"Some say that they ought to confess their sins only unto God, and some think that they are to be confessed unto the priests: both of which, not without great fruit, is practised within the holy Church. Namely thus, that we both confess our sins unto God, who is the forgiver of sins, (saying with David: I acknowledge my sin unto thee, and mine iniquity have I not hid. I said I will confess against myself my transgressions unto the Lord: and thou forgavest the iniquity of my sin) and, according to the institution of the Apostle, confess our sins one unto another, and pray one for another, that we may be healed. The confession therefore which is made unto God, purgeth sins; but that which is made unto the priest, teacheth in what sort those sins should be purged. For God, the author and bestower of salvation and health, giveth the same sometime by the invisible administration of his power, sometime by the operation of physicians." This Canon is cited by Gratian out of the Penitential of Theodorus, Archbishop of Canterbury, but clogged with some unnecessary additions. As when in the beginning thereof it is made the opinion of the Grecians, that sins should be confessed only unto God; and of the rest of the Church, that they should be confessed to priests: where those words, ut Græci, in Gratian, seem unto Cardinal Bellarmine "to have crept out of the margin into the text, and to

67

65 Quidam solummodo Deo confiteri debere dicunt peccata; quidam vero sacerdotibus confitenda esse percensent: quod utrumque non sine magno fructu intra sanctam fit ecclesiam, ita duntaxat, ut et Deo, qui remissor est peccatorum, confiteamur peccata nostra, (et cum David dicamus, Delictum meum cognitum tibi feci, et injustitiam meam non abscondi: dixi, Confitebor adversum me injustitias meas Domino, et tu remisisti impietatem peccati mei,) et secundum institutionem Apostoli, Confiteamur alterutrum peccata nostra, et oremus pro invicem ut salvemur. Confessio itaque quæ Deo fit, purgat peccata: ea vero quæ sacerdoti fit, docet qualiter ipsa purgentur peccata. Deus namque, salutis et sanitatis auctor et largitor, plerumque hanc præbet suæ potentiæ invisibili administratione, plerumque medicorum operatione. Ibid. cap. 33.

66

66 Grat. de Pœnit. Distinct. 1. cap. ult. Quidam Deo.

67 Quidam Deo solummodo confiteri debere peccata dicunt, ut Græci; quidam vero sacerdotibus confitenda esse percensent, ut tota fere sancta ecclesia. Ibid.

68 Videtur irrepsisse in textum ex margine; et marginalem annotationem imperiti alicujus fuisse qui ex facto Nectarii collegit, sublatam omnino confessionem sacramentalem apud Græcos. Nam alioqui in ipso Capitulari Theodori, unde canon ille descriptus est, non habentur duæ illæ voces, ut Græci; neque etiam habentur in Concilio 11. Cabilonensi, cap. 33. unde Theodorus Capitulum illud accepisse videtur: sed nec Magister Sentent. in iv. lib. Dist. XVII. eandem sententiam adducens, addidit illud, ut Græci. Bellar. de Pœnitent. lib. iii. cap. 5.

70

For

have been a marginal annotation of some unskilful man, who gathered by the fact of Nectarius, that sacramental confession was wholly taken away among the Grecians. otherwise," saith he, "in the Capitular itself of Theodorus, whence that Canon was transcribed, those two words, ut Græci, are not to be had; nor are they also to be had in the second Council of Cavaillon, c. 33, whence Theodorus seemeth to have taken that chapter: neither yet doth the Master of the sentences, in his 4th book and 17th distinction, bringing in the same sentence, add those words, ut Græci." But the Cardinal's conjecture of the translating of these words out of the margin into the text of Gratian is of little worth; seeing we find them expressly laid down in the elder collections of the decrees made by 69 Burchardus and Ivo; from whence it is evident that Gratian borrowed this whole chapter, as he hath done many a one beside. For as for "the Capitular itself of Theodorus, whence" the Cardinal too boldly affirmeth "that Canon was transcribed;" as if he had looked into the book himself; we are to know, that no such Capitular of Theodorus is to be found: only Burchardus and Ivo (in whom, as we said, those controverted words are extant) set down this whole chapter as taken out of Theodore's Penitential, and so misguided Gratian; for indeed in Theodorus' Penitential, which I did lately transcribe out of a most ancient copy kept in Sir Robert Cotton's treasury, no part of that chapter can be seen; nor yet any thing else tending to the matter now in hand, this short sentence only excepted, Confessionem suam Deo soli, si necesse est, licebit agere; "It is lawful that confession be made unto God alone, if need require." And to suppose, as the Cardinal doth, that Theodorus should take this chapter out of the second council of Cavaillon, were an idle imagination ; seeing it is well known that Theodore died Archbishop of Canterbury in the year of our Lord 690, and the council of Cavaillon was held in the year 813, that is, 123 years after the other's death. The truth is, he who made the additions to the Capitularia of Charles the Great and Ludovicus Pius, gathered by Ansegisus and Benedict, translated this Canon out of that council into his "collection :

69 Burchard. Decret. lib. xix. cap. 145. 70 Ivo, Decret. part. xv. cap. 155.

71 Addit. III. cap. 31. edit. Pithæi et Lindenbrogii.

which Bellarmine, as it seemeth, having some way heard of, knew not to distinguish between those Capitularia and Theodore's Penitential; being herein as negligent as in his allegation of the fourth book of the sentences: where the Master doth not bring in this sentence at all, but having among other questions propounded this also for one," Whether it be sufficient that a man confess his sins to God alone, or whether he must confess to a priest," doth thereupon set down the diversity of men's opinions touching that matter, and saith, that "unto some it seemed to suffice if confession were made to God only, without the judgment of the priest, or the confession of the Church, because David said, I said I will confess unto the Lord: he saith not, Unto the priest; and yet he sheweth that his sin was forgiven him." For in these points, as the same author had before noted, "even the learned were found to hold diversely; because the doctors seemed to deliver divers and almost contrary judgments therein.

6674

The diverse sentences of the doctors touching this question, whether external confession were necessary or not, are at large laid down by Gratian; who in the end leaveth the matter in suspense, and concludeth in this manner : 74 Upon what authorities, or upon what strength of reasons both these opinions are grounded, I have briefly laid open. But whether of them we should rather cleave to, is reserved to the judgment of the reader. For both of them have for their favourers both wise and religious men.' And so the matter rested undetermined 1150 years after Christ; howsoever the Roman correctors of Gratian do tell us, that now the case is altered, and that it is most certain, and must be held for most

72 Utrum sufficiat peccata confiteri soli Deo, an oporteat confiteri sacerdoti. Quibusdam visum est sufficere, si soli Deo fiat confessio sine judicio sacerdotali et confessione ecclesiæ, quia David dixit, Dixi, Confitebor Domino, &c. non ait, Sacerdoti; et tamen remissum sibi peccatum dicit. Petr. Lombard. lib. iv. Sentent.

Dist. XVII.

78 In his enim etiam docti diversa sentire inveniuntur; quia super his varia ac pene adversa tradidisse videntur Doctores. Ibid.

74 Quibus auctoritatibus vel quibus rationum firmamentis utraque sententia innitatur, in medium breviter exposuimus. Cui autem harum potius adhærendum sit, lectoris judicio reservatur. Utraque enim fautores habet sapientes et religiosos viros. De Pœnit. Dist. 1. cap. 89. Quamvis.

75 Certissimum est, et pro certissimo habendum, peccati mortalis necessariam esse confessionem sacramentalem, eo modo ac tempore adhibitam, quo in Concilio Tridentino post alia Concilia est constitutum. Rom. Correct. ibid.

certain, that the sacramental confession of mortal sins is necessary, used in that manner, and at such time, as in the Council of Trent after other Councils it is appointed." But the first Council wherein we find any thing determined touching this necessity, is that of Lateran under Innocent the Third, wherein we heard that transubstantiation was established for there it was ordained, that "76 Omnis utriusque sexus fidelis, every faithful one of either sex, being come to years of discretion, should by himself alone, once in the year at least, faithfully confess his sins unto his own priest; and endeavour according to his strength to fulfil the penance enjoined unto him, receiving reverently at least at Easter the Sacrament of the Eucharist: otherwise, that both being alive he should be kept from entering into the Church, and being dead should want Christian burial." Since which determination Thomas Aquinas, in his exposition of the text of the fourth book of the Sentences, distinct. 17, holdeth "the denial of the necessity of confession unto salvation to be heresy; which before that time, saith Bonaventure, in his Disputations upon the same fourth book, was not heretical; forasmuch as many Catholic doctors did hold contrary opinions therein, as appeareth by Gratian.

79

78

But Medina will not admit by any means, that it should be accounted "strictly heresy;" but would have it said, that "it savours of heresy." And for this decree of confession to be made once in the year, he saith, that it "doth not declare nor interpret any divine right of the thing, but rather appointeth the time for confession." Durand thinketh that it may be said, that this Statute containeth 80, Pan holy

76 Omnis utriusque sexus fidelis, postquam ad annos discretionis pervenerit, omnia sua solus peccata confiteatur fideliter, saltem semel in anno, proprio sacerdoti; et injunctam sibi Pœnitentiam studeat pro viribus adimplere, suscipiens reverenter ad minus in Pascha Eucharistiæ sacramentum, &c. alioquin et vivens ab ingressu ecclesiæ arceatur, et moriens Christiana careat sepultura. Concil. Lateran. cap. 21.

77 Magister et Gratianus hoc pro opinione ponunt. Sed nunc, post determinationem ecclesiæ sub Inn. III. factam, hæresis reputanda est. Thom.

78 Ideo dicendum, quod præfata assertio non est stricte hæresis, sed sapit hæresim. Jo. Medina, Tractat. 11. de Confessione, Quæst. IV.

79 Nam illud, quod illic dicitur de confessione semel in anno, non procedit declarando, nec divinum jus interpretando, sed potius tempus confitendi instituendo. Id. ibid. Quæst. II.

80 In quo præmittitur exhortatio sancta et salubris de confessione facienda, et subjungitur præceptum de perceptione Eucharistiæ vallatum pœna. Durand. in lib. iv. Sentent. Distinct. XVII. Quæst.

XIV.

and wholesome exhortation of making confession, and then adjoineth a precept of the receiving of the Eucharist, backed with a penalty;" or if both of them be precepts, that "the penalty respecteth only the precept of communicating (of the transgression whereof knowledge may be taken), and not the precept of confession;" of the transgression whereof the Church can take no certain notice, and therefore can appoint no certain penalty for it. But howsoever, this we are sure of, that the canonists afterward held no absolute necessity of obedience to be required therein, as unto a sacramental institution ordained by Christ for obtaining remission of sins; but a canonical obedience only, as unto an useful constitution of the Church. And therefore, where Gratian in his first distinction de Pænitentia had, in the 34th chapter and the three next following, propounded the allegations which made for them, who held 82 that men might obtain pardon for their sins without any oral confession of them, and then proceeded to the authorities which might seem to make for the contrary opinion; Johannes Semeca, at the beginning of that part, upon those words of Gratian, Alii X e contrario testantur, putteth to this gloss: 83 From this place until the section, His auctoritatibus, he allegeth for the other part, that sin is not forgiven unto such as are of years without confession of the mouth, which yet is false," saith he. But this free dealing of his did so displease Friar Manrique, who, by the command of Pius Quintus, set out a censure upon the glosses of the Canon Law, that he gave direction these words, "which yet is false," should be clean blotted out. Which direction of his, notwithstanding, the Roman correctors under Gregory XIII. did not follow; but letting the words still stand, give them a check only with this marginal annotation: "Nay it is most true, that without confession, in desire at least, the sin is not forgiven."

Et ob hoc posset rationabiliter videri alicui, quod prædicta pœna illius statuti respicit solum præceptum de communione, de cujus transgressione constare potest, et non præceptum de confessione. Idem ibid.

22 Unde datur intelligi, quod etiam ore tacente veniam consequi possumus. De Pænit. Dist. 1. cap. 34. Convertimini.

Vide initium ejusdem Distinct. et Glossam, ibid. verb. Sunt enim.

83 Ab hoc loco usque ad sect. His auctoritatibus, pro alia parte allegat, quod scilicet adulto peccatum non dimittitur sine oris confessione, quod tamen falsum est. Gloss. 84 Imo verissimum, sine confessione in voto non dimitti peccatum. Rom. Correct. ibid. in marg.

G