Repentance than Baptism doth Ad quam novitatem vitae saith it ‖ Sess 14. c. 2. integritatem per Sacramentum Paenitentiae sine magnis nostris fletibus laboribus Divinâ id exigente Justitiâ pervenire nequaquam possumus Again for the Sacrament of the Eucharist here the worthy Receiver ought to be already in the state of Grace all guilty of any Mortal Sin are required to prepare themselves not only with Repentance but the Sacrament of Penance Sess 13. c. 7. Ecclesiastica autem consuetudo declarat eam probationem necessariam esse ut nullus sibi conscius mortalis peccati quantumvis sibi contritus videatur absque premissâ Sacramentali Confessione ad Sacram Eucharistiam accedere debeat For the time also the same Church requires of all her Children at Least once a year Repentance and Confession of their sins in order to the holy Communion though it is the practice of many to receive it every Festival or once a week or at Least once in a fortnight So that those who hold no necessity of Repentance save at the hour of Death must also hold no necessity of Justification of the Sacraments of Faith Hope Charity or the Love of God of being a member of Christ or of the Church but in articulo mortis § 4 This being the Doctrine and Practice of the Roman Church concerning Repentance consider what just cause this Author had in disparagement thereof to say ‖ p. 182. We dare not flatter men so in teaching that Repentance only in articulo mortis serves the turn into eternal misery we cannot but declare to them the necessity of a sincere repentance and holy life in order to Salvation as if the Church of Rome declared no such thing And we cannot absolve those whom God hath declared he will not absolve i. e. the impenitent but doth he not number among these men not to be absolved the old sinner repenting on his death-bed whom the Popish Priest with his two fingers and a thumb ventures to absolve whom he saith God hath declared he will not absolve if his words here have any application to his former He goes on Indeed for the satisfaction of truly penitent Sinners our Church approves of applying the promises of pardon in Scripture to the particular case of those persons which is that we mean by Absolution Here if I rightly understand him this Author supposes Absolution only useful for the satisfaction of the truly penitent not also necessary for the effectual Remission of their sin if Mortal And again in his describing it only an Application of the promises of pardon in Scripture he seems to make Sacerdotal Absolution nothing differing in its vertue or efficacy from a Laick's for surely these may also apply such Scriptures as they see need to the Penitents comfort How his Superiors may like of this I know not § 5 But here it seems necessary that Protestants should be undeceived in this matter and further acquinted That the Churches Act of Sacerdotal Absolution is not only beneficial for the consolation of true Penitents but necessary for the forgiveness of all their mortall sins by or before God and that when ever such Absolution can be had and they not out of an invincible but faulty ignorance hereof do neglect or contemn it they can have no just hopes the Ordinance of God standing as it doth of the Remission of any such Mortal sin committed after Baptisme by God himself And for this I refer any who think this matter worthy their further inquiry not to the Fathers or Roma Doctors but even to Bishop Andrews in his Court-Sermon and Comment on Jo. 20.23 Quorum remiseritis peccata c. where concerning Sacerdotal Absolution its having a just share in Remission of sin We are not saith he pa. 58. the Ordinance of God thus standing to rend off one part of the Sentence There are here expressed three Persons 1 The Person of the Sinner in quorum 2 of God in remittuntur 3. Of the Priest remiseritis Three are expressed and where three are expressed three are required and where three are required two are not enough It is St. Augustine that thus speaketh of this Ecclesiastical Act in his time Nemo sibi dicat occulte ago paenitentiam Hom. 29. de 50. apud deum ago Novit deus qui mihi ignoscit quia in corde ago Ergo sine causâ dictum est quae solveritis in terrâ soluta erunt in Caelo Ergo sine causâ Claves datae sunt Ecclesiae Dei Frustramus Evangelium Dei frustramus verba Christi Thus He. where also he takes notice that the Ordination of Priests even those of the Church of England is only by these words Quorum remiseritis peccata pag. 57. c. Neither are they saith he that are ordained or instituted to that calling ordained or instituted by any other words or verse than this Yet not so that absolutely without them God cannot bestow it A thing also said by Catholicks But speaking of that which is proper and ordinary in the course by him established this is an Ecclesiastical Act committed as the residue of the Ministry of reconsiliation to Ecclesiastical Persons I add and so properly and ordinarily we to obtain remission i. e. of such Mortal sins by their Absolution if we expect it from God's And accordingly the words of the Absolution of Penitents run thus in the English Liturgy I by the Authority of Jesus Christ committed to me i. e. in these words here Quorum remiseritis peccata absolve thee c. And God ordinarily proceedeth saith the Bishop in remitting sin by the Churches Act. Pag 53. And hence they have their parts in this work and cannot be excluded no more in this than in other acts and parts of their function And to exclude them is after a sort to wring the Keyes out of their hands to whom Christ hath given them is to cancel and make void this clause of Remiseritis as if it were no part of the Sentence To account of all this solemn sending and aspiring or breathing on them Jo. 20.22 as if it were an idle and fruitless ceremony Be this Sacerdotal Act then only declarative be it applying the Evangelical Promises or what you will else yet it is a special Authority given to Christs Ministers so that ordinarily for Mortal sins which sins only after Baptisme put us out of the state of Grace it seems without the remiseritis of the Priest there is no remittuntur by God if we take the Judgment not only of the Roman Doctors but of Bishop Andrews To whom give me leave to add the words of Mr. Thorndike on the same subject that it may make the more impression on some considering Protestant when he sees the evidence of such a truth to force a confession from the pens of such Persons contrary to secular interest He at his Majesties happy return in his Just Weights ‖ ch
18. p. 122. making many proposals of the Reformation of the Reformation mentions this among the rest the restoring the Power of the Keys as to imposing Penances on such whose sins have voided the grace or effect of their Baptisme called by Catholicks Mortal Sins that so by the Churches Ministry they may obtain a true and valid remission thereof It will appear saith he a lamentable case to consider how simple innocent Christians are led on till death in an opinion that they want nothing requisite for the obtaining and assuring of the pardon of their sins when it is as manifest that they want the Keyes of the Church as it is manifest that the Keys of the Church are not in use for that purpose S. James ordaineth that the Presbyters of every Church pray for the sick with a promise of pardon for their sins This promise supposeth them qualified by submitting their sins to the Keys of the Church which the Presbyters do mannage The promise belongs not to the Office of Presbyters upon other terms but by their submitting their sins to the Keys And after In the mean time saith he the Forgiveness of Sin according to S. James comes by the Keys of the Church Recovery of Health from the Prayers of it Again in his Epilogue l. 3. ch 8. p. 94. If this be said i. e. that when the Churches Ministry cannot be had a desire thereof serves the turn for pardon of such sin I will allow saith he that he who refuses the Ministry of the Church rendring him a reasonable presumption of attaining reconcilement with God by the means of it according to the just laws of Christianity can have no cause to promise himself pardon without it Thus He. Though it is true that he maintains the Church hath no power to forgive sins immediatly but only by the medicine of Penance and that he supposeth also some such cases wherein the pardon of Mortal sin may be obtained without the Keys as differ from the Doctrine of Catholicks Pardon this Digression because I hope it may be useful Now to go on in the present matter § 6 Next setting aside these necessities of Repentance in order to the Sacraments to Justification to an Holy life upon pain of offending against the vertue of Religion and Charity and considering it barely as it is an Affirmative Precept Here Though it is generally true of these Precepts and so of this that non obligant ad semper for so one ought continually to do nothing else but practise such a particular command and as much all as any one and so a man must be said to be bound necessarily in the next instant after his sinning to exercise immediatly an act of Repentance or else to stand Guilty of incurring a second Mortal sin and these Mortal sins too to multiply as the instants do wherein the act is longer deferred yet 1st After sinning a present Obligation is maintained by Catholick writers of no further perseverance in or bearing any affection to such sin For this were sinning a new all sinning is at all times prohibited Loquimur saith Lugo ‖ D. Paenitentia disp 7. §. 11. de mer â dilatione Penitentiae cessante omni continuatione pecÌ„cati praeteriti omni affectione erga illud Which if any one thinks hardly possible to be observed viz. to lay aside affection to sin without an actual disaffection to and displicency of it not to hate God and as yet not to Love him this still the more hastens an act of Repentance 2ly The Act of penitency is made by Catholick writers as necessary after sin as the Precept of Loving God is and if we will follow the most common opinion of them though they say it is hard to prescribe to sinners positively a set time after which any longer delay of Repentance would be another Mortal sin yet negatively it is not hard to name it viz. That Repentance is not for any long time to be deferred and then for the positive time they first tell us the sooner the better and the safer Consultissimum est saith P. Lay-man ‖ Moral Theol. l. 5. tr 6. c. 2. statim post commissum peccatum ad paenitentiam confugere And the Roman Catechism ‖ De SaSacrampaenitent is yet more preâ—â—â— Neque enim saith it ad ullum temporis punctum cum in memoriam praeterita peccata redeunt vel jam aliquid offendimus contritione animus debet vacare this being the Key by which after Mortal Sin we can only re-enter into such a condition wherein we can have any title to Christ or Heaven and then they remit every one for this seasonable time to the dictate and remorse of his own Conscience or the directions of those whom he acquaints with it Of which matter thus Suarez ‖ De Paenitent Disp 15. §. 6. n. 20. Hanc obligationem paenitendi i. e. sub mortali peccato magis explicamus per modum praecepti negativi non differendi conversionem ad Deum usque ad mortem vel diuturno tempore Ex hac autem obligatione negativâ necessario infertur affirmativa al'quando excreendi hanc contritionem ante mortem Illud vero tempus si non sit positivâ lege praescriptum prudenti arbitrio ipsius hominis vel alterius qui ejus conscientiâ cognitâ possit auxilium praestare committendum est ut pensatis circumstantiis omnibus judicet an incipiat nimia esse dilatio neque aliquam regulam certiorem aut magis particularem assignare possum tam in hoc precepto quam in aliis affirmativis praesertim circa actus qui ad Deum ordinantur solâ ac nudâ ratione naturali perspectis though in relation to other things mentioned before our Justification participation of the Sacraments c. it is necessary when ever they are And the very same he saith else-where of the act of the precept of Charity or of Loving God ‖ De Charitate Disp 5 §. 5. Articulus temporis non tam affirmative quam negative assignari potest sicut in praecepto restitutionis dicitur obligare ad non multum differendum restitutionem licet non possit assignari primum instans restitutionis So Card. Lugo de Paenitentia Disp 7. § 11. n. 248. comparing that of Repentance with the obligation of the precept of Loving God And see Paul Laymann Theol. Morall 5. tract 6. c. 2. n. 6. quoting S. Thomas Caietan and others to the same purpose § 7 Yet mean while it is most true that there is no time in this life that can be stated too late wherein to perform such a Repentance as may be Salrificall and that if deferred till death yet this may be valid may but I do not say always or often is nor yet the Roman Doctors who warn all to take heed of such a procrastination and in this matter cite that of St. Austin-Paenitentia quae ab infirmo petitur petitur i. e. of the Priest
not conferred till the sincerity of his Repentance is further cleared and rendred more probable Especially upon their discovery in any person such ill symptomes as these 1. That he hath sinned as frequently after his former Confession as before it 2. Hath neglected to use the means for avoyding such sin prescribed him in Confession Hath not removed or remedied the former occasions or temptations to sin to which he hath been advised or also hath engaged himself Or 3. That the sin is of very general practice from which men are more difficultly weaned The Sacrament I say on such a one not to be hastily conferred till some actual reformation for a certain time be practised and some penances used in order to the begetting a sound Contrition and former bad habits appear some way corrected and near occasions of sinning removed Vt possit de illius dispositione proposito vitandi peccata moraliter constare saith Suarez Which cautions of not admitting habitual and often relapsing sinners i. e. as to Mortal sins toties quoties to the Sacraments occurr frequently in the Roman Casuists and Schoolmen See Suarez De Paenitent Disp 38. §. 7. n. 7. Layman moral Theol. l. 5. tract 6. c 4. n. 10. And see the many Authorities to this purpose diligently collected by Monsieur Arnaud in his Book De la frequente Communion part 2. c. 45. and particularly the instructions to Confessors of St. Carlo Borromeo not long after the Council of Trent Ibid. c. 36. 38. The Council of Trent also in requiring Confessors not to impose slight Penances for great Crimes ne alienorum peccatorum participes efficiantur Seems much more to enjoyn the non-admittance of a slight profession of Repentance or amendment of life for great and inveterate Sinners in order to conferring on them the Sacraments in as much as a defect in their Repentance or Contrition is much more dangerous than a defect in their satisfaction the non-remission of the sin it self and its eternal punishment following the one the non-remission of some temporal suffering only the other § 21 This being the proceeding of the two Churches in this matter Both requiring Repentance and where life continued an actual Reformation but the latter exacting much more also besides these and laying many other yoaks upon Sinners as to the Sacrament of Penance which Protestants are not willing to bear consider what just cause this Author had in disparagement of its Laws and Discipline to speak on this manner ‖ p. 181. To what end should a man living in the Church of Rome put himself to the trouble of mortifying his passions and forsaking his sins if he commits them again he knows a present remedy toties quoties it is but confessing with sorrow and upon Absolution he is as whole as if he had not sinned Again ‖ p. 182. We cannot but declare to Sinners the necessity of a sincere Repentance and holy life in order to Salvation Again * p. 180. We believe that as no man can be saved without true Repentance so that true Repentance doth not lye meerly in Contrition or sorrow only for sins Repentance in Scripture implys a forsaking of sin and without this we know not what ground any man hath to hope for the pardon of it although he confess it and be absolved a thousand times over Hence the doctrine imputed to the Roman-Church wherein his Protestant Reader must believe him is in the first that no man needs to put himself to the trouble of forsaking his sin In the second that there is no necessity of a sincere Repentance or holy life in order to Salvation In the third that true Repentance where life continued implies not a forsaking of sin and upon this he chargeth the Doctrine of the Roman Church as prejudicial to piety Thus men write ad Populum and for those that can know nothing but as themselves inform them Now if these men in these things do speak of some matters of Fact or Practice only not Doctrine or of some Doctrines found to be held or taught by some in that Church but not owned by It let them then not censure the Churches Doctrine but such particular practices or doctrines But indeed should their stile run so as in truth it ought it could no way serve their design viz. the Disswading men from such a Churches Communion from which such partioular doctrines or practices cannot justly deter them because they are such things as none by embracing its communion are obliged to and any member of that Church may as freely censure as themselves do But supposing the very worst that such a harmful Doctrine did find many Patrons and some malignant Doctrine were very commonly taught in this Church yet doth this afford to none a just pretence for departing out of it so long as this Church obligeth none to the belief of such Doctrine or makes it part of their Faith and surely these persons that discover such a doctrine faulty receive no harm by it nor know they how soon the Governours of this Church the Divine Providence ever watching over it may take notice of and rectifie it § 22 III. I proceed to the Third The Roman Doctrine as he relates it of the Sacraments their conferring Grace ex opere operato on whatever subject or Receiver of them 3. Of a right disposition in the suscipient necessary to the Sacrament its conferring Grace though never so indisposed or unprepared only if all Mortal sin be confessed he saith not repented of and if there be no actual opposition in the will to the Sacrament as for instance If a man when he is going to be baptized resolves with himself that he will not be baptized or while he is baptizing that he will not believe in the Father Son and the Holy Ghost ‖ Roman Idol p. 206. i. e. that the party in receiving it resolves in himself against receiving the effect of it For the Contrary of this First see the express Declaration of the Council of Trent * Sess 14. c. 4. concerning that Sacrament that most concerns Sinners after Baptisme the Sacrament of Penance Falso quidam calumniantur Catholicos Scriptores quasi tradiderint Sacramentum Paenitentiae absque bono motu suscipientium gratiam conferre quod nunquam Ecclesia Dei docuit nec sensit To which this Author though pressed by his Adversary therewith ‖ See p. 200. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 returns no Answer So also Sess 7. can 7. it saith Dari gratiam per Sacramenta semper omnibus quantum est ex parte Dei but si recte ea suscipiant And can 6. Sacramenta Novae legis continere gratiam quam significant gratiam ipsam conferre But non ponentibus obicem This in General Come we to the particular Sacraments and see what particular dispositions and preparations are required for receiving any benefit by them 1. For the two Sacramenta Mortuoram as they are called
a multitude of Credends here accuse her silence reservedness So Doctor Taylor observes in his Disswasive * c. 1 §. 3. p. 39. That because the Doctrines were so dangerous uncertain invidious by the advice of the Bishop of Modena the Council of Trent left all the Doctrines all the Cases of Conscience quite alone and slubbered or better passed over the whole matter in this Question in general and recommendatory terms That they established no Doctrine neither curious nor incurious nor durst they i. e. the Council bold enough in other matters decree the very Foundation of this whole matter the Churches Treasure And so all this our Author's Questions about this Treasure which amount to Ten of the Fifteen Queries he proposeth p. 518 c. and saith That when be once seeth those Questions satisfactorily answered he may then think better of our Doctrine are beside the purpose and to be cancell'd if he intends only to encounter the professed Doctrine of the Roman Church But we on the other side say That these men deal not fairly who for defending their discession from the Church of Rome and from the Communion of their Fore-Fathers urge such Doctrines as none in staying in this Communion are obliged to maintain and that the less this Church hath determined or required our assent to in this point the more freely may any holding what ever seems to him the most probable submit to her Decrees and hath the less cause to accuse or reproach her § 40 All then that the Council hath stated and asserted in this matter is this ‖ See Con. Trid. Sess 25. Deer de Indulg as Doctor Holden F. Veron and others have observed who have endeavour'd for the frustrating such Discourses as these to sever points of Faith from School-Opinions Indulgentias conferendi potestatem ab ipsomet Christo Ecclesiae concessam fuisse at que hujusmodi potestate antiquissimis etiam temporibus Ecclesiam usam fuisse Hunc usum Christiano populo esse maxime salutarem Sacrorum Conciliorum authoritate probatum in Ecclesiâ retinendum Fosque Anathemate Synodum damnare qui aut inutiles esse asserunt aut eas concedendi in Ecclesiâ potestatem esse negant This is all the Council hath determined And upon this F. Veron in his Rule of Catholiek Faith ‖ c. 17. justly contends That no more ought to be proposed to separatists to be believed than what the profession of the Catholick Faith and the General Councils engage them to That it is sufficient to render one a true Child of the Church if he submit to these and that other Questions wherein the Council is silent are impertinencies and digressions § 41 Now because the Council in this her Decree we see defends her present Doctrine and Practice by that of Ancient times and by what is approved in former Councils if we look into Antiquity concerning this matter we may there easily discover thus much 1. That severe and long Penances were then imposed on greater sinners some way proportionable to their faults and these not only for satisfaction of the Church and the Scandal many times given to it in publick sins but chiefly for the Satisfaction of Gods Justice and appeasing his wrath for Reconciliation unto Him Remission of their sins and Eternal punishment due thereto and for begetting in them a true and solid Repentance and Contrition for their Sin and so for saving their Souls For which I refer the Reader to what hath been said before § 16. and the many testimonies of the Fathers collected by Morinus De Paenitent l. 3. c. 11 12 and l. 10. c. 24. To which effects these Penances were esteemed very advantageous and though not as to all of them any proper Satisfactions yet a means very beneficial for perfecting the Sinner's Repentance and Sorrow for sin and procuring the application to them of the Merits and Satisfactions of Christ Gods Mercy and Justice still accompanying one another as in respect of Christs sufferings and satisfactions paid for our sins by Him so in respect of some temporal sufferings of our own either freely offered and tendered by our selves or if not Prevented by these inflicted on us by God to such a degree as seemeth meet to his Divine Majesty § 42 2. We may find That there were then somtimes Indulgences granted of such Penances all or part to some Persons thought rightly qualified for them upon certain just causes of a greater advancement of piety and Gods Glory and Service thereby either in respect of such Persons private or some other publick and greater good Which cause was thought a sufficient motive for such a relaxation and prevalent with God for ratifying such indulgent act of the Church-Governors to whom our Lord hath committed in his stead the power of binding and loosing Sinners whereby the same punishment of sin due to the Divine Justice is presumed to be remitted by God to persons if being as they appear sufficiently contrite upon such Indulgence granted as would have been upon the Penances performed for else if such punishment in Gods Court and not only that of the Church had not been taken away by them the Indulgence conceded as a favour would have been really much to the Penitents loss whilst after it those heavier punishments remaine to be inflicted on and undergone by them from which their much easier Penances if not indulged would have discharged them And so this power of the Keys would have been rather to Destruction than Edification § 43 To come to some Instances Such was St. Paul's Indulgence or Remission in the person of Christ as he saith ‖ 2 Cor. 2.10 or by the Commission of Quorum remiseritis * Jo. 20.23 of part of the Penance that was formerly imposed by him upon the incestuous Corinthian as for the scandal given to the Heathen and the Church so also chiefly for the saving of his Soul 1 Cor. 5.5 Yet such remission of them was not without several just Motives inciting the Apostle thereto and which he judged more acceptable to God so more effectual for procuring the application of Christs Merits for this Sinners pardon than the remainder of his Penance had it been fulfilled Such as were the gratifying the Intercessions for this person of the Saints in Corinth and preventing their apprehensions of the Apostles too great severity the excessive sorrow and confusion appearing already in the Penitent and least perhaps through a despondency of mind he should throw off the Christian Faith and abandon himself to vice in all which the Apostle saw Satans wiles See 2 Cor. 2.6 7 11. § 44 Such again were the Indulgences used in the Primitive times upon several judged by them just causes moving the Church-Governors thereto either for the private good of the Penitent or publick of Religion 1st Such anciently were in respect of the private good of the Penitent 1. An extraordinary diligence and fervour in their performing
Penance producing in them a great reformation c. and so this seeming sufficient for quitting the remainder of their debt in the Indulgment of whom was also a publick good intended that so the negligent might hereby be excited to like fervor upon hopes of like favour 2. The pusillanimity or weakness or temptations of the Penitent whereby it was feared that he might through despair sink under the burden laid upon him or throw it off his shoulders revolt to Heresie or Gentilisme 3. In times of great persecution the better fitting and arming of the Penitent for Martyrdome by his receiving a reconcilement to God and the Church and after it the Holy Communion and the same also was done in his being exposed to any other eminent danger of death by sickness or otherwise in which necessity Absolution and the Eucharist were administred though the Penance unfinished As still the inability of any further doing Penance to such persons as are supposed contrite and otherwise well disposed at the hour of death is thought a sufficient ground of an Indulgence 4. Somtimes also some Heroical Act of the Penitent was accepted instead of further Penance As persons returned from Heresie were usually received into the Church upon easie terms and without exacting from them the Penances due to so great a sin both for other reasons tending to advancement of true Religion and for the great Confusion such persons exposed themselves to in the publick confessing and renouncing their former Opinions and professing of that Faith they had before censured and condemned Errors that prejudice our understanding being with much more difficulty acknowledged by us than those Sins that are only the exorbitancies of our Passions So somtimes the Lapsed after their having denied Christ in their returning boldly to confess and suffer for him were for this indulged all the Penance imposed for their former lapse ‖ See Morinus l. 9 c. 14. 2. Again Such Causes or Motives in respect of the publick good anciently was the honouring of Martyrs i. e. such who had already suffered loss of goods limbs tortures for the Christian profession or were imprisoned and destined to such tortures in conceding Indulgencies of their Penance to such persons for whom these petitioned or gave their commendatory Letters or Tickets and for whom these Martyrs promised their Intercessions with God and this done by the Church to shew the power and value which she believed such sufferings and intercessions to have with God and hereby also to encourage many others to Martyrdom Such also was the preventing of the growth of Schismes and the enlarging of the Catholick Faith in the receiving of Hereticks usually into the Church with much indulgence and not clogging them with such great Penances as such a Crime deserved ‖ Ibid. l. 9. c. 8. to encourage more to come in and prevent their further infecting of others § 45 Now a strict correspondence to such ancient customs have the latter times of the Church observed in their continuing of Indulgences in these two principal points 1. that such Indulgence be to a person rightly disposed by Repentance so far as the Church can judg of it otherwise without this as no remission of Sin so no reason to expect such divine relaxation of punishment to a yet impenitent Sinner And 2. next That there be a just and weighty Cause for granting it else it would quite ruine the Churches Discipline and abuse the power she is intrusted with to remit the Penance and expect that God should withdraw such punishments and change that ordinary course of his justice by which he makes men sensible of his hate to Sin upon any light and frivolous Motives which may daily occurr That there be a cause I say not exactly the same alwaies with those ancient forementioned a thing not necessary for the Ancient also we see were various but just still and judged proportionable to the quality of the Indulgence as theirs was In latter times then after a much remisser imposing of Penances for great crimes than was anciently because of the hardness of mens hearts and a reluctance to receive or bear them When once Commutations of Penances were become more in use and Absolution frequently in great offences also was joyned immediatly with Confession and the Penance deferred till afterward In these latter times I say such Causes have been a setting the Penitent instead of such Penances declined by him which though now not enjoyned yet now are as much as anciently due from him as to the satisfying of the Divine justice upon some other acts of piety or devotion more willingly performable by him and these especially such as by their tending to some publick and eminent good may be more acceptable to God and proportionable to the relaxation of such Penances Such as are the enjoyning of Almes Prayers Fasts c. for averting some imminent Judgment or danger from the Church for the conquering of Infidels and the Churches Enemies such was the recovery of the Holy Land for converting of Hereticks for relief of the Poor in some time of great distress for the building of Churches Hospitals or other pious Benefactions where much necessity of them And among the rest this motive not the least considerable mentioned also by Bellarmin De Indulgent l. 2. c. 18. namely an excitement of the people to Contrition and Confession to Prayers and doing Penances now when they reject these any way proportionable to their faults and as satisfactions of the Divine Justice at least for the gaining of the Indulgences which are by them supposed a much easier relief the procurement of which Indulgences hath been much used by many wise and Holy Prelates as namely by St. Carlo Borromeo to this purpose and Ipso usu constat saith Suarez gratiam favorem Indulgentiarum multum conferre ad Spiritualem profectum fidelium Disp 49. §. 1. ut melius ac frequentius a peccatorum vinculis liberentur That men that are not already in the state of Grace may by their preparation for the benefit of the Indulgence be brought thereto and so after a remission of the Eternal punishment by their Contrition and the power of the Keys be also by this favour upon some pious work discharged of the temporal or at least of some part thereof § 46 In these two things therefore 1 a worthy person to be indulged 2 and a just cause of such indulgement the present use of Indulgences runs parallel with the ancient And then the present difference which is confessed between the latter and former times 1. One that the former were Indulgences of Penances enjoyned the present of the self-same Penances in the same measure due to Gods justice and to be paid now as much as then for obtaining from him a relaxation from such punishment but for the Penitents indisposition after a long desuetude of such a practice not enjoyned now as formerly 2. The other that those were usually granted to
Bellarmin * De Indul l 1. c. 12. nisi quia ot osae manes irritae sunt quas quidam Ecclaesiarum Praelati facere non verentur claves Ecclesiae contemnuntur paenitentialis satisfactio enervatur decerninus c. Thus Innocentius 3. long ago in the great Lateran Council ‖ Can. 62. And Sixtus 4. having been somwhat Prodigal in this kind recalled many Indulgences formerly conceded by him See Extravag Commun l. 5. tit 9. c. 5. And so Clement 8. effusas nimis Indulgentiarum concessiones restringere aggressus est saith Baronius * A D. 147. And of the possibility of the failing of the Pope himself somtimes in this sufficiency of the cause thus speaks a Jesuite ‖ Sua ez De Indulg Disp 56. §. 3. Quamvis Pontifex expresse declararet se moveri propter talem causam quam reputat sufficientem ad tantam indulgentiam concedendam non esset infallibile vel causam esse talem vel quod consequens est totam indulgentiam esse validam Quia talis declaratio Pontisicis non est de doctrinâ ad sidem pertinente sed de quodam facto particulari quod ad prudentiam spectat in quo Pontisex non habet infallibilem assistentiam Spiritus Sancti sed in his tantum quae ad doctrinam sidei morum spectant And again Quamvis Pontifex existimet aut declaret talem causam subesse nihilominus decipi potest quia quoad hoc prudentiâ existimatione humanâ gubernatur possetque etiam humano affectu moveri Thus Suarez comparing the Popes dispensing in Penances with that in vows And thus Estius ‖ In. 4. Sent. Dist 20. §. 9. Si nullâ rationabili causâ movente Pâ—ntifex vel Episcopus Indulgentiam concederet existimandum non est eam alicujus efficaciae seu valoâ—is fore What a many Jests and Sarcasmes now hath this unserious Writer lost here in playing upon the Pope's infallibility in this matter the chief common-place of Protestants when seeking quarrels perhaps content to seem ignorant herein that he may shew wit Though mean while the Christian Humility and Obedience in the Subjects of this Church is far from distrusting the prudence or fidelity especially of this their chief Pastor assisted with so wise a Council in his dispensing these favours and far from weighing and discussing whether the cause of such promulgation be sufficient or no Which as it is a thing of difficult resolution where many circumstances are to be considered that are not so well known to Subjects and such cause not expressed or not totally in the Indulgence for the pious work may be diverse from the cause or motive of the promulgation of such a pardon ‖ See Suarez De Indulg Disp 56. §. 3 as I say it seems to be a matter of difficult resolution so the assurance thereof as I shall shew by and by is of little consequence § 53 As for Indulgences their Valent quantum sonant the sonant is to be understood not of that sense which an illiterate person not well instructed may possibly take them in but with those commonly-known limitations or suppositions belonging to them and particularly those now mentioned Valent quantum sonaent 1 To persons rightly prepared and 2 if passed upon a just and sufficient cause which are or ought to be common praecognita to all that make use of them Scarce any promise passed amongst men but includes some condition which being well known is thought not necessary to be expressed And when we find Remission in the Scriptures promised in several places to Faith to Almes to the Sacrament to the love of God to our For giving our Neighbours sins against us c. I hope we may rightly say these Texts valent quantum sonant and that the Holy Ghost in them intends no fraud and yet some other Conditions must be understood which are commonly known and learnt from other Scriptures without which none of these Texts rigidly and singly taken are true and valid If then some particular Indulgences upon the defect of some condition requisite to their validity should fail at least in part of what they promise yet as rashly and untruly as uncivilly doth our Author therefore pronounce the Promulgator a Cheat Because one may possibly be mistaken without a design to deceive and this Author himself when in a calmer temper may discover a Medium between speaking a truth and cheating Otherwise it will follow that himself also in all he saith is either infallible or a Cheat. § 45 3ly They are taught that though perhaps there should be some invalidity in an Indulgence by reason of some defect in the cause as to the full effect thereof yet is not the Indulgence therefore totally invalid any pious cause whatever serving for a partial effect and so that it would prove an oversight in any Christian to lose this benefit And if the releasment of some temporal punishment by the omitting our penances and the Indulgences failing of its full effect be not had yet 1st Some other pious work enjoyned by the Indulgence is performed which hath its reward 2ly Whilst some part of such temporal punishment that remains so uncompounded for may retard for some time ones future bliss yet his preparation to render himself in the state of Grace and so capable of the benefit of the Indulgence how dimuinitive soever this be may be of much more consequence to him than is such punishment uncancelled whilst it secures the main business i. e. his Salvation and this way he gains much more by the Indulgence than he loseth another 3ly It is also very considerable that the Penances now a-days remitted by Indulgences are such as are due indeed to Gods Justice and these as great as ever yet most of them are not now imposed as formerly they have been and so we should have as much omitted such a quantity of these Penances as is not enjoyned which is the most without as with our receiving an Indulgence for them And so indeed it is but a small penance that the most do forbear by gaining an Indulgence and as much temporal punishment we may think would remain unsatisfied for without such Indulgence granted to us as now we become answerable for by any defect in it and so if we have no gain by it neither is there any great loss I mean from our neglects in doing penance upon the security of the Indulgence But 4ly No loss there is but a sure gain by it if we take care both to perform all our penances enjoyned in these latter times not so burdensome nor bearing any porportion to those prescribed by ancient Canons and also to gain the Indulgence by doing the pious works it enjoyns for that wherein our penances performed may fall short of the satisfaction due If any then shall urge here that it is difficult to know the true validity of an Indulgence or the sufficiency of its cause I
answer As it is difficult so I have shewed here not much necessary § 55 And lastly since Indulgences are a priviledg or favour that none are compelled to make use of those who either scruple their validity or fear a relaxation of necessary Christian Discipline by them may let them alone do their Penance and all is well And those Protestants who so much dislike them are welcome to stay in the Communion of the Church and have none of them Neither had Luther any just cause to run out of the Church for fear Indulgences should have gotten some of his money § 56 4ly Though upon the concession of a plenary Indulgence none are strictly obliged to the performance of any penances either those enjoyned them or others due for the satisfaction of any part of the Temporal punishment of their sin Yet 1st As these penal deeds such as Almes Watching Fasting and Prayers are numbred among other good works that are always very acceptable to and highly rewardable with God and may possess them of an higher Degree of Glory so all are advised to a frequentation of them still on this account which augmentation of glory and our future reward by these penal as they are also good works is much more to be esteemed as Card. Lugo observes ‖ De Sac. Paeuit Disp 27. §. 2. than the Redemption of our Temporal pain by the benefit of Indulgences 2. And again as they are any way profitable and requisite to those two ends of Penances often forementioned * See §. 15 17. as 1 the begetting of a true and solid Contrition for sins past without which had the very foundation of Indulgences fails or 2 the cure of former vicious habits the moderating of our passions and prevention of sin for the time to come a relapse into which in effect as to salvation ruines again what Indulgences have formerly procured and much better were it for the Penitent to forgoe the Indulgence than such Penance the omission whereof should betray him to be re-enslaved to sin Here also I say he is still advised especially as he hath more reason to suspect his present estate to a continuance of such Penances notwithstanding what-ever favour done him by Indulgences of which matter thus P. Laeymann ‖ Lib. 5. tract 7. c. 3. out of Albertus Magnus Consultissimum esse ut semper tota paenitentia namely that is enjoyned us impleatur quia plerumque minor quam peccatis debeatur injuncta est per modum medicinae reservantis a recidivâ saepe incertum an Indulgentiam lucrati simue touched before vel saltem an it a plene ut ab omni paenâ immunes existamus And Paenitentiae quoe pro peccat is injungi solent exignae sunt saepe tantum loco Medicina seu curationis peccatorum imperatae quas omnimodo implere expedit Thus also Bellarmin ‖ De Indulg l. 2. c. 13. in answer to Chemnitius urging Non bebere relaxari per Indulgentias excrcitia virtutum fructus paenitentiae et novae vitae carnis mortificationem alioqui noxiae perniciosae essent Indulgencae De paenis sponte susceptis respondemus non debere â—as relaxari quatenus utiles sunt ad novitatem vitae carnis mortificationem sed posse relaxari quatenus sunt panae debitae peccatis i. e. post novitatem vitae ad adeptam And elsewhere saith he * De Indulg l. 1. c. 7. Hoc tempore qui se parant ad Indulgentias consequendas confiteri solent peccata Sacerdoti injunctam satisfactionem implere non igitur existimantes sibi tantum injunctas paenitentias condonari sed alias longe majores I said here the Penitent notwithstanding Indulgences is advised to perform his penances imposed but some Roman Dctors say obliged if such Penances be expresly imposed by his Confessor not as satisfactory or vindicative for sin past but as judged by him morally necessary for preserving one from future of which thus Suarez ‖ Cum in Paenitentiâ injuncta duplex ratio inveniri possit nimirum vindictae medicinae praeservantis quamvis ex vi Indulgentiae cesset satisfactio Sacramentalis sub priori rations non tamen sub posteriori si sub illâ posita sit Quia Indulgentia tollit debitum non tamen tollitur materia sen necessitas medicina Again ‖ De Paenit D. 50. §. 2. Intelligendum est per has Indulgentias remitti paenitentias impositas ut satisfactivae sunt non ut medicinales quia Indulgentia non datur in destructionem sed in aedificationem animarum And His temporibus considerato modo quo paenitentiae imponi solent raro vel nunquam omittere licet paenitentias impositas propter Indulgentias quia rever â imponuntur levissimae paenitentiae quae vix sufficiunt per modum medicinae And that passage of Card. Bellarmin Indulg l. 1. c. 7. seems much to confirm this Interdum etiam Pontifices saith he in literis Indulgentiarum praescribunt ut Sacerdotes injungant paenitentias salutares iis qui indulgentiam consequi desiderant Relaxare autem non intendunt paenitentias illas salutares quas jubent imponi And those Doctors of a contrary opinion yet grant an obligation still of the penitents performing them though not from the Priests injunction yet from the morall necessity of the thing as to avoiding sin See Card. Lugo De Sacram. Paenitent D. 27. § 2. who also concludes Consulendum semper esse paenitenti ut opera imposita quoad fieri possit adimpleat nec debere panitentias omitti indulgentiarum occasione quia illa opera imposita etiam fuerunt a medico ex desiderio salutis quia prosunt ad meritum quod pluris faciendum est quam redemptio panae temporalis § 57 As Indulgences therefore are a great consolation to Christians in respect of the Temporal Punishments or Penances for removing them longe majores as Bellarmin than those enjoyned that they are liable to by their former sins so are they by prudent Christians made little or no use of for the omission of any Penances they can well perform in their having a continual eye to the other two ends now named which must be made good for reaping any benefit by an Indulgence and to the third also for the advancing of their future happiness And this which is said here may I suppose satisfie the Objection of our Author ‖ p. 526. that by Indulgences Catholicks are excused from doing the best parts of their Religion viz. Severe Mortification Fastings Prayers Almes c. Which 1st If it have any strength in it holds as much against ancient Indulgences as the modern nor presseth it the one more than the other both these remitting the like penal Satisfactions 2ly So far as such penal works are necessary as other good works to the purchase or augmentation of eternal happiness or to repentance for sins past or to leaving off sin for the future
de facto concedant super votis dispensent a perjuriis homicidiis peccatis aliis sibi consitentes absolvant male ablata incerta data sibi aliqua pecuniae quantitate remittant tertiam aut quartam partem de paenitentiis injunctis relaxent animas tres vel plures parentum vel amicorum illorum qui elecmosynas eis conferunt de purgatorio ut asserunt mendaciter extrahant ad gaudia paradisi perducant benefactoribus locorum quorum Quaestores existunt remissionem plenariam peccatorum Indulgeant aliqui ex ipsis eos a paenâ a culpâ ut eorum verbis utamur absolvant Nos abusus hujusmodi per quos censura vilescit Ecclesiastica cldvium Ecclesiae authoritas ducitur in contemptum omnimode aboleri volentes inhibemus c. Lastly the Council of Trent ‖ Sess 21. c. 9. after the lost labour of several precedent Councils to reform these persons who also gave so great scandal to Luther and his followers quite abrogated this Office and the priviledges belonging thereto and hath committed the publishing of such Indulgences and collection of Charities to the Ordâ—nary of the place and two of the Chapter joyned with him to be done nullâ prorsus mercede acceptâ i. e. when these Alms are directed to some certain publick work and not left to the peoples own distribution of them to what poor and necessitous persons themselves think good in such a quantity as every ones devotion shall move him to as in many Indulgences they are where we see that all the Sales Harvests Trading Avarice Cheating of the Pope and his Hucksters occurring almost in every page of our Authors discourse comes only to this the relieving of some poor and the occasioning of some deeds of Charity to the rich where themselves judg it best bestowed And doth this Author think in this liberty he takes to say what he pleases that if words spoken words also printed and those somwhat more than 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 shall not be called to an account Mat. 12.36 But suppose it be a Collection of the peoples Charity for some publick work as the building of a Church or Hospital the maintaining of a just War against some Enemy and oppressor of Christianity and this amounting to some vast sum of money may every one therefore take the liberty to charge the Pope or the Churches Prelates with fraud covetousness putting all or a great part thereof in their own Coffers and pretending only not intending a publick benefit at pleasure and without proof Or this being a tâ—uth may he therefore deny the lawfulness of Indulgences and defame the Church that allows them upon such a Personal fault § 61 Personal abuses in Indulgences are granted whilst the Doctrine and practice allowed by the Church are justified A good Catholick this Author may be and be obliged to believe no more than now he doth several things which in this discourse he eagerly opposeth Doth he condemn concessions of Indulgences for frivolous causes and some slight work So do the Catholick Authors And doth he not hold the Popes judgment to be infallible in these Neither do they Is he for no Treasure of the Church If the infinite and inexhaustible treasure of the Merits and satisfactions of our Lord Jesus Christ be only allowed by him the Roman Divines hold no other Treasure necessary Will he have Indulgences only remit Canonical Penances Those Authors that hold so are not censured by the Roman Church Doth he think that some of the Roman Doctors in their stating of Indulgences have swerved from the Doctrine of the ancient Church he may enjoy the Churches Communion and hold with others of them those tenents that please him better I have here frequently quoted several of them to shew that nothing here said by me is singular Doth such a frequency of Iudulgences as ruines Church-Discipline and renders the Power of the Keys contemptible displease him So doth it the Council of Trent ‖ Sess 25. Decr. de Indulg desiring a greater moderation therein a reduction to the pattern of Antiquity So hath it likewise done several Popes as is said before Doth he detest the base Arts and mis-informations of the people for filthy lucres sake promising them much more than Indulgences extend to or the Churches Doctrine warrants So have Councils and Popes as I have shewn censured and endeavoured to suppress them Are such conplaints of the abuse of Indulgengences made now So were they in St. Cyprian's time Of which he said * Serma de Lapsis Irrita pax perniciosa dantibus nihil profutura accipientibus And ‖ Epist 11. Ad Martyres Confessor Ea concedere quae in perniciem vertuntur decipere est nec erigitur sic lapsus from the Indulgence sed per Dei offensam magis impellitur ad ruinam But not therefore for such abuses the use of Indulgences to be abrogated To conclude the present allowed practice of Indulgences by occasioning the examination of mens Consciences and a sence and sorrow for their sins a repairing to the Sacraments and performing many penances seems rather to improve Christian Discipline as the times are now degenerated from the ancient than to impair it And ordinarily by the Indulged his disposing of his own Alms this practice is sufficiently cleared from Covetousness Bargains Sales Cheating this Authors main charge Again the Doctrine of the Church concerning them is very compendious and general Nor is there any part of this Authors book wherein so much may be granted him without violating any thing taught by It. And as no Point commonly is more baited by Protestants than this of Indulgences so none seems to afford them less pretence of discontent or to give less cause of departing from the Churches Communion yet this is said to be the first that occasioned that of Luther and the Reformation since it is a Priviledg or Favour that none are compelled to make use of and those who have any fears or scruples concerning it and therefore would have no Indulgences may let them alone do their penances and all is well § 62 And here I might well pass by the Fifteen Questions every one also containing many sub-Questions in it with which this Author ‖ c. 6 §. 9. p. 5â—8 concludes his Discourse of Indulgences and saith the Roman Doctrine of Indulgences with a touch of these flyes in pâ—eces like a Glass-drop though this Doctrine hath been touched by the chiefest of these Questions long ago asked by Luther Calvin Chemnitius and others and the Catholicks Answers to them seem to have made them vanish away like so many water-bubbles Neither hath this Author for all his terrible and destructive touches had the courage to touch these Answers These I say I might pass by having already spoken to all that seems material and pertinent therein in the precedent Discourse Besides He that maintains a thing as a point of his Faith cannot therefore
these still accepted by God through his Sons Satisfactions § 76 To go on with the Eleventh Qu. 11. Here we repeat the same again How comes this Holy Man to do such large Penances with regard to Gods Justice and Wrath if the sanctification of Christ were of so infinite a nature And if he practice mortifications and penances is he not sufficiently rewarded for them If he be how come these to help the other his Friend which he is abundantly recompensed for himself Here I ask also How come our prayers to procure from God some benefit to others when for the Charity of them we our selves likewise are rewarded by him a thing not doubted of The same pious work or suffering may obtain a manifold recompence and that as to several persons by way of Impetration from Gods bounty and mercy which enlargeth its self without bounds See Bellarm De Indulg l. 1. c. 2. §. 2. Propositio how far it pleaseth But it is granted that when we speak of a strick compensation or satisfaction made to Gods Justice thus no work or suffering of ours that is equivalently satisfactory only for anothers debt suppose of temporal punishments can be also of our own for none can so pay to Gods Justice two debts with that sum which is due for one of them only § 77 In the Twelfth We ask If the satisfaction of Christ doth only obtain Grace for this Holy man to do penance himself Q. 12. for averting the temporal punishment of his own sin But who saith thus how can the application or acception of this Holy Mans penances free another from the temporal punishment of his sin without his doing any penance Or have his penances being joyned with Christs satisfactions greater power with God for this other person than the satisfactions of Christ have for himself Whatever the Authors meaning is in this Question which perhaps I do not rightly comprehend Christs satisfactions alone are affirmed both for Common Penitents and Saints all sufficient and not only do obtain grace for Saints to satisfie themselves for a temporal punishment but also when applyed by an Indulgence do procure a remission of such temporal punishment to them without their own Penances or Satisfactions § 78 We continue in the Thirteenth the same demand Qu. 13. Why the satisfaction of Christ may not serve But who are they that say it may not See before § 47. without this Holy Mans penances to remit only the other persons temporal punishment for his sin when the satisfaction of Christ was sufficient alone to remit both eternal and temporal to that person in the Sacrament of Baptisme Or was the force of it spent then that it needs a fresh supply afterwards from this Holy Mans penances But if then it could be applyed to a higher end without any other help why not where it is to have far less efficacy We have now passed through all his Questions concerning the Churches Treasure many of them as they seem to me very irreverent and impertinent of which as I said he may accept of that Answer in his application of them to Indulgences which he gives us in ours to the Sacrament The last Question yet remains § 79 Viz How came this treasure of the Church i. e. the superfluities Qu. 15. as he calls them of Christs satisfactions for the temporal punishment of sin which are applyed in Indulgences into the Popes keeping and who gave him the Keys of them when every Priest is trusted in the Sacrament of Penance with the treasure of Christs necessary satisfaction for the remitting of the eternal punishment R. After I have first told him for the language is used by him here that I know no Roman Divine that stiles Christs satisfactions for the remitting of Sin and the eternal punishment necessary and of the temporal superfluous I Answer That in the doubt what persons have the lawful power of concedâ—ng Indulgences it is sufficient that Protestants then be satisfied when they are first agreed to admitt them Mean while what needs our Author trouble himself or us with such a question The Pope surely hath as much power of and right to keep the Keys as any Of those Indulgences then which he concedes none needs dispute the validity But not to leave this unspoken to I say 1st That as not the Concession of Indulgences so neither the Exercise of the power of Absolution this also being an Act of Jurisdiction and Judicature i.e. neither the application of Christs Merits and Satisfactions for the eternal nor for the temporal punishment of Sin doth belong to the Inferiour Clergy but dependently from the Bishops and Governours of the Church which Commission they receive also with a reservation of several Cases wherein they may not absolve Next for Church-Governours Not only the Pope but other Bishops de facto have conceded Indulgences in ancient times and do still But whether the conceding of them doth belong to all Bishops Jure Divino or only to the suprem Governour the Pope is disputed among the Schoolmen The Council of Trent though there they were much disputed hath determined nothing about the Limits of such Episcopal Jurisdictions but left them to the former current Ecclesiastical Customs and Practices Several limitations and restraints of them have been made by the supreme Bishop of the Church the Successor of St. Peter to whom in the first place our Lord committed the Keys Tibi dabo Claves not only with a Precedency to but Power and Authority over the rest and have been made to very good ends that things might be done with better order and discussion and with less confusion and relaxation of Discipline as it is also particularly in this granting of Indulgences And so long as the Bishops acquiesce therein such questions as this seem rather moved to the disturbance of the Churches peace than any edification in the Christian Faith And so I leave it The Roman School-Divines to this and several other of his questions have not been silent nor wanted his Predecessors the wit to ask them before him If he looks so much into their Books as he pretends why takes he no notice of their Answers Is it not because he finds so much Reason in them as he is loth to divulge to his party unless he could do it with greater satisfaction § 80 This to his questions But now after all these Invectives against the Roman Indulgengences i. e. against the remitting of some Penances and this not gratis but for some other Pious Works done in liue thereof perhaps so many times Visiting a Church and therein for some time offering up his Devotions Fasting on certain days giving so much Alms and the like and for a Cause that in advancing some publick or private good bears some proportion to that which is remitted or also far exceeds it as warring against Infidels oppressing the Church Conversion of Hereticks building of Churches Hospitals c. And again