A detection of sundrie foule errours, lies, sclaunders, corruptions, and other false dealinges, touching doctrine, and other matters vttered and practized by M.Iewel, in a booke lately by him set foorth entituled, a defence of the apologie. &c. By Thomas Harding doctor of diuinitie.

About this Item

Title
A detection of sundrie foule errours, lies, sclaunders, corruptions, and other false dealinges, touching doctrine, and other matters vttered and practized by M.Iewel, in a booke lately by him set foorth entituled, a defence of the apologie. &c. By Thomas Harding doctor of diuinitie.
Author
Harding, Thomas, 1516-1572.
Publication
Lovanii :: Apud Ioannem Foulerum,
Anno 1568.
Rights/Permissions

To the extent possible under law, the Text Creation Partnership has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above, according to the terms of the CC0 1.0 Public Domain Dedication (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/). This waiver does not extend to any page images or other supplementary files associated with this work, which may be protected by copyright or other license restrictions. Please go to http://www.textcreationpartnership.org/ for more information.

Subject terms
Jewel, John, 1522-1571. -- Defence of the Apologie of the Churche of Englande.
Catholic Church -- Apologetic works.
Link to this Item
http://name.umdl.umich.edu/A02637.0001.001
Cite this Item
"A detection of sundrie foule errours, lies, sclaunders, corruptions, and other false dealinges, touching doctrine, and other matters vttered and practized by M.Iewel, in a booke lately by him set foorth entituled, a defence of the apologie. &c. By Thomas Harding doctor of diuinitie." In the digital collection Early English Books Online 2. https://name.umdl.umich.edu/A02637.0001.001. University of Michigan Library Digital Collections. Accessed June 7, 2024.

Pages

Iewel. Pag. 133.

VVe saie, that priuate Confession to be made vnto the Minister, is neither commaunded by Christe,* 1.1 nor necessary to saluation: and there∣fore Chrysostom saith, I wil thee not betraye thy selfe openly, not to accuse thy selfe before others. But I counsel thee to obey the Prophete saying, open thy waye vnto the Lorde.

Harding.

* 1.2NEither doo we say precisely, that Priuate Confes∣sion is necessarie, but that either Priuate, or Pub∣like is necessarily to be made to a Priest, bicause he onely hath power of Christe to forgeue, and to retein sinnes: And he can not iudge, who are to be forgeuen, or who are to be reteined, excepte the sinners do parti∣cularly open their hart, and thought, where the foun∣teine of sinnes is,* 1.3 accordingly as Christ said: Euil thoughts come forth from the hart.

S. Chrysostom in this place speaketh not in deede of Sacramental Confession, but of that, which is daily to be made vnto God alone.* 1.4 He had said before, Poeniten∣tem non oportet peccatum suum obliuioni tradere: peccatum Confessione minuitur, nullum inuenitur delictorum tale re∣medium, sicut eorum continuata memoria. The penitent must not forgete his sinne. The sinne is diminished by Confession. No such remedie of sinnes is found, as the continual remembrance of them. Nec tantum nos pec∣catores esse dicamus, sed etiam ipsa peccata specialiter singula computemus. Neither let vs only saye we are sinners (in general) but let vs recken vp euery sinne in special.

Page 275

Vpon which wordes immediatly it foloweth: I saie not to thee, that thou shalt bewray thy selfe openly, but open thy way vnto our Lorde.

Now put the whole tale of S. Chrysostome together: whereas he willed men to haue continual remembrance of their sinnes, to confesse them, and that in special, and particularly, and stil to do it: a man might worthily haue said vnto him, why syr, shal I go euery daye to the Priest, and neuer leaue confessing the selfe same sinne? To this obiection he maketh answer, saying: Ibid thee not bewraie thy selfe openly, nor to accuse thy selfe before others. Reuele thy wayes to God. Here then we haue,* 1.5 that it is good to cal the selfe same sinnes oftetimes particularly to remē∣brance, and to cōfesse them ofte vnto God. But that they neede not at al to be confessed to the priest, that S. Chry∣sostome saith not. For in other places he hath taught vs, that the priest is in better case to purge sinnes now, then the priest in the lawe was to shewe, that the leprouse were purged. His wordes are.

Corporis lepram haud purgare quidem,* 1.6 sed purgatos pro∣bare, Iudaeorum sacerdotibus solis licebat. At vero nostris sacerdotibus non corporis lepram, verùm animae sordes, non dico purgatas probare, sed purgare prorsus concessum est. The priestes onely of the Iewes had power, not to purge the Lepre of the body, but to trie them that were purged. But truly vnto our Priestes it is geuen vtterly to cleanse, not the Lepre of the body, but the filth of the soule. Marke reader these wordes, To cleanse, and not to trie who are cleane.

If our Priestes do so farre passe the Priestes of the Lawe, and yet no Leprous man might be admitted into

Page [unnumbered]

the Temple, and Communion of the Iewes, vntil the on∣ly Priestes of Moyses law had declared him to be cleane: much lesse can any mortal sinner (who in his soule is le∣prous) be ordinarily purged, but onely by the Priestes of Christ, who now, as S. Chrysostom saith, doo not only shew that men are purged, but haue power throwghly to purge the lepre, that is to saie, the mortal sinne of the soule. But how can they discretely purge that, which is not shewed vnto them?* 1.7 When Christ sent away the le∣prouse man, bidding him to shewe him selfe vnto the prieste, then he declared (as in a figure of the law) that in the time of the new testament a great sinner should not be purged, before that he had shewed him selfe, that is to saie, had reueled the soares of his hart, and conscience vnto the priest. So haue we, that it is good and necessarie to confesse al our sinnes vnto God, and our Lepres, or mortal sinnes also vnto the Priest. Of these two truthes neither impugneth other. That is a continual practise of Heretikes, to reproue the one kind of Confession, bicause they find somtimes the other alone cōmēded, or spokē of. A wise, and a good mā wil cōferre, and ioine al truthes to∣gether, and not go about to destroie one truth by another.

As for Gratian, and al your hotchepotte of gloses, I wil leaue for a more conuenient place, where per∣happes if it shalbe thought worth the labour, they shalbe answered al at ones.

Against your heretical Proposition I wil set S. Basils catholike iudgement. It was demaunded of S. Basil, Qui vult confiteri peccata sua,* 1.8 num omnibus confiteri debet, & quibuscunque, & quibus. He that wil confesse his sinnes, whether he ought to confesse them to al men, and to

Page 276

what soeuer personnes, or els to whom? Hereunto he maketh this answer. Necessarium est confiteri peccata ijs, quibus administratio mysteriorū Dei concredita est. Sic enim & qui olim poenitentiā egerunt, coram sanctis fecisse compe∣riuntur. Scriptū est enim, in Euāgelio quidē, quòd Iohanni Ba∣ptistae confite bantur peccata sua: in Actis verò, Apostolis ipsis, à quibus etiam omnes baptizabantur. It is necessarie to cō∣fesse sinnes vnto them, to whom the dispensation of the mysteries is cōmitted (those are the priestes). For so they that in old time did penaunce are founde to haue done before the Saintes. (He meaneth priestes). For it is writ∣ten in the Gospel, that they confessed their sinnes to Ihon Baptist: In the Actes, that they cōfessed them to the A∣postles, of whom also they were al baptized. By S. Basil then it is necessarie to confesse sinnes vnto the priestes, who are Christes ministers: by M. Iewel it is not necessa∣ry at al. Who is the likelier of these two to be a lyer?

Notes

Do you have questions about this content? Need to report a problem? Please contact us.