The Practical Divinity of the Papists Discovered to be Destructive, Discourse · Chapter 5

The Practical Divinity of the Papists Discovered to be Destructive · Discourse · Chapter 5

p. 119CHAP. V. There is no neceſſity of true Repentance for Romaniſts by their Doctrine.

Sect. 1. IF any thing be abſolutely and indiſpenſably neceſſary to Salvation, it is Repentance. Chriſt himſelf declares it, Luk. 13. 13. The doctrine of Repentance from dead works, is a fundamental, and ſo made expreſly by the Apoſtle, Heb. 6. 1. So that without the belief and practice of it, no Sinner can poſſibly be ſaved, nor have any hopes of it, but ſuch as are deluſions. Thus neceſſary hath the Lord made it, and yet by the Roman Doctrine, it is more than needs for any ſort of ſins.

As to Original ſin, (the corruption of our natures) thoſe of them who hold there is any ſuch thing within us; yet declare that, if it be any ſin at all, it is the leaſt of all ſins. Andradius employed by the Council of Trent to write, tells us, that their Divines ſo determine. p. 120Bellarmine ſaith, (a)(a)After Aquinas 3. q. 1. art. 4. De amiſſ. grat. l. 1. c. 10. p. 226. Inter om…i… pe…cata minimum habet de voluntario & ideo minus grave eſt in ratione voluntarij qua… quodlibet veniale.that amongſt all ſins it is the leaſt voluntary, and on that account is leſs than any venial ſin; and it muſt be little indeed, that is, leſs than any venial; for that, as another Cardinal (b)(b)Modicum pro nihilo habetur, Cajetan. Sum. v. feſt. (& ſaepius alibi) ſecundu… quoque commune, eſt, modicum pro nihilo reputari, p. 310.tells us, paſſeth for nothing. And that which hath ſo little, or nothing of ſin in it, needs no repentance. So (c)(c)Haud tamen huic homini, ulla eſt paenitentia neceſſaria. De nat. & Grat. l. 2. c. 12. p. 92. Contritio cum ſit dolor, voluntatis duritiem ex peccato contractam comminuens … proprie eſt de peccato Originali, Aqu…n. ſupplem. q. 2. art. 2. Sylveſt. v. contritio; n. 4. Graff. l. 1. c. 4. n. 2.Soto concludes, A man that hath no guilt but that of Original ſin, hath no need of any Repentance. Thus they repreſent Original ſin, as it is in them before Baptiſme: but after they are Baptized, they all agree that it is no ſin at all. The Council of Trent hath determined it (and ſo it is now with them an Article of Faith) (d)(d)In Baptiſmate—non modo remitti reatum originalis peccati, ſed totum id auſerri, quoad veram at propriam rationem peccati habet, Seſſ. …. c. 4.That in Baptiſme, not only the guilt of Original ſin is remitted, but what ever of it hath any thing of the true and proper nature of ſin, is totally taken away; and they curſe (e)(e)Ibid. ca. 4.thoſe who hold that it is only pardoned or impaired, and not all the ſin of it quite aboliſhed by Baptiſme. (f) Innocentes, puri, immaculati, inno xij.They ſay they are become Innocent, Pure, Harmleſs, Spotleſs; without the leaſt ſpeck of Original ſin; and ſo without any need of Repentance, upon that account, (g)(g)Tantum abeſt ob igari quempiam ad originalis culpae paenitentiam, ut neque poſſ…. Soto ibid.They are ſo far from being actually obliged to repent of any natural corruption, that they cannot be obliged to it, God himſelf cannot bind any one to Repent of it. So that if there be in our natures any defectiveneſs, as to the Image of God, any averſneſs to God, and that which is good, any propenſeneſs to evil; we are not to take notice of it, or grieve for it as a ſin: for how ever the Apoſtle frequently calls it ſo, it is none; no more to be repented of, than p. 121an innocent harmeleſs thing. Thus Original ſin is quite diſcharged from any concern in our Repentance.

Sect. 2. There are other evils which make up the far greateſt part of actual ſins, which by their doctrine are but Venial. Of this quality are not only thoſe which they count ſmall in their own nature; and thoſe which are ſmall in reſpect of the matter of them: but likewiſe all (how hainous ſo ever, as to the nature of them, how great ſoever as to the matter of them) that are acted without perfect deliberation, and are not compleatly voluntary. And by favour of their deſcribing this third ſort of minute evils, the moſt enormous wickedneſſes that can be acted againſt God or Man, may come under the notion of Venial faults, (of which hereafter.) Blaſphemy, Perjury, Adultery, Murder, &c. when without perfect deliberation will be no worſe.

How-ever theſe with them are light faults, and lightly cancelled (as they tell us) by the Biſhops bleſſing, by Holy water, by knocking the breaſt, by ſaying a Pater-Noſter; by extream Ʋnction, (ſo (h)(h)In Matth. 10. 12.Matt 10:12our Rhemiſts. Aquinas adds) by the Euchariſt, by any of the ſeven Sacraments (i)(i)3tia. q. 87. art. 3. Taceri citra culpam, multiſque aliis remediis expiari poſſunt, Conc. Trident. Seſſ. 4. Can. 5., by any Sacramental Ʋnction…, by Prayer in a Holy place; yea, or by but entring into a Conſecrated Church.

So that by theſe, and other ſuch means & ſi aliqua alia ſunt hujuſmodi (ſaith Aquinas) Pardon of Venial ſins may be obtained, yea any one of them will quite (k)(k)Vid Aquinas ibid. 3tium.aboliſh the fault, if not the whole penalty, particularly Holy water, which (as Canus (l)(l)Peccatorum paenas ſolvit culpas etiam veniales, De Sacrament, pars. 1. p. 752. vid. p. 751.teacheth) takes away the puniſhment of ſin, and alſo the faults that are Venial. No wonder if they determine that the Sacrament of Pennance is not needful for theſe, not ſo much as their ritual Repentance, and that there is no neceſſity they p. 122ſhould be ſo much as confeſſed, (m)(m)Concil Trident. Seſſ. 4. Can. 5. Ad venialia in confeſſione expl…canda teneri, qui ſolis venialibus urgetur—negat communis opinio cum D. Thoma Scoto, Durando. Major. Victorell. ad Tol. l. 6. c. 11. Utrum peccata venialia neceſſario ſint confitenda? Reſp. ſecundum Scotum, quod non, etiamſi nullum habet mortale: quoniam per peccatum veniale etiam in propoſito, homo non poteſt damnari nec pe…iclitari, & paenitentia eſt ſecunda tabula pro periclitantibus, igitur non obligatur ad eam niſi habens mortale. Immo dicit Petrus de Palude in 3. quod nec etiam Papa poſſit ad hoc obligari. Angel. ſum. v. Confeſſ. n. 25. Cum dolor de venialibus non ſit neceſſarius, ne confeſſio quidem venialium neceſſaria eſt. Canus. pars. 6. relect. de paenitent p. 955. Secundum S. Thom. in 4. diſt. 17. homo tenetur habere iſtum delorem (contritionis) de peccato actuali, non de originali—& de mortali non de veniali, quia cum ejus complacentia mori poteſt, ac ſalvari, Sylveſt. v. contrit. n. 4. vid Navar. c. 1. n. 24.nor any remorſe or grief required for them; nor that any ſhould be (n)(n)Non eſt neceſſum habere propoſitum nunquam peccandi venialiter, Navar. c. 1. n. 10.relinquiſhed ſo much as in reſolution only. Contrition is ſo far from being requiſite for Venial ſins, that with them attrition is not needful; for that is a diſplicence ariſing from ſhame or fear; but theſe ſins are (in their account) (*)(*)Conc. Trid. Seſſ. 14. 4.neither ſhameful (its no crime (they ſay) to glory in them) nor dangerous; no man can be condemned for them.(*)(*)Vid Suarez. tom. 4. diſp. 20. Sect. 6. n. 3.

Thus their Doctrine giveth them all abundant encouragement to live and dye impenitently in theſe ſins; in all of them, (o)(o)Etiamſi omnia venialia peccata ſimul colligerentur in unum, nunquam efficerent id, quod facit unum lethale peccatum. Bellarm, de amiſſ. grat. l. 1. c. 13. p. 91.for all of them in the World, if found in one man together, amount not to ſo much as one mortal ſin. All the penitence for theſe that is required by the preciſeſt of them, is no more than one act of Charity contains, i. e. ſuch a (p)(p)Aquinas, 3. l. 87. art. 1. c.Vertual diſlike, as a man may have of that, which he was never actually diſpleaſed at, no, nor ſo much as thought of.

It may ſeem ſtrange (the operation of ſpirit of deluſion not conſidered) how ſuch a conceit could ever poſſeſs the fancies of rational perſons, and of ſome acquaintance with the Scriptures; that their Sacramental, (Holy water, and the like trifles) ſhould have the vertue to procure pardon of ſins, even without Repentance: Aquinas would p. 123have us ſatisfied with this, (q) Ideo iſta dicuntur ſpecialiter dimittere, non quia remittunt per ſe, ſed quia ſunt excitativa fervoris per quem ſit remiſſio. D. Th. in 4. art. ad 2 dum.that they do not remit ſins of themſelves, but are ſaid to do it, becauſe they may excite that fervour by which they are remitted; but this fervour is not Repentance, and what-ever it be, it ought to be excited, that it may remit ſin, ſince this admirable vertue is aſcribed to it on that account. No, ſay his followers, (r)(r)Sed adverte quod reſponſio D. Thom. quod ideo iſta dimittunt venialia, quia excitant fervorem, intelligenda eſt, non quod ſemper requiratur illa excitatio, ſed quod de ſe haec Sacramentalia ad hoc ſint inſtituta. Quare illa ſuſcipere, tanquam ad illum effectum ab eccleſia accommodata cenſetur actus paenitentiae, & acquirit remiſſionem venialium, etiamſi nullatenus excitetur ad devotionem, nec memoriam habeat venialium, vel diſplicentiam, nam ſi illa requireretur, profecto Sacramentalia non eſſent, cum ſola diſplicentia ſufficeret. Sotus diſt. 15. q. 2. art. 1. modo tunc non habeat complacentiam, Graff. t. 1. c. 16. n. 9. p. 13. Victoria, Canus, Major Cajetan. Ledeſma & alij in Suarez. tom. 4. diſp. 12. Sect. 2.We muſt underſtand him ſo, that it is not always requiſite, it ſhould he excited, but that theſe Sacramentals are inſtituted for this end. Wherefore to receive them as accommodated by the Church to this effect, is an act of Repentance, and procures remiſſion of Venial ſins; although there be no way, any excitement of devotion, nor any repenting of theſe ſins, nor any diſlike of them; for if this were required, truly, they would not be Sacramentals, ſince this diſlike alone would be ſufficient; ſo de Graffiis after Soto. Here is pardon of ſin by an excitement of fervour, though it be not excited; that muſt be the implicite Repentance, ſufficient for the pardon of Venial ſins; and the Explicite very like it, an act of Repentance (ſuch as is receiving of Holy-water) without any remembring the ſins to be repented of, or any diſlike of them. They had need believe, that theſe ſins are no tranſgreſſions of the Law, ſince they expect to be ſecured from it's penalty by that which is no repentance.

Sect. 3. Hereby it is too manifeſt that they make Repentance needleſs, both in reference to Original ſin, and likewiſe to all thoſe which they count Venial. If they will have it needful for any ſin at all, it muſt be for thoſe they call Mortal; but then theſe are b…t few in compariſon. p. 124They have reduced them to ſeaven, (*)(*)The particular ſins contained under theſe 7 Capitals (as their Off-ſpring) the people need not trouble themſelves about them; for common Confeſſors are not obliged to know whether they are mortal or no. Angel. ſum. v. Confeſſ. 4. n. 3.and none paſs for deadly, but ſ…ch as quite extinguiſh ſpiritual life, and kill the ſoul immediately.

Well, but is Repentance neceſſary for theſe? As to this, divers of great eminency amongſt them (s)(s)Sunt enim Theologi & ſuerunt, quorum opinione de actu paenitentiae ſpeciali praeceptum nullum eſt, hanc vero ſententiam in primis ſuadent teſtimonio, D. Thomae, &c. Canus pars. 4. relect. de paenit. p. 856.conclude, that there is no divine precept for Repentance. God hath not commanded any to Repent: Now if he command it not, it is not neceſſary; and if it be not a neceſſary duty, it is no mean neceſſary to Salvation: for, as (t)(t)Aquinas & Bellarmin. ſupra. Media neceſſaria ad ſalutem ſunt nobis divino jure precepta quod tradit, D. Tho. 2. 2. q. 2. art. 5. &c. & eſt quaſi axioma communiter receptum, Suar. l. 1. De Orat. c▪ 29. n▪ 2. In hac controverſia Praeceptor meus olim. F. Franciſcus Victoria, vir noſtra aetate literis, inenio, religioneque clariſſimus, ibid. fuere Catholici quidam, ut reſert. Jo. Medina & Vega, & quidem ex ſchola, D. Tho. ex quibus ſuit Victoria, qui dicebant paenitentiam non eſſe in praecepto ullo, idque ex D. Thom. videbantur probare, & meo judicio ſatis effi…aciter, Vaſq. in 3. …hom. tom. 3. q. 86. art. 2. dub. 2. n. 1.themſelves tell us, Though all that is commanded be not neceſſary to Salvation, yet all that is neceſſary to Salvation is commanded. That there is no ſpecial precept which requires Repentance, was the opinion of their famous Franciſcus de Victoria, (in his time the great Maſter of Divinity in Spain) and of other Divines both before and after him, as Melchior Canus (ſometimes his Scholler) tells us. And when that of Chriſt, Luk. 13. Except ye Repent, ye ſhall all likewiſe periſh, is objected, they Anſwer, the meaning is, They ſhall periſh for preceding ſins, not for impenitence. By their doctrine there is no danger that any ſhould periſh for that, though perſiſted in unto death: and they had ſome reaſon to alledge Aquinas (the Angel of their Schools) as of their judgment herein; for he ſaith plainly, (u)(u)Permanere in peccato uſque ad mortem, non eſt ſpeciale peccatum, ſed quaedam peccati circumſtantia, 22. q. 14 art. 2. Corp. & tamen ſi eſſet de paenitentia ſpeciale praeceptum, omiſſio illius ſpecialis culpa ſine dubio eſſet, as they argue in Canus, ibid.That impenitency continued in till death is no ſpecial ſin, but a circumſtance of ſin. By this doctrine, it is no ſin, no tranſgreſſion of any divine precept to be impenitent, or to perſevere therein to the end.

p. 125Thoſe who will be concluded by the Council of Trent, muſt believe that there is no divine precept which requires Contrition or true Repentance preciſely, but only disjunctively, either that, or what is there declared to be ſufficient without it. And they muſt take it for certain, that it is not a medium neceſſary to Salvation, ſince that Council has determined, that ſomething elſe will ſuffice for pardon without it; and ſo they declare it expreſly.(*)(*)Contritio proprie accepta, in lege nova, non eſt neceſſaria ſimpliciter neceſſitate medij ad juſtificationem & ſalutem, Bonacin. de Sacram. diſp. 5. q. 5. p. 2. n. 1. ibid. Petigianus, & alij.

Sect. 4. But let us take notice of thoſe who ſeem more ſevere. Many there be, who think that Repentance is under a Divine command; yet theſe in the iſſue make it no more neceſſary then the other, who find no precept for it. For they determine that we are not obliged to Repent preſently; that it may be deferred till the approach or danger of death; and in fine, that it is needleſs, even when a man is dying.

For the firſt, They teach that a Sinner is not bound to Repent preſently, it is lawful to defer it. So their Doctors of all ſorts, ſo all the faithful (ſay they) ſo the whole Church, (a)(a)Non illico ut homo ſe reum ſentit culpae, paenitentiae lege paenitere conſtringitur. Haec profecto concluſio more & uſu eccleſiae ſatis videtur conſtabilita. Soto in 4. diſt. 1…. q. 2. art. 6.That a man is not bound to Repent preſently is a concluſion, ſaith Soto, eſtabliſhed by the practice and the uſage of the Church. Canus (b)(b)Ut mea fert & communis opinio non protinus tenetur homo paenitentiam agere. Atque haec aſſertio non alia ratione potiore oſtendi poſſit, quam quod ſidelium omnium conſenſus facile admittit, &c. nec aut paenitentes in conſeſſione hujus criminis ſe accuſant, aut ſacerdotes id curant—Cum nulla idonea ratio ſit, nullave authoritas qua praeceptum adeo durum aſſeratur, &c. Melch. Canus. pars. 4. relect. de paenit. p. 862. 863. Licet toto tempor, qeuo quis agnoſcit ſe lethali peccato mortuum, de bono conſilio debeat curare, ut a tam gravi morbo reſurgat; periculumque mortis jubitae atque aeternae effugiat, juxta illud, Ne tardes converti ad Dominum, & ne differas de die in diem, Eccl. 5.—non tamen ad id tenetur praecepto, ad novum peccatum mortiferum obligante; niſi ea temporis parte, qua memoriae occurrit quoad uſum—ſecundum communem opinionem. Imo neque tunc, ob ea per quae id affirmavit Adrianus, & ob ea, quae nos addimus Navar. cap. 1. n. 27. & n. 29. Alenſis, Bonaventura, Durandus, Aquinas, Adrianus, Angelus, Medina Viguerius, &c. vid. in Suarez. 4. 4. diſp. 15. Sect. 5. n. 2. Praeceptum non obligat ad agendam paenitentiam ſtatim, etiamſi opportunitas occurrat, ſeu licet facile fiere poſſit, Vid. Vaſq. in. 3. Th. ibid. dub. 5. n. 9. Eſt Veriſſima opinio praeceptum contritionis non obligare ſtatim. Alexand. S. Thom. Angelus. Jo Medina, Sotus, Durand. Canus, Navar. Paludan Adrian, Viguerius, merito ergo omnes in hoc conveniunt.Eccl 5tells us, it is his own, and the p. 126common opinion, That a man is not obliged to Repent forth-with; and this he ſaith is confirmed by beſt Reaſon, viz. The conſent of all the faithful, both Prieſts and People; and adds, That to make the precept ſo rigid as to require preſent Repentance, hath no probable reaſon, no nor any Authority.

Now this Doctrine concerning Repentance, in this firſt ſtep of it, where it appears more modeſt and innocent than in its further advance, is yet very horrid and deſperate. For it is all one as if they had ſaid, That they may, notwithſtanding any command of God, continue (for ſome time at leaſt) in their hatred of God, and ſtate of enmity againſt him, ſince that is confeſſed, the temper and ſtate of the impenitent. Beſides, it emboldens Sinners, and giveth them confidence to leave their ſouls at a deſperate venture; preſuming they may Repent time enough hereafter, when they can have no aſſurance of any time at all for the future. And it is the more dangerous, becauſe their doctrine takes away all apprehenſion of danger, leaving them no fear, either of penalty, or ſin in putting off Repentance. No danger of ſuffering by preſent neglects or delays, for they are told that they may Repent when they pleaſe. The Lord, ſaith one (c)(c)Vega in Conc. Trid. lib. 13. cap. 11. Molina. concord. grat. & lib. arb. q. 14. art. 13. diſp. 10. Valent. tom. 2. diſp. 8. q. 3. Semper quoad ſe habet oportunitatem, quia ſemper eſt in ſuo arbitrio poſitum conteri Filliuc. tr. 6. c. 8. n. 202. Cum q…ilibet poſſit ope divina (quae nunquam facient quod in ſe eſt) ſuorum peccatorum paenitere, & corum veniam conſequi. Nav. cap. 24. n. 14.part of their Divines, is every moment ready to help them to Repentance; or ſay (d)(d)Cum non poteſt ſine converſione vitare peccatum. Bellarm. de grat. l. 2. c. 5. &c. 8. Becan. de auxil. grat. cap. 6. Alvarez de auxil. grat. l. 11. diſp. 112. n. 5. concl. 2the reſt, He will help them to it (if they pleaſe) in the Article of neceſſity; when ever the precept makes it their duty. And what ſhould hinder them upon ſuch encouragement to defer it, even to the point of death? they need not fear that they ſhall periſh, nor need they fear they ſhall ſin by thus putting it off. Some of their Doctors make it no ſin at all, others as good as none. (e)(e)Neque enim praeceptum de paenitentia agenda quovis tempore obligat, cum ſit affirmativum, ſed ſolum certis temporibus, ut cum verſamur in periculo mortis, cum ad confeſſione… eſt accedendum, (but for this, he ſays attrition will ſuffice, l. 2. c. 18. p. 974.) c… Deus peculiari inſpiratione ad paenitentiam nos invitat. At extra ejuſmodi tempora impaenitentia non tam peccatum novum, quam peccati patrati circumstantia eſt. De paeni…. l. 2. c. 9. p. 938.Bellarmine determines, That it is not a p. 127ſin, but only a circumſtance of ſin, when the command doth not oblige; and that, it doth not preſently, but only at a certain ſeaſon. (f)(f)Non eſt dubium, quin id licitum ſit, de panit. tr. 1. q. 6. p 18.Medina affirms, That without all doubt it is lawful. (g)(g)In 4. diſt. 17. q. 2. art. 6. Relect. de paenit. pars. 4. p. 866.Soto ſaith, it is but a Venial ſin. Canus takes a courſe to reconcile them, he concludes it is no ſin at all not to Repent preſently; and that it is but (h)(h)Ibid, p. 863. ſupra.a Venial ſin to Will (or reſolve) not to Repent. Now if it be no ſin at all, there is no danger at all; if it be but a Venial ſin, there is very little or none to be regarded, no neceſſity upon any account to Repent of it; and he ſaith the people never confeſs this in order to Repentance, the Prieſts never require it, nor regard it; by the conſent of all we are not obliged to it.

Now that which a man is not bound to Repent of, he may ſtill continue in, and ſo he may ſtill continue reſolved to put off Repentance, yes, ſo he may ſafely, ſay they, till the Article of neceſſity.

Sect. 5. But when is that? Let us next enquire after it, and in the purſuit thereof, we ſhall diſcover the ſecond point I charge them with. That a man, by their doctrine, needs not Repent all his days, till he be in danger of death.

This is their common doctrine, ſince the command to Repent is Affirmative, (i)(i)Quantum autem ad vitandum novum p…ccatum tranſgreſſionis praecepti de contritione, tempus eſt determinatum ad articulum neceſſitatis: ſicut in aliis affirmativis praeceptis contingit. Cajetan. Sum. v. contrit. p. 104. Canus, ibid. p. 863.it doth not oblige but in time of neceſſity, even as other affirmative precepts do. All the queſtion will be, When is this time of neceſſity, when it will be neceſſary to Repent without longer delay? Now their Doctors are agreed in no other Article of time, except it be the point of death, or when a mans life is apparently in danger. There is no other time in a mans whole life, wherein it is likely that Repentance ſhould be requiſite, but they deny it to be then neceſſary; and offer arguments to prove, that it is not needful in any other, however probable ſeaſons. Let me ſhew this in ſome inſtances.

Is it neceſſary to Repent at ſolemn times of worſhip, when we addreſs our ſelves in a more particular manner to a Holy God? No, ſay p. 128they (k)(k)Aquinas 2. 2. q. 122. art. 4. Cajetan, ibid. p. 105, Soto de juſt. & jur. l. 2. q. 4. art. 4. ſupra Bellarm. de cult. Storum. l. 3. c. 10. ſupra. Sylveſt. ſum. v. Domin. n. 8. Graff. lib. 1. cap. 5. n. 14. Navar, cap. 13. n. 17. Sum. Roſellae, v. feriae n. 2. Lopez, cap. 12. p. 85.generally: and Canus (l)(l)In diebus feſtis non obligari homines ad ageudam paenitentiam aut divino praecept… …ut humano, praeceptum emim de colendo Deo, quo feſtis diebus aſtringimur, opera religion… praeſcribit: at paenitentia religionis opus non eſt, ſed vindicationis, Canus ibid. p. 864. Ita Cajetan. Soto, Navar, Armilla, Roſell. & alij communiter, Suar. l. 2. de feſt. c. 16. n. 14.giveth this reaſon for it. Though acts of Religion be then required, yet Repentance is not an act of Religion, but of Revenge.

Is it needful on days of Faſting? It may ſeem ſo, becauſe the main and proper end of Faſts, is the exerciſes of Repentance and Humiliation. No, ſay they, It is not needful then; for if this were the intention of God, or the Church, in injoyning Faſts, yet the intention of the Law-giver doth not bind us. (m)(m)Ex D. Thomae & graviorum autorum ſententia ad finem legiſlatoris minime teneamur, Canus ibid. p. 871.No exerciſe of Repentance is with them, requiſite on their Faſts, but what they may perform in a Dream: for if they ſleep the whole Faſting day, yet they fulfil the Precept for Faſting (*)(*)Si aliquis dormiret pro totum diem qua obſervari praecipitur jejunium, praeceptum jejunij impleret, Jo. Sanc. diſp. 5…. n. 2.. To their Faſts they require nothing but abſtinence from ſome ſort of meat, not any Religious act at all: and if with them the Precept for the Maſs, or Prayer, could not be fully accompliſhed without ſome penitent ſenſe of ſin, as it may; yet neither the Maſs, nor Prayer publick, or private, is requiſite to their Faſts. Yea, in extraordinary times for Prayer, upon occaſion of ſome great calamity befalne them for their ſins; they think not contrition for ſin needful: the peopls (n)(n)Vid Bonacin. de Sacram. d. 5. q. 5. p. 2. n. 6. Quia non conſtat privatis hominibus tempore u…gentis neceſſitatis oraturis pro populi neceſſitate, quod contritio de ſuis peccatis ſit remedium ſolitum ab ipſis adhiberi, & qui… ignorant id remedij eſſe neceſſarium, neque de hoc tanquam de re neceſſaria ſolent admontri a confeſſoribus vel praedicatoribus: ideo peccatorem privatum tempore calamitatis magna, qua premitur reſpublica, orantem Deum pro reipublicae liberatione ſine praevia contrition, ad peccatum mortale non ideo damnarem, &c. Lopez, cap. 16. p. 97.know not there is then any neceſſity thereof; their Confeſſors and Preachers are never wont to mind them of this as a p. 129thing neceſſary; and therefore Lopez ſaith, He would not condemne any private perſon, that neglects it in theſe circumſtances, and ſo concludes he after others. As for their common Faſts, theſe (no more than their Feſtivals) require not abſtinence from acts of wickedneſs, much leſs Repentance for them.

Is it neceſſary when ſins are brought to our remembrance, and when our minds dictate to us, that they are to be hated and Repented of? It ſeems then needful, if ever, ſeeing a practical judgment obligeth even in things lawful, though they be not otherwiſe neceſſary. (o)(o)Ex hoc autem quod peccata memoriae occurrunt, ſicut non tenetur ad tunc confitendum, ita nec ad tunc conterendum Cajetan. ſum. v. contrit. p. 105. Non autem quandocun que occurrit memoriae peccatum tenetur conteri—nec etiam ſi practice occurrant memoriae peccata extra tempus praecepti, quia tunc ſecundum Sotum, ne que placere ne que diſplicere, ſed neutro modo ſe habere, non eſt contemptus. Lopez. cap. 12. p. 85. vid. Navar (after Adrian) cap. 1. n. 27.No, not then, (p)(p)Non tenetur homo paenitentiam agere, quoties peccata memoriae occurrerint, ſive ſpeculative ſi…e practice occ…rerint. Canus. ibid. p. 863.a man is not bound to Repent when his ſins are offered to his mind, either ſpeculatively or practically. One would think if a ſinner needs not repent, when he is mindful of his ſins, it could never be needful, ſince he can never repent but when he is mindful of them.

Is it neceſſary when a ſinner comes to their (q)(q)Non tamen ad id tenemur quotres Miniſtramus, vel accipimus Sacramenta—quia non tenemu tune habere contritionem Navar. cap. 11. n. 8. vid. Lopez. cap. 10. p. 70. Their common Doctrine, as we ſaw before, requires nothing but attrition for Baptiſm and Pennance, no actu…l diſpoſition at all for their other 5 Sacraments. Baptizans autem in neceſſitate non tenetur ad hoc (viz. Contritionem) Sylveſt. v. Baptiſm. 3. n. 6. ne que Baptizandus. vid. Soto. de Nar. & grat. l. 2. c. 15. p. 101. Si attritus ſuſcipit Sacramentum Paenitentiae & Ench…riſtiae, ſatisfacit praecepto eccleſiae. Cajetan. ſum. v. contrit. p. 104. Sacramentum Baptiſmi & penitentiae, licite ſumi poſſint ab his qui habent conſcientiam peccati mortalis, modo habeant attritionem qua tollitur obex & complacentia in peccatum commiſſum. Canus. ibid. pars. 6. p. 932.Sacraments; particularly to that of Pennance? This muſt be the time for it (as we may well conceive) if there be any time for it at all, in the Romiſh Church. Then a ſinner is to ſurvey his life, to find out his ſins, and as a Penitent to make particular confeſſion of them, and is to have pardon of his ſin, as one that truly Repents; being abſolved by a judicial ſentence, as p. 130(r)(r)Ne que aliter eſt accipienda vox ſacerdotis peccata condonantis quam vox Chriſti, qui ait paralytico, Mat. 7. Confide fili, remittuntur tibi peccata. Catechiſm. Trident. de paenit.Matt 7valid, as if Chriſt himſelf did paſs it immediately. If Repentance be not needful, when a ſinner is to have pardon, then the Lord never required it, nor can it ever be made neceſſary by man.

This notwithſtanding, Repentance, they ſay, is not neceſſary, no, not for the Sacrament of Pennance. Attrition will ſerve for that, which is but a (*)(*)Aquinas aſſerit attritionem eſſe diſplicentiam imperfectam. Can. ibid. p. 935.ſlender (s)(s)Attritio eſt dolor peccatorum, non qua ratione ſunt offenſa Dei, ſed quatenus nobis nocua. Nimirum quia ſunt cauſa paenae aut in hoc, aut in futuro ſaeculo. Soto de nat. & grat. l. 2. c. 14. p. 99.diſlike of ſin, becauſe it is hurtful to a mans ſelf, without reſpect to God, as it is offenſive to him. This, (t)(t)Concil. Trident. ſeſſ. 14. cap. 4. vid. Cajetan. Navar. Canum. Lopez. ſupra. Bellarm. de paenit. l. 2. c. ult. p. 974. Sacramenta novae legis conferunt gratiam attritis. Canus de Sacramentis. pars. 5. p. 797.though ſhort of true Repentane, is ſufficient to qualifie a man for the Sacrament of Pennance, by the Doctrine of their Church. For they hold the Sacrament is not only duely adminiſtred; but (u)(u)Concil. Trident. Seſſ. 7. c. 6. Sacramentum gratiam confert omni adulto offerenti ſe, non pon…ndo obicem. Cajetan. ſum. v. abſolut. p. 12. Canus pars. 3 Relect. de paenir. p. 844. Angel. ſum. v. confeſſ. 7. Secundum Scotum & S. Thom. ſi praecedens dolor non ſuffeciſſet ad contritionem, &c.effectual for all its ends and purpoſes, when there is no obſtacle in the receiver; (x)(x)Idem. ibid. p. 932. ſupra.the obſtacle in this caſe is complacency in mortal ſins, (y)(y)Complacentia vero ſatis tollitur per quemcun que dolorem. Soto. de nat. & grat. l. 2. c. 15. p. 101.the complacence is gone, when ſin is diſliked or diſpleaſing out of any reſpect, and ſo the obſtacle is removed by the diſlike of ſin, which is in attrition.

Thus comes Attrition to be ſufficient, and (z)(z)That which we, with the Scripture, call true Repentance, they call Contrition. As for attrition, it is ſo far from being true Repentance, that, with the Council of Trent, they all acknowledge, it is not of it ſelf ſufficient for pardon. Attritio—quamvis ſine penitentiae Sacramento pe rſe adjustificationem peccatorem perducere nequeat. Concil. Trid. Seſſ. 14. c. 4.true Repentance not needful, no, not for the Sacrament of Repentance.

This is not only concluded by the generality of their Doctors, but by the Council of Trent. And by theſe particulars we may diſcern, That p. 131Repentance with them, is not neceſſary, at any ſeaſon of a mans life, when it would be counted ſo, if they did judge it needful at all, before the approach of death.

Sect. 6. But indeed there needs no induction of particulars to prove this, for they declare plainly that by the command of God, it is not neceſſary to repent till one be at the point of death. This is ſaid to be the judgment of Aquinas, Soto, Navarre, Durandus, Medina, Cajetan and others in Suarez. The ground of it is, (b)(b)In qua re eſt multorum opinio hoc praeceptum (penitentiae) per ſe & natura ſuatantum obligare pro articulo mortis, ita ſentit. D. Thomas & Durandus—Et eodem modo ſumitur haec opinio ex Cojetano, Medina, Soto, Navarr, &c. Et fundamentum—quia ſuppoſito, quod praeceptum non ſtatim obliget ante articulum mortis; nulla eſt major ratio deſignandi unum tempus, quam aliud: imo ne que eſt ratio deſignandi aliquod, quia in nullo eſt vera neceſſitas: praeceptum autem affirmativum tantum obligat p…o articulo neceſſitatis. Suarez. Tom. 4. diſp. 15. Sect. 6. n. 2.becauſe the reaſons brought to prove that it doth not oblige preſently; prove it as much of any other certain time in our life, except tbat only when a man is dying.

It is to the ſame effect that others ſay, the precept does but oblige in danger of death, or perpetual madneſs. So Bonacina and in him (beſides Jeſuites) Medina, Sotus, Angles, Zerola Pitigianus, Sayrus, Molfeſius, and others. De Sacram. ibid. n. 5. So that while a man is like to live, and be ſober, he need not repent: but if he be in danger to dye, or run mad, he ſhould be ſo wiſe as to repent firſt, but how he ſhall know when he is like to run mad, or that his madneſs will be perpetual, is a hard queſtion; and till he can reſolve it, they will go near to excuſe him. And if he can have a Confeſſor, though he be at the point of death and diſtraction too, he need not trouble himſelf with repenting, that proviſo they ſtill add (ſaltem quando non adeſt copia confeſſarij, cui fiat confeſſio cum attritione) this indeed is it, that their Confeſſors ſerve, for to ſave ſinners the labour of going to Heaven, by turning them out of the only way to it.

However by this it appears, that any Papiſt hath warranty by their Doctrine to live impenitently, till he be in danger to live no longer. He need not grieve for offending God, till he be dying, nor reſolve upon that account to forſake any ſin, till there be reaſon to think, that he can live no longer to commit it.

p. 132What a Temptation is here for all wicked perſons to turn Papiſts, if they could but prevail with themſelves to believe in this particular, as the Church believes, againſt all that God hath declared concerning repentance? And ſince men eaſily believe, what they deſire ſhould be true though againſt the word of truth: how ſtrange would it be, if the World did not wonder after the Beaſt?

Sect. 7. But though they excuſe a ſinner from repenting all his l…e before, yet when he comes to dye, do they not then make it needful? they make ſome ſhew of it indeed, but it is a mere deluſive ſhew; & they are therein as falſe to their own pretenſions, as they are to the Souls of ſinners. For at the approach of death (as at any period before, wherein ſome of them ſeem to make Repentance neceſſary, yet) even then they abuſe them with conceits, that ſomething elſe will ſerve without it. The expedients which they have provided, thus to delude periſhing Souls all their lives, and even when they are paſſing into eternity, are many and various; that thoſe who do not like to be ruined one way, may be taken with another; and ſo, that repenting, which alone can ſecure them, may be declined by all.

Firſt, Repentance without any ſenſible ſorrow for ſin, will ſerve the turn. This is the way of Scotus, and Vega and others. A will not to have ſinned, though it be without any (c)(c)In N…var. cap. 1. n 3grief for ſin, or without any actual conſideration, that he hath ſinned, is ſufficient for pardon. Such an act of the Will is the eſſence of that contrition which procures forgiveneſs, (d)(d)Ex mente Navarri, Soti, Paludani, Scoti eſt, quod contritio quoad ſuam eſsentiam eſt iſte actus nollem peccaſse. Lopez. cap. 10. p. 68. & cap. 6. p. 38. vid. D. Thom. Paludan, Soto, Navar, Ledeſma, Cajetan. Concil. Trident, and others in Jo. Sanc. diſp. 1. n. 8.as not only Scotus, but Paludanus, Cajetane, Soto, Victoria and Navarre in Lopez.

(e)(e)Per ſupradicta conſtet (contritionem) non eſſe dolorem eſſentialiter; ſed cauſam, ex qua, & alijs ad id neceſſarijs naſcitur dolor, ſi aliunde non impediatur. Nav. ibid. n. 14.Sorrow is not eſſential to Repentance, but an effect; and ſuch a one as is contingent and ſeparable, and doth not neceſſarily follow it. Correſpondent to this is their Doctrine who teach, that a vertual Repentance p. 133is ſufficient, (f)(f)Sufficit actus qui licet non ſit paenitentia talis formaliter, eſt tamen virtualiter ſecundum Scotum communiter receptum. ibid. n. 5.any act whatever, which may be counted penitence vertually; though it be no ſuch thing actually, or formally; is enough by their common Doctrine, any (g)(g)n 30.love to God above all is ſuch a vertual Repentance, though without (h)(h)Imo quilibet amor Dei, quo plus quam omnia alia diligitur, vid tur virtualis peccatorum paenitentia, ſecundum communem quam ſequitur. Jo. Medina. ibid. n. 5.any remembrance of ſin, this is not only the opinion of Medina, but that which is commonly received. Any kind of love will ſerve for this, though it be but natural, and ſuch as may be had without the grace of God, as (i)(i)Cap. 11. n. 7. …. 13…. Supra.Navarr expreſſeth it. And the limitation which he would ſeem to add, that ſuch a vertual Repentance is but ſufficient when there is no time for a formal Repenting, is excluded by their common Doctrine. For he and others with him generally teach, that there is no ſpace of time requiſite for this, but it may be ſufficiently diſpatched in a (k)(k)Cap. 1. n. 38. Paenitudo momentanea—ad remiſſionem pecca…i juxta comnunem ſuſficiat.moment.

And ſome of their chief Divines hold, that a ſinner being pardoned upon this vertual paenitence, if he remember his ſins afterwards, is not bound to repent of them. So Corduha, Sotus, Vega, Bonacin. ibid d. 5. q. 5. p. 2. n. 1.

Thus we have Repentance ſufficient to Salvation in the Roman Church without any ſorrow, without any ſenſe or remembrance of ſin. And how can they count any more ſorrow for ſin neceſſary? who hold (l)(l)Nullus eſt adeo imprudens qui tempore confeſſionis peccata ſua non deteſtatur formaliter vel virtualiter. Major & Victoria in Lopez. c. 17. p. 100.That no prudent perſon doth confeſs his ſins to a Prieſt, but he deteſts them formally or vertually, and ſo ſome way ſufficiently: when it is known to be their common practice to confeſs ſins, without any ſorrow or deteſtation thereof? Yea even in the hour of death, asking God forgiveneſs without any remembrance of ſin or actual Repentance, is enough for pardon. So Joſeph the Minorite teacheth, favouring their conceit (as Lopez obſerves) who think it repentance p. 134(m)(m)Sufficere ad contritionem, tunſionem pectoris, aut prolationem Miſerere mei—Cap. 13 p. 90. Inſtante mortis prae anguſtia tollente recordationem peccatorum, ſi quis toto corde petat veniam, ſine actuali paenitentia p…r orationem juſtificabitur.enough, to beat their breaſts, and ſay Lord have mercy. Nor doth ſuch pernicious preſumption find encouragement only in the Minorites Divinity; Pope Clement the 8th contributes more to it, when in his indulgences ſent to Poland he promiſeth pardon, to any one whoever that is dying, if he have but the name Jeſus once in his thoughts, though he cannot expreſs it.

As there can be no true Repentance without ſorrow fot ſin; ſo neither without Reſolution to forſake it: and yet they teach, Repentance may be as well without this as the other. (n)(n)Non eſt neceſſarium ad remiſſionem peccatorum formale propoſitum vitandi peccatum. Vega. Concil. Trident. l. 13. cap. 21.a vertual reſolution may ſerve i. e. ſuch a purpoſe to abandon ſin, as he may have, who never thought of leaving it. (o)(o)Cap. 1. n. 6. Sicut actus, qui eſt paenitentia virtualis, ſufficit, ita eadem ratione ſufficere videtur, quod eam comitetur id, quod eſt propoſitum virtuale confitendi, ſatisfaciendi, & amplius non peccandi. n. 11.Navarre tells us that the ſufficiency of ſuch a purpoſe is learnedly and magnificently aſſerted by Vega. He (p)(p)n. 12. vid. Suarez. tom. 4. diſp. 20. Sect. 4.himſelf explains it and defends it, without any limitation, but, that the vanity whereof appears before; and (q)(q)Graves Doctores exiſtimant ſufficere virtuale propoſitum, ita Major, Almain, Vega, Medina, Petrus, Soto, Navar. Adrian. idem. ibid. diſp. 4. p. 3. n. 2.tells us the Council of Trent requires not a formal purpoſe, but thinks that ſufficient which is only virtual. And their Divines whom they call Nominals, deny that any purpoſe to forſake ſin is neceſſary to Repentance, as Soto p. 135(r)(r)Ex nominalibus quidam addubitant, nam in ratione contritionis neceſſarium ſit propoſitum cavendi a vitijs in futurum. At que id negant Soto De natur. & gr. l. 2. c. 14. p. 99. vid. Canum, Cordubam qui refert Durandum, Paludanum, Capreolum & Antoninum pro tali ſententia in Suarez. tom. 4. diſp. 20. Sect. 2. n. 6. Non eſſe neceſsariam deteſtationem efficacem cum abſoluto dolore & propoſito non peccandi, ſed diſplicentiam quamcun que , cum velleitate non peccandi, ſufficere ad valorem Sacramenti, tenet Cajetan. Victoria, Canus, Ledeſma, Sicut Paludanus, Sylveſter, ibid. Sect. 4. Aquinas, Capreolus, Thom. Hurtado. Tom. 2. tr. ult. n. 501. Ne que oportet, ut confeſſor ſibi perſuadeat, & judicet etiam probabiliter, ita eſſe futurum ut paenitens a peccando abſtineat, ſed ſatis eſt, ut exiſtimet tunc habere tale propoſitum, quamvis poſt breve tempus illud ſit mutaturus. Ita docent omnes auctores. Idem diſp. 32. Sect. 2. n. 2. p. 426. Scotus in 4. diſt. 14. q. ult. art. 3. and Sylveſter after him, ſum. v. confeſſio n. 24. hold that neither ſorrow for ſin, nor reſolution againſt it (no, not ſo little as they aſcribe to attrition) is needful: but that a willingneſs to partake of their Sacrament is ſufficient for juſtification by it.informs us. So that by the Doctrine of all ſorts of Divines amongſt them, a repenting, which wants the eſſentials of true Repentance, will ſuffice in life or death.

Secondly, A Repentance or ſorrow for ſin, which is merely natural is counted ſufficient. The Apoſtle to true Repentance requires Godly ſorrow. 2 Cor. 7. 9, 10. but they, many of them, think it not requiſite that it ſhould be Godly, no not in reſpect of its original. That will ſerve, which is not from God, but from nature. Scotus a leader of one mighty Squadron of their School-Doctors determines, (s)(s)Expreſſe ipſe (Scotus) in 4. diſt. 14. q. 2. ait. quod ex puris naturalibus, cum communi influentia, poteſt eſſe attritio, quae ſit meritum de congruo ad deletionem peccati mortalis—adeo pro conſtanti ubi que habet, quod naturaliter poſſumus diſponi de congruo ad juſtificationem: quam ſolam diſpoſitionem ipſe docet. Atqui Adrianus, Durandus, & ferme Nominales, & ita illum ſentire indubie putant, & ſentiunt ipſi. Soto. ibid. l. 2. c. 4. p. 68.That ſuch a ſorrow may be had by the power of nature, as will in congruity merit pardon of ſin. And Adrian, Durandus with all the Nominals in a manner, take that to be his judgment, and are of the ſame perſwaſion themſelves. The Franciſcans maintained it (t)(t)That a man by natural power only, may feel a ſorrow for ſin, which is a diſpoſition, and merit of congruity to aboliſh it. Hiſt. of Counc. of Trent. l. 2. p. 198.in the Council of Trent. Aquinas (u)(u)Ibid. & Soto. ibid. l. 1. c. 2. (Aquinas) opinionem commun…m inſequutus affi… maſſet, tum quod homo ex naturalibus poſſet ſe diſponere ad gratiam, tum quod diſpoſitio illa eſſet meritum de congruo. p. 66.whom the reſt of their School Divines generally follow, was of that opinion too. And the chief of the Dominicans his modern followers (even thoſe of them, who are loth their Angelical Doctor ſhould appear to be ſo much a Pelagian) do hold; that ſuch a ſorrow as is merely from nature (without either habitual grace, or ſpecial aſſiſtance) is enough, to juſtifie him, who through ignorance thinks it enough. So Canus and Soto in (x)(x)Quaeſtio oritur, an cum attritione orta ſolum ex viribus naturae ſim…l cum Sacramento in re, poſſit paenitens juſtificari. Et quidem quaeſtio eſt, quae nobis Thomiſtis facit negotium, propterea quod Scotus & Canus Clariſſimi Thomiſtae, videntur hic affirmativam tenere. Cap. 8. p. 53.Lopez, from whence Lopez inferrs (y)(y)p. 55., That in their account ſuch remorſe for ſin, as requires ſpecial aſſiſtance, is not neceſſary to the juſtification of a ſinner: but p. 136that may ſuffice, which is had from the power of nature, though the ground of it be but outward diſgrace. Thus if we will believe the Romane Doctors, Thomiſts or Scotiſts (the Jeſuites who ſerve themſelves of both as they ſee occaſion, I need not mention; ſince of their concurrence herein there is no queſtion): a ſinner may be ſaved by ſuch a ſort of Repentance, as is not the gift of God; but the pure iſſue of corrupt nature.

Thirdly, a ſlight and inconſiderable ſorrow (ſuch as falls ſhort of what the Scripture calls for) will ſuffice inſtead of true Repentance. One act of grief, they tell us, is enough for the ſins of a whole life, one only, there needs not two. So (a)(a)S. Thom. Nugnus, Navar, Victoria, Sotus, Pitigianus, Zerola, Cajet. Palatius, Canus, (in) Bonacin…. ibid. l. d. 5. q. 5. p. 5. n. 1. Satis eſt ſi paenitens peccatis omnibus memoratis, unam deteſtationem applicet. in Lopez c. 6. p. 39.Soto, (b)(b)Ne que illud exigitur ut tot ſint actus contritionis, quot ſint peccata—eſt concedendu… hominem unica actione peccata omnia, quae memoriae forte occurrunt, deteſtari, at que ob… commiſſa dolere: alioquin enim falſum eſſet, quod paulo ante demonſtravimus, in momento poſſe hominem converti, & juſtificari. De paenit. l. 2. c. 11. p. 944.Bellarmine, &c. One act will ſerve for all ſins in general and together, remembred or not remembred, in which ſenſe they ſay a (c)(c)Cajetan. ſum. v. contrit. p. 103, 104. Soto diſt. 17. q. 2. art. 3. Tol. l. 3. c. 15. p. 516.general Repentance will ſuffice. Their ſenſe de Graffiis thus Reports. (d)(d)Non requiri ſingularem ſed quod ſufficiat una generalis, quae ſaltem virtualiter ſe extendat ad omnia peccata mortalia, &c. l. 1 c. 5. n. 5. Satis est ut concipiat generalem ejuſmodi paenitudinem quae virtute ſe extendat ad omnia mor…fi…a. Navar. c. 1. n. 22. quod tenendum eſt cum Jo. Majore & Cardinale S. Sixti alij communiter in Bonacin. ibid. punct. 6.A particular Repentance is not required, but one general will ſerve, extending it ſelf, at leaſt vertually, to all mortal ſins, both which he remembers, and remembers not; with a will to abſtain from all; this is enough for Remiſſion of ſins.

Further, this one act of grief needs be but very little and ſlender, the very leaſt remorſe in the loweſt degree that can be, will ſerve.

When they require no ſenſible ſorrow at all to Repentance, but only a diſlike of the will, or a will not to have ſinned; the beſt and weakeſt motion of the will that way (againſt paſt ſins) will ſuffice.

To (e)(e)Ad perfectionem paenitentiae requiritur tenuis quidam dolor internus. ſum. q. 16 …t. 1. Contritio una licet remiſſa. l. 3. c. 5.the perfection of Repentance, a certain ſlender inward p. 137grief is requiſite ſaith Maldonat, one act of Contrition, though it be remiſs, is enough, ſaith Tolet. Theſe two are Jeſuites, but ſpeak more modeſtly than others of their Doctors. Let us hear Canus (f)(f)Praeceptum de actu fidei & de actu ſpei homo implet, etiamſi non agat ex toto conatu; ergo & praeceptum de charitate & contritione: non ergo contritio totum animi conatum exigit—Quod autem nullum ejuſmodi eſſet praeceptum, patet, eſſet enim ſtultum praeceptum, quod ſemper invincibiliter ignoratur. Relell. de paenit. pars. 3. p. 841.we need not grieve for ſin as much as we can, ſuch an endeavour is not required in any other precept for Love, Faith, Hope, or Righteouſneſs. Yea they would be fooliſh precepts, if they enjoyned a certain degree. But if we need not grieve ſo much as we can, how then? Why, as little as can be: or if that will not ſatisfie, As little as we will. Quantumcun que ſit remiſſa (g)(g)Quantumcun que ſit remiſsa—ſatis eſt ad crimina diluenda Cap. 1. n. 31 S cundum mentem communem Doctorum.ſaith Navarr, Penitence be it never ſo little, it is ſufficient for the waſhing away of all crimes, according to the common ſenſe of the Doctors, (h)(h)Secundum. S. Thom. quaecun que contritio vera, quantumvis remiſſa, etiam in inſtanti concepta ſatis eſt ad remittenda omnia mortalia. Cap. 15. p. 94. De paenit. l. 2. c. 11. p. 943. Contrit. n. 106.quantumvis remiſſa, Be it as little as you will, ſayes Lopez after Aquinas. (k)(k)Dicendum eſt ad rationem contritionis nullam definitam intenſionem requiri, ſed ſufficere ſubſtantiam actus, in quocun que gradu ſiat. Suarez. tom. 4. diſp. 4. Sect. 4. Ita expreſſe Gabriel, Soto, Medina, Vega, Navarrus. ibid. n. 9. vid. plures in Bonacin. ibid. punct. 7. n. 3.No certain degree, none that can be aſſigned, above the leaſt of all, is requiſite in Bellarmine, Victoria, &c. But ſhould there not be a degree, more than the leaſt, for the more grievous ſins? No, no more for them than the leſs. In (i)(i)(l) Licet de graviori peccato gravior requiratur paenitentia ſive paenitudo, hoc tamen intelligendum eſt de conſilio & honeſtate, non autem de neceſſitate. Navar. c. 1. n. 31.honeſty we may grieve more for the greater, to comply with the advice of God, but there is no neceſſity for it; it's only matter of Counſel, and ſo left to our pleaſure. But muſt we not grieve for ſin, as thoſe who conceive it to be hateful above all, and moſt to be avoyded? No, (m)(m)Deteſtari peccatum ſupra omne malum paenae, non neceſſarium. Cajetan, Navar, Vega, in Suarez. ibid. diſp. 3. Sect. 9. n. 8.not that neither: Lopez (n)(n)(Nullum concilium, nec Sancti, nec Scriptura Sacra, id ſupra omne odibile, dolorem neceſſarium eſſe expreſſere. c. 15. p. 92.tells us, that neither Council, nor Scripture have p. 138declared it neceſſary to grieve for ſin, as that which is moſt hateful: and (which is more than all,) that the Council of Trent requires it not. Navarr (o)(o)Cap. 1. n. 25.had ſaid as much before him, only the former thinks, it may be requiſite that the penitent do not expreſly or poſitively form in his mind a Reſolution not to grieve for ſin above all that is hateful. Thus is Repentance reduced in a manner to nothing: in reſpect of Appretiation, it is too much to grieve for ſin, as that which is moſt odious: in reſpect of intenſeneſs, it is enough to grieve leſs for it, than other grievances, the leaſt degree of all is ſufficient, and that which is next to nothing may ſerve.

Moreover, this one act ſo extreamly little, may be diſpatched (*)(*)Sufficit, ſi fiat in inſtanti Bonacin. ibid. punct. 8. ibi. Nugnus, Molfeſius & alij.in a moment. The leaſt degree of it is enough, but the leaſt continuance is too much; all the Repentance that is a Sinners duty, may be perfectly finiſhed in the twinkling of an eye; an indiviſible inſtant can ſerve all the exigencies of it, and it may be as ſoon over as a man can ſay peccavi. It's ſuch an act as vaniſhes ſo ſoon as ever it appears, and is come and gone before there is time to obſerve it; they allow not the leaſt ſpace, the leaſt particle of time to be neceſſary for it: And it is ſo in Faith, Hope, Love, and other vertues; no man ever required any ſpace of time for this; ſo Bellarmin, (p)(p)Non requiritur certus gradus intenſionis, neque mora ulla temporis ad veram contritionem—Quis unquam in Praeceptis fidei, ſpei, dilectionis, aliarumque virtutum iſtas menſuras excogitavit, &c. De paenit. l. 2. c. 11. p. 943.Canus (q)(q)Canus. pars. 3. Relect. de paenit. p. 842.de Graffiis; (r)(r)Graff. l. 1. c. 5. n. 7.ſo Navar, (s)(s)Secundum mentem communem Doctorum, quam explicat Jo. Major, paenitudo circumamicta debitis circumſtantijs & ſupradictis, quantumcunque remiſsa, & breviſſimo tempore, etiam in inſtanti concepta, ſatis eſt ad crimina diluenda, Cap. 1, n. 31. & n. 22. & n. 38.ſo all in a manner; for he tells us, it is the common ſenſe of their Divines. The leaſt penitence that may be, in the ſhorteſt time that can be, yea, in that which is leſs than any particle of time, even in an inſtant, is enough to blot out all crimes. And Scotus, for ſaying that penitence diſpatched in a moment, is not ſufficient for pardon, had like to have ſuffered ſhrewdly, every one almoſt being ready to fall p. 139foul upon him; (t)(t)Vid. Lopez. cap. 15. p. 94. alij Scotiſlae videntur Scotum ſalvare ejus ſenſum & mentem interpre…ando—Nam culpam poſſe remitti per contritionem etiam remiſſam, & habitam in inſtanti, non dubitavit, &c.but his followers have compounded for him, and brought him off with a diſtinction, which makes him ſay as the reſt do, whether he thought ſo or no. And now it paſſeth currantly, that all the ſorrow which any need have for all his ſins, may be over in leſs than a minute, and may be begun, perfected, and ended in leſs time than you can pronounce the leaſt ſyllable of miſerere; and this they reſtrain not to extraordinary caſes, but conclude it as common to all. Finally,

This one little act ſo ſuddainly diſpatched, need never return: Do it but once, and no need to do it again. The act, though next to nothing in degree; though nothing at all, as to continuance, is not neceſſarily to be repeated, or the defect of it to be ſupplyed by another act, though there be time and occaſion for it; all exerciſe of Repentance for ſin, ſuppoſed to be thus pardoned, upon any occaſion, is altogether unneceſſary. Having paſſed one act of grief ſo extreamly ſlender, & ſo ſuddainly over, he needs never trouble himſelf with it further; (u)(u)Non eſt praeceptum quod nos obligat ad eam habendam bis ſpeciatim de eodem, Navar. c. 1. n. 28. vid. Sylveſt. Sum. v. contri…. n. 4. He is not obliged afterwards when he remembers his ſins, Aquinas, Navar, Sajirus, Angles, Pitigianus, Molſeſius, &c. Bonacin, ibid. punct. 2. n. 9.There is no command that can oblige us to have it twice for the ſame ſin. Such is the Repentance which in the Church of Rome is counted ſufficient for ſalvation, even in ordinary caſes; how agreeable it is to that which the Scripture makes neceſſary, let others judge? to me it ſeems calculated for the humours of thoſe who would be ſaved with a conceit of Repenting, without troubling themſelves with the thing; yet this is not the worſt. For,

Fourthly: When they have commended to Sinners a ſort of Repentance, which is not ſufficient to ſave them, they take it for granted that it is inſufficient; and yet maintain that it is enough, if the Sinner do but think ſo, yea, or do not think the contrary. He that thinks he is contrite, ſaith Soto, when he is not; (x)(x)Tum enim licet attritio interna non ſufficit, tamen quia ille bona fide accedit, recipiet gratiam per Sacramentuni, De nat. & grat. l. 2. c. 15. p. 101.though his inward remorſe p. 140be not ſufficient, yet becauſe he means honeſtly, he ſhall receive juſtifying grace by the Sacrament. Navar tells us that Soto herein followed Aquinas commonly received; and he (y)(y)Cap. 1. n. 42. & n. 35 Quando non habet ſigna ſufficientia doloris, poteſt & debet interrogare paenitentem, … ex animo deteſtetur peccatum, cui affirmanti credere tenetur. Et hoc idem dicendum eſt de propoſito in futurum—I…a docent omnes authores. Suar. tom. 4. diſp. 32. Sect. 2. n. 2.after Franciſcus Victoria judgeth it to be the plain ſenſe of the Council of Trent, (a)(a)Victoria. Soto. Ledeſma. Vega. Corduba in Suarez. l. 4. diſp. 20. Sect. 1. n. 7.Carduba, Canus, and (b)(b)Quando ſaltem concipitur ob amorem Dei—cum credulitate quod habeat ſufficientem dolorem, licet revera illum non habeat, l. 1. c. 2. n. 8. & n. 6.de Graffiis, with others, concur herein. As for the followers of Scotus, amongſt them it is taught, That whoſoever thinks he is contrite, hath really obtained pardon; and therefore none, who make account they bring contrition to the Sacrament, do by it receive the firſt Grace, becauſe they are poſſeſt of it already, by thinking ſo well of themſelves, (c)(c)Neque vero ignoro Nominalium quorundam opinionem docentium, quod quicunque exiſtima…, ſe eſſe contritum, revera obtinuiſſe jam veniam, atque adeo quod nullus cogitans contritionem ſe adferre ad Sacramentum, per ipſum recipit primam gratiam: quin vero jam recepit per ſuam bonam illam cogitantiam, ibid. p. 102.as Soto reports them. Add but Cardinal Tolet (that we may ſee how all Orders conſpire herein) (d)(d)Aliquando homo dolet de peccato, dolore qui per ſe non ſufficeret delere peccatum, & tam…n accedente Sacramento deletur, Juſt. l. 2. c. 16. p. 460.Thoſe who come with remorſe (which they think to be contrition) receive the firſt Grace. He thus explains it: Sometimes a man hath ſome grief for ſin which is not ſufficient for pardon; but the Sacrament being added, he is pardoned.

Thus all ſorts agree in this conceit, which I know not, whether it be more ridiculous or pernicious, that a man's, thinking he hath true Repentance, when he hath it not, is enough (at leaſt with the Sacrament of Abſolution) to ſave him. Let any man but delude himſelf, or be deluded by others, with a falſe conceit that he truly Repents, when he doth not; and any Prieſt can let him, in his impenitence, into Heaven; if the beſt of the Roman Guides may be believed, or thoſe Impoſtors regarded, who hereby make it plain, (if they did it no other way,) that they are given up to ſtrong deluſions.

Fifthly: If a man want that penitent ſorrow which is ſufficient, yet if he ſignifie, that he would have it, or that he is ſorry that he hath p. 141it not, it is as effectual, as if he had it. (e)(e)Secundum Pet. de. Pal. a paenitente requirendum eſt, ſi paenitet: & ſi non ſufficienter dolet, an hoc ſibi diſplicet, & vellet ſufficienter dolere. Et hoc inquit ſufficit, quod valde nota, quia ſic diſpoſitus eſt contritus vel ſaltem attritus, ut poſſit abſolvi—& eſt mens S. Thom. S. Bonavent. & omnium Theologorum, Sum. v. contrit. n. 2.The Penitent is to be asked (ſaith Paludanus) whether he Repent; and if he do not grieve ſufficiently, whether this do not diſpleaſe him, and whether he would not grieve ſufficiently; and this (ſaith he) is ſufficient, which Sylveſter would have well obſerved, becauſe one ſo diſpoſed may be abſolved; (i. e. though he want that Repentance which is ſufficient, yet he hath enough to put him into a ſaving ſtate) and this he tells us, is not only the ſenſe of Peter Paludanus, but of Aqninus and Bonaventure, and all their Divines. (f)(f)Cap. 1. n. 18. & cap. 10. n. 4.Navar ſaith as much approving it as the opinion of all their Doctors. And yet this willingneſs which they will have to ſupply the want of ſufficient Repentance, is but a conditional Velleity, ſuch as Lopez obſerves, (g)(g)Secundum Doctores & ipſum Navarrum paenitentia de praeteritis habetur per iſlum conditionalem actum nollem peccaſſe, ſed cum iſtis conditionalibus nolleitatibus aut velleitatibus, ſtare poteſt propoſitum abſolutum de ſibi contrario. Ut cum nolleitate qua ingruente procella mercator nollet projicere merces fuas in mare ſecundum, Ariſtot. ſtat. abſolutum propoſitum, eas projiciendi. Et cum villeitate quam meretrix in lupanari tenet inde exeundi, ſtare poteſt abſoluta voluntas ibi manendi, Cap. 15 p. 91.may ſtand with an abſolute unwillingneſs to Repent ſufficiently; ſuch a Will as a Whore may have to leave the Stews, when ſhe hath an abſolute purpoſe to ſtay there; and yet he himſelf (h)(h)Non ſufficit cum Sacramento Paenitentiae ad ſalutem, niſi ſaltem attritio adſit, ibid. vid. Suarez.will have ſuch a Velleity with attrition (which is far from true Repentance) to be ſufficient, in the want of it; and this leads us further.

Sixthly: Attrition, though known by the Sinner to be ſhort of true Repentance, is ſufficient without it, to paſs him into a ſaving ſtate, if the Sacrament be added. Betwixt Contrition (which with them is true or compleat Repentance) and this Attrition, the diſtance is great; they give an account of it in (i)(i)Vid. Soto in 4. ſent. diſt. 17. q. 2▪ art. 3. Graſf. l. 1. c. 2. n. 3.many particulars. THAT is a grief for offending God, THIS for temporal or eternal puniſhment, as the greateſt evil. THAT proceeds from filial, THIS from ſlaviſh fear. THAT p. 142cannot be had without ſupernatural aſſiſtance, THIS may be had by the power of nature, ſay many of them. THAT is an act formed by Grace and Love, THIS an act unformed, deſtitute of Grace and Love. THAT can paſs one into the ſtate of Grace, with a deſire only of the Sacrament, THIS cannot, without an actual partaking of it. So in fine, THAT is compleat Repentance, THIS but a defective remorſe, (k)(k)Idem ibid. C. Judas. C. Sceleratior de paen. diſt. 3.ſuch as was in, Antiochus and Judas. Attrition, we ſee by their own account, is very far from true Repentance, yet being held ſufficient for a ſaving ſtate without it, if the Sacrament be added, by vertue hereof, Repentance is moſt evidently rendred needleſs. And ſuch Attrition they think ſufficient for this purpoſe, as either ariſeth from the turpitude of ſin, as it is diſagreeable to reaſon, or from fear of Hell, or apprehenſions of temporal puniſhments and damage, as loſs of Health, Credit, Eſtate, &c. The Council of Trent admitts of any of theſe. (l)(l)Quinimo minime malum eſt paenitere ſolum metu paenae, infamiae vel alterius mali: modo voluntatem peccandi excludat, luculenter declarat, Concil. Trident. Seſſ. 14. c. 4. Navar. cap. 1. n. 8. Vega lib. 13. in Trident. c. 14. Concedit deteſtationem ob metum aliarum paenarum, eſſe attritionem, & contineri ſub primo membro: nam Conci…ium utrumque conjunxit, ſcil. ex metu gehennae & paenarum, in Suar. tom. 4. diſp. 5. Sect. 2. n. 15. vid Bonacin. ibid. punct. 3. n. 3. Zerola. Chamerota, Pirigianus, & alij ibid.For Attrition by their declaration, is either (m)(m)Illam vero contritionem imperfectam, quae Attritio dicitur: quoniam vel ex turpitudinis peccati conſideratione, vel ex gehennae & paenarum metu communiter concipitur, Seſſ. 14. cap. 4.that which proceeds from conſideration of the turpitude of ſin, or fear of Hell, or other puniſhment. And ſuch Attrition is, with the Sacrament, ſufficient for pardon, as is determined by that Councel in theſe words, (n)(n)Quo paenitens adjatus viam ſibi ad juſtitiam parat, & quamvis ſine paenitentiae Sacramento per ſe ad juſtificationem peccatorem perducere nequeat: tamen eum ad Dei gratiam in Sacramento paenitentiae impetrandam diſponit. ibid.Hereby he makes his way to Righteouſneſs, and although without the Sacrament, it [Attrition] cannot by it ſelf bring a Sinner to juſtification; yet it diſpoſeth him to obtain the grace of God in the Sacrament of pennance: So that by their doctrine, Attrition ſo diſpoſeth a Sinner for Juſtification, that their Sacrament being added, it actually juſtifies, i. e. puts a Sinner p. 143into a ſtate of Grace and Salvation. From this ſentence of the Council, as Bellarmine tells us, (o)(o)Et de eo loquuntur theologi, cum dicunt, attritionem ex timore conceptam, diſpoſitionem eſſe ad juſtificationem, & Sacramento accedente, revera juſtificari, ut perſpicuum eſt ex concilio Tridentino, Seſſ. 14. c. 4. de paenit. l. 2. c. 18. p. 972.the Truth of what their Divines hold, is conſpicuous, viz. That Attrition ariſing out of fear, is a diſpoſition to Juſtification; and the Sacrament being added, doth truly juſtifie. How generally they hold (with ſome difference of notion) the ſufficiency of Attrition with their Sacrament, we may ſee in ſuch as give an account of their Opinions diſtinctly (not taking any of the Society into the reckoning): it will be enough but to name ſome of them, ſince their ſuffrages after the determination of a Council are leſs needful. (p)(p)Vid Suarez. tom. 4. diſp. 20. Sect. 1. n. 5.Some are for Attrition improved, as Henricus, Cajetan, Ferrarienſis, Petrus, Soto. Some for Attrition, miſtaken for Contrition, (q)(q)n. 7.as Victoria, Soto, Ledeſma, Vega, Corduba. Some for Attrition known to be ſo, (r)(r)n. 9.as Aquinas, Scotus, Paludanus, Capreolus, Durandus, Adrian, Antoninus, Sylveſter, Cano, & ſome (s)(s)Soto, Canus, Vega, n.for the opinion of Attrition, without the reality. But this is enough to ſhew, that by the doctrine of their Church, Attrition with the Sacrament, is ſufficient to put a Sinner into a ſaving ſtate at any time living or dying. Thus is true Repentance reduced to Attrition, and this made enough to qualifie an impenitent Sinner for pardon, ſo as he cannot fail of it; and yet Attrition, of what kind ſo ever, can ſcarce paſs for a good quality. That ſort of it which is rational (a diſlike of ſin, becauſe it diſagreeable to reaſon) is not ſo good in their account as that which is (ſervile); becauſe as ſuch, (t)(t)Deteſtatio peccati quia eſt contra rationem non eſt ſufficiens, quia non reſpicit Deum ipſum, nec peccatum, ut eſt offenſa ejus—tum quia ex vi illius motivi non eſt ſupernaturalis, Idem ibid. diſp. 4. Sect. 2. n. 11. Primum itaque genus imperfectae diſplicentiae eſt, cum quis dolet de peccato propter humana naturaliaque motiva, ut quia turpe eſt & contra rationem, Canus, Relect. de paenit. pars. 3. p. 836.it is but a meer natural act, and hath no reſpect to God, and ſo hath nothing in it which looks like Godly ſorrow. As for that which is ſervile, (a diſlike of ſin only, or principally for fear of puniſhment temporal or eternal) this is ſo far from being ſpiritually p. 144good, that it is morally evil. So bad it is, by the Authority and reaſon of their own Divines. Thus Gregory, Almain, and Adrian conclude (u)(u)Nonnuli Catholici—operari ex timore tanquam ex fine proximo, judicant eſſe malum ut Gregorius, Almain, Adrian, Suar. ibid. diſp. 5. Sect. 2. n. 3. p. 65. Vid Angel. Sum. v. Timor., that it is evil to act out of fear of puniſhment, as the next end or motive. It is no better by the reaſoning of others, who would have us think better of it. A Sinner thereby prefers himſelf before God (and that ſure is a ſin (in any, unleſs they will except his Holineſs) not any repenting of ſin); for he that diſlikes ſin for puniſhment principally, or as the greateſt evil, (x)(x)Si paena timeatur tanquam maximum, ſupremum, peſſimumque malum, tunc eſt pra…us timor, nam per illum prefert homo malum ſuum, malo Dei: unde in ſe non in Deo conſtituit finem ultimum. Idem. diſp. 1. de ſpe. Sect. 4. n. 6. Valent. tom. 3. diſp. 2. q. 2. punct. 3.regards more (as themſelves argue) that which is evil to himſelf, than that which is evil to God, and ſo placeth the ultimate end in himſelf, not in God.

Sect. 8. Having thus reduced Repentance to a thing no better than we ſee Attrition is, as though it were yet too good and too much; they bring Attrition down to nothing. It is but as they deſcribe it, a diſlike of ſin, not as that is offenſive to God, but out of other reſpects, wherein (*)(*)Aquinas 2. 2. q. 19. art. 6.ſelf-love is moſt concerned, and ſlaviſh fear is moſt operative. The leaſt diſlike of this nature will ſerve, and in the loweſt degree that can be: (y)(y)Nulla intentio vel duratio eſt de ratione contritionis (Gabriel, Soto, Medina, Vega, Navar.) & idem eſt de Attritione propter eaſdem rationes, Suar. ibid. diſp. 5. Sect. 1. n. 6.Nor need this continue any longer than the leaſt moment.

And it will be ſufficient, ſay ſome, though it be but (z)(z)Ad effectum hujus Sacramenti ſufficere Attritionem naturalem, i. e. ſolis viribus naturae elicitam: ſive illa ſit concepta ex motivo aeterno & honeſto, ut eſt fugere paenas inferni, vel turpitudinem peccati, ſive ex motivo temporali & indifferente, ut eſt vitare infamiam, vel aliud temporale detrimentum, Soto & Canus, ibid. diſp 20. Sect. 2. n. 7.merely natural, excited by ſome natural or human motive, without the grace of God, or his Divine aſſiſtance: So Canus and Soto. Or it will ſerve if p. 145there be but a diſlike, that this diſlike of ſin is wanting (a)(a)Satis eſt, ut quidam dicunt, quod paenitens diſplicentiam habeat, quod de peccato non dolet, Ibid. Sect. 1. n. 2.. So Paludanus, Navar, and others. Or it will be enough if there be a willingneſs to have it in thoſe who have it not, (b)(b)Sufficit, ſi quis vellet habere diſplicentiam, & Dei gratiam cavendi in poſterum: quia talis eſt Attritio virtualiter ſecundum doctrinam Sanctorum, maxime, S. Thom. & Rich. Sylveſt, Sum. v. Confeſſ. 1. n. 24.according to the Doctrine of their holy men Aquinas and Richardus eſpecially. Or a mans thinking probably, that he hath it when he hath it not, (c)(c)Aliqui ſentiunt ad hunc effectum non eſſe neceſſariam veram Attritionem, in re exiſtentem, ſed inculpabiliter & probabiliter putatam ſufficere, quod ſenſit, Cano & Vega. l. 13. c. 34. Suar. ibid. Sect. 2. n. 2. & alij in Bonacin, ibid. q. 5. p. 3. n. 6.will ſerve the turn; ſo Canus and Vega. (d)(d)Imo dicitur fortius ſecundum Scotum, quod ſufficit, quem velle talem diſplicentiam non ſolum formaliter, ſed etiam virtualiter, eam volendo in ſua cauſa, i. e. in Sacramento paenitentiae justificante, quia in 4. diſt. 14. q. ult in art. 3. tenet, quod ad conſequendam gratiam per hoc Sacramentum, non requiritur attritio: ſed ſufficit voluntas ſuſcipiendi hoc ſacramentum, &c. Sylveſt. ibid. Imo aloqui Doctores aſſerunt hoc valere (viz. attritionem putatam) etiamſi omiſſa ſit, vera attritio ob negligentiam in praeparatione facienda, Bonacin. ubi ſupra de paenit. d. 5. q. 5, Sect. 1. p. 3. n. 6.Or if he neither have it in reality nor in conceit, it will ſuffice, if he be but willing to partake of the Sacrament; for ſo they tell us, he is vertually willing to be attrite, and this qualifies him for pardon, though he neither actually hath Attrition, nor deſires it; ſo Scotus and Sylveſter after him. Thus after Attrition hath ſwallowed up true Repentance, yet it ſtill becomes more lank by their handling, and in fine, ſhrinks quite away. But whether it be little or nothing, it will ſerve to juſtifie them, yea, and that too, without their ritual pennance; other Sacraments, or rites, with this, will do it. They advance the ſufficiency of Attrition, for all the purpoſes of true Repentance, even without their pennance. This, with the Euchariſt, will ſerve, not (ſay they) that there is need of true contrition, a conceit that he hath it, with this and the Euchariſt, (r)(r)Aquinas 13. q. 79. art. 1. 2. in Tol l. 6. c. 16. Halonſis in Victorell, ibid. Soto d. 12. q. 1. art. 4. dicit hanc eſſe D. Thomae ſententiam, & omnium. Suarez ſays, omnes theologi ita docent, Tom. 3. diſp. 63. Sect. 2.will procure p. 146him pardon. This with extream Unction will ſerve, as (s)(s)Sum. v. Sacram. n. 4. Navar. juxta opinionem, S. Thom. communiter receptam c. 23. n. 13. this may (as they ſay of all their Sacraments) ex attrito facere contritum, infundendo gratiam primam, ut communiter tenent omnes, in Jo. Sanc. d. 27. n. 8.Sylveſter tells us; yea, this may be enough without any Sacrament at all; as if a man in mortal ſin, and ſo (with them) not in the ſtate of grace, be killed, becauſe he is a Chriſtian, while he is a-ſleep; if he was Attrite, and willing to ſuffer before, by vertue hereof his ſins are pardoned; ſo Cajetan, Sotus, and Lopez (t)(t)Cap. 12. p. 83. & hoc videtur ſentire, D. Thom.after them.

In ſhort, the Maſs may ſerve their turn; for divers of them hold, that this being offered for ſuch as are Attrite, by vertue thereof (ex opere operato) immediately, and without more adoe, they have pardon of mortal ſins, and habitual grace; ſo Catharinus (in Canus; loc. Theol. l. 12. c. 13. p. 693.) and others.

Here is competent proviſion made, that Sinners may periſh ſecurely, and never look after true Repentance, living or dying. There is but one thing which may ſeem to give ſome check to this great encouragement. Theſe adminiſtrations, whereby they will have the Impenitent ſaved, depend upon a Prieſt; and the Sinner may be in ſuch circumſtances (though this be very rare) wherein a Prieſt cannot be had, and then if he ſhould chance to dye without Contrition, he will periſh. But this need not diſturb any in their courſe of impenitence; for in caſe of neceſſity, where a Prieſt cannot be had, another may ſerve in his ſtead, though he be a Laick, Confeſſion may be made to him, and God will ſupply the want of a Prieſt; ſo Aquinas (in 4. diſt. 17. q. 3. art. 3.) or he may have the Euchariſt adminiſtred to him without a Prieſt: and it is their common doctrine, that the Euchariſt juſtifies one that is in mortal ſin, if he be attrite, and thinks but himſelf contrite. yea, he may adminiſter it to himſelf with the ſame effect, in caſe of neceſſity: divers of all ſorts amongſt them are of this opinion. The Authority of Aquinas is alledged for it, (3. q. 82. art. 3.) and Cajetan in Matth. 26. The example of the Queen of Scots, (commonly produced) who having the Sacrament by her, adminiſtred it to her ſelf, is highly approved by all.

p. 147Thus far Satan has prevailed with them, to promote the Damnation of Sinners, by hardning them in impenitence, even when the intereſt of their Prieſts ſeems a little concerned. But what if a Catholick Sinner, relying upon ſuch Impoſtors, ſtill neglect true Repentance, and death ſurprize him ſo ſuddenly, as to render theſe other devices unpracticable, is not his caſe then deſperate? No, he may have as good hopes of Salvation as other Catholicks have, a probable ground for his hope (and none muſt have any certainty.) Such a ground is the judgement of their Angelical Doctor, who declares, that if one ſick deſires pennance, and before the Prieſt comes, he dyes, or is ſpeechleſs; the Prieſt may look on him, as if he had confeſſed, and may abſolve him, being dead, (Opuſc. 63. de offic. Sacerd.) Accordingly Clemens 8. Abſolved one whom he ſaw falling from St. Peters Church in Rome, (Molfeſ. t. 1. tr. 7. c. 5. n. 48.) So that any may be Abſolved, i. e. Pardoned and Sanctified (for the ſenſe of the Prieſts Abſolvo, is, I give thee grace which pardons thy ſins, Impendo tibi gratiam remiſſivam peccatorum ut communiter Doctores, in Jo. Sanc. diſp. 27. n. 18.) even after they are dead, if they did but deſire confeſſion before. Now thoſe amongſt themſelves, who do not deſire confeſſion while they live, are ſuch only as will not have Salvation if they might, upon the moſt trivial terms, and ſo none need fear Damnation, how impenitent ſoever; otherwiſe they live and dye but ſuch as are worſe than any Devil now in Hell. And who can accuſe them as too rigid, if they make true Repentance unavoidably neceſſary for ſuch as theſe, ſince this doctrine makes it needful for none beſides?

All theſe ways any man may be ſaved without true Repentance, if he will believe the Roman Doctors (though if we believe Chriſt, he ſhall certainly periſh that repents not, what-ever courſe he takes beſides.) Any of theſe are probable, and may be by their principles (having grave Doctors, more than enough, to authorize them) ſafely followed; but that of the Councils preſcribing is infallible, and will not fail to ſecure thoſe who practiſe it, if any thing in their Church may have credit; nor can fail to ruine thoſe who follow it, if the word of God may be truſted. Thus while they would increaſe their party, by having it thought, that in their way, ſcarce any Roman Catholick will be Damned; they take the courſe (in this, as in other particulars) p. 148that none, who w…ll follow them, can be ſaved, unleſs ſalvation be for the impenitent.

Sect. 9. By this it is alſo manifeſt, that the charge brought againſt them in the three laſt Articles, for making Saving Faith, Love to God, and true Repentance needleſs in life or death, is not founded only upon the opinion of their private Doctors, or the greateſt part of them, but hath that which they count the ſureſt ground of all, the determination of a general Council confirmed by the Pope. For if Attrition be ſufficient, as that Council declares, then true Repentance is not neceſſary. If grief for ſin, out of ſlaviſh fear, or ſhame only, without any love to God, be enough, then Love to God is needleſs; and if Love be not needful, then Faith, which works by Love, and is the only ſaving Faith, is needleſs, till there be no time for it to work.

But is it credible, that they who ſometimes ſeem to lay ſo great ſtreſs upon theſe graces, as neceſſary to ſalvation, ſhould contradict, not only the Scriptures, but themſelves, and make them needleſs, not only all a mans life before, but even when he is dying? ſure, they muſt have ſome device, to ſupply, in pretence at leaſt, the want of theſe; if not before, yet at the point of death, and will ſubſtitute ſomething in their ſtead, of ſuppoſed equivalence to them. Indeed they are fruitful in inventions tending to ruine ſouls, and ſubvert the doctrine of ſalvation: and one particularly they have in this caſe; and that is, what we before mentioned, their Sacrament of Pennance. When a man is near death, if he be Attrite, and confeſs his mortal ſins to a Prieſt, and be abſolved; by vertue thereof, he hath remiſſion of ſins, and together therewith infuſion of grace, particularly of Faith, Hope, and Charity. Thus they come to have grace in a moment, who lived graceleſs all their days before; and had dyed ſo if ſuch a Rite had not been provided for their relief. By vertue of this Sacrament Love is planted in their heart, and their Faith in God, and ſorrow for ſin, is formed by Love, and becomes ſaving; ſo that if they dye preſently in that ſtate, their ſalvation is ſecured. But what if they live, muſt not theſe habits be afterwards exerciſed? muſt not there be ſome act of contrition in thoſe who never had any before? No, by their doctrine there is no neceſſity for it, though there be no true actual Repentance without it. The queſtion is in one of their greateſt Divines, p. 149Whether (u)(u)An etiam in lege gratiae poſt obtentam juſtificationem per Sacramentum paenitentiae cum ſola attritione, maneat haec obligatio habendi contritionem? Dicendum eſt, per ſe loquendo, non manere in lege nova obligationem hanc poſt praedictam juſtificationem. Ita ſentiunt omnes, qui putant Sacrameneum paenitentiae juſtificare cum ſola attritione cognita Suarez. tom. 4. diſp. 15. Sect. 4. n. 12. & 13.in the Law of Grace, after juſtification obtained by the Sacrament of Pennance with Attrition alone; there remain any obligation to have Contrition? and it is reſolved, that there is no ſuch obligation, and that this is the judgment of all thoſe who hold that the Sacrament of pennance doth juſtifie with Attrition alone, known to be ſo; and (x)(x)Aquinas, Scotus, Paludanus, Capreolus, Durandus, Adrian, Antoninus, Sylveſter, Cano, ibid. diſp. 20. Sect. 1. n. 9. Corduba, Vega, Soto, in Vaſquoz. (Corduba docet, quod qui juſtificatus eſt Sacramento paenitentiae, cum contritione tantum exiſtimata, non tenetur eorundem peccatuo…m contri…ionem veram habere; & eam aperte colligere licet ex Soto. & ita Vega.) in 3. Thom. q. 86. a, 2. d. 2. n. 11.theſe are the moſt for number, and the moſt conſiderable for authority in their Church and Schools, Aquinas and Scotus, both, whom the reſt moſt commonly follow, concurring in it, beſides their great Council.

Sect. 10. This then is the doctrine of their Church introduced there, inſtead of that of the Goſpel: the Habits muſt ſerve to ſave them without their Acts, and the Sacrament of Pennance, will help thoſe that are attrite, to thoſe Habits. Here's all the hopes they have for ſinners, whom they have encouraged to continue all their days, without Repentance, ſaving Faith, or Love to God, even to the very Article of death. If this Sacrament do not perform all this for them, they will not deny, but they are certainly damned? But what ground have they for this, upon which their everlaſting eſtate depends? None at all, but their own opinion, and the opinion of ſuch men as themſelves, without any ſupport from the word of God. If their own word will ſecure them for Eternity, they are ſafe enough; otherwiſe truſting to this, they are loſt for ever, the whole weight of their ſalvation hangs upon a Spiders Web, ſpun out of their own conceits. For this Sacrament of Pennance, upon which all depends, is a mere invention of their own; there is no divine inſtitution for it, it was never authorized by God, he never promiſed any thing to it, or any part of it upon their terms, much leſs any ſuch thing as they expect.

p. 150And who but they who are under the power of ſtrong deluſions, would truſt to any thing for Salvation, without a word from him; who is the abſolute Diſpoſer of grace, and the Soveraign Lord of life, and death? Some of themſelves acknowledge that their Sacrament of pennance (x)(x)Gloſſa quam nonnulli Canoniſtae ſecuti ſunt. Eraſmus, B. Rhenanus, Bonaventure Alexander Alenſis, Hugo Victor, Janſenius, in Suarez. tom. 4. diſp. 17. Sect. 1. n. 9.was never inſtituted by Chriſt. And many (y)(y)The eſſentials of this pretended Sacrament are with them, it's matter and form. The matter of it conſiſts in contrition, confeſſion, and ſatisfaction; each of theſe are acknowledged by their own Authours, to be either unneceſſary any way, or at leaſt by Chriſt's inſtitution. Contrition, and therewith true Repentance is diſmiſſed as unneceſſary to this Rite, not only by their other Doctors, but by the Council of Trent, and another thing aſſumed inſtead of it, as we ſaw before. Satisfaction is as unneceſſary in their account. Theres no need, either that the Prieſt ſhould injoyn it (D. Thomas, Petrus Paludanus, Petrus Soto, Victoria, Ledeſma Cajetau, Navar, ibid. diſp. 38. Sect. 3. n. 2. & 4.) or that the confitent ſhould ſubmit to it. Scotus, Gabriel, Medina, Sylveſter, Armilla, Navar, Hoſtienſis, Panormitan, Cajetan. ibid. diſp. 38 Sect. 7. n. 1. Thus all material in it, is reduced to Confeſſion, and ſo the Rite has almoſt loſt its name, being now commonly ſtyled the Sacrament of Confeſſion. Yet confeſſion is acknowledged not to be of Divine inſtitution by all their Canoniſts. Sunt inter Catholicos qui putant nullum eſſe Divinum praeceptum de confeſſione, ut omnes decretorum interpretes, & inter Scholaſticos Scotus. Maldonat. Sum q. 18. art. 4. And their beſt Divines deny the neceſſity of it, as to this Rite. Hunc modum Secretae confeſſionis non eſſe de neceſſitate hujus Sacramenti. Ita docent frequentius Scholaſtici. Alenſis, D. Thomas, Major, Richardus de Sancto Victore, Paludanus, Soto, Adrian, Richardus, Medina, Pet. Soto, Vega, Caſtro, Cajetan. (Chriſtum non inſtituiſſe auricularem confeſſionem) Canus. Et nunc cenſeo hanc doctrinam certam ex concilio Tridentino (viz. quod) ne que in inſtitutione poſuit Chriſtus Dominus modum Secretae confeſſionis. Suar. ibid. diſp. 21. Sect. 2. n. 9. p. 290. Yea the form of it (their mode of Abſolution) is denyed by their Divines, who hold that the Prieſts cannot forgive ſins properly as to the fault, and eternal puniſhment. Qui negant poteſtatem clavium extendi ad remiſſionem culpae mortalis. So Magiſterſentent, Hugo, & Richardus de Sancto Victore. Alenſis & Bonaven…ura, Gabriel, Major, Supplementum Gabr. Medina, Adrian, Petr. Soto, Altiſiodorenſis, Abulenſis. ibid. diſp. 20. Sect. 1. n 3.of them hold that the material parts of it have no ſuch inſtitution: Now to truſt to any device of man for ſpiritual effects, of ſo high a nature, is impious folly; but to lay their Salvation on it is prodigious madneſs. They may with as much reaſon, expect the infuſion of grace from the ſprinkling of holy-water; or the cleanſing of a Soul at death from the p. 151guilt and ſtain of ſin, by a Prieſts ſpittle; the Lord hath given them no more ground to expect any more from the one, than from the other.

But I need not inſiſt upon any thing which they may have the confidence to deny. It will be plain enough by what they cannot but acknowledge, that neither pardon, nor grace can be expected from their Sacrament of Pennance as ordered by them. For, they aſſert (z)(z)Unde in ipſa juſtificatione cum remiſſione peccatorum haec omnia ſimul infuſa accepit homo per Jeſum Chriſtum cui inſeritur, fidem, ſpem, charitatem. Concil. Trident. Seſſ. 6. c. 7. Gratia non praecedit ſed ſimul infunditur cum remiſſione peccatorum Bellarm. de paenitent. l. c. p. 954. Sperare a Deo remiſſionem peccatorum ſine paenite…tia—modus praeſam…pionis conjunctis cum haereſi. Pet. S. Joſeph. De 1. praecept. art. 4. A…u…nas, Arragon, Bannes, Malderus, & alji in & cum Bonacin. in 1 praec…pt. q. 3. p. 1. n. 4.that pardon and grace are alwayes inſeparably conferred together; So that he hath no infuſed grace, that hath not pardon. And it cannot be denyed, but that pardon can never be had, without true Repentance, in Scripture nothing is more evident. He therefore that comes to the Sacrament of Pennance with Attrition only, and ſo without true Repentance; he gets thereby nothing at all: neither pardon, which cannot be had without Repentance; nor infuſed grace, which is never had, without pardon; neither Love, nor Faith working by love, nor Godly ſorrow, nothing that is ſaving; unleſs he can have it without God, or againſt what he hath expreſly declared. So that if he comes to this their Sacrament in a damnable condition, he certainly dyes ſo, for any relief that Rite will afford him. And therefore their Doctrine which incourageth ſinners, to live all their life, without ſaving Faith, or Love, or Repentance; in confidence that this rite will help them to theſe graces, when they are dying, is a damning impoſture; and their Sacrament of Pennance, a moſt pernicious trap to draw ſinners (as they ſet and bait it) out of the way of Salvation, whileſt they live; and to plunge them into Hell, when they dye, without any apprehenſion of their danger, till there be no way to eſcape it.

Sect. 11. Hereby they manifeſtly declare themſelves to be enemies to Chriſtianity, and the Souls of men. For what more effectual courſe could they take to deſtroy theſe, and root out that: than by concluding p. 152it certain (as certain as they would have a decree of the Council of Trent accounted) that though ſinners neglect the great Duties, and Acts of Chriſtians, and live in any wickedneſs oppoſite to the rule of Chriſt: yet the Church hath a device to ſave them; and by it they may be ſure to eſcape Hell without true Repentance? What is this, but to declare, that the moſt damnable neglects and practices ſhall never damn them, though they never repent thereof, the Church hath a trick to ſecure them notwithſtanding? What is this, but to proclaim that the Lawes of God, and the rules of the Goſpel are unneceſſary impoſitions, without the obſervance whereof Salvation may be had? The knowledge of Chriſt, explicite faith in him, actual love of him (which comprize all the reſt) as they teach, are not neceſſary as means, Salvation may be had without them: and as for a neceſſity hereof by vertue of any Precept, that is not conſiderable, but in reference to the danger of not obſerving the precept; and there's no danger in this, though the neglect hereof were in their account a mortal ſin, no more than in Venials (or no ſins at all); if it will not damn thoſe, who never truly repent of it. So that plainly by excuſing ſinners from Repentance, they make all ſins ſafe, and all duties needleſs: and give men aſſurance, that they may live and dye impenitently, in the neglect of all, even the moſt important duties; and in the practice of any, the worſt wickedneſs, and yet be ſaved. There never was any Hereſie broached in the World, more monſtrous and pernicious than this which the Council of Trent hath brought forth, it hath all the damnable wickedneſs, both as to judgment and practice, that ever was or can be on Earth, in the bowels of it. It promotes the Birth, the Growth, the continuance thereof: for it promiſeth ſafety to impenitency therein, yea Salvation too, by a knack of a very eaſie uſe, and new invention. It hath in it the venome of all damning opinions, practices and neglects; for that which makes them all deadly is impenitency; not would they without this be finally and unavoydably deſtructive. But this would have impenitency it ſelf ſwallowed.