Serm. CVI. in order to Pardon 11 ers ; and then becaufeprivate Chriftiansmay alfo be ufeful to oneanother in this kind, he adds, that they fhould alto lay open their condition and troubles to one another, that fo they might have the help of one.anothers Advice and Prayers; and very probably all the Confeflion here meant of private Chriftians to one ano- ther is of the Offences and Injuries they may have been guiltyof, one towards .a- nother; that they fhould be reconciled upon this occafion; and as a teftimony of their Charity, Ihould pray onefar another; whereas they are bound to fendfor the Elders of the Church, and they are to pray over them, as an a& not only ofCharity, but of Superiority, and by virtue of their Office in the Church, a more efpecial_ blefling being to be expe&ed from their Prayers. Thefe three Texts are the main Arguments from Scripture, which they of the Church ofRome bring to provetheir auricular or fecret Confeffion tobe of Divine Inftitution ; and woful Proofs they are : which (hews what miferable fhifts they are reduced to, who refolve tomaintaina bad Caufe. I proceed in the Second place, to difcover the Falfhood of their other Preten- ces, that this kind of Confeffion bath always been praftifed in the Catholick Church ; andnot only fo, but believedabfolutely neceffary to the remiffionof Mens fins and their eternal falvation. The truth of the whole matter is this : Publick Confeffion and Penance for open and fcandalous Crimes was in ufe, and with great ftri&nefs obferved in the firft Ages of Chriftianity ; and there was then no general Law or Cullom, that exa&ed fecret Confeffion of fins to the Prieft, as a neceffary part of repentance, and condition of forgivenefs: afterward publick Penance was by degrees difufed, which plainly (hews that, in the opinion of the Church, this Difcipiine, how ufeful foever, was not of abfolute necetfrty to reftore Men to the Favour ofGod: In place of this came in private Confeflion to the Prie(t, particularly appoin- ted to this Office, and calfd the Penitentiary ; but upon occafionof a fcandal that hapned, this alfo was abrogated by Ne5tarius Bifhop of Conflantinople which !hews that neitherwas this neceffary. And this a& of Neúarius was jultifiedby his Succeffor St. Chryfoflom, who doesover and over molt exprefly teach, that Confef- fion of our fins to Men is not neceffary to the forgivenefs of them, but that it is fufficient to confefs them to God alone ; fo that St. Chryfoflom does plainly flan(' condemned by the Decrees of the Council of?rent. And thus for feveral Ages the matterrated, till the degeneracy of theChurch of Romegrowing towards its height, about theIX. and X. Centuries, fame began to contend for the neceflìty of fecret Confeffion ; and this in the Year r 215. in the IV.Council ofLateran under Pope Innocent III. was decreed and eftablifh'd. And this is thefist! publick Law that was madein the ChrittianChurch concer- ningthis matter, notwithflanding all the boafts of the Council of Trent, about the antiquity of this Inffitution and Praftice; for Oration, who lived about 5o Years before this Council, tells us, that in his time feveral wife and religious Men were of the contrary opinion, and did not hold Confeffionneceff: ry by virtue of any Divine Law. Afterwards in the Council of Florence, and efpecially in that of Trent, this Decree of the Council ofLateran was confirmed and enlarged in many particulars, of which I have alreadygiven fome account. And whereas they pretend for themfelves the univerfál Pra&Icenot onlyof the pat}, but prefent Church, we are able to Phew from clear Teftimony of their own Writers, that Confeffion, as taught and prafifed in the Church of Rome, is no where elfe inufe at this day, neither among the Abyifines, nor Indiansof St. Tho- mas, nor the Neflorians, nor the Armenians, nor theYacobites, Churches of great antiquity and vati extent. And as for the Greek Church, if we may believe Cara- tiara, and the Author of the Glofs upon the Canon Law, the Greeks hadancient- Jy noTradition concerning the,neceffrtyofConfeffion, nor do they at this day a- gree with the Roman Church inall points concerning it. So that, infhort, there is noNation nor Church throughout the whole World, that bears thename of Chrifl:ian, the Roman Church onlyexcepted, that doth ful- ly embrace andmaintain the whole Do&rine of the Council of Trost concerning Confeflion 5 andyet according to their Principles, the whole is of equal neceffity C 2 to
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=