The Novelty of Popery Opposed to the Antiquity of True Christianity, Book 7 · Controversy 8 · Chapter 13
CHAP. 13. In what ſenſe the words Penitence and Satisfaction, are taken in the writings of the Fathers, and that the Penitence of the antient Church, is much different from the penitences of the Roman Church.
THis word Penitence is taken two wayes, in the writings of the Fathers; Sometimes in a proper, ſometimes in a figurative ſenſe.
Penitence in the proper ſenſe, is a change of the ſinner, conſiſting in ſorrow for ſins paſt, and in amendment for the time to come.
The Roman Decree, in the third Diſtinction of Penitence, and Lombard in in the fourth Book, in the fourteenth Diſtinction, bring many texts of the Antients, which give the definition of Penitence. They alleadge this ſentence of Ambroſe, (a)Diſt. 3. de Poenitentia Can. Poenitentia. Poenitentia eſt mala praeterita plangere, & plangenda iterum non committere.Penitence is to weep for ſins paſt, and to do no more, things that we ſhould weep for. And this of Auſtin, (b)Diſt. 3. Can. Satisfactio. Satisfactio poenitentiae eſt peccatorum cauſas excindere, nec earum ſuggeſtionibus aditum indulgere.The ſatisfaction of penitence, is to cut off the cauſes of ſins, and to give no more acceſs to their ſuggeſtions. And of(c)Eadem Diſt. Can. Poenitentiam. Poenitentiam agere eſt & perpetrata plangere & plangenda non perpetrare. Gregory the I. To do penitence, is to lament the faults committed, and to commit no more, things that need to be lamented. And of Smaragdus, (d)Ead. Diſt. Can. Ille. Ille poenitentiam digne agit, qui ſic praeterita mala deplorat, ut futura iterum non committat.That man doth penitence worthily, that ſo lamenteth the evils committed, that he committeth no more for the future. They alleadge alſo Auſtin in the Book of Soliloquies,(e)Eadem Diſt. Can. Inanis. Inanis poenitentia, quam ſequens culpa coinquinat. That Penitence is vain, that is defiled with following ſins.
Ambroſe in the ſecond Book of Penitence, chap. 10. ſaith that we do penitence, cum dolemus admiſſa, admittenda excludimus, when we are ſorry for ſins committed, and exclude thoſe which we might commit in the time to come. This language is conſonant to that of Scripture, and to the nature of true penitence, and agreeth with the etymologie of the word. For the word penitence, ſignifieth repentance: Now that man is not truly repenting, who continueth to do evil. And when all is ſaid, true penitence conſiſteth in amendment of life.
But the Fathers often will take the word Penitence in a figurative ſenſe, uſing that common and familiar Metonymie, whereby the name of the thing ſignified is given unto the ſign. As when we ſay, that a man is mourning, when he weareth clothes that are ſigns of mourning.
Thus words that ſhew joy, are called joy, and faith is taken often for the profeſſion and confeſſion of Faith. In the ſame manner we ſay, that a man doth penitence in the Church, when in the preſence of the Church he giveth ſigns of penitence. It is ſo, that the Fathers call penitence the outward ſigns, and publick profeſſions of repentance; and call thoſe Penitents that make publick profeſſion in the Church, that they are Penitents, although very often their heart be not touched with any repentance. For the ſame reaſon the Fathers call Penitence, the exemplary pain which a ſinner cut off from the Communion, bore in publick for a time prefixed by the Eccleſiaſtical Canons, before he could be reconciled with the Church.
That publick penance is alſo called(f)Tertul. de poenit. cap. 12. Si de exomologeſi retractas. exomologeſis, that is, confeſſion, becauſe the penitent ſinner did publickly confeſs his ſin. Wherein the Novatians were different from the Orthodox: For they received not thoſe that were faln, to publick penitence, and kept them for ever out of the Communion.
(g)Tertul. de poenit. cap. 4. Poenitentiam ita invade, ut nanfragus tabulam. Et cap. 12. Eſſe in exomologeſi ſecunda ſubſidia.Tertullian hath writ a Book of Penitence, and Ambroſe two, where they call Penitence a ſecond remedy after Baptiſm, and as it were a ſecond plank after the ſhipwrack.(h)Hieron. ad Demetriadem. Quaſi ſecunda poſt naufragium miſeris tabula. Hierom ſaith the ſame.(i)Tertul. de Poenit. cap. 7. Ambroſ. l. 2. de Poenit. cap. 10. Sicut unum Baptiſma, ita una poenitentia quae publicè agitur. Tertullian and Ambroſe hold, that publick penance cannot be done but once, and that a man who after he hath fulfilled his penitence, falls into ſin again, can no more be received to do penitence: Wherein they uſe too much rigor.
But that Penitence of the Antients, had nothing common with the penitences of the Roman Church of this time. For the penitence which the Fathers ſpeak of, was publick, and was done according to the publick Conſtitutions and Eccleſiaſtical Canons, but the penitences of the Roman Church are enjoyned in private, and according to the Confeſſors diſcretion. 1. For although the Council of Trent approve publick penitences, yet they are no more practiſed in the Roman Church, as all they that have written of that matter freely acknowledge. 2. The antient penitence was accompliſhed before the abſolution, or reconciliation to the Church. But the penitences and ſatisfactions of the Roman Church, commonly are fulfilled after abſolution. 3. In old time, while a ſinner was accompliſhing the time of his penitence, he was not received to the Communion. But in the Roman Church, a penitent is admitted to the Sacrament, while he is performing his penitence. 4. All the penitence of the Antients, conſiſted only in the publick ſhame, and in the ſuſpenſion and removing from the communion for a certain time, not in whipping, or pilgrimages, or faſts enjoyned by a Confeſſor, or pecuniary pains, or rehearſing of the ſeven Pſalms, or ſaying a limited number of Pater's, interlaced with Ave's, in an unknown tongue. What was the countenance, and what the humiliation of the old penitents, Tertullian teacheth us, in chap. 13. of the Book of Pudicity, and in the Book of Penitence, in the ninth chapter. 5. In thoſe dayes penitence was not done by Atturney, and a man whipt not himſelf, and faſted not for another. 6. Neither were corporal pains changed into pecuniary. 7. And one Confeſſor did not change the penance enjoyned by another. 8. It is to be noted, that in the writings of the Fathers, the word Penitence is found in the ſingular only, becauſe Penitence in their time was ſimple, and conſiſted only in publick humiliation. They did not yet know thoſe pye-bald penances, conſiſting in ſo many Articles, as thoſe which we have ſeen before, when a penitent is enjoyned to faſt ſo many dayes, to ride neither in a coach nor on horſe-back, to eat the leavings of Grey-hounds, and to receive ſo many laſhes ſinging melodiouſly. 9. If any penitent to the publick penitence added private faſts, and more frequent prayers, it was done by a voluntary humiliation, not by the injunction of a Confeſſor. 10. In the writings of the Antients, no mention is found of a Sacrament of Penitence, compoſed with four pieces, Contrition, Confeſſion, Satisfaction and Abſolution, whereof the three firſt are the matter, and the fourth the form. This came out of the forge of Schoolmen, who going about to poliſh Popery, and to give it a form, have beſet it with thorns, and have ſmothered the truth. And that this doctrine was unknown among the Antients, it appeareth by the Books which Tertullian and Ambroſe writ of penitence, where for examples of penitence, they bring the Ninivites and the Iſraelites, whom God hath ſo often ſummoned and invited to repentance, and the Jews, whom John the Baptiſt exhorted to penitence, and Saint Peter who lamented for his ſin; whereas our Adverſaries hold, that in thoſe dayes the Sacrament of Penitence was not yet inſtituted. 11. I paſs by a multitude of errors about Contrition, as that which the Doctors commonly teach, that Contrition is the meritorious cauſe of Juſtification, and deſerves it, at leaſt by congruity. 12. That Attrition is an imperfect Contrition, proceeding not out of the love of God, but out of fear to be puniſhed: That ſuch an Attrition is good, and that by the Abſolution, the Attrition goeth for Contrition, as the Council of Trent teacheth, in Seſſion 14. chap. 4. and Bellarmine in the ſecond Book of Penitence, chap. 17, 18. 13. That it is not neceſſary to have contrition for venial ſins, and that one may be abſolved from them, though he be not contrite and ſorry in his heart for them, as Tolet teacheth in the third Book of the Inſtruction of Prieſts, chap. 5. ſect. 2. And many the like doctrines, of which there is no trace, neither in the Word of God, nor in the Fathers.
It remains to ſay ſomething of the ſenſe, in which the Fathers have taken this word Satisfaction. The holy Scripture ſpeaks not of ſatisfaction towards God. But the Latine Fathers uſe that language many times, according to the ſtyle of the Juriſconſults, who ſpeak of ſatisfying for debts by paying, and for injuries, by craving forgiveneſs.
The ſatisfactions of which the Fathers ſpeak, are either towards God, or towards the Church. Publick penitences were ſatisfactory towards the Church, and reparations of the ſcandal. So did Auſtin underſtand it, in chap. 65. of his Manual to Laurentius, (k)Recte conſtituuntur ab iis qui Eccleſiae praeſunt tempora poenitentiae, ut fiat etiam ſatis Eccleſiae, in qua ſola peccata remittuntur.The times of penitence are with good reaſon conſtituted by thoſe that govern the Church, to ſatisfie the Church alſo, in which only ſins are remitted. This muſt be carefully obſerved, becauſe our Adverſaries alleadge indifferently the teſtimonies of the Fathers, in which it is ſpoken of ſatiſfaction, not diſcerning whether they ſpeak of ſatisfaction to God, or to the Church.
The ſame Fathers ſpeak often of ſatisfying God, but they ſpeak after the ſtyle of the Juriſconſults, which is alſo uſual among the people, for by Satisfaction, they underſtand acknowledging a fault in words, and asking pardon.(l)Diſt. 1. de Poenit. Can. Petrus. Ambroſe who had been the Emperors Lieutenant in Lombardy, and Judge of his Courts, underſtood the terms of Judicature, when he ſaid, Lachrymas Petri lego, ſatisfactionem non lego; that is, I read of Peters tears, but I read not of his ſatisfaction. He ſaith that, becauſe the Goſpel relates that Peter wept, but ſaith not that he craved pardon, or that he confeſſed his ſins. For taking the word ſatisfaction, for humbling ones ſoul after the ſin committed, in that ſenſe tears are a ſatisfaction. And the ſame Father in the ſecond Book of Penitence, chap. 10. ſpeaking of the ſatisfaction which is done for offences unto men, ſaith, that to make ſatisfaction, a man will humble himſelf, kiſs the offended perſons feet, and ſend his innocent children to ask pardon.
Cyprian hath many ſuch paſſages: As in the twelfth Epiſtle,(mEp. 12. Sect. 1. In ſatisfactione Dei & deprecatione vigilare. Watching for the ſatisfaction which is made unto God, and for prayer. And in the 52. Epiſtle,(n)Ep. 52. Sect. 6. Redeunte ad Eccleſiam Trophimo & ſatisfaciente & poenitentia deprecationis errorem primum confitente. Trophimus returning to the Church and ſatisfying, and by the penitence of prayer confeſſing his ſin. And in the 55. Epiſtle,(o)Epiſt. 55. Sect. 13. Intercedunt, ne exoretur precibus & ſatisfactionibus Chriſtus. They hinder that pardon be obtained of Chriſt by prayers and ſatisfactions. And in the book of the unity of the Church,(p)Lib de unit. Eccleſ. cap. 17. Deum plenis ſatisfactionibus deprecantur. They pray to God by full ſatisfactions. In all theſe places and many more, it is evident that ſatisfactions are prayers, whereby the ſinner confeſſeth his ſin, and craveth pardon. And the ſame Father, towards the end of the book to Demetrian a Pagan.(q)Ad Demetrianum. Hortamur dum facultas adeſt, dum aduc de ſaeculo ſupereſt, Deo ſatiisfacere. We exhort you to ſatisfie God. There theſe words ſatisfie God, cannot ſignifie paying a recompence to God for the temporal pain. For according to the doctrine of the Roman Church, that exhortation cannot be made to a Pagan, who is bound to eternal pain.
Tertullian in the book of Penitence, Satisfactio confeſsione diſponitur, Satiſfaction is prepared by Confeſſion. This Doctor was learned in the Roman Laws, and knew that ſatisfaction is made for offences, by confeſſing the offence, and asking pardon.
Sometimes the Fathers ſay, that by amendment of life, and by good works, ſatisfaction is made unto God, meaning that it is a courſe acceptable unto God, as Lactantius ſaith. The man may be brought back and delivered, (r)Lact. lib. 6. de vero cultu, cap. 24. Si eum poeniteat actorum, & ad meliora converſus ſatisfaciat Deo.if he repent of his acts, and being turned to better things, make ſatisfaction unto God.
If any places of the Fathers be found, where they will have us to redeem and expiate our ſins our own ſelves;(ſ)Ambr. de Helia & Jejunio c. 20. Pecuniam habes? redime peccatum tuum, &c. redemptio viri divitiae ejus. as when Ambroſe ſaith, Haſt thou money? redeem thy ſin, &c. A mans wealth is his redemption. We reverence the antients ſo much, as to bear with theſe improper expreſſions, not believing that ever they believed that a mans money can be the redemption of his ſin. And when the ſame Ambroſe ſaith to Valentinian, Tu me redemptorem ſperabas, Thou didſt hope that I ſhould be thy redeemer; and praiſeth that Emperor becauſe he called him his Redeemer; that expreſſion and the like, muſt be corrected by other expreſſions of his, in which he acknowledgeth no other price of our redemption, but the death of Chriſt. By redeeming our own ſins, he underſtood only correcting or bringing our ſelves to a better courſe. Of which ſignification, we have brought many examples out of Scripture. Ambroſe, who is the moſt licentious of all the Fathers in thoſe expreſſions, ſhews evidently, that by redemption from ſin, he underſtands a deliverance by amendment, and inward regeneration. For theſe are his words, in chap. 15. of the firſt book of Penitence,(t)Orationibus & fletibus plebis redimitur à peccato, & in homine mundatur interiore. By the tears of the people and by prayers, they are redeemed from ſin, and cleanſed in the inward man. This Father is ſo far from underſtanding by ſatisfactions, the torments of Purgatory, that in the ſame book(u)Ambroſ. lib. 1. de poenit. c. 17. Cum manifeſtum ſit neque animam ſine carne neque carnem ſine anima, cum ſibi ſint geſtorum operum conſortiis copulatae, ſine conſortio vel poenae eſſe vel praemii. he maintains that the ſouls ſeparate from the bodies, cannot be tormented. But our Adverſaries gather up the faults of the Fathers, and leave out their vertues; Like flies, that will chuſe ſcabs, rather then the ſound parts of a body to ſit upon. They make uſe of theſe improper terms, to perſwade men that they are their own redeemers, and that ſins are redeemed with money. May we not obtain ſo much of theſe Gentlemens kindneſs, that this honour be deferred unto the eternal Son of God, to have the title of Redeemer attributed unto him alone? Is not this a truth worth dying for? Is it not better to ſuffer all things, then to impart that praiſe to any creature, or to believe that all the money of the world is ſufficient to be the redemption for one ſin?