Rhemes against Rome: or, The remoouing of the gagg of the new Gospell, and rightly placing it in the mouthes of the Romists, by the Rhemists in their English translation of the Scriptures. Which counter-gagg is heere fitted by the industrious hand of Richard Bernard ...

XXVI. Proposition. That Confession, commonly called Auricular, or Sacra∣mentall, is of necessitie.

THey meane hereby, a secret confession onely to the Priest alone, of all, at least mortall sinnes, particularly reciting them, with all circumstances thereof, as they committed them in thought, word and deed: and that without this, there is no remission of sinne.

This wee deny to be of necessitie. But they affirme it to bee such an ordinance of Christ, as not onely hee which doth con∣demne and contemne it; but whosoeuer doth neglect or omit the same when he may haue it, cannot be saued.

Confuted by their owne Bible.

I. It affordeth no commandement, or any example hereof, either in the Old Testament, or in the New, that any should goe to a Priest secretly, and make confession after this manner to him. Therefore this is no diuine ordinance necessary to Sal∣uation.

II. Promises of mercy and forgiuenesse are made to the confession of sinnes, not mentioning the particular enumera∣tion of them to a Priest, 1. Ioh. 1. 9. Prou. 28. 13. Therefore there is pardon without this burthensome ordinance, which is maintained so strictly among the Romanists, that thereby the Priests may tyrannize ouer the consciences of the poore Lay-Catholiques, and further serue their owne turnes for politique ends.

III. There are examples of such as obtained pardon. First, by confession onely to God, as Dauid himselfe withesseth in Psal. 32. 5, 6. Secondly, by making onely a generall confession,* 1.1 as Dauid did, 2. Sam. 12. 13. This wee see also to be so in the Publicanes confession, Luk. 18. 13, 14. in Zacheus confession, Luk. 19. 8, 9. in the Prodigall sons confession, Luk. 15. 21. and

thirdly, by onely hearty contrition, without any vocall con∣fession at all, as in the example of that Woman, which with teares washed Christs feet, Luk. 7. 38.

Therefore this comming to a Priest, and numbring vp sinnes in particular, is not absolutely necessarie to obtaine pardon of them.

Contraried by Antiquitie.

August. Confess. lib. 10. cap. 3. What haue I to doe with men, that they should heare my confessions, as though they were able to heale all my sores?

Nectarius the Bishop of Constantinople put it downe, and* 1.2 all the Bishops in the East, and their Churches: which they ne∣uer would haue done, had it beene the ordinance of God, and necessarie for all times and people.

Chrysostome, hom. 2. in Psal. 50. who was after Nectarius, saith, I will thee not to confesse thy sinnes to thy fellow-ser∣uant (meaning the Priest:) confesse them vnto God that may heale them.

And in Hom. 22. ad popul. Antiochen. saith further, This is wonderfull in God, that hee not onely forgiueth vs our sinnes: but neither doth disclose them, nor make them knowne, nei∣ther doth he enforce vs to come forth and tell them: hee requi∣reth no more, but that we speak to him alone, and to him alone confesse our faults. This Father held it then, not of necessitie to goe to a Priest.

For more testimonies, see the late and learned booke of Bi∣shop Vsher, vpon this point; hee citeth Chrysost. Austin, the E∣gyptian Abbot, Basil, Ambrose, Maximns; Taurinensis, Greg. Nyssen, Origen, Nectarius, Clem, Alexandrinus, Laurence, Bishop of Nouaria. Theodore an Archbishop of Canterbury.

Gainsaid by themselues.

The Canon Law saith, de poen. D. 5. in poenit. Glossa. It was taken vp, onely by a certaine tradition of the Church, and

not by any authoritie of either the Old, or New Nesta∣ment.

Panormitan. super 5. de poen. & remiss. ca. omnes vtrius{que} saith, that hee findeth no manifest authoritie, that euer God or Christ commanded vs to confesse our sinnes to a Priest.

Petrus Oxoniensis the Diuinity Reader at Salamanca, taught publikely, that it had a beginning from a positiue law of the Church, and not from the Law of God.

Beatus Rhenanus in the Argument of Tertul. de poenit. that* 1.3 this priuy kinde of Confession was euer commanded by God, saith he, we reade not.

Erasmus in annot. ad Epist. Hieronymi ad Oceanum de obitu Fabiolae, telleth vs, that in Saint Ieromes time, (foure hundred yeeres after Christ) secret confession of sinnes was not or∣dained.

Bellar. lib. 3. de poenit. cap. 1. acknowledgeth, that Rhenanus and Erasmus beleeued that this secret confession was not insti∣tuted, nor commanded by God, nor in vse in the Ancient Church. And these were as two learned Papists, as euer were. And therefore their testimonie is of no small credit herein: Yea, Erasmus there telleth vs, that the Writings of the Fathers are abused, to maintaine this priuate and secret confession.

Caietan in 3. Tho. q 8. art. 4. holdeth, that a man by contri∣tion, without confession, is made cleane, and a formall member of the Church: Yea, he saith, that hee which is contrite for his sinne, and receiueth the communion without Shrift, sinneth not mortally, though he haue a Confessor at hand.

Cornelius Agrippa. de vanit. cap. 64. I could, saith he, by ma∣ny examples fresh in memory, shew how fit this Shrift is for bawdry.

If any desire more, reade Bishop Vshers last booke, wherein is cited Gratian, Iohannes Semeca, Michael of Bononia, Iohannes de Selua.

Also let him look into Doctor Whites way of the true Church, of the Papists differing opinions about this, pag. 440. 441. in quarto, digress. 55. Num. 8. and D. Whites last booke, p. 190, 191.* 1.4 192. citing Iohn Medina, Gratian, and Caietan, Iansenius, Ʋas∣ques,

Mich. Palacius, Gloss. on Gratian, Gerson, Panormitan. Mal∣donat, and others.

Scriptures obiected answered.

Math. 18. 18. Whatsoeuer ye shall binde on earth, &c.

Answ. 1. Here is not a word of confession in this place of Scripture, but rather of accusation by another. For in the words foregoing, the notice giuen to the Church, is from the partie not offending, but offended. If thy brother trespasse against thee, &c. tell it to the Church. But all Auricular confession is supposed voluntary, whereby a man accuseth himselfe, and in priuate, not publike, as here.

Ioh. 20. 23. Whose sinnes ye remit, &c.

Answ. 1. Here is no mention of confession of sinnes to them. Secondly, the authoritie giuen here to the Apostles, was exerci∣sed in the publike Ministerie, & preaching of the Word, though they heard no priuate confession, as the Papists dreame of. Therefore the Apostle Saint Paul calleth the preaching of the Word, the ministerie of Reconciliation, 2. Cor. 5. 18. Thirdly, Christ saith there, As my Father sent mee, so I send you. Now he was not sent to heare priuate confessions, and thereupon to giue them absolutions: but by preaching, to binde vp the broken hearted, to proclaime libertie to the captiues, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound, Esai. 61. 1. Luk. 4. 18. Nei∣ther did he binde any to priuate confession, nor sate to heare the same. Therefore such as he sendeth, are not tyed to doe other∣wise; neither hath heere Popish shrift any ground. Fourthly, Caietan on this place, saith, that the Sacrament of penance hath here no commandement.

Act. 19. 18. And many that beleeued, came and confessed, &c.

Answ. Here is mention indeed of confession, but this pro∣ueth not imposed priuate confession, secretly in the Priests eare. For first, this is of a confession voluntary, not enforced. Second∣ly, of many that did it: but not of all. Thirdly, publike, and not in S. Pauls eare. For as they shewed their workes, and brought their bookes, and burnt them before all men, verse 19; So was

this confession open: for the Text maketh no difference of these actions. Fourthly, Here it is said, they confessed: but no particu∣lar enumeration of sinnes with circumstances. Fiftly, Caietan a Cardinall, in his Commentarie hereof, holdeth, that this place is not meant of Auricular confession.

Iam. 5. 16. Confesse your faults one to another.

Answ. This is nothing for the Popish confession. For first, it is as generall as prayer one for another. But Prayer is a dutie common to all. Secondly, he saith not, the prayer of the Priest, but of a righteous man. And I hope that others beside Priests are righteous men. Thirdly, here is not a word of absolution: but a promise to the prayer of faith, not to the Priests words, to saue the sicke, and to haue his sinnes pardoned, verse 15. Fourthly, confession commanded heere, is not confined to a Priest, but may extend to any other.

This Saint Iames speakes to all, to whom he wrote his Epi∣stle. And this place is to be vnderstood one of these three wayes. First, either of Priests and people: and then are the Priests bound to confesse, as well to the people, as the people to them. For its said, Confesse one to another, that is, mutually, or recipro∣cally. Secondly, or heere is vnderstood onely of Priests among themselues, and then is there nothing to the people. Thirdly, or onely of the people among themselues, and then is this no∣thing to the Priest, to take authoritie hence, to bind the people to confesse to him. Fourthly, confession here is not of secret sinnes in heart against God, or sinnes hidden from men, but of trespasses or offences one against another, as the word in the Originall sheweth, and is so taken in Marke 11. 25, 26. Vpon which grieuances, mutuall confession or acknowledgement of wrongs is here enioyned as a fit meanes of brotherly reconci∣liation, and preseruation of peace among themselues. To which they must adde prayer, one for another, that their mutuall con∣fession reciprocally, for reconciliation, may bee blessed vnto them. Of which practice, happy are they which make consci∣ence: and blessed should we be, if to this euery man would sub∣mit himselfe. A harder taske, then to whisper his sinnes in a Priests eare secretly.

Lastly, the Rhemists say vpon this text, that it is not certaine that S. Iames speaketh here of Sacramentall confession. Where∣vpon others, in alledging Scriptures for Auricular confession, leaue out this place, as not to the purpose.

Mat. 3. 5, 6. Then went out to him Ierusalem, and all Iudea, and all the Region round about Iordane, and were baptized in Iordane, confessing their sinnes.

Answ. This sorteth not with Popish Auricular Confession, and that for these three reasons.

First, this was publike, not in a corner of the Temple, or of a Synagogue, but in the place where he baptized them in Iordan, before all the people.

Secondly, this was at their first conuersion receiuing Bap∣tisme, and not yeerely at set times.

Thirdly, its not certaine, what sinnes, or how many, whether in generall, or particular, they confessed.

Fourthly, it was impossible for Iohn to heare euery mans pri∣uate confession, with enumeration of circumstances, seeing all Iudea, and all the Region about Iordane, and Ierusalem, went out to him; meaning very many, and multitudes of people.

Leuit. 13. 2. & 14. 2. The Leper shall bee brought vnto the Priest, &c.

Answ. 1. Here is no mention of confession of sinnes: but of one brought to the Priest, to take a view of the Plague of Le∣prosie vpon the body, verse 9, 10. All the argument therefore that can hence be drawne, is onely typicall, not conuicting.

Secondly, the partie was not to come and confesse himselfe a Leper to the Priest: but the Priest was to iudge him so, and to pronounce him a Leper, chap. 13. 3, 11, 44. Then should the Leper cry and confesse, not to the Priest, but to the people, that hee was vncleane, verse 45.

Thirdly, this iudgement of the Leprosie, by a plaine Law, here belonged to the Priest. But where can they shew a Law onely for their Priests to heare priuate confession after their Po∣pish manner?

Fourthly, the Priest looking vpon the partie, was not in pri∣uate, betweene them two; but before other: for hee was

brought vnto the Priest by others to bee viewed.

Fiftly, the Priest did not alwayes professe the partie cleane, vpon shewing his malady, as the Popish Priest doth euer the Confitent, vpon shewing his sins by confession: but the Leui∣ticall Priest put the partie apart from all others a time for a try∣all Leuit. 13. 4, 5. and after tryall, pronounced the party vn∣cleane, and shut him out of the assembly of the people, verse 46. Numb. 5. 2. Which the popish Priest neuer doth: who vpon confession runnes to remitting and loosing, but not at all to re∣taining and binding: and yet he that may doe the one, may and ought to doe the other.

Numb. 5. 7. Then shall they confesse their sinne, which they haue done.

Answ. I. This sinne is not euery euill in thought, word, and deed, or a numbring vp of all sinnes, that may be remembred, as Papists require: but onely of some trespasses betweene man and man; as when one coozeneth another, or violently hath wronged another in such things wherein restitution may and ought to be made, as is cleere in this text, speaking of re∣compensing the trespasse, as also in Leuit. 6. 2, 3, 4, 5. spea∣king of the same with this text, and expressing the particulars. In this case of restoring and recompensing, reason requireth an acknowledgement of particulars, to shew why, and for what, restitution is made.

II. The text speaketh of confession, but doth not expresse to whom, whether to God, or to his neighbour, or to the Priest.

First, it may be meant to God, when the offendour seeth his sinne, and humbleth himselfe before God, confessing and cra∣uing pardon: for to such God promiseth mercy, Prou. 28. 13. So Dauid confessed, Psal. 51. 4. and obtained pardon, Psal. 32. 5.

Secondly, it may be vnderstood of confession to man, to the party wronged, as Iosua exhorted Achan to doe to him before the people, Iosh. 7. 19. Of this speakes our Sauiour in Luk. 17. 4. Mat. 5. 23. 24. And this text in Numbers, doth leade to this. For here is immediately ioyned recompence of the trespasse to con∣fession. This latter dutie is performed to the partie offended, as

the text sheweth in Leu. 6. 5. and what hindereth that the for∣mer should not be so too, seeing the text speaketh after confes∣sion, so much of restitution to the partie offended, or to his kinsman in the first place, before any mention made of the Priest? Of whom when Moses speakes, he mentioneth no pri∣uate confession to him, not a word of the Priest hearing of con∣fession, but of the man bringing his trespasse-offering, and of the Priest making atonement thereby, Leu. 6. 6, 7.

Thirdly, if this confession be made to the Priest, it helps no∣thing for Popish priuy confession. For the Priest did not sit in a corner to heare confession within the Tabernacle, for within came none of the people, but onely in the out Court, and thi∣ther came the man with his offerings to the Priest in the view and hearing of the Priests and people, for one man and one Priest was not alone in the out-Court, as it is in Popish Shrift.

To conclude the answer to this; The Papists owne Lyranus, who had beene sometimes a Iew, saith on Leu. 16. 21. that the Priest did not heare the particular confessions of the people, for that had been impossible, but onely in generall.

Ioh. 11. 14. Iesus saith vnto them, Loose him, and let him goe.

Answ. 1. Here is no mention of confession.

Secondly, if this loosing noted the Priests absolution, then the Priest must absolue publikely, and also without confession, and after men to risen from the dead, as well as before.

Thirdly, it cannot be proued that the commandement giuen to loose him, was spoken to Christs Disciples. It is likely Mar∣tha and Mary, Lazarus his louing Sisters, would bee most rea∣die to doe this, before all other, and the Iewes which came to them to comfort them, verse 31. who, as it is most probable, are they, to whom Christ spake to take away the stone, verse 39. For when Christ speakes to his Disciples, its vsuall in the Euan∣gelist to expresse the same, and to mention the deeds and sayings of the Disciples which are here omitted. Also the Relatiue them in this 44. verse, must bereferred to the persons beforenamed, in verse 36. 39. which were Iewes, when no mention was made of his Disciples, from verse 16. Is it like that the Relatiue in

verse 44. should haue relation to verse 16. when there is seuen and twenty verses betweene? Now if Christ speake to the Iewes, and they loosed him, and not the Disciples, then this place is vainely alledged.

Lastly, this is but an allegorizing vpon a text; and an allego∣ricall interpretation not intended in the text, is a weake, yea, an idle proofe, in a controuerted point of Doctrine.

But in conclusion, I would haue these Gaggers know and ac∣knowledge, that our Church doth not banish Confession made to the Minister, and euen priuately, when men finde their con∣sciences burthened, and distressed, that they may receiue in∣struction, comfort & absolution, sealed vnto their soules, by the execution, and applying of the power of the Keyes, whereof our Church of England is as truely and rightfully possessed, as any Church in the world. But our Church hath duely reiected the corruptions of confession, which stand in the heauy yoake of absolute necessitie of such confessing and particular circum∣stantiall enumeration of sinnes, which hath no warrant by the Word of God, nor example of practice in the ancient Church.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Psal. 32. 5, 6.
• * 1.2

  Locrat. lib. 5. ca. 19. Zozom. ••. 7. c. 16. Tripart. hist. l. 9. c. 35. Niceph. lib. 12. cap. 28.
• * 1.3

  Caranza in Six∣to 4 Ouand. 4. d. 16. Pro. 2.
• * 1.4

  Ans. to Fisher