſmall credit herein: Yea, Eraſmus there telleth vsus, that the Writings of the Fathers are abuſed, to maintaine this priuate and ſecret confeſſion.
Caietan in 3. Tho. q 8. art. 4. holdeth, that a man by contrition, without confeſſion, is made cleane, and a formall member of the Church: Yea, he ſaith, that hee which is contrite for his ſinne, and receiueth the communion without Shrift, ſinneth not mortally, though he hauehave a Confeſſor at hand.
Cornelius Agrippa. de vanit. cap. 64. I could, ſaith he, by many examples freſh in memory, ſhew how fit this Shrift is for bawdry.
If any deſire more, reade Biſhop Vſhers laſt booke, wherein is cited Gratian, Iohannes Semeca, Michael of Bononia, Iohannes de Selua.
Alſo let him look into Doctor Whites way of the true Church, of the Papiſts differing opinions about this, pag. 440. 441. in quarto, digreſſ. 55. Num. 8. and D. Whites laſt booke, p. 190, 191.Anſ. to Fiſher 192. citing Iohn Medina, Gratian, and Caietan, Ianſenius, Ʋaſques, Mich. Palacius, Gloſſ. on Gratian, Gerſon, Panormitan. Maldonat, and others.
Scriptures obiected anſwered.
Math. 18. 18. Whatſoeuer ye ſhall binde on earth, &c.
Anſw. 1. Here is not a word of confeſſion in this place of Scripture, but rather of accuſation by another. For in the words foregoing, the notice giuen to the Church, is from the partie not offending, but offended. If thy brother treſpaſſe againſt thee, &c. tell it to the Church. But all Auricular confeſſion is ſuppoſed voluntary, whereby a man accuſeth himſelfe, and in priuate, not publike, as here.
Ioh. 20. 23. Whoſe ſinnes ye remit, &c.
Anſw. 1. Here is no mention of confeſſion of ſinnes to them. Secondly, the authoritie giuen here to the Apoſtles, was exerciſed in the publike Miniſterie, & preaching of the Word, though they heard no priuate confeſſion, as the Papiſts dreame of. Therefore the Apoſtle Saint Paul calleth the preaching of the Word, the miniſterie of Reconciliation, 2. Cor. 5. 18. Thirdly, Chriſt ſaith there, As my Father ſent mee, ſo I ſend you. Now he was not ſent to heare priuate confeſſions, and thereupon to giuegive them abſolutions: but by preaching, to binde vp the broken hearted, to proclaime libertie to the captiues, and the opening of the priſon to them that are bound, Eſai. 61. 1. Luk. 4. 18. Neither did he binde any to priuate confeſſion, nor ſate to heare the ſame. Therefore ſuch as he ſendeth, are not tyed to doe otherwiſe; neither hath heere Popiſh ſhrift any ground. Fourthly, Caietan on this place, ſaith, that the Sacrament of penance hath here no commandement.
Act. 19. 18. And many that beleeued, came and confeſſed, &c.
Anſw. Here is mention indeed of confeſſion, but this proueth not impoſed priuate confeſſion, ſecretly in the Prieſts eare. For firſt, this is of a confeſſion voluntary, not enforced. Secondly, of many that did it: but not of all. Thirdly, publike, and not in S. Pauls eare. For as they ſhewed their workes, and brought their bookes, and burnt them before all men, verſe 19; So was this confeſſion open: for the Text maketh no difference of theſe actions. Fourthly, Here it is ſaid, they confeſſed: but no particular enumeration of ſinnes with circumſtances. Fiftly, Caietan a Cardinall, in his Commentarie hereof, holdeth, that this place is not meant of Auricular confeſſion.
Iam. 5. 16. Confeſſe your faults one to another.
Anſw. This is nothing for the Popiſh confeſſion. For firſt, it is as generall as prayer one for another. But Prayer is a dutie common to all. Secondly, he ſaith not, the prayer of the Prieſt, but of a righteous man. And I hope that others beſide Prieſts are righteous men. Thirdly, here is not a word of abſolution: but a promiſe to the prayer of faith, not to the Prieſts words, to ſaue the ſicke, and to hauehave his ſinnes pardoned, verſe 15. Fourthly, confeſſion commanded heere, is not confined to a Prieſt, but may extend to any other.
This Saint Iames ſpeakes to all, to whom he wrote his Epiſtle. And this place is to be vnderſtood one of theſe three wayes. Firſt, either of Prieſts and people: and then are the Prieſts bound to confeſſe, as well to the people, as the people to them. For its ſaid, Confeſſe one to another, that is, mutually, or reciprocally. Secondly, or heere is vnderſtood onelyonly of Prieſts among themſelues, and then is there nothing to the people. Thirdly, or onelyonly of the people among themſelues, and then is this nothing to the Prieſt, to take authoritie hence, to bind the people to confeſſe to him. Fourthly, confeſſion here is not of ſecret ſinnes in heart againſt God, or ſinnes hidden from men, but of treſpaſſes or offences one againſt another, as the word in the Originall ſheweth, and is ſo taken in Marke 11. 25, 26. VponUpon which grieuances, mutuall confeſſion or acknowledgement of wrongs is here enioyned as a fit meanes of brotherly reconciliation, and preſeruation of peace among themſelues. To which they muſt adde prayer, one for another, that their mutuall confeſſion reciprocally, for reconciliation, may bee bleſſed vntounto them. Of which practice, happy are they which make conſcience: and bleſſed ſhould we be, if to this eueryevery man would ſubmit himſelfe. A harder taske, then to whiſper his ſinnes in a Prieſts eare ſecretly.
Laſtly, the Rhemiſts ſay vponupon this text, that it is not certaine that S. Iames ſpeaketh here of Sacramentall confeſſion. Wherevpon others, in alledging Scriptures for Auricular confeſſion, leaue out this place, as not to the purpoſe.
Mat. 3. 5, 6. Then went out to him Ieruſalem, and all Iudea, and all the Region round about Iordane, and were baptized in Iordane, confeſſing their ſinnes.
Anſw. This ſorteth not with Popiſh Auricular Confeſſion, and that for theſe three reaſons.
Firſt, this was publike, not in a corner of the Temple, or of a Synagogue, but in the place where he baptized them in Iordan, before all the people.
Secondly, this was at their firſt conuerſion receiuing Baptiſme, and not yeerely at ſet times.
Thirdly, its not certaine, what ſinnes, or how many, whether in generall, or particular, they confeſſed.
Fourthly, it was impoſſible for Iohn to heare eueryevery mans priuate confeſſion, with enumeration of circumſtances, ſeeing all Iudea, and all the Region about Iordane, and Ieruſalem, went out to him; meaning very many, and multitudes of people.
Leuit. 13. 2. & 14. 2. The Leper ſhall bee brought vntounto the Prieſt, &c.
Anſw. 1. Here is no mention of confeſſion of ſinnes: but of one brought to the Prieſt, to take a view of the Plague of Leproſie vponupon the body, verſe 9, 10. All the argument therefore that can hence be drawne, is onelyonly typicall, not conuicting.
Secondly, the partie was not to come and confeſſe himſelfe a Leper to the Prieſt: but the Prieſt was to iudge him ſo, and to pronounce him a Leper, chap. 13. 3, 11, 44. Then ſhould the Leper cry and confeſſe, not to the Prieſt, but to the people, that hee was vncleane, verſe 45.
Thirdly, this iudgement of the Leproſie, by a plaine Law, here belonged to the Prieſt. But where can they ſhew a Law onelyonly for their Prieſts to heare priuate confeſſion after their Popiſh manner?
Fourthly, the Prieſt looking vponupon the partie, was not in priuate, betweene them two; but before other: for hee was brought vntounto the Prieſt by others to bee viewed.
Fiftly, the Prieſt did not alwayes profeſſe the partie cleane, vponupon ſhewing his malady, as the Popiſh Prieſt doth euer the Confitent, vponupon ſhewing his ſins by confeſſion: but the Leuiticall Prieſt put the partie apart from all others a time for a tryall Leuit. 13. 4, 5. and after tryall, pronounced the party vncleane, and ſhut him out of the aſſembly of the people, verſe 46. Numb. 5. 2. Which the popiſh Prieſt neuer doth: who vponupon confeſſion runnes to remitting and looſing, but not at all to retaining and binding: and yet he that may doe the one, may and ought to doe the other.
Numb. 5. 7. Then ſhall they confeſſe their ſinne, which they hauehave done.
Anſw. I. This ſinne is not eueryevery euill in thought, word, and deed, or a numbring vp of all ſinnes, that may be remembred, as Papiſts require: but onelyonly of ſome treſpaſſes betweene man and man; as when one coozeneth another, or violently hath wronged another in ſuch things wherein reſtitution may and ought to be made, as is cleere in this text, ſpeaking of recompenſing the treſpaſſe, as alſo in Leuit. 6. 2, 3, 4, 5. ſpeaking of the ſame with this text, and expreſſing the particulars. In this caſe of reſtoring and recompenſing, reaſon requireth an acknowledgement of particulars, to ſhew why, and for what, reſtitution is made.
II. The text ſpeaketh of confeſſion, but doth not expreſſe to whom, whether to God, or to his neighbour, or to the Prieſt.
Firſt, it may be meant to God, when the offendour ſeeth his ſinne, and humbleth himſelfe before God, confeſſing and crauing pardon: for to ſuch God promiſeth mercy, Prou. 28. 13. So Dauid confeſſed, Pſal. 51. 4. and obtained pardon, Pſal. 32. 5.
Secondly, it may be vnderſtood of confeſſion to man, to the party wronged, as Ioſua exhorted Achan to doe to him before the people, Ioſh. 7. 19. Of this ſpeakes our Sauiour in Luk. 17. 4. Mat. 5. 23. 24. And this text in Numbers, doth leade to this. For here is immediately ioyned recompence of the treſpaſſe to confeſſion. This latter dutie is performed to the partie offended, as the text ſheweth in Leu. 6. 5. and what hindereth that the former ſhould not be ſo too, ſeeing the text ſpeaketh after confeſſion, ſo much of reſtitution to the partie offended, or to his kinſman in the firſt place, before any mention made of the Prieſt? Of whom when Moſes ſpeakes, he mentioneth no priuate confeſſion to him, not a word of the Prieſt hearing of confeſsion, but of the man bringing his treſpaſſe-offering, and of the Prieſt making atonement thereby, Leu. 6. 6, 7.
Thirdly, if this confeſsion be made to the Prieſt, it helps nothing for Popiſh priuy confeſſion. For the Prieſt did not ſit in a corner to heare confeſsion within the Tabernacle, for within came none of the people, but onelyonly in the out Court, and thither came the man with his offerings to the Prieſt in the view and hearing of the Prieſts and people, for one man and one Prieſt was not alone in the out-Court, as it is in Popiſh Shrift.
To conclude the anſwer to this; The Papiſts owne Lyranus, who had beene ſometimes a Iew, ſaith on Leu. 16. 21. that the Prieſt did not heare the particular confeſſions of the people, for that had been impoſsible, but onelyonly in generall.
Ioh. 11. 14. Ieſus ſaith vntounto them, Looſe him, and let him goe.
Anſw. 1. Here is no mention of confeſſion.
Secondly, if this looſing noted the Prieſts abſolution, then the Prieſt muſt abſolue publikely, and alſo without confeſſion, and after men to riſen from the dead, as well as before.
Thirdly, it cannot be proued that the commandement giuen to looſe him, was ſpoken to Chriſts Diſciples. It is likely Martha and Mary, Lazarus his louing Siſters, would bee moſt readie to doe this, before all other, and the Iewes which came to them to comfort them, verſe 31. who, as it is moſt probable, are they, to whom Chriſt ſpake to take away the ſtone, verſe 39. For when Chriſt ſpeakes to his Diſciples, its vſuall in the Euangeliſt to expreſſe the ſame, and to mention the deeds and ſayings of the Diſciples which are here omitted. Alſo the Relatiue them in this 44. verſe, muſt bereferred to the perſons beforenamed, in verſe 36. 39. which were Iewes, when no mention was made of his Diſciples, from verſe 16. Is it like that the Relatiue in verſe 44. ſhould hauehave relation to verſe 16. when there is ſeuen and twenty verſes betweene? Now if Chriſt ſpeake to the Iewes, and they looſed him, and not the Diſciples, then this place is vainely alledged.
Laſtly, this is but an allegorizing vponupon a text; and an allegoricall interpretation not intended in the text, is a weake, yea, an idle proofe, in a controuerted point of Doctrine.
But in concluſion, I would hauehave theſe Gaggers know and acknowledge, that our Church doth not baniſh Confeſſion made to the Miniſter, and euen priuately, when men finde their conſciences burthened, and diſtreſſed, that they may receiue inſtruction, comfort & abſolution, ſealed vntounto their ſoules, by the execution, and applying of the power of the Keyes, whereof our Church of England is as truely and rightfully poſſeſſed, as any Church in the world. But our Church hath duely reiected the corruptions of confeſſion, which ſtand in the heauy yoake of abſolute neceſſitie of ſuch confeſſing and particular circumſtantiall enumeration of ſinnes, which hath no warrant by the Word of God, nor example of practice in the ancient Church.