to prescribe him penance infirma est quae autem a moriente petitur timeo ne ipsa moriatur And again ‖ De Tempore Serm. 57. Agens Paenitentiam ad ultimum reconciliatus si securus hinc exit ego non sum securus And Nunquid dico damnabitur non dico Sed dico etiam liberabitur Non. Et quid dicis mihi Nescio non praesumo non promitto And so if we put the case that one lives a wicked life for three-score or four-score years yet I suppose will a Protestant Minister on his death bed exhort such a one to Repentance nor pronounce it fruitless therefore neither may they expect the Catholick should do this when such a person dying in that Church adds to his Repentance the Sacraments Confession of his sins to the Priest the receiving his Absolution the Holy Communion and Extrem unction § 8 Lastly if after all this said here this Author or Bishop Taylor can produce some Testimonies out of other Catholick Writers to this purpose that Repentance considered meerly as an affirmative praecept and abstracted from all those necessary ends mentioned before in respect of all which God conditionally requires it it not obligatory as in case of necessity under Mortal sin if deferr'd any longer save only in articulo mortis Yet this seems far from ingenuous dealing either from such Testimonies to deduce in general these Authors affirming that God hath commanded no man to repent sooner than the Article of his death ‖ See Rom. Idolat c. 3. p. 181. or if such things were rightly deduced from these Authors therefore to accuse the Church of such a Doctrine Since where the Doctors of the Roman Church are divided in their opinion and her Councils are not found to have stated any thing therein here either none of these opinions may be charged on the Church or else in Charity that rather ought to be so which to us seems the more reasonable and true Most of the Doctors of the Church in any Age are not Writers nor of these Writers the major part School-men or Casuists or applying themselves to their Subtilties And so long as the Church I mean in her Councils cannot be charged with a doctrine that seems to us malignant and corrupt it seems vain to tell men such a doctrine is taught by several in the Church when as its Subjects have many other Teachers in the same Church that with its allowance and Countenance instruct them otherwise and better For Example What Catholicks are there that do not receive from their Teachers frequent Exhortations to a speedy repentance for their sins and Reformation of their lives the chiefest Common-place in Divinity and amongst whom they do not first lay this Foundation of Repentance from dead works Heb. 6.1 as the Apostle calls it But here especially those who defend their separation from the Communion of a Church by reason of its erroneous or corrupt Doctrines are not excused at all in their shewing such Doctrines taught by some in it but only if they make appear that these are taught by It and the belief of them also exacted from its subjects For where the Church hath determined no such corrupt Doctrine we may still abide in this Church and believe otherwise or if we be of its Clergy teach what is better Much less then may we complain for such gross and corrupt doctrine taught by some when a greater number of others give us that which is more pure and refined And this here said somtimes these men when it is for their Advantage seem to be sensible of as this Author speaking of the manner of the Sacraments conferring Grace ex opere operato Although saith he ‖ c. 3. p. 109. Cassander produce some particular Testimonies against it of persons in that Church yet we must appeal for the sense of their Church to the decrees of the Council of Trent But this he said when he conceiv'd the Council to maintain a grosser sense of Opus Operatum than several of their Writers And from these Considerations I conceive may be returned a reasonable answer to Bishop Taylors defence made in his disswasive ‖ chap. 2. Sect. 1. for his charging as he doth very frequently that which he calls though indeed it is not in that manner as he relates it without their limitations a Common opinion of the Roman Doctors or Casuists upon the Roman Church He there saith for his defence of charging the Opinions of the School-men upon the Church That if by the Doctrine of the Roman Church we mean such things only as are decreed in their Councils it is to be considered that but few things are determined in their Councils Here for his purpose he saith few things but elsewhere the multitude of them is exclaimed against by himself and others But if few hence it follows that few are required of him for enjoying the communion of that Church to be asserted or believed But not that therefore a Common opinion of Casuists is to be adopted or pronounced by him a Doctrine of the Church lest her Doctrines should be few Again he saith That if they the Roman Doctors will not be reproved for any thing but what we prove to be false in the Articles of their simple belief they take a Liberty to say and to do what they list and to corrupt all the world by their Rules of Conscience I Answer That That so many of these Doctors as he can prove to err in any thing he may also take as much liberty to reprove but not reprove or defame the Roman Church or disswade her Communion for that error which she doth not own Lastly He saith That their own men tell us it is the Doctrine of the Church when they say Communis omnium It is the doctrine of all their men I Answer Communis omnium is only opinio or sententia and that in such things wherein he cannot deny the Church to have left to all their Liberty to think so or the contrary But when these men would say it is the Doctrine of the Church he cannot but know their comcom expression not communis omnium but that such point is De side from which none may dissent Again this their Opinio omnium must admit many limitations First Of such School-men or Casuists as have writ of such a Question and this extended only to those of such time as the Author writ in not the present when perhaps such opinion better considered may be changed Secondly Of so many of them as he hath seen and as such person apprehends their sense in which perhaps too much addiction to his own opinion may cause a mistake And in this particular point concerning Repentance what ever Reginaldus and Navarr say though they say it only with limitations omitted by Doctor Taylor yet that it is not Sententia Communis Omnium is clearly shewed before I say therefore this Injustice of some late Protestant Writers
THE ROMAN DOCTRINE OF REPENTANCE AND OF INDULGENCES VINDICATED From Dr. Stillingfleet's Misrepresentations Concil Trident. Sess 6. c. 14. Docendum est Christiani hominis Paenitentiam post lapsum multo aliam esse a Baptismali eaque contineri non modo Cessationem a Peccatis eorum detestationem aut Cor contritum humiliatum verum etiam eorundem Sacramentalem Confessionem saltem in voto suo tempore faciendam Sacerdotalem Absolutionem Itemque Satisfactionem per Jejunia eleemosynas Orationes c. Printed in the Year MDCLXXII The Roman Doctrine of Repentance Vindicated § 1 HItherto I have explicated and endeadeavor'd to vindicate the Roman Devotions The other matter of great consequence wherein that Church hath suffered much wrong from Doctor Stilling fleet as also before him from Bishop Taylor in his Disswasive is the Roman Doctrine concerning Repentance and a good life in these 5. Particulars following wherein this Author informs his Credulous Reader according to what the General current of his discourse represents 1st That the Roman Church holds no necessity of Repentance but only once in ones life i. e. in articulo mortis Rom. Idolat c. 3 §. 1. p. 181. Ibid. pag. 180. as he expresseth it out of Dr. Taylors Disswasive an Author of the same fidelity 2ly That the Roman Repentance or Contrition doth not include or oblige any to forsaking of their sin or Reformation of life 3ly That it holds the Sacraments to confer Grace ex opere operato on whatever subject Ibid. §. 6. p. 203. or receiver of them though never so indisposed or unprepared 4ly Of the easiness for any in the Church by this feat of the Sacrament of Penance Ibid. §. 2. p. 184. remitting sin and conferring Grace ex opere operato to change the Eternal punishment of sin which is certainly remitted always together with the sin it self into a Temporal one or to change Hell-torments into those of Purgatory and then of the easiness of getting out of these with a little Money or Friends 5. Lastly of the Roman Doctrine of Indulgences charged by him ‖ G. 6. §. 4 9 10. with many gross Absurdities and as excusing Roman Catholicks from doing the best parts of their Religion § 8 Lay these things together and see what a Monster this Author makes here of the Roman Catholick Religion and of that Church which before Luthers time when there was none besides any better than it was called in our Creed the Holy Catholick Church and which is so spread over the face of the Earth and the Nations flowing into it And who would think that a Church that taught such doctrines as he here presents to his Protestant Reader should keep such a doe about Abstinences fasting and Penance and Personal Satisfactions and the Justification by and Merit of Good Works about long Offices and many Hours of Prayer about Poverty Celibacy Solitude Silence Hair-cloath Disciplines which if he saith they are not really performed yet he must confess in this Church at least they are taught and called for Or if he saith they are only vaingloriously hypocritically performed so to speak truth he must know hearts Who would think I say a Church should make such a noise about these things of many of which among Protestants is deep silence unless to revile them when as after this Author hath cast up a true account of it this Church holds teaches Repentance only necessary to any person once in his life and that not extending to any reformation of it or forsaking of his sin nothing less but only to some sorrow for his sin and that but a little sorrow at one time and that at the hour of his death sufficient that the Sacraments freely confer Grace and put every one in the state of Salvation come and take them who will prepared or unprepared only if he that goes to them confesseth such his sins and doth not resolve against receiving any benefit by them Onely saith he ‖ c. 3. §. 6. p. 2.6 that there be no mortal sin unconfessed that there be no actual opposition in the Will to the Sacrament as for instance if a man that goes to be baptized resolves with himself not to be baptized i. e. not to have the benefit of Baptisme And that thus every one is rid of Sin and its Eternal punishment And then for the Temporal that remains the charges come to a very small matter and this punishment is redeemed too and so away straight to Heaven So that he saith of Catholicks That it is the hardest thing that may be Ibid. p. 212. for any one to want grace among them if they do but suffer the use of Sacraments upon them and that they are the gentlest givers of it imaginable for all they desire of their Patients for Grace is only for them to lye still but if they should chance to be unruly and kick away the Priests or their rites I know not then saith he what may become of them And page 181. he saith That it is impossible to imagine a doctrine that more effectually over-throws the necessity of a good life than theirs doth It seems the Protestants Justification by Faith alone is nothing to it In all which I think in common prudence he ought to have shewed a little more moderation if he intended to have gained belief even with his own party Now out of Charity to those who may be deceived by him I shall without much engagement in the particular controversies briefly shew to the pious Reader that this Author in none of these points fore-mentioned hath dealt faithfully or truly related the Doctrine of the Roman Church and I desire the Readers faith to my words no further than the following Testimonies make it appear § 3 1. For the first then the Non-necessity of Repentance save at the Hour of Death For the contrary hereof 1. Of Repentance not to be deferr'd First It is clear out of the Doctrine of the Council of Trent that no person that hath the use of Reason can enter into the state of Grace or Justification can be capable of the benefit of any Sacrament even that of Baptisme much less of the rest the Sacrament of Penance of the Eucharist c. without an Actual Repentance preceding See Conc. Trid. Sess 6. c. 6. Where speaking of the preparation for obtaining Justification it requires in such person sidem spem Dilectionem dei and adversus peccata odium detestationem hoc est eam paenitentiam quam ante Baptismum agi oportet propositum inchoandi novam vitam servandi mandata quoting the Text Act. 2.28 Paenitentiam agite baptizetur unusquisque restrum in nomine Jesu Christi and Mat. 24.19 Baptizantes eos in nomine Patris c. docentes eos servare quaecunque mandavi vobis Again for the Sacrament of Penance after a relapse the Council declares it to require yet a greater preparation by
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
some particular persons appearing penitent these indefinitely to all but upon the same condition that they be penitent which also they must testifie by their repairing to the Sacrament of Penance otherwise they are taught that they receive no benefit thereby Now a difference in these I say seems to alter nothing in the substance of Indulgences and the one way to be as necessary to the constitution of the present times as the other was of the ancient § 47 The Church's Doctrine about Indulgences thus delivered As for many other Questions touching the manner how these Indulgences benefit the receiver whether by the way of Absolution or Solution whether with or without a Counter-satisfaction paid to Gods Justice and this when or how or by whom paid the like the present Church is no more concerned to state them than the ancient and what absurdities therein may be thought to press or prejudice the one will as much the other In this Author 's inquiring then from what Solutions or Satisfactions or Church-treasures these Indulgences become admitted and ratified by the Divine Justice much pains and his many Queries might have been spared the Church herein hath determined nothing and he together with Catholicks hath the liberty to take that opinion that likes him best Doctor Holden in his Resolution of Faith ‖ l. 2. c. 6. written for informing such Protestant Questioners hath told him in this matter Catera etiam dubia sunt a Theologis in utramque partem agitata Nimirum An sit the saurus aliquis meritorum satisfactionum in Ecclesiâ cujus dispensatores sint Romanus Pontifex reliqui Ecclesiae Pastores And paena quae ex naturâ rei coram Deo solvenda sit pro peccato sive publico sive secreto possit ab-alio quocunque adimpleri per modum solutionis satisfactionis debitae quam ab ipsomet peccatore And F. Veron in his Rule of Faith * c. 17. Since saith he neither our profession of Faith nor the Council of Trent take any notice of this matter why should we press such opinions or propose more to them Separatists than these engage it to Here then if this our Adversary will grant that there can be no remission of sin or of any punishment thereof eternal or temporal for satisfying in rigour the Divine Justice but by the application of the superabundant and infinite merits and satisfaction of our Lord Jesus Christ a thing which I suppose no Protestant will deny no more is desired of him or any For the other Treasure of the satisfactions of the Saints though it is certain here 1 That God may if he pleaseth accept the satisfactions of one person for the debt of another for so he did in our Lord's and 2 again that for what is imperfect in the Saints satisfactions he may compleat it with his Sons yet I know no Roman Divines that do hold any such satisfactions of Saints in this matter absolutely necessary but that our Lords alone are all-sufficient and if the Saints great sufferings for their Fellow-members not to be denied are also thrown into this Treasure this is more to honour them than that it needs any recruit by them Thesaurus Ecclesiae saith Suarez ‖ De Indulg disp 51. §. 3. non est simpliciter necessarius ut Indulgentiae concedantur sumnque habeant effectum And Sicut Christus est unicus Redemptor ita etiam est per se sufficiens sine adminiculo aliorum sanctorum And Non est opus ut adjungantur satisfactiones ex passionibus Sanctorum passionbus Christi quasi hae per se non sufficiant Sed hoc tum gloriosum Christo a quo est omne bonum Sanctorum tum ipsis etiam sanctis perhonorificum saith Bellarmin * De Indulg l. 1. c. 4. This said of the Doctrine proceed we to consider the present practice of Indulgences and the great dammage done to Piety Devotion thereby which this Author so earnestly chargeth § 48 And here 1st The Subjects of the Roman Church are generally instructed that no Indulgence can benefit them as to any remission of the guilt of Sin as it is an injury and offence done to God or of the Eternal punishment thereof or to the making their peace with God with which these eternal pains are inconsistent but only as to the temporal that is still retained by God after our reconciliation and peace made with him for the satisfaction of his Justice in some part which thinks it not fit to let our former wickedness pass altogether free from some temporal punishment which if this Author please he may call Chastisement to shew his hatred of sin even when he hath received into favour the Sinner For as the Council of Trent ‖ Sess 14. c. 8. Divinam clementiam decet ne ita nobis absque ullâ satisfactione peccata dimittantur ut occasione arreptâ peccata leviora putantes velut injurij contumeliosi Spiritui Sancto in graviora labamur Of which ordinary course of Gods Justice even toward those already re-admitted into grace and friendship he who doubts may at his leisure consider well these passages of Scripture Numb 20.12 27.12 13 14. Numb 14.34 2 Sam. 12.10 13 14. 2 Sam. 24.10 13. 2 King 20.6 18. compared with 2 Chron. 32.31 2 Chron. 20.37 35.22 23. 1 King 13.22 Exod. 32.34 where the punishment threatned verse 10. being remitted yet others less than that are reserved whensoever their new sins should provoke the Lord also to remember the last Josh 22.17 Psal 89.31 c. Prov. 11.31 1 Pet. 4.18 Ecclus. 5.4 Psal 98.8 1 Cor. 11.31 32. 1 Cor. 3.15 which text shews a temporary suffering to remain also in the next world for faults not fully expiated and accounted-for here by our judging our selves that we may escape the judgment of God Of which faults either in their nature or by our Repentance and the Sacrament of Penance rendred not mortal to us thus Caesarius Arelatensis ‖ Hom. 8. Quicquid de istis peccatis redemptum non fuerit illo igne purgandam est de quo Apostolus c. Redemptum non fuerit i.e. as he saith before by our Penances Continuis Orationibus frequentibus jejuniis largioribus cleemosynis c. Nor is this postume punishment since it is revealed and made known to us here purely vindicative for sin but as other Temporal punishments here design'd to excite us to a cleansing and correcting betimes whatever is ill built by us for sear of it and by our lighter penances here to a preventing it And if the preaching of Hell-torments to come may profit us so may those of Purgatory Again Mat. 12.32 ‖ De Civ Dei l. 21. c. 24. From which Text St. Austin collected Sunt quibus etsi non in isto tamen remittetur i. e. not for the eternal remitted alwaies here or not at all but a temporal pain or punishment in futuro Examples also of
such temporal punishments avertitible or removable by some penal works of our own and our greater suffering from God changed into those lesser from our selves See in Jona 3.10 compared with 7 and 8. c. 1 King 21.29 2 Chron. 12.6 7. 33.12 13. 2 King 7.1 compared with 2 King 6.30 1 Cor. 11.31 32. I have quoted here the more Texts to shew that Gods Mercy ordinarily includes also some personal satisfaction in some part at least to his Justice Justitia pax osculatae sunt Miseri cordiam judicium cantabo tibi Domine that he may be both loved and feared They are taught therefore that a true Contrition in the subject the requisites of which see before § 10. c. is still presupposed to the benefit of any Indulgence and that he who hopes any gain thereby must also if in Mortal sin by the Sacrament of Penance render himself first in the state of Grace Contritis Confessis being the Condition on the part of the indulged expressed or implyed in all Indulgences § 49 As for the ordinary expression in these Indulgences promising a remission of their sins the first of this Authors hard Questions who asks how it consists with this Doctrine of Indulgences their respecting not the fault but the temporal punishment thereof it is answered long since by Bellarmin ‖ De Indulg l. 1. c. 7. and it were well if this Author with his old objections would communicate to his Protestant Readers the Catholicks old Answers and to the Catholick Readers his own Reply to them Id propterea dici quod indulgentia conjungitur ordinarie cum confessione Sacramentali facit ut qui per Sacramentum Paenitentiae which is received as a preparation for the Indulgence fuit absolutus a culpâ per Indulgentiam absolvatur a paenâ and that the Indulgences speak of the remission of sins quoad paenam or as Suarez * De Indulg Disp 50. §. 1. Absolvit a culpâ paenâ non quia Indulgentiae utramque tollat sed quia ut habeat effectum debet supponere remissam culpam ipsa complet totius paenae remissionem § 50 Things standing thus to what end hath this Author sought out and cited some testimonies of Roman Writers One saying ‖ p. 525. That after Indulgences were grown common many men did abstain less from evil actions A second That they were only profitable to the Idle and Wicked A third That true Christian piety was destroyed by them and that all manner of wickedness did spring from thence and that men were affraid of committing no kind of sin when at so cheap a rate they could purchase a remission of them A fourth That let men do what wickedness they will by them they shall be free from punishment c. besides all his own invective stuff from pag. 415. to p. 499. or § 3. to § 8. where he would perswade his Reader that the Roman Indulgences countenance the impenitent to a continuance in their sins or promise to them any the least relief as to their pardon I say what mean all these impertinences when as Indulgences belong to none but just persons and none but the already penitent and reformed as Catholicks are generally taught are at all concerned in or succoured by them And it must be by a most Gross and highly-Culpable ignorance if any heretofore have so far mistaken the Churches constant Doctrine of Indulgences as to imagine the least good from them as to their Salvation if they either still continued in any Mortal sin or afterward returned to it and if the pardon of such sin were not first procured from God by a sincere repentance There is saith this Author ‖ p. 497. after his learned Collection of old Indulgences one odd condition implied in some of these Prayers he ought to have said in all called being in the state of Grace the want of which may hinder the effect from them but a due Confession with Absolution will at any time put a man into it But by his leave there is another odd Condition besides which Catholicks call Contrition or Repentance and what Catholicks mean by it may be seen before § 10. and 23 which this Author according to his wonted candor hath left out and without which his due Confession and Absolution signifie nothing and if they have this indeed also to put them in the state of Grace much good may they have of their Indulgence for also Protestants and this Author hold this Contrition or Repentance of such a strange vertue that they admit all into the state of Grace though unabsolved or unconfessed by it alone § 51 What means then such a Tragical clamour against Roman Indulgences as nourishing and licensing mens sins and as sold dear and greedily bought i. e. with almes and other pious works on this account and at last deceiving the purchaser whereas suppose them all utterly to fail and to be meer frauds they cannot be said to fail to any such unpenitent Sinners they fail only to those that however this bargain as they call it proves are already in Gods Grace and favour and the state of Salvation and to whom perhaps the very granting such Indulgence by reason of their diligent preparation for it was the occasion of bringing them into such a state and Indulgences fail to these for nothing more but what the same Indulgences pretend to give viz. the remission of some temporal punishment upon which failing follow some dilation perhaps of the possession of their future bliss whilst their Contrition Confession and the pious Work they do for such an Indulgence are forth-coming forth their reward But Protestants denying any such temporal punishment to remain after remission of the sin consequently must affirm that Catholicks gain much by what they do and lose nothing at all by what they are promised though the Indulgence utterly fail them § 52 2ly As Catholicks are taught that a right disposition is necessary in the Penitent so that for the Indulgence is also necessary a just cause or motive of granting it and some way proportionable to the quality of the penance that is relaxed by it i. e. a cause prudently estimated more acceptable to God and sooner procuring the application of our Lords satisfactions for the remitting of such punishment of sin than such penances would be Nothing is more obvious than this in Catholick Authors and upon this ground the saying of one Pater Noster or giving the Almes of a penny or the like is not thought by them a sufficient cause where is no other motive thereof for the Church-Governours thereupon to concede a plenary Indulgence Neither is it here pretended that all past Indulgences of Popes or others that may be produced have always therefore necessarily had or included such a cause neither are Popes maintained infallible in their judgment herein Quia per indiscretas atque super fluas and cur indiscâ—etae superstuae saith
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
been amply shewed in the Vindication of the Second and Third Point The Subjects of the Roman Catholick Church then are in this matter thus instructed 1. That the due effect of the Sacrament of Penance repaired unto by such delinquent is necessary to the Remission of such sin and its Eternal Punishment 2. That this effect is not conferred on all that are Confessed as this Author seems to take for granted that it is ‖ See p. 206. 498. but only among these on the rightly pre-disposed by Faith and a true and acceptable Repentance Which Repentance includes not only sorrow for sin but an actual amendment of life and ceasing from sin where life longer continued and for the sorrow Sine magnis nostris fletibus laboribus divinâ id exigente justitia ad hanc novitatem integritatem viz. remission of sin and former state of regeneration pervenire nequaquam possumus saith the Council of Trent ‖ Sess 14. c. 2. 3. That when all is done the person is not absolutely certain that he hath attained such a worthy and sincere Repentance Contrition or Attrition as infallibly receives the effect and benefit of the Sacrament 4. That if there should happen any defect therein the best way to compleat such Contrition ad praeteritorum peccatorum vindictam castigationem saith the Council * Sess 14. c. 8. is the exercise of much Penance and Mortification and the surest sign of such Contrition compleated is a change of life and perseverance therein and the surest means again for such perseverance ad novae vitae custodiam infirmitatis medicamentum saith the Council ‖ Ibid. are Penances and Mortifications § 37 5. As to Penances their removing or taking away punishments and so just Indulgences of Penance doing the same They are taught First That no such Indulgence relates at all to quitting the punishment Eternal Secondly That no Penances or Indulgences are beneficial to the removing any Temporal punishment so long as the person by his sin unrepented of is still liable to the Eternal and suppose they were yet this infinitely greater debt still uncancelled renders the discharge of the other not valuable Thirdly That the remission of the Eternal depends chiefly on the sincerity of their Repentance and Conversion to God and change of life as hath been shewed before And this thing viz. lest by any defect of these there should be some flaw in the pardon of the Eternal punishment keeps all pious Sons of this Church perpetually on their guard notwithstanding what-ever Indulgences are passed concerning the Temporal to make good on their part the conditions that are required from them for the cancelling thereof And if by the Money and Friends this Author speaks of as a means of evading these punishments be meant Alms-deeds and other mens Prayers it is granted That both for the procuring Grace and the Remission of Sin and of these punishments attending it they help much And in this respect granted again that the Rich both as to giving Alms and by them procuring the intercessions of such as are relieved have a great advantage And very fit they should having so many disadvantages and running so many hazards from their Wealth other waies But then the Poor are no way inferiour to them who as they want the one so are freed from the other And we are told by our Lord that more Rich incur these Eternal or Temporal punishments by the Temptations of their wealth than escape them by the Charitable distribution of it § 38 From these things it appears that how easie soever the releasment of such punishment is amongst Catholicks it is made much more easie or less difficult among Protestants For 1st For Sin and the Eternal punishment if Protestants require repentance sorrow for sin and an actual change or reformation of life Catholicks as hath been shewed § 10 c. require also these and much more namely a necessary repair to the Sacrament of Penance Confession Absolution and for the greater securing of their Contrition or Repentance of which none can be absolutely certain fletus labores penances mortifications and dignos fructus paenitentiae and these not only ad novae vitae custodiam but ad praeteritorum peccatorum vindictam 2ly 2 Cor. 7.11 For the Temporal punishment 1. Catholicks hold after the Eternal remitted such a punishment to remain still uncancelled Protestants deny it and throw all punishment whatever into the Pardon of the Sin and as soon as the sentence Dominus transtulit peccatum tuum is past 2 Sam. 12.13 clear all accounts 2ly Catholicks hold many faithful Souls such as have been more imperfect in their repentance and negligent in Christian-duties here as it must be granted of those who all find mercy some are much more than others to be detained after death for some time in a state of Purgation Protestants send all that go not to Hell and the greatest misery straight to Heaven and the most supreme happiness 3ly Catholicks make divers Penances and Satisfactions imposed or also voluntarily assumed necessary for the discharge of such temporal punishment that by judging of themselves they may prevent that of God 1 Cor. 11.31 But Protestants by denying such punishments have also no need of such Penances and so release them to their Subjects 4. And lastly If in some of her Indulgences the Roman Church is said by them to sell these Pardons of Temporal Punishments very cheap the Protestants give them to all for nothing This of the 4th Point § 39 V. Come we to the Fifth The Roman Doctrine concerning Indulgences 5. Of Indulgences beneficial only to those in the state of Grace charged by this Author ‖ p. 518. with many gross Absurdities and as excusing Roman-Catholicks from performing the best parts of their Religion i. e. saith he enjoyning Penances accounted among them fruits of true Repentance severe mortification Fasting frequent Prayers and Almes * p. 526. To the Contrary of this I shall shew to his abused Reader That neither the Absurdities pretended by him nor the omission of any necessary Duty follow either from the Roman Doctrine of Indulgences or the commonly allowed Practice And 1st For the Doctrine of this Church If this Author had done her justice so far as to accuse or question no more than what he found to be her doctrine in her Councils concerning this point and if he had said here for righting the Church what he hath said else-where ‖ p. 209. when for his own advantage That though some Testimonies of particular persons may be produced for several opinions yet we must appeal for the sense of this Church to the Decrees of its Councils how many leaves might he have spared from his discourse on this subject as wholly impertinent Indeed so compendious and cautious have the Church's Decrees been in this matter as that those Protestants who complain at other times of her oppressing their Faith with
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
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
For the remission of which Penances the Person is required first to examine the quality of his sins and to excite a Contrition sutable thereto to repair to the Sacrament of Penance Confession and Absolution and also to perform such penances as may be thought salutary and medicinal to the conquering his lusts and preventing the like miscarriages for the time to come and all this to be done by him to render himself capable of the benefit of an Indulgence I say after all this inveighing against such a practice of the Roman Church wherein as usually in all other Points contested she only stands upon her guard and defence of Customs descending to her from Ancient Times and the Accusers and Invaders are the other Party with what greater severity do the Protestant Ministers treat a Person that after the losing his Baptismal Grace labours under mortal sin What Penances what better thing than those Roman pious Works which they deride do they impose They indeed as Catholicks also exhort such a person to repentance of his sin and amendment of his life and tell him as Catholicks also do that these are necessary but then the surest way to acquiring a true repentance and the chiefest means of working in him a reformation of life i. e. solitude penance mortifications abstinences c. they press not to him and of the necessity also of the Churches Keys for remission of such Mortal sin committed after Baptism they do not inform him They tell him that he needs fear no further reckonings for his sin as to any punishment or sufferings for it if once repented of that sin all its punishments are wiped off at once for saith our Author * p. 519. Quest 2. how can that fault be said to be remitted which is yet punished and therefore that our doing any penance for avoiding such punishment is needless The Indulgences in the Catholick Church only somtimes used for remitting such penances yet this not without commutation are cried out of ‖ Rom. Idol p. 526. as excusing them from doing the best parts of their Religion Yet among Protestants such penances are remitted always in their being never at all imposed and yet their piety and Religion thrives well enough without them and they are neither required as the best nor any part of it They cry out of the lightening somtimes of mens burdens in the Church of Rome by Indulgences but themselves will not touch those lighter burdens mentioned before that are laid on them for gaining these Indulgences with one of their fingers Nothing is done right in the Church of Rome whilst among them nothing is done at all and therefore in the other is nothing done right § 81 To Conclude these discourses let all pious Christians in general beware of such a destructive and Negative Way of Religion as to so great a part of the Churches Practicals Which thus endeavours to pull down all that stands before it but it self builds nothing and under pretence of reforming Religion and Devotions only defaceth them and so leaves the ruines thereof to be trampled upon by Atheists Here are speaking of the most part and those that stand at a farther distance from the Roman Church no Mental prayer no Purgation or Mortification in order thereto no Abstraction of life no Contemplation no state of perfection no Aspirations no Active or Passive Vnions talked of No Evangelical Councils but those so called help precepts to some particular persons of which none finds himself to be one no recommending of solitude of single life of quitting the possession and cares of Riches Vt soliciti sint quae sunt Domini quo modo placeant Deo 1 Cor. 7.32 and ut facultatem praebeat sine impedimento Dominum obsecrandi No Sacerdotal Confession and so no Casuists to satisfie scruples so no liability of such to be misconstrued in stating such points as the Roman Casuists are most shamefully by Protestants citing their words and defalking Circumstances which continually alter the state of the Question No Penances or Satisfactions to appease Gods wrath for their sins those of Christ being sufficient and so no need of Indulgences No Sacrifice of the Altar No Corporal presence of our Lords Body there and so no solemn Ceremonies attending it No Adoration there and so no questioning of them for Idolatry No Sacrament of Penance for deliverance from Mortal sin and so no Grace expected from the Opus operatum of it When people are sick no care of confessing them or of not letting them depart hence without their Viaticum Jam. 5.15 and without Extreme Vnction in the name of the Lord. No recommending themselves to the Prayers of Saints to help them with their Intercessions to God No Purgatory or present Middle State of any faithful Souls however departed hence with imperfect reformation of life but all Christians sent immediatly to Hell that do not go immediatly to Heaven and to the Beatifical Vision of God and so no Prayers no Oblations no All-Souls-days no Anniversaries for benefiting of such Souls No saving so as by fire No sufferings to be endured hereafter if the most extreme be once escaped and what ever soul departing hence is not worthy of the lowest Misery 1 Cor. 3.15 instantly ascends into the highest Bliss And there too no Degrees of Glory but in Christ all equal But then if it be considered how few of those who seem to dye penitent are well prepared by reason of their repentance and imperfect reformation of manners to enter immediatly to the fruition of Gods presence and possession of eternal joyes and how much many Protestants disparage a death-bed Repentance whilst thus they send no Souls to Purgatory they send the more to Hell In extremes they are the one way or the other whilst the Church guided by Scripture expounded by Tradition goes in a middle way rather inclined to mercy than rigour Again No Vowes no macerations of the Body no Vigils no Observing Fasts hardly any Festivals much less their Octaves But every one left to pray to repent after his own way fast when he pleaseth do good works out of gratitude to him who hath done and suffered for him all that God requires to believe firmly and without wavering the remission of all his sins how hainous soever and so to magnifie the more Gods Mercy and Christs Merits to read the Scriptures without asking the Eunuck's Question Quomodo possum intelligere nisi quis ostenderit mihi c. and not to doubt but that God will illuminate him in the understanding of them as much as is necessary when as he stops his ears to the instructions of those Missioners sent by our Lord to teach him in them No such numerous Catalogue of the Articles of their Faith or Determinations of former obliging Councils nor yoke of Assent or Belief imposed but boasting of their indulging to all men liberty of opinon in those things where the former Church they say hath used Tyranny No sure Tradition save only that of the Scriptures for this alone serves their turn no Church-Infallibility and I had almost said no Church-Authority A fine contrived way of Religion for invading others and no need of defending it self For on Affirmes lies the Proofe All these Church-Practices before Luthers appearance are thrown off by many for I cannot say it of all Those among them I hope will consider whom these things concern Nor have they any reverence to their gray hairs or their great antiquity But for their defence against this not to be denied they bring in Antichrist to farther them bring him not into the world only in such early days but into the Church and in the Church place him also in the chiefest Chair therof in the latter end of the Fourth Age or beginning of the Fifth for many of these Customs rejected by them are then found in the Church and there he hath sate ever since and given laws to Christianity if we will believe them for a thousand years till the Reformation appeared notwithstanding our Lords Promise to the Church of Portae inferi non pravalebunt And since this his coming all these things are found Superstition Wil-worship Mandata Hominum with these Reformers and upon the same account many other Sects Sub-reformers of the Reformed are hard at work to pull down the remainder of Church Government Ceremonies Discipline which these first Demolishers have yet left standing And having thus dismissed and rid their hands of all these former Church-Customs they have now the leisure to make sport with them too and call them to an account And for fitting the Churches Tenants and Practices the better for their drollery they mis-relate and mis-represent them so far as that they can manifest them unreasonable and ridiculous and the extravagancy of any Casuist or Schoolman is applyed and imputed to the Church whilst the Protestant Reader though otherwise never so prudent and knowing yet unstudied and unexperienced in these things believes their relation as a truth and the Learned amongst Catholicks are astonished to see the Churches Doctrine so disguised and falsified Tuautem exaltare Domine in virtute tuâ and as there want not many to invade thy Truth so raise up alwaies those that may defend it with the strength not which they have of themselves that is none but which they receive from Thee who usest to confound the Wise of this world with things weak and despised that no flesh may glory in thy sight And as for the Enemies of thy Church and Truth whoever they be Imple facies eorum ignominiâ Domine ut quaerant nomen tuum