clashes with the express teaching both of Scripture and of the Catholic Church, the faithful witness of God's Word. The principle embodied in the question of the Pharisees, "Who can forgive sins but God only?" (S. Mark ii. 7) was evidently allowed by our Lord, with the single reservation that the Divine power of remission belonged on earth to the Incarnate Word. Simon Magus is bidden by the Apostles of Christ to "repent and pray God, if perhaps the thought of his heart may be forgiven." (Acts viii. 22.) S. Paul, describing the office of an "Ambassador of Christ," to whom is given "the ministry of reconciliation," speaks simply of 'praying men in Christ's stead to be reconciled to God.' (2 Cor. v. 18—20.) S. John treats of both confession and Absolution as matters of direct negotiation (through the Intercession of our Lord) between the soul and GOD. "If we confess our sins, HE is faithful and just to forgive us our sins;... If any man sin, we have an Advocate with the FATHER, JESUS Christ the Righteous; and He is the Propitiation for our sins." All Scripture testifies that repentance and faith alone are necessary for the forgiveness of those who sin after Baptism; a doctrine which is hopelessly at variance with a system of judicial priestly Absolution. Lastly, the great teachers of Christian antiquity are herein at one with Scripture and at variance with Rome. Again and again they infer the Deity of our Lord from His power authoritatively to forgive sins1. Again and again they testify that Christ Alone forgives judicially. "Let no one deceive himself," writes S. Cyprian, "the Lord Alone can show mercy, He Alone can bestow pardon for sins committed against Himself.... Let the penitent pray to the Lord....Who Alone 1 De laps. I. p. 129. has received all judgment from the Father." "To forgive sins," says S. Ambrose, "is the office of Christ Alone, Who hath taken away the sin of the world1.” "He Alone can remit sins," writes S. Clement of Alexandria, "Who Alone is able to discern disobedience from obedience"." "Who else,” exclaims S. Cyril of Alexandria, "may free the transgressors of the law from sin, but He who is the Author of the law itself 3?” "See," adds S. Ambrose, in another place, "it is by the agency of the Holy Spirit that sins are forgiven. Men employ their ministry in the remission of sins, but exercise no kind of power which is theirs by right"." (4) Satisfaction. If by Satisfaction the Church of Rome understood either amendment of life or restitution in case of injury inflicted on a fellow-creature, the Church of England would fully agree with her in requiring both. She teaches the necessity of "bringing forth worthy fruits of penance," as well as of "bewailing our sinful life," and "acknowledging and confessing our offences 5:" i. e., that satisfaction is no less a part of true repentance than contrition or confession. She requires any of her members who may have been excluded from Holy Communion for evil living to "satisfy" the congregation by an open declaration of his penitence, and to "recompense the parties to whom he hath done wrong"." But "satisfaction," in its Tri 1 Ep. 76 ad Stud. 3 In S. Joann. XII. 56. 5 Commination Service. 2 Pædagog. I. 8. 4 De Spiritu Sanct. III. 19. 6 "Hereby we do learn what is the satisfaction that God doth require of us, which is, that we cease to do evil, and do good; and if we have done any man wrong, to endeavour ourselves to make him true amends.... This was commonly the penance that Christ enjoined sinners, 'Go, and sin no more.'"-Hom. Of Repentance, part 2. dentine sense, is something wholly distinct from this. It is "that compensation by which a man makes some reparation to God for the sins that he has committed1." Of this (we are told) that there are several degrees; the first and most excellent, and that which alone gives its value to any other satisfaction, being the Atonement of the Cross: the second that which is called "canonical," and consists in the discharge of certain penances imposed by the Church. Voluntary acts of self-mortification, and providential visitations borne with patience and submission, are also of avail to satisfy for sin. Such satisfaction is through the merit of Christ meritorious: it "averts the vengeance of God," removing or lessening the temporal punishments of sin, which are not always remitted together with the punishment of eternal death. Lastly, this satisfaction (it is taught) may be made by one member of Christ's body for another: "those who are endued with divine grace may pay for another what is due to God." It is obvious that this elaborate system rests in principle on the Roman doctrine of human merit, which has already been discussed in ch. iii. § 2. Historically, an attempt is made to father it upon the disciplinary system of the Early Church, which consisted of exclusion from Holy Communion and other Church privileges until the offender had passed through certain successive stages of public confession and humiliation. Thus the Tridentine Catechism quotes S. Augustine's words; "Rightly are times of penance appointed by these who preside over the Church, that satisfaction may be made to the Church in which the sins themselves are remitted"." Two differences however, and those of primary importance, 1 Cat. Co. Trent, part 2, c. v. 9, lix.—lxxii. lie almost on the surface. (1) Primitive penance preceded absolution: the satisfaction which Roman priests prescribe, follows after it. (2) Primitive penance was a satisfaction "to the Church:" the penance which Rome requires is a satisfaction offered to GOD. As to the practical effect of this modern view of satisfaction, the anathemas of Trent will scarcely avail to keep members of the English Church from exercising their own judgment. And few who know what human nature is will doubt that a theory of meritorious satisfaction, however guarded or qualified, tends to obscure the satisfaction of our Lord, and to erect an edifice of spiritual pride in the room of real humiliation. Not without point is the suggestion of the English Homily on Repentance', that Judas himself attempted to make a satisfaction for his sin. Thus the language used by the Church of England with regard to the Roman Sacrament of Penance is amply justified. In every one of its constituent parts it is a "corrupt following of the Apostles." Contrition, Confession, Absolution, Satisfaction-all have their place in Apostolic Christianity. But not one of these appears there in the form now inculcated by Rome. In respect to each she has more or less widely departed from the faith which was 66 once for all2 delivered to the saints." 1 Part 2. 2 Tŷ άπa‡ πapado@elon (S. Jude 3): admitting therefore of no change or accretion. 1. Expediency of Clerical Celibacy. Is Celibacy or Matrimony the more honourable estate? Which tends most generally to the glory of God and the good of souls? Which is most expedient for those who are called to the special self-consecration of Holy Orders? These are important questions, and there is much to be said on either side. On the one hand, Scripture teaches that "marriage is honourable in all" (Heb. xiii. 4)1; certain heretical ascetics are condemned for 1 τίμιος ὁ γάμος ἐν πᾶσιν. It is immaterial whether we translate "marriage is honourable," or "let marriage be honourable." év Tâow is perhaps purposely indefinite-"in all places, times, and persons" (Wordsworth). |