Answer to Book by Romish Priests, Doctrine 15
XV. That we ought not to confeſs our ſins to any man, but to God only.
Anſwer.
THis is a moſt impudent falſhood; for we preſs this as a Duty in ſome caſes, for the quieting of mens Conſciences, when they are burdned with Guilt; particularly, before they receive the Communion, and when they are ſick. But that which we affirm in this matter, is, That God doth not require all Chriſtians to make a particular Confeſſion, privately to a Prieſt, of every ſin he hath committed, tho only in thought, under pain of being damn'd, if he do not. Much leſs do we believe ſuch Confeſſion to be Meritorious, and Satisfactory for ſin. Nor do the Scriptures which he quotes, prove a ſyllable of this doctrine.
The firſt he alledges, III. Matth. 5, 6.Matth. III. 5, 6. ſpeaks of thoſe who confeſſed their ſins, before they received Baptiſm of John the Baptiſt. But what is this to Confeſſion of ſins after Baptiſm? And beſides, there is not a word of their confeſſing them to John; nor of particular Confeſſion of every ſin: And therefore Maldonate tells ſuch raw Divines as this, We ought not to rely upon this Teſtimony, for it is manifeſt it doth not treat of Sacramental Confeſſion, which was not yet inſtituted. And Bellarmine, their great Maſter, durſt venture no further, than to call this, which was done at John's Baptiſm, a figure of their Sacramental Confeſſion. And this poor man himſelf concludes no more from hence, than this, That we may confeſs our ſins, (who doubts of it?) not only to God, but alſo to man. But this is very ſhort of what he undertook to prove by expreſs Texts, That we ought to confeſs, &c.
Act. XIX. 18, 19.Nor dare he venture to conclude any more from the next place, but that we may confeſs our ſins to men, XIX. Acts 18, 19. Where he bids us, Behold, Confeſſion, but doth not tell us to whom: So we are never the wiſer; becauſe it might be to God, and that before all the Company, as the words ſeem to import. But he bids us alſo, Behold Satisfaction; becauſe ſeveral people, (not the ſame he ſpake of before) brought forth their curious Books, which were worth a great deal of money, and burnt them before all men. A plain and publick demonſtration indeed, that they deteſted thoſe Magical Arts whereby they gave alſo ſatisfaction to all men, of their ſincere renunciation of ſuch wicked practices: But what proof is this of a Compenſation made to God hereby for their Sins, which deſerved of him an acquittance?
His Third Text is ſtill more remote from the buſineſs, V. Numb. 6, 7.Numb. V. 6, 7. and therefore alledged by wiſer heads than his, ſuch as Bellarmine, only as a figure of Sacramental Confeſſion; the leaſt ſhadow of which doth not appear: For there is neither Confeſſion of all ſins here mentioned, but only of that particular for which the Sacrifice was offered; nor Confeſſion of the ſin to the Prieſt, but rather to the Lord, as the words more plainly ſignifie; If a man or w…an commit any ſin that men commit, and do treſpaſs againſt the LORD, and that perſon be guilty, then they ſhall confeſs their ſin which they have done. An unbiaſſed Reader would hence conclude, they were bound to confeſs their ſin to the LORD, againſt whom they had treſpaſſed.
His other Scriptures, perhaps, he was ſenſible, were nothing to the purpoſe; and therefore he only ſets down the Chapter and Verſe, as his manner is, when he bids, See more, where nothing is to be ſeen: For the firſt is only the ſame we had out of St. Matthew. The next, V. James 16. ſpeaks of one man's confeſſing his ſins to his neighbour. The next we had before, under the former Head: And the laſt I am willing to think is miſ-printed, or his mind was much amiſs when he noted it, XVII. Matth. 14.
His Fathers alſo have only the word Confeſſion, not ſaying, whether to God, or to man; and he thinks that enough: But it is a ſhameleſs thing to quote St. Chryſoſtom for this Doctrine; who in ſo many places exhorts his people only to confeſs their ſins in private to God; that Sixtus Senenſis is forced to expound him, as if he ſpake only againſt the neceſſity of ſuch Publick Confeſſion, as was aboliſhed at Conſtantinople. But Petavius (who proves there was no ſuch Publick Confeſſion) is fain to deſire the Reader to be ſo kind, as not to take St. Chryſoſtom's words ſtrictly, but ſpoken popularly, in a heat of declamation: And we are content to do ſo, if they would be ſo juſt as to do the ſame in other caſes: But ſtill we cannot think St. Chryſoſtom ſo very hot-headed, but that ſometimes he would have been ſo cool, as to have ſpoken more cautiouſly, and not have ſo frequently overlaſht, as they make him.
That which he quotes out of Ambroſe, he is told by Bellarmine, is Greg. Nyſſen; ſo little doth this poor man know of their own Authors. As for his ſitting to hear Confeſſions, (if his Author be worth any thing, which is much ſuſpected by Learned men of his own Communion) it is meant of Publick Confeſſion, ſuch as was in uſe in his time.