Full text of "An examination into the doctrine and practice of confession"

See other formats

BV 8A5 .J4

Jelf, William Edward, 1811-

1875.
An examination into the

doctrine and practice of

d^li

CONFESSION

Woi'ks by the same Author.

BAMPTON LECTUKES. (Parker, 1857.)

WHITEHALL SERMONS. (Parker, 1848.)

MARIOLATRY, as exhibited in books at pa-esent used in the

Romish Communion. (Rivingtons, 1869.)
QUOUSQUE. (Longmans, 1873.)

SECESSION TO ROME. (Longmans, 1874.)

GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK LANGUAGE.. Fourth ■ Edition.

(Parker.)
ARISTOTLE'S ETHICS, with English Notes. (Parker, 1856.)

AN EXAMINATION

INTO THE

DOCTEINE AND PEACTICE

CONFESSION

WILLIAM EDWAED JELF, B.D.

AUTHOR OF 'QUOUSQUE

SOMETIMK CENSOR OF CH. CH.: BAMPTOX IJiCTUKEK 1857: WHITEHALL PliEACHER 184C

LONDON
LONGMANS, GEEEN, AND CO

1875

All rif/hff: rexerrei:

LOXDOX ; PniXTED liV

SPOTTISWOODK AND CO., NKW-STltKKT SQfAUE

AND PAULIAMENT STUKKT

PEEFACE.

I HAVE not sufficient reliance on myself to put forth a
work upon Confession at the present moment, without
expressing a hope that any auguries which I may en-
tertain of its acce]^tance may be realised only so far
as the views it contains are in harmony with God's
Word and Will ; that if, contrary to my own firm con-
viction, it be otherwise, it may be overruled so as to
be of none effect ; and with this hope, or rather prayer,
T commit it to the judgment of my readers and God's
good Providence.

I have thought it best not to load my pages with
numerous references to patristic books (not on the
shelves of ordmary libraries) in support of facts, the
authorities for which can be found almost exhaustively,
certainly abundantly and sufficiently, in the pages of
such works as Bingham and Usher, and the note in
the translation of Tertullian in the Library of tlie
Fathers. I have, therefore, referred my readers to
these books, where they will find not only references
to the original works, but generally full lengtJi quota-
tions of the passages referred to.

I must beg niy readers' indulgence for any faults

vi PREFACE.

of style or language which they may discover. Writ-
ing on such a subject, it is difficult to be accurate
without being tiresome, to be full without overflowing.
I am aware that my readers will find occasional re-
petitions which they may possibly think they might
have well been spared : but the matter of fact is, that
the subject divides itself into many distinct heads and
points of view, and where the same arguments and
facts apply to all, or more than one of these, I have
preferred to commit an offence against rhetoric by re-
producing the link which was necessary to the coherence
of my chain, rather than to offend against logic by
leaving it incomplete.

40 Queen's Gate Gardens :
January 1875.

CONTENTS.

CHAPTER I.

PEELIMINAET OBSERVATIONS.

Importance of the Subject^ Aspects and Results of the Confessional — In-
stinctive Aversion to it — Not the Ground of this Treatise — But its Eepug-
nance to God's revealed Word — Urgency of the Question — Indistinctness
and Hesitation in dealing with it — Various Grounds of its Acceptance —
Necessity for an Examination of it — Conclusion at which I have arrived —
The People to whom it is addressed — A priori Reasons for douLting its
Soundness — Sophistry and Sophistries of its Supporters — Petty Arguments
current among its Partisans page 1

CHAPTER II.

Point at Issue — ^Jot the clerical Commission, but its Nature and Extent — Not
whether Men ought to be anxious about their Salvation, but whether
Auricular Confession is an appointed Means thereto— Not whether confi-
dential Communications between a Pastor and his Flock are desirable or
allowable, but whether formal Absolution is an ordained Channel of
Pardon, or a desirable Preparation for the Holy Communion — No Neces-
sity to adduce the extravagant Utterances of the School — The Subject
will be treated in its least irrational Aspect — Varieties of Opinion among
those who have accepted the Sj'steni — A Suspicion of Unclearness and
Unsoundness created thereby — Not necessary to examine all these in
Detail — Some evidently Errors — Some will be touched upon hereafter —
Cause of this Inconsistency of View — In the Teachers of the Party — In its
Disciples and Partisans — Real point advocated by the Confessionalists —
What they mean by Auricular Confession— Notions mixed up in the Term
Confession — Confidence and Confession, Absolution and Pardon to be dis-
tinguished from each other — Confesi^ion inits popular Acceptation, includes
Confidence and Confession in its technical sense — Great Contrast between
these — How they are linked together in the Confessionalist system — Points
successively advanced — Ending in Auricular Confession, technically so-
called — Differing little from the Roman practice — Different in Details —
Identical in Error 14

CONTENTS.

CHAPTER TIL

Twofold Plea for Confession: — 1. As a natural duty — 2. As a divine Ap-
pointment— Attempt to identify Confession -with the natural Instinct of
Confidence by throwing the same Colouring of Duty over both — 1. By
asserting that they are both commanded in Scripture — 2. By Analogies
of Lawyer and Phj-sician — This latter Argument examined as used to
support Confession — Analogies too far fetched — Do not touch the required
Point — Argue from prudential to an intrinsic Obligation — Hence even if
they did apply to Confidence, yet they would not apply to Confession —
fail in their Facts — Full disclosure to a Lawyer or Physician often not
necessary — Fail in their Relation — One relating to Things natural in which
there is generally no Alternative, the other to Things spiritual in which the
Absence of an Alternative is the very Point to be proved — These Analogies
do not justify special Arrangements for Confession — Betting-houses furnish
the closer Analogy on this Point — Question whether Scripture enjoins the
Duty of private Confession — Passage in St. James has two possible Meanings
— Diflference between them — The Confessionalist Interpretation not
recognized in the early Chiirch — The Confession spoken of by St. James
is Reciprocal — Language of the Homilies on the Subject— St. James is not
speaking of technical Confession — If he was, his Language would be more
Definite — Confessionalists not to be heard in their Application of this
Passage page 26

CHAPTER IV.

Fallacy of passing from Confidence to Confession — Gain to the Confessionalist
Cause in identifying them — Confidence •A\\o'^-A\Ae under certain Conditions —
Not peculiar to Christianity, though possibly more effective under its
Auspices — Arises not from sacerdotal Prerogative — But from the natural Sym-
pathies and Yearnings of Humanity — To be disconnected from sacerdotal No-
tions— Distinction between Confidences for Relief of Mind, or for the Sake of
Advice — The Clergyman the proper Person to apply to, but the having
Recourse to him a Sign of Spiritual Weakness — Opportunities for good in such
Confidences — Recourse to Clergymen for removal of Doubts of Forgiveness —
No Sign of Spiritual Health, but the Reverse — Cure for a morbid State —
Any System of Training or Preaching which creates the Need of such a mor-
bid State bears Witness against itself— Confidences to be received under
certain Limitations — How they may approach to Confession — Care miist be
taken not to confound these two different Things — Danger at present day in
Confidence — Differences between Confidence and Confession, and between
Pastoral Advice and Direction — Importance of realising these Distinctions —
This Confidence only once suggested by our Church to Persons in Health and
Strength- Practical Transition from Confidence to Co7ifession . . 38

CONTENTS.

CHAPTER V.

Second Plea for Confession as part of a Divine Ordinance for the Forgiveness of
Sin — The Theory displays much knowledge of human Nature and human
Wants — Might have recommended itself to our acceptance had there been
no Revelation — The ignoring of God's revealed Cure for Sin the real Ob-
jection to it — No Trace in Scripture of any such Ordinance for Pardon as
private Confession to Man, or any such Practice being used, or recommended
by the Apostles— Nor yet any Trace of it in the really Primitive Church-
Primitive Practices recogjiised by our Church as a Witness to Facts — Espe-
cially valued byMediaevalists- Tliis finds no Place in Primitive Practice —
No private Confession practised or recognised except as preparatory to
public Discipline, and this not in the earliest Ages — Evidence of Mr. Carter
on this Point— Of E. B. P. in a Note on Tertullian— This shows, not
only that private Confession was not compulsory as in Romish Church,
but that it did not exist at all page 51

CHAPTER VI.

Further Examination into the Ancient Practice — Both Persuasives to and Dis-
suasives from private Disclosure of Sin — Solution of this is that Disclosure is
recommended in certain Cases with a View to public Confession — Discour-
aged as a Means of obtaining Pardon from God — Threefold Phase of Sin —
Against a Brother — Against the Church — Against God- -Threefold Phase of
Guilt — DiiFerent Means of obtaining Remission of these several Phases of
Guilt.

Sins against the Church were Matters of penitential Discipline— Remitted by the
Church as the Party offended— Remitted by Individual Cliristians, when the
Sin and Guilt arose from Private Injuries — Sins against God remitted by
God alone on Confession to Him — Prominent Place held by Sin against
the Church — Afterwards the Notion of such Sin died away, and tlie peni-
tential Discipline fell into Disuse — Persuasives to disclosure of Sins origi-
nally had reference to public i isclosure, Dissuasives had reference to the
Requirements of God by Confession to Him alone.

Proofs that public Discipline dealt only with Sins as against the Church — Not
with Sins as against God — Line tlrawn between these — Passage from Cyp-
rian— Differences between Public Discipline and Auricular Confession —
Too wide to admit of one being any Warrant for the other . . .63

CHAPTER VII.

Nature and Decay of Public Discipline — Case of Corinthian Sinner — Developed
in the Century after the Apostles — Lapsi — Scandalous Offences — Those
which caused no Scandal, left to private Conscience and Discipline — No pri-
vate Confession, fur the Sin was notorious — Public Disclosure of secret Sins
for Relief of Conscience — This only allowed on Recommendation of some wise

X CONTENTS.

Layman, or aftorwarcls Priest — Private Disclosure of Sins to such Persons for
this Purpose — Not followed by Absolution — Multiplication of such Cases —
Appointment of Psenitentiarius — His Office that of ' Juge d' Instrziction^ —
Advance towards Mediaeval System, but not to Absolution— Scandal
caused by this Office— Abolished — No warrant for Confession, but the con-
trary.

Private personal Discipline for Offences not against the Chiu'ch — Same as that
recommended by our Church as Preparation for Holy Communion.

Confidence in Early Church — Primitive Usage retained in our Church, except as
regards Public Discipline.

Abolition of Psenitentiarius^Private Confession assumes a substantive Form —
Public Confession less frequent — Public Reconciliation for notorious Offences
superseded by private — Change in the Notion of Public Eeconciliation — Pri-
vate Confession for notorious OiFences authorised — Change of Doctrine as
well as Practice — Reconciliation or Absolution still precatory, not indicative,
and so up to end of twelfth Century — -This is a Matter of Ecclesiastical
Arrangement, not of Scriptural Obligation — Hence we must see what is the
Practice and Teaching of our own Church.

Attempt to distinguish occasional from habitual Confession — Flaws in the
Argument ........... page 74

CHAPTER VIII.

This a Matter of Canonical Arrangement — Argument from this — Pleas, that
this accounts for the absence of Primitive Sanction, and that our Church
has a Right to enjoin the Practice — Logical Effect of these Pleas — If so,
it cannot be a Sacramental Ordinance of Divine Appointment — Plea, that
Language of the Church may indicate a Recognition of its Scriptural Obli-
gation, or makes it binding on us, answered — Effect of such a Plea —
Necessity for examining our Church's Language — Positive Assertions of
Confessionalists on this Point — Mistaken Proofs they adduce — What it is
they assert to be taught by our Church — Visitation Office — Method pre-
scribed— Inquiry into the Fact of the sick Man's Repentance, not any Detail
of his Sins — Special Confession — Not necessarily private — Absolution to be
reluctantly applied — Pardon not given — But prayed for after the Absolution
— This Prayer the Relic of the old precatory Form — Argument of Confession-
alists about this Prayer answered — "Why it is untenable — Precatory Form up
to twelfth Century shows that Forgiveness was held to be a Matter of Petition,
not as a ' fait accomflV — Change to 'ego te ahsolvo' — Caution of our Church
in this Matter — Instances of the Nature of Absolution in otiier Passages of our
Prayer Book — Morning and Evening Prayer — Must be essentially the same
in Visitation Office, differently applied — Not Forgiveness, Imt God's Promise
and Offer to forgive — Difference between Absolution and Pardon — Instances
of tliis in the Prayer Book — In the Visitation Formula — The Special Con-
fession comes nearer to Confidence — But at all Events it would furnish no
Precedent for Cases essentially different —Certainly not for Confession in the
only Case in which even Confidence is recommended liy our Church . 87

CONTENTS.

CHAPTER IX.

Exhortation to Holy Communion — Wrongly claimed by Confossioualists as de-
cisive in their Favour — -The best and indispensable Preparation set forth
in the preceding Paragraphs — Case in which Confidence is recommended—
State of the Man's Mind — What ho is directed to do — The Kemedy not Ab-
solution, but the Ministry of God's Word conveying the Benefit of Absolution
— Directions clear and precise, to the utter Exclusion of any Sacerdotal Action
— Why and how different Interpretation has been admitted — Counter-
balanced by the Fact of the Interpretation put upon it by general Usage.

Key of the Confessionalist Position — Benefit supposed to be meaningless — Abso-
lution supposed to denote the Exercise of the Power of Forgiveness.

Exhortation may be read by a Minister — Confessionalist Argument on the use
of this Term — Changes in the Terms in this Sentence — Other Alterations —
Prayer Books of 1549 (1552), 1559— As revised in 1662— All these Altera-
tions, Additions, Omissions, Point the same Way — Why ^Absolution' was
changed into 'Benefit of Absolution' — Attempt of Laud to introduce a
Formula of Absolution— Meaning of the Terra ^Ministry of Word' — Lan-
guage of Homily — Passage tells against the Confessionalists, and not for
them — No Clergyman is here authorised to pronounce any Form of Abso-
lution— Canon of 1603 — Langiuige of Homily .... page 102

CHAPTER X.

Ground of the Discussion shifted to private Absolution — Confessionalist Argu-
ment from Ordination Formula — Question at Issue — Relation between our
Lord's Words in St. John and the Ordination Formula — Analysis of the For-
mula— Relation of the third Paragraph to the second — Twofold Power con-
ferred— These were held in Early Church to be exercised by the Dispensa-
tion of the Word and Sacraments, and in our own — Not by any Sacerdotal
Power or Sentence — This Method exhausts our Lord's Commission as far as
private Sins are concerned — No private Power of repelling from the Holy
Communion contemplated in the Exhortation to the Holy Communion —
Language of our Church on this Point — ' Discipline of Church ' in the Promise
made by the Candidate for Ordination — How limited — These Limitations
confine the Exercise of any Power to notorious Sins — Directions before the
Communion Office — Summary of the Argument — Practice of our Church —
Does not recognise actual Forgiveness as the Result of the Power in any of
the Places where it is exercised — Reason and reasonableness of this — Pos-
sible Translation of the Formula does not affect this View — What the Power
is not — Not judicial — Not operative or effective — Not a Grant of Pardon — Not
Supernatural — Not Sacramental — Private Confession to a Priest not neces-
sary to the Exercise thereof — Special Confession in Visitation Office not
necessarily Private — Not necessary as giving the Priest Information on the
Case — Knowledge of a Man's Sins not recognised as necessary to the telling
him he can be saved — Nor to determine the Amount of Penance or Peni-
tence . . • 119

ii.i CONTENTS.

CHAPTER XI.

Sense of our Lord's Words in St. John xx — Bearing of this Point on our
Church's View — Keal Question at Issue — Points required to prove the
Confessionalist case — Twofold Question — To whom were the Powers given —
And what were the Powers — Powers given to those addressed — This assumed
to be the eleven Apostles — Admitting this, the Power might have been con-
fined to them — They had Faculties whereby they could pronounce absolute
Forgiveness — Which Priests now have not. 'I am with you always' does
not carry on this Power — Others addressed besides the Apostles —
Others were ^dth him — Power conferred on the Church— This difference
Important — What were the Powers given — Clearly the Power of remitting
ecclesiastical Offences — But this not exhaustive — Comparison of Accounts of
different Evangelists — St. Luke states the Commission to have been preach-
ing Repentance and Remission of Sins — St. Matthew and St. Mark relate
the giving this Commission to the Apostles on other Occasions — How the
Accounts may be reconciled — Both embodied by our Church — How the Power
was exercised in apostolic Age — Confessionalist Assertion — Negatived by
Pacts — No such Power exercised or claimed by Apostles — Simon Magus —
Case of Corinthian Penitent — Tells against the Confessionalists, not for them,
even on their own View of it — Literal Meaning of St. John's Words — Not
taken by anyone — St. Matthew ix. 8 — Practical Test of the Power claimed
under this Passage — 2 Cor. v. 18 — ^ Asmy Father sent Me, so send I you'' —
How far the Mission of Church is identical with that of Christ — Con-
fessionalist Position assumes that the Power they claim is the Only Method
of exercising our Lord's Commission — How answered — Flaw in the Position
that this Way is one out of many — Practical Test of this Argument

PAGE 138

CHAPTER XII.

Witness of the practice of the post-apostolic Early Church as to the meaning
of our Lord's Words — As to what was not held — As to what was held —
Interpretation put upon our Lord's Words — In their widest sense — Direct
remission of ecclesiastical offences — Mediate and indirect commission — By
preaching of repentance and remission of sins — Baptism — Intercessory
prayer — Result of the power exercised — By the proclamation of God's pro-
mises— By baptism — Intercessory prayer — Ret;iining power — Exercise and
results of — Power not to be exceeded — What is absolution — Not mere
preaching — Not merely reading the Bible — Proclamation of the Gospel by
the Church before the New Testament Scriptures existed — Under our Lord's
special commission and authority — This proclamation afterwards embodied
in the written Word —Authority of the Church and of the Scriptures — The
written Word does not supersede the voice of the Church, but bears witness
to it and protects it from corruptions — Essential duty of every Church
still to publish the message which our Lord put into its mouth — This pro-
phetic office of the Church exercised in absolution — Conferred in oiir own
Church on the second order of ministers — Couched in a formula of words —
Difference between this and preaching on the one hand, and the sacra-
mental theory on the other — Not antagonistic to the written word . 162

CONTENTS.

CHAPTER XIIL

How this power is oxercisud in our own Chiircli — In a formula expressing the
unlimited mercy of God — In a formula of prayer — In a formula addressed
personally to an individual — In the Morning and Evening Serviee^In the
office of the Holy Communion — Confirmed by the comfortable words of
Scripture— Visitation Office— State of the man— Nature and result of the
absolution — Not granting of pardon, not declaring it absolutely granted—
Not a sealed pardon but a sealed offisr of pardon — How far it affects the
state of the individual— Illustrations— Not required by men of strong faith
— Hence only permitted in cases of morbid doubt— How far an assurance
of repentance — Doubt of God's mercy not to be suggested — Pardon not to
be represented as given through the minister — Not to be suggested with a
view to future influence — Absolution not to be pronounced over unconscious
persons — Argument thence as to its nature- Confession and absolution not
recognised as a preparation for the Holy Communion — Doubts not to be
suggested or aggravated— "Why absolution permitted on a death-bed

PAGE 175

CHAPTER XIV.

Summary of the proofs and arguments on each side — Case of the Confession-
alists — Case on the other side — Practical conclusions — Difference between
Eome and Confessionalists one of degree not of kind — Between Cohfession-
alists one of kind not of degree — Powers conferred by ordination— How ex-
ercised in our Church — Absolution does not convey pardon— Not even in /
absolve thee — Confession — Confession as viewed by the Confessionalists and
in the Church of England — Special confession in the Visitation Office — Ee-
cognised nowhere else — Difference between confidence and confession — Be-
tween what is suggested in the Communion Office and that permitted in the
Visitation Office — The question is not between -habitual and occasional con-
fession— How this notion arose — Flaw in the tlieory of occasional auricular
confession - Solution of the difficulty in which Eitualists plead they are
placed by the importunity of applicants — Unreality of the plea — Danger of
even confidential consultations in these days — Laity not responsible for the
revival of the practice — How clergymen may deal with tliose who consult
them— For relief of mind — For disclosing a doubt — Auricular confession a
misuse of the clerical office — Cannot be claimed liy the laity as a right —
How such an applicant to be dealt with — This method pursued since the
Eeformation — Distinction between mortal and venial sin — Does not autho-
rise auricular coufpssion — Nor do the Confessionalists confine the practice to
mortal sin — Plea for absolution as a restitution to a state of grace . 1 89

CHAPTER XV.

iv CONTENTS.

ceptible in English writers— Passages often taken without the context

Conditions of value for a catena — All authorities to be struck out of the
catena who are speaking of something different to the point alleged — And
those whose views are based on probably erroneous grounds — Or where
they are at variance with the Church of England or with history, or with
each other — On the other side, a large catena of practice — Occasional in-
stance of absolution — Not always in harmony with the Church teaching —
Catena of authorities on the other side — What the catena is worth at its
highest and best — Catena cannot supply evidence — Nor can any amount of
vague assumptions — Nor counterbalance the lack of it — Limitations intro-
duced by these divines fatal to their theory — Benefits alleged as arising
from the practice — See-saw argument of the Confessionalists— Testimony to
its benefits — From personal experience — From parochial experience — Not
necessary to parish work properly carried on — Perhaps necessary to public
discipline if it existed among us — Possibly useful for direction, but this not
recognised in our Church — Confidential intercourse admits neither sacra-
mental confession nor direction — Confession and absolution are not to be
directed as a condition of pardon, or used to get the secrets of a man's soul
— Alleged benefits counterbalanced by known evils — Question whether
it is not an intrusion on the revealed scheme of salvation — This the great
question — The evil of this not counterbalanced by any great benefits — What
God has given us is exhaustive and sufficient — Clergy not physicians, but
only errand-boys of the Great Physician — Have no licence to alter or add
to His panacea — Certainty of methods prescribed by God — Danger of human
devices — Auricular confession implies disbelief in God's promises — The im-
portance of this principle makes me defer the consideration of the benefits
of confession — Argument for toleration is a sign of conscious weakness — Not
likely to succeed — Apathy on the point quite unintelligible — Important re-
sults of the confessional : Theologically— Evangelically — Ecclesiastically —
Eeligiously— Personally — Nationally — Socially — Danger of again allowing
it to take root .... page 209

CONFESSION.

CHAPTEE I.

PEELIMINART OBSERVATIONS.

Importance of the Subject — Aspects and Results of the Confessional — In-
stinctive Aversion to it — Not the Ground of this Treatise — But its Repug-
nance to God's revealed Word — Urgency of the Question— Indistinctness
and Hesitation in dealing with it — Various Grounds of its Acceptance —
Necessity for an Examination of it — Conclusion at which I have arrived —
The People to whom it is addressed — A ^priori Reasons for doubting its
Soundness — Sophistry and Sophistries of its Supporters — Petty Arguments
current among its Partisans.

The progress of tlie doctrine of Confession — the revived importance
use of the Confessional as a channel of j)ardon and a ject.
means of grace — is one of those remarkable features of
the day from which it is impossible to turn in silence :
and this all the more as its advocates boast of the
strides which it is daily making among us. In whichever
of its manifold aspects it presents itself — whether theo-
logically, or politically, or socially, or individually — it is a
l^rinciple and a power which must be regarded either with
dread or with hope, certainly not with indifference. The Aspects
total change it introduces into what may be called the of the Con-
machinery of the spiritual life, as administered by the
Church; its invasion of many of those principles and
rights which we and our fathers believed ourselves to
have recovered at the Reformation, as essential points in

fessional.

2 CONFESSION.

tlie Charter of Salvation, wliicli God lias given us through
Christ ; the retrogression it marks towards the Mediaeval
phase of Christianity, from which the Reformation set us
free ; the power it will give to the clerical caste, which is
almost sure to develop itself all the more rapidly under
its auspices ; the new element it will introduce into the
closest relations of life ; the new spring it will create in
politics ; the fresh barrier it will set up between the
Church and the Nonconformists ; the new aspect it will
throw over the spiritual energies and growth of each
individual — combine to give it an importance which can
be claimed by scarcely any, if any, other point of religious
controversy. It is not merely a part of the programme
of the school which is opposed to the Reformation and
protests against the Protestant character of the English
Church, but it affects the whole of the inner and outer
Itisarevo- state of the Church and Churchmen. It is simply a
religion. revolution. If it is true, we have nothing to do but to
accept it, with shame and sorrow for the short-comings
and the loss of our forefathers and ourselves ; if it is false,
we have nothing to do but to oppose it with the energy of
men who are indisposed to accept a new religion, in the
place of that which our forefathers recovered and handed
down to us.

The advocates of the Confessional sometimes pretend
that it is the tremendous character of the practice which
makes people shrink from it, and therefore condemn that
Instinctive whicli they afterwards approve and value. In the book
f7not°im-° circulated for the guidance of the clergy in the Loudon
reasonable. ]\];iggiQn i it is said that ' it is the instinctive consciousuess
of the divine power of the priesthood which makes Con-
fession such a dread reality.' It may be true that there
s much about it which is repulsive, and that people
shrink from it without exactly knowing what it is ; we

' ' Parochial Missions,' page 92.

REASONS FOR CONSIDERING THE SYSTEM. 3

liave reason to thank God that it carries with it this
providential safeguard against itself. It may be true also, •
on the other hand, that when persons under the influence
of excited or morbid feeling look upon it as it is painted
in false colours by one of these men — as a special means
ordained by God, and entrusted to his ministry — they may,
deceived and seduced by his apparent earnestness and
confident assertion, be induced to catch at this straw,
which he holds out to them, after having, by concealing
, God's covenanted promise of forgiveness, persuaded them
that they are as drowning men without any other means
of escape ; but this does not prove that the original repul-
sive instinct was not well-founded, or that the changed view
is reasonable. With this instinctive aversion to the Confes-
sional, however, I have nothing to do, beyond thanking God
that it exists, and praying that it long may exist. I am But not the
not going to found my case against the Confessional upon opposingU.
it ; its only relation to what I am going to write is, that
I trust the following pages will, among other results,
prevent its being overpowered or extinguished by the
fallacies, the sophistries, the misrepresentations, the un-
authorised promises, sometimes the falsehoods — one does
not like the word, but truth compels one to use it — with
which some of its advocates are trying to impose it on the
religious yearnings, on the awakened consciences of our
people. The repulsive character of the Confessional is not
my reason for condemning and opposing it. I condemn it But because
— I oppose it — because, while in practice it is an act of dis- sedcs God's
belief in God's revealed promises, in theory it is a super- piomisea
seding God's ordained means for the forgiveness of sin and thods.
restoration to a state of grace : placing instead thereof a
human, unrevealed device, not to be found in Scriptural
Christianity, not known in the primitive Church, struck
out of our own Church system at the Eeformation — a sys-
tem and a practice which it is wickedness to attempt to

B 2

CONFESSION.

Present
!-tate of the
question.

Prevalent
indistinct-
ness and
hesitation
on the
subject.

Causes
tliesc.

re-introduce, and madness to permit its introduction ;
seeing that it was in its earliest existence tlie offspring of
a debased Christianity— afterwards the parent and the
nurse of a Christianity still more debased.

The state of the question, too, forces it upon us. It is
not merely that it is pressed more eagerly than ever by
the small but energetic school of Medisevalists, but that
even some of those who are most opposed to it seem
to have more difficulty in treating it than they had when
it was first mooted. As long ago as the Nottingham
Congress, I heard it remarked, that the utterances for it,
though studiously moderate, were bolder and more decisive
in tone, the utterances against it more hesitating, than on
former occasions ; and though popular feeling has at length
most justly, and not one hour sooner than was needed,
roused itself against it, yet it must be confessed that the
utterances and actions of many of our spiritual guides are
marked by an indistinctness and hesitation, of which, I
suspect, they are themselves painfully conscious. Those
who broadly abjure it in one sentence, partially admit
it in another, seemingly shrinking from denying in its
details that which they condemn in theory, without being
exactly able to define the grounds of their condemnation.
The aim of those who do not condemn it seems to be
the limiting it to certain occasions, thus admitting a
principle of which they cannot define satisfactorily the
limitation.

This difficulty, which is felt in dealing with it practi-
cally, is one of the points which convinces me that the
matter is very imperfectly understood, sometimes pur-
posely mystified : that it has been subjected to very
superficial tests by a large number of those who have,
either actively or silently, given it countenance. This is
explained by the fact, that till within a very few years men,
not being obliged to look at it practically, were content to

THE QUESTION IS IMPERFECTLY UNDERSTOOD. 5

adopt what certain writers had said before them, or to state
loosely what seemed to them at first sight to be the theory .
of the Church, without caring to look into it more deeply.
It was not of any practical importance either in the teach-
ing of the Clergy, or in the use of the Laity ; and hence,
now that it has been revived among us in its practical
bearing on everyday life, it is accej)ted very differently,
and on very different grounds, by different people — the
natural result of its having existed among Divines in the
shadowy form of i^osse and very rarely, if ever, in any
well-defined reality of esse. By some it has been accepted
on the authority of one or two great names, without any
real examination into its intrinsic merits and claims and
history ; by others it has been adopted as part of the sys-
tem of a school ; by others, again, as holding out a prospect
of that personal influence over their people, which is so
great an object with every active clergyman, whether his
aim be personal success or the salvation of souls. Others,
again, look at it as a means of stemming dissent and re-
covering dissenters ; others have taken it up on the show
of reason which has been cast around it by the mis-state-
ments and sophistries of its champions ; others, again,
have been won by specious statements of the practical
blessings which, it is asserted, experience proves it to
po:;sess. It seems to me that those who look at it with
dislike and suspicion (and these are very far from being
exclusively what are called Low Church or Broad Church)
hardly know how to deal with the audacity, with which its
advocates assume that their case is self-evident, or with
the portions of the Prayer-book which are alleged as
putting the matter beyond doubt or disjDute.

The onus prohandi should, indeed, rest with those who Reasons for

-'- _ the preseut

are endeavouring to introduce in a greater or less degree treatise.
Auricular Confession, as a means of grace more or less in-
dispensable : but the argument and proofs they have put

6 CONFESSION.

forward have met with a sufficient degree of acceptance to
justify, and indeed to necessitate, a searching examination
into their validity and value. I should have been thankful
if I had found this done to my hand as fully and satisfac-
torily as I believe it admits of being done ; but as I have
not, my apology for coming forward is, my having, after a
long, careful, and thoughtful consideration, come to the
undoubting conclusion, that neither in Scripture nor in the
early Church, nor in our own Church, is there anything
to justify its being placed in the position, in which even the
most moderate of its advocates seek to place it, far less in
that which is claimed for it by the extreme partisans of
the so-called ' Catholic ' revival. This conclusion, and the
grounds on which I have come to it, I submit to the
judgment of my readers. I can scarcely hope that what I
urge will be generally accepted by those who are pledged
to the practice. There are some, doubtless, whose honesty
of character and purity of conscience, and love of truth,
will induce them to abandon even a favourite system if
they see that it is baseless. But, generally speaking, it
would be too much to expect that men, whose professional
position rests mainly on the success of what they have
advocated so warmly and so confidently, will kiss the axe
which professes to be laid to the root of their self-esteem,
and to convict them of being misled and misleading. It is
People to not to, or for, such men that I am writing. I am convinced,

wliom it IS ' _ ° '

addressed, howcvcr, as I Said abovo, that there are many who have
adopted, or approved, or not opposed, this innovation, in
consequence of being unable to see their way out of the
arguments, which were presented to them as self-evident
propositions, admitting no denial and needing no proof.
There are a still larger body, who have an instinctive
repugnance to such a system, as well as rational doubts of
its being part of God's will for the salvation of man,
and yet scarcely know how to maintain their position in

SOPHISTRIES OF ITS SUPPORTERS. 7

tlie face of so aggressive an enemy. Many, for instance,
especially in holy orders, have been perplexed by being-
told tliat sacramental confession is expressly ordered by
the Cliurcli, and implied in their ordination vows. And I
cannot help hoping that some benefit will result to the
Church and to Religion, if it can be shown that this
dogma has in it nothing more substantial than the colour-
ing which a sharp-dealing sophistry throws around it ;
that the statements whereby men have been perplexed
are inaccurate, not to say false ; the reasonings totally
inconclusive ; that the injunctions of Scripture, the witness
of antiquity, the voice of their own Church, are so far from
lending it any countenance that they are decidedly and
directly opposed to it.

I confess that I have been very much surprised at the Sophistries

•''^sup-
singular poverty and shallowness of the grounds andargu- porters

ments alleged in support of so weighty a matter ; a poverty

so transparent and so striking, that it is almost incredible

that those who use them can possibly believe in their

depth or force. And it is quite in harmony with this, that

the tone they adopt with their opponents is often that of

rude arrogance and impertinent surprise at their differing

from them.^ I have been struck, too, with the sophistry

with which some minor detail of the system is elaborately

discussed, as if the main point were confessedly true. Thus Passing by

one divine of note among them writes a thick pamphlet to which

show that every man may choose his own father confessor, proo"?;^-

as if this was the only point that remained to be settled. ^lenJn.

Others, again, will discuss the question whether auricular

confession is voluntary or necessary, as if it were admitted

on all sides that, within cei'tain limits and in certain cases,

' I recollect a man younger than myself, to whom I was personally
known, on my expressing an opinion such as I have given above, sneeringly
saying, ' I suppose you. have Loen ordained ' ? as if it was possible that a
reasonable man should express so decided an opinion on a vexata qiiastio witliout
having thoroughly weighed a point which lies on its very siu-facc.

8 0 CONFESSION.

it was established beyond a question. In this as in most
other parts of the Mediaeval system, one of their most
usual fallacies is passing over the point to be proved, and
enlarging on some general principle, which, however true
it may be, does not hold good for their purpose until they
have proved the point that they have passed over. Thus,
for instance, Mr. Carter attempts to show that the great
promise of immediate forgiveness from God Himself may
be reconciled with his theory of the necessity or benefit of
a deferred forgiveness by sacramental confession, on the
principle that two contradictory doctrines or truths may
co-exist. He ignores the equally undoubted principle, that
this does not hold good except where each of the opposed
points is expressly and unmistakably revealed in Scripture.
He ought to have proved that this deferred forgiveness is
revealed in Scripture, instead of arguing that, if it were so,
the two must be held together. Any mere rationalising
deduction from a Scripture word or phrase in favour of
deferred forgiveness — any plea resting merely on its benefits
real or assumed — cannot neutralise or weaken any definite
proof against it, drawn from its being a negation of a
clearly, revealed fact of the Gospel scheme, or from there
being no pretext furnished by Scripture for withholding or
deferring God's mercy for a moment from anyone who really
seeks it. And even if deferred forgiveness could find any
warrant in Scripture, it would not follow that it would
de^Dend on the sentence of the Priest — it would not sanc-
tion the Confessionalist theory.
Unwar- Another of these fallacies is the drawing, as if from

elusions. preceding pages, a conclusion which is not contained in
them, and is utterly unsuj^ported by the statements from
which they quietly pretend to deduce it, or place it as if
it were a deduction from premisses.^

' This may be instanced by tlie assumption from private Confession not
being compulsory in the Early Chxirch, that it was recognised as an optionad

CONFESSION AND THE SPIBITUAL LIFE. 9
It would be imioossible to g^o tlirousrli all the petty Petty argu-

*■ & & L J ments in

arouments in the use of which the rank and file of the defeuceont.
Confessionalist party are so carefully drilled by their
leaders. It will, however, I fear, be necessary from time
to time to deal with them, as this or that part of my sub-
ject, with which they are specially connected, brings them
on the tapis. Some, however, of the more prominent may
be touched upon at once : it is like the clearing away the
rubbish from a building, the true proportions of which it
is sought to discover and restore.

Thus, the attempt to identify the revival of the Con- From the

■^ -' _ _ assumed

fessional with what they call the deepening of the spiritual deepening
life, as if this were an undisputed argument in its favour, ritual life

under its

is sophistical. This assumed coincidence fails m more influence.
points than one. There is much dispute, and much greater
doubt, whether what they call deepening the spiritual life
is not rather filling it up and choking it with rubbish.
Sisterhoods, they say, attendance at communions, and the
like, are coeval with the revival of confession, therefore
confession is a spiritual good ; they beg the question
whether the perversion of the Lord's Supper to uses for
which it was never designed, the turning it into a
Culte — function for high days and holidays — the clothing
it with powers and attributes of which there is no trace
in Scripture, be not rather a detriment to Christianity
than the contrary : whether the clothing the spiritual
sacrifices of prayer and praise with a Medisevalistic for-
mality, ceremonial, and routine be not rather a deadening
of spiritual devotion ; whether the restricting the reli-
gious life to special vows, special dress — the identifying
it with the monastic institutions of sisterhoods — be not
rather a narrowing, and contracting, of the powers and

ordinance ; or from public Confession not being required for certain sins, that
private Confession was necessary to their forgiveness. Both of these argu-
ments are found in Eitualistie authors.

10 CONFESSION.

sphere of Christianity : whether the divorcing- of religious
life from the ordinary life of a faith be not rather a death-
blow to religion than the revival of it ; in which case, the
coincidence they remark between the progress of Confes-
sion and the progress of Mediaivalism is an argument
against the former, and not for it — an argument which is
confirmed by the known results of Confession in every
country where it has obtained. Where Confession has
most had its own way, there is least of spiritual life in
any real sense of the word — more of vice, superstition,
and infidelity. This fact they pass over sicco pede.
Abstract Under the same head we must place the use of arbitrary

arguments

in favour deduction^, from facts known or assumed, to establish this
or that ordinance or doctrine ; such as all abstract argu-
ments in favour of Confession, resting on the nature of
man, or the nature of sin ; or in favour of penance from
the way in which God dealt with our first parents after
their first sin. It may be true, that if confession and
penance were established on sufficient grounds of Eeve-
lation, then facts in natural religion, or Scriptural in-
stances of God's method of dealing with His people, might
be alleged as harmonising with, or illustrating, the points
so established by Eevelation, or as answering objections
against them ; but they cannot supply the want of definite
evidence, or give to a passage an interpretation which it
could not otherwise have. Such arguments are really
the same as those of rationalising scepticism or heresy,
only with a different application— the one arguing that
this or that doctrine, though not definitely revealed, must
on rational grounds be a.dmitted into revealed truth — the
other, that this or that doctrine, though clearly revealed
in Scripture, must on rational grounds, be rejected.
Arguments Nor are they more fortunate in their arguments from
Scripture. Scripture. Such an argument, for instance, as I have met
with, to the effect that though there is no precept to confess

ARGUMENTS FROM SCRIPTURE. 11

sins to God, yet there is one to confess sins to men, rests on
a misinterpretation of two texts, and an illogical deduction
from them even so misinterpreted ; for the text ' Confess
your sins one to another,' even if the way in which they
take it were the true one, does not contemplate absolution,
conveying', or declaring judicially, an actual forgiveness of
sins, but by prayer, regarding the forgiveness as a thing
not yet in esse but in posse. And even if it were true that
there were no text enjoining confession to God as a con-
dition of forgiveness, yet this would not give any sanction
for confession to a priest.

Again, the scanty passages adduced by men of the ^'^™^^^
weaker sort from the historical books of the Old Testa- Scripture.
ment only show, that in order to find any Scriptural support
of their system, they are obliged to let themselves fall
into misrepresentations of the facts they quote ; for in-
stance, Achan's confession was public and not private ;
and Achan had been already miraculously convicted of his
sin. David's confession was not of sins poured secretly
into Nathan's ear, but the acknowledgment of the sinful-
ness of an act which Nathan, already knowing it, had
brought home to his conscience." Nathan in a figure told
David the nature of his sin, David did not tell Nathan ;
besides which, unless I am mistaken, Nathan was a pro-
phet and not a priest. It would be easy to go through
them all with the same result, but I am unwilling to waste
my space in disproving arguments (if it be not a misuse
of the term), which even instinctive logic will feel to be
fallacies. It really is not too strong to say that they are
nonsense — simply insults to our understanding.

Another instance of this inherent feebleness is the ^.^'^sum^j't
attempt to neutralise the almost universal instinctive dice against
feeling against Confession, or even to convert it into an
apology and support of it, not by showing that this feeling
is based on unreal grounds, or embodies nothing but unfair

CONFESSION.

prejudices : but by a vague reference to the fact that a
popular feeling is sometimes an unfair criterion, founded on
prejudice, not experience : whence they argue that adverse
popular feeling is a proof in favour of their system. But
if being spoken against is no proof of this or that thing
being bad, still less is it a proof that it is good. Where
it is not mere prejudice — where the feeling is based (even
though perhaps unconsciously) on experience or history —
then such an attempt to evade the witness which it bears
against the practice is but to acknowledge its reality and
force. I confess that to my mind such reasonings are like
the dummies in a druggist's shop, which betray the empti-
ness of the stock, as well as the poverty of the man's re-
sources.

They have, however, an argumentative value, though
not exactly of the sort which they were designed to have.
When a system is obliged to rest on false assumptions,
inaccurate quotations, wrong inter]3retations, illogical de-
ductions, obvious fallacies, indistinct views, it creates a
strong suspicion against itself: betraying at the same
time a logical incapacity in those who use such arguments
without discerning these flaws, which accounts for the
phenomenon, so puzzling to some people, that men with
some rej)utation for ability are found among its partisans.
The fact is, that such logical incapacity is not unfre-
quently accompanied by a certain superficial acuteness,
which invents or adopts a shadowy reasoning, without
sufficient judgment to detect the want of substance which
makes it, for the purpose of argument or truth, worse
than nothing. Men thus endowed are very apt, especially
under the pressure of a favourite crotchet, to rest on
grounds, which turn out to be mere quicksands, the
positions which self-esteem or obstinacy forbid their
abandoning as untenable.

Under the circumstances of there beinar so much

LOGICAL VALUE OF SOPHISTRIES. 13

sopliistiy and unclearness hanging about tliis subject, I
trust 1 shall not be held guilty of^ unpardonable pre-
sumption if I confess that I have been induced to put
forth these pages in the hope of being able to place it
before my readers in the light which has been thrown
upon it in my own mind, by a somewhat patient study of
what is claimed for the system, and on what those claims
rest. I feel myself more imperatively called upon to do
this from having found, on communicating to others what
has been developed in my own mind, that I have been
able to relieve them from what seemed insurmountable
difficulties in rejecting and opposing Auricular Confession.

CONFESSION.

CHAPTEE II.

Point at Issue — Not the clerical Commission, but its Nature and Exteiit — Not
whether Men ought to be anxious about their Salvation, but whether
Auricular Confession is an appointed Means thereto — Not whether confi-
dential Communications between a Pastor and his Flock are desirable or
allowable, but whether formal Absolution is an ordained Channel of
Pardon, or a desirable Preparation for the Holy Communion — No Neces-
sity to adduce the extravagant Utterances of the School — The Subject
will be treated in its least irrational Aspect — Varieties of Opinion among
those who have accepted the System— A Suspicion of Unclearness and
Unsoundness created thereby — Not necessary to examine all these in
Detail — Some evidently Errors — Some will be touched upon hereafter^ —
Cause of this Inconsistency of View — In the Teachers of the Party — In its
Disciples and Partisans — Real Point advocated by the Confessionalists —
What they mean by Auricular Confession — Notions mixed up in the Term
Confession — Confidence and Confession, Absolution and Pardon to be dis-
tinguished from each other — Confession in its popular Acceptation, includes
Confidence and Confession in its technical sense —Great Contrast between
these — How they are linked together in the Confessionalist sj'stem — Points
successively advanced — Ending in Auricular Confession, technically so-
called — Diiferiug little from the Eoman practice — Different in Details —
Identical in Error.

Real

points to be
considered.

As to the

clerical

office.

The perpetually recurring attempt to put the question
on a wrong issue makes it at tlie very outset necessary to
state very clearly tlie point wliich is to be submitted to
my readers' judgment. Be it then borne in mind, that
the question is not whether the clergy do, by divine
appointment, intervene in any way between God and the
sinner ; not whether they are, or are not, intrusted with a
ministry of reconciliation ; but whether that intervention
is to be exercised, and that reconciliation to be effected, in
that particular way which the Confessionalists hold ; so the
extent and nature, and not the fact, of the clerical commis-
sion enter into the discussion. Again, the question is, not

REAL QUESTION AT ISSUE. 15

wliether the clerical office is of divine or merely of human
appointment — not, whether ordination does or does not
confer a certain commission and authority from on high —
but whether this divine appointment and commission invest
the clergy with the powers which these men profess to exer-
cise in the confessional — with the power to forgive sins
by private and personal absolution. Nor yet whether remis-
sion of sins is brought about by the exercise of the chmcal
office, but whether it is to be sought and ministered in that
particular way which is known by the name of Sacramental
or Auricular Confession, or, to call it by its proper name,
the sacrament of penance.^

In many cases the advocates of the system take the Wrong

point

first point in each of these questions, as if this, being proved-
established, compelled the admission of the second point,
whereas in reality it is the second point in each question
which they have to prove. The first may be and is held
by very many who absolutely deny what is sought to hang
upon it as inevitably implied in, or following on it.

So, again, in the exhortations wherewith Confessional- As to

. anxiet}' for

ists press their system, when they urge the salvation of the salvation.
soul as the reason for acceptance of it — assuming that those
who will not listen to them are indifferent on the subject —
the practical question is not between an anxiety to be jDar-
doned and an indifference to pardon — not between a man's
allowing his sick soul to go on without seeking any
remedy, and the availing himself of a remedy ready to
his hand ; but whether God has ordained that health and
pardon should come to the soul through Auricular Confes-
sion— whether God has provided su.ch an ordained means
of pardon at all, or whether what they prescribe may not
be called a quack remedy, more likely to kill than cure.
To urge anxiety for one's soul as an overwhelming reason

* It is so called in the Intercession paper of the notoriotis Confraternity
for February 1873.

16 CONFESSION.

for adopting Auricular Confession, is much the same as if
anxiety for our health was held to oblige us to the use
of some of Culpepper's prescriptions.
tiir^'n"' And most particularly it is necessary to point out that

muuica- the questiou I am considering is not primarily, whether
clergyman. Certain Confidential communications on matters of conver-
sation and conduct between a pastor and members of his
flock, in certain cases, are or are not desirable and spiritu-
ally beneficial, but whether the confessing sins privately
to a priest, and receiving from him, as a priest, his formal
absolution, is an ordained means of grace, in itself an or-
dained means of recovery from sin, or of obtaining pardon,
or a recognised and desirable preparation for the Holy
Communion. The first jpoint may be — nay, is — perfectly
true, and all the rest utterly false. I think, before I have
done, it will be seen that the difference between these is
not one of degree, but of kind.
Extrava- It will not be necessary to place before my readers, for

gancies not j i. j y

noticed. the purposes of refutation, the extravagant utterances of
those among the school who carry their doctrine out to
its legitimate conclusion; such as those who talk of
Confession as the cleansing stream. These, indeed, may
fiiirly be used as arguments against that of which they
are the legitimate conclusions ; and as such I may, per-
haps, use them in the way of redudio ad ahsurdum ; but I
am not desirous to prove my case by dis]3roving notions
which to most thinking minds carry with them their own
refutation. I am willing to take the system in its best and
least irrational phase, as of course these ultraisms fall to the
ground if that whereof they are the ultraisms is displaced. ^

' Some of these extreme views must be read before it can be believed that
clergymen of our Church can put them forth as the doctrines they are bound
to teach. In a small tract, in the series of 'Books for the Young' (Palmer,
2 Little Queen Street), called ' Confession,' it is broadly stated ' Our Lord
Jesus Christ commands us to confess to His Priests all the great sins we have
committed.' Is it too much to say that this is an unmixed falsehood ?

VARIOUS VIEWS ON CONFESSION. 17

It is, however, necessary to say a few words on the Differences

of view

differences of view on the subject, not only because this must be

, f -t • 11 • • n 1 considered.

sort of haziness creates a reasonable suspicion of the
theory round which it hangs, but also because it is in a
great measure the cause of the modified acceptance which
it finds in some minds, and because it undoubtedly in-
creases the difficulty of dealing with it ; indeed, the first
thing which will strike anyone who sets about treating
the subject scientifically, must, I should think, be the
variety of notions which in theological as well as in
popular thought and language, have been, and are, mixed
together in the term Confession, as if they were essential
parts of a whole, one of which could not be denied without
denying the others, or as if one being admitted the rest
must be admitted also. This, though perpetually assumed
by the Ritualists, is very far from being the case.

Thus some writers in defending Confession content instances

11- ri ... of these

themselves with proving absolution. Some maintaining differences,
ahsolution, think their point is established if they believe
that they have shown confession to be useful or necessary to
the spiritual life. Some identify absolution with the abso-
lute forgiveness of sin, or a judicial power of forgiveness ;
others speak of it as having the promise of forgiveness of
sin, or as an assuring or absolving grace, or grace of abso-
lution, or an authoritative grant, or assurance of forgive-
ness; others, as the channel through which forgiveness ipso
facto flows ; some as the application of the Blood of Christ
to the soul for the remission of sins. Some call Confession
a divinely appointed means of cleansing the soul ; others, a
divinely appointed condition of pardon ; some hold it to be
indispensable, others only beneficial; some universally obli-
gatory, others universally optional; some as obligatory only
in some cases, optional in others — some, as beneficial only
to persons of a peculiar temperament, or only for grievous
sins ; others, for all persons and for all sins — some hold

18 CONFESSION.

that every sin must be laid before the priest ; others, that
only particular sins must be disclosed — some hold Confes-
sion to be an essential part of the forgiving ordinance ;
others, only as necessary to it, either for a complete re-
pentance, or for the assurance of a complete repentance,
or as enabling a priest to judge of the sincerity of a re-
pentance necessary for forgiveness — to fix the amount of
penitence to be gone through before absolution, and the
amount of penance to be appointed after it, so that he may
be able to arrange the terms on which God's mercy may
be obtained ! Some learned men say the difference
between Confession in the Church of England and the
Church of Eome is, that in the latter it is habitual and
obligatory, and in the former occasional and voluntary ;
laying especial emphasis on its not being compulsory in
the Church of England, as if anything of the sort could be
compulsory in our Church, except in proportion as people
were told that they could not do without it. In fact there
are not many of its advocates or apologists who do not at
one time advance one thing, and at another something-
else.

It is unnecessary now to go into all these in detail.
There are probably few of my readers whose acquaintance
with the Christian scheme is not suj0S.cient to enable them,
with very slight reflection, to see that some of these notions
are more or less intrusions on, and innovations in, the
Gospel scheme of mercy ; for instance, the notion of an
exact arrangement of the terms on which pardon can be
obtained, of some proportion to be laid down between the sin
committed and the satisfaction to be paid by the repentant
sinner, would strike most people as being, in more regards
than one, a simple and direct denial of some of the most
distinctly revealed features of the Gospel. Others, less
self-evident, will be treated of in their proper places as far
as they deserve separate notice.

VARIOUS VIEWS ON CONFESSION. 19

In the case of the teachers this inconsistency seems to
be caused by the difficulty of finding or framing a defini^
tion, which will not be too openly opposed to plain state-
ments of Scripture on God's mercy and the forgiveness of Whence

•^ ^ *' ° pvoceeding,

sm, to allow its passing muster even for a time ; while in
the case of some who are rather passively its partisans
than actively, it is mostly an indistinctness arising from
the circumstance of a matter of great importance and
greater interest, both in a religious and social sense, having
been suddenly and unexpectedly brought forward at a time
of somewhat feverish excitement, in a fashion which almost
precludes the possibility of more than a superficial ac-
quaintance with what is thus presented for the immediate
acceptance of those, who had hitherto formed no concep-
tions upon it, and in whose religious training and educa-
tion and practice it had been hitherto unknown. In some
cases, I suspect, a misty indefiniteness has been purposely
thrown over it by the leaders or the partisans of the
pseudo-Catholic revival, in order to elude the grasp of
those who by their natural logic, or common sense, would
be able to grapple with and overthrow the system, were it
presented to them undisguised by words and inconsisten-
cies. A conscious runaway often assumes disguises in
order to escape detection.

The first step towards a clear understanding and a First: real

••• ° view of

logical treatment of this tangled subject is, to keep sacerdotal
steadily before our minds that which, even amidst all this
variety of view and discrepancy of language, it is not
difficult to discern, viz. that the Auricular Confession which
the sacerdotal party really advocate, is composed of two
elements, private confession, and private absolution, each,
in their creed, essential to the other ; and though either
of these may be viewed independently, yet when so viewed,
it is very different from what it is when combined with
the other : so that no recognition, no case of private con-

c 2

CONFESSION.

Next: the
necessity
for distin-
guishing
different
senses of
tlie Avord.

fession alone, or of private absolution alone, if any sucli
can be found, necessitates tlie admission of what is com-
monly called Auricular Confession, or can be alleged as
furnishing any authority or precedent for it. Thus all
those views which do not recognise absolution as a neces-
sary part of the practice — in which Confession is rather
pastoral than sacerdotal — are not really admissions of the
Confessionalist system within certain limits, but of some-
thing distinct and different from it.

Hence we shall be naturally led to distinguish between
the several notions which have, especially of late years,
been jumbled together under the name of Auricular Con-
fession, or wrongly identified with it. Thus Auricular
Confession will be distinguished from the public con-
fession of ecclesiastical offences, or of offences viewed
as such in the early Church, which, though it is some-
times adduced as furnishing a precedent for the modern
system, has nothing to do with the question, except as
far as it may explain certain terms and practices, and
give the key to certain patristic passages, loosely and
inaccurately adduced in favour of the auricular confession
of the present day. Perhaps there is nothing which
will throw more light on the confusion which at present
prevails on the subject, and lead us to a clear under-
standing of it, than to recognise the difference between
Confidence and Confession, Absolution and Pardon;
which, though commonly spoken of as identical, and com-
prehended under the term Auricular Confession, are, in
reality, verj^ different in their nature and results ; and I
think that such an analysis of the system will enable us
to recognise the value and extent of that which we may
see reason for admitting as true, and to mark it off by
essential differences from that which we reject as false.
As we proceed we shall, I think, see that the term Con-
fession, in its present theological sense, cannot properly

CONFIDENCE AND CONFESSION. 21

be applied to pastoral confidences, and tlirougliout these ^h!!-""""
pages, tlie essential differences between them will be b;^^^^'^^^
marked by terming one Confidence and the other Confession; fession.
and I would suggest that the term might be advantageously
adopted; at all events those who admit and approve of
Confidence would be able to mark, without any explana-
tion, that they do not intend to give the least approval or
sanction to Confession.

Takins", then, this term Auricular Confession as repre- Different

"^ &' ' ^ pliases of

senting in its technical, as well as its popular, acceptation, Confession.
the two elements of confession and absolution, there is a
further distinction to be drawn between two phases which
the former may bring before the mind. One of these, and
that the simiDlest, is nothing more than a confidential
intercourse between a father and a child, or between a
pastor and any of his flock who in times of doubt and
difficulty come to him for comfort or counsel : and this is
a loose and inaccurate use of the word. The other, and
that the extreme phase, is intimately joined with sacer-
dotal absolution ; and this is its proper technical sense,
representing it as a part of an ordained means of ob-
taining pardon of sin from God.

When we put these side by side, the difference between Difference
them is so great it is at first difficult to see how the one these.
could be engrafted on the other, or be signified by the
same term. Look at the girl who goes to her clergyman
to ask his advice how to meet a particular doubt, or
temptation or weakness, and then turn to the penitent,
prostrate on the chancel floor of a ritualistic church, till
a priest in full costume comes to lift her up, and lead her
into the vestry to receive her confession, to give her his
absolution, and to appoint her penance. How great the
contrast between them ; it is a difference, not in degree
but in kind ; and yet, in this age, the one is often, but
the first step to the other. It is one of the evils of

22 CONFESSION.

this system, that what may be -useful and innocent in
itself becomes, under its auspices, dangerous and sus-
picious.

As we, however, look into the matter, it is not difficult
to see how the advocates of the system manage to inter-
twine progressively the several notions and practices, so
that they become links in the chain whereby feminine
consciences learn to rest their hopes and peace on a priest
■ — feminine wills to submit themselves to him in obedience.
How they The voluntary disclosure of a mental difficulty to some

are linked

together in One wlio, from positiou or experience, is fitted for the
sioiiaiist giving of counsel — the disclosure to a priest of some par-

svstBrn

ticular sin as the source of the difficulty, the knowledge
of which is, therefore, necessary to its solution — the full
disclosure, still voluntary, of all the sins and secrets of
the heart, as a matter of prudence — the full disclosure of
these to a pastor and guide, as a matter of obligation —
the obligation of confession to a priest — its necessity as a
preparation to absolution, and as a condition of forgive-
ness— the inherent and talismanic efficacy of the exercise
of a sacerdotal power in the formal absolution pronounced
by a priest — the saving and healing virtue of penance as
a reparation for forgiven sin — all these are links in the
chain, steps in the ladder. Each of these challenges
examination, both in itself and in its relation to the link
which precedes and follows it in the chain ; and I am
much mistaken, if ray readers will not be convinced, not
only that each point as maintained by the Confessionalists
is, more or less, unsound in itself, but that even where it
is not so, it is only by a series of sophistries that the
last stage in the system is represented, not merely as the
accidental development and consequence of the first —
which, unhappily, I fear, thanks to these pseudo-Catholics,
it is — but the legitimate and logical development, which
happily it is not.

LINKS IN THE SYSTEM, 23

Let us first look a little more closely into these points Arguments

successive-

as tliey are successively advanced. Tlie Confessionalists ly ad-
generally begin by introducing us to that confidential
intercourse which would naturally exist between a person
in spiritual difficulties and one older and wiser than him-
self: to this they presently add the notion of the disclosure
of sins to some one — a father or mother, perhaps — as
sources of these spiritual difficulties, making it out to be
a matter of obligation, by virtue of a special command
in St. James v. 16, the fuir consideration of which must
be deferred for the present (see page 33). They next put
the case of the father or mother being persons in whom
the girl can have no confidence, and there being no one
else among her friends or family to whom she could have
recourse : then she naturally turns to her clergyman to
help and guide her out of her difficulties. My readers
will see how the clergyman is introduced, not by virtue of
that sacerdotal right which is presently to be assigned to
him, but in the lack of anyone more fitted for the pur-
pose. The next step brings the clergyman before us as
being professionally, apart from the above-mentioned lack
of others, the fittest person to be consulted, as a lawyer
in matters of law, or a physician in matters of health.
Then by degrees this fitness is to be looked at as official
and supernatural, not arising from his character or know-
ledge, or experience of spiritual things, or even from his
pastoral position, but by virtue of his having received the
Holy Ghost for this especial purpose ; as having a com-
mission and authority from God in this matter, which gives
him a right to be consulted and listened to, and imparts to
his advice a weight, and wisdom, and power which it has
not in itself. Here the act first approach-es the character
of sacramental confession ; that is, the act of confession is
viewed as attended with some talismanic grace as being
made to a priest, besides and beyond the benefit derived

24 CONFESSION.

from tlie opening out tlie heart to a sympatliising friend,
•wlietlier lay or clerical, and receiving from him the comfort
and counsel he is personally or professionally fitted to give.
I must beg my readers to mark the chain of the sophistry ;
the sympathising pastor sliding quietly and noiselessly
into the Mediaeval priest, pretending to represent the per-
son of God. Then comes in that which the Confession-
alists allow, or rather maintain, gives a completely new
character to all that has gone before ; namely, the personal
exercise of a sacerdotal power of forgiving sins confessed,
by the pronouncing certain words uttered over the person
confessing, as being expressive of that power. The moment
absolution (in their sense of the word) comes in, there is
a difference in kind — the theory is different — the practice
different — the aim diflferent — the means different — the
agency different. It will probably have struck my readers,
without my calling attention to it, that the change intro-
duced by this new element is so great as to draw a marked
line between it and what has gone before it ; unless, per-
haps, the line should properly be drawn at the earlier stage
in which, as I have pointed out, the priest is first intro-
duced in place of the pastor. However innocent and
useful the act may have been up to this point, it does not
follow that it is so after it, any more than the fact of a
river being pure at its spring implies that it is pure and
wholesome at its mouth.
Auricular We havc now arrived at what is technically called

Auricular or Sacramental Confession, that is, confession
received by a priest in the exercise of his sacerdotal office
with a view to, and to be followed by, a formal and per-
sonal forgiveness of sins, in the exercise of a sacerdotal
power attached to that office, but which, in the parlance
of the school, is generally called Confession, without any
addition to distinguish it from the earlier and more
innocent stages ; to confound it with which is the result,
if not the design, of this usage of the word.

AT LEAST DIFFERS LITTLE FROM ROME. 25

My readers can scarcely fail to see that, wliile this
differs essentially from pastoral intercourse, it differs little,,
at least in its extreme development, from tlie pseudo-
sacramental Romisli practice ; that the change from the
one to the other would be little more than nominal and
accidental. I say 'in its extreme development,' because Difierent
there are varieties in the mode of administration oi this ministering
so-called ordinance, corresponding more or less to the ex-
ternals of the Eomish rite, as there is a greater or less
identity in essentials. Sometimes I believe the penitent,
to use a verhum artis, simply kneels down after he has
confessed his sins to receive absolution ; sometimes the
confession is made kneeling, the priest being clothed in
his sacerdotal garments ; in some few churches the con-
fessional-box has been added. Sometimes the ' Confiteor,'
in its longer or shorter form, is used : sometimes confes-
sion is made to God, and ' Thee, O my Father : ' some-
times there is a mere disclosure of sins. Perhaps the
most ultra of all is where the form is gone through,
though there are no definite sins to confess.' But in all
these varieties of development, differing, as I have said,
more or less from the Eomish externals, the same doc-
trine is at work ; there is at bottom the same misappre-
hension of the Gospel scheme, the same error of belief
and practice on which this stronghold of Eomanism is
built.

* ' Mission Book,' p. 99. ' There are some persons who make this excuse '
(that they have nothing to confess) ' with sincerity— hut then they will not he
afraid to go through the form of Confession.'

26 CONFESSION

CHAPTEE III.

Twofold Plea for Confession: — 1. As a natural duty— 2. As a divine Ap-
poJ;)tment — Attempt to identify Confession 'with the natural Instinct of
Confidence by throwing tlie same Colouring of Duty over both — 1. By
asserting that they are both commanded in Scripture— 2. By Analogies
of Lawyer and Physician — Tliis latter Argument examined as used to
support Confession — Analogies too far fetched — Do not touch the required
Point — Argue from prudential to an intrinsic Obligation — Hence even if
they did apply to Confidence, yet they would not apply to Confession —
Fail in their Facts — Full disclosure to a Lawj'er or Physician often not
necessary — Fail in their Relation — One relating to Things natural in which
there is generally no Alternative, the other to Things spiritual in which the
Absence of an Alternative is the very Point to be proved — These Analogies
do not justify special Arrangements for Confession — Betting-houses furnish
the closer Analogy on this Point — Question whether Scripture enjoins the
Duty of private Confession — Passage in St. James has two possible Meanings
• — Diiference between them — The confessionalist Interpretation not
recognized in the early Church — The Confession spoken of by St. James
is Reciprocal — Language of the Homilies on the Subject — St. James is not
speaking of technical Confession — If he was, his Language would be more
Definite — Confessionalists not to be heard in their Application of this

I THINE tliat my readers will have gathered from what
has been said above, that the case for confession rests
upon two grounds or pleas, (1) its own independent
claims and merits — that such a disclosure to our fellow-
men is a natural instinct, elevated into a moral duty by
the analogies of the lawyer and physician, and recognised
in Scripture, especially in the words of St. James : (2) As
a corollary of absolution ; that it is a necessary part of a
divine ordinance for the pardon for sins, which makes it
according to some in all, according to others in some,
eases a matter of divine appointment and obligation.
The attempt to confound Confession with the human

TWOFOLD J> LEA FOR CONFESSION. 27

yearning- after sympathy and the out-pourings of a Attempt to
burdened spirit — so that the soi-cUsant religious duty confesaion
may seem to be but the development and perfection of aYvenrnin'o'
the natural instinct, and the confidential disclosures of ^^^^^ -^J"™!'^"
difficulties or doubts to a friend or pastor, which are ad-
mitted by all, may be identified with the formal confession
of sins to a priest, which is denied by most — is so trans-
parent a fallacy, that it maybe safely left to the judgment
of common sense, and the common knowledge of human
nature. It will be sufficient to place before my reader,
as I shall presently do, the diflPerences which exist between
that pastoral confidence, Avhich is the development of the
natural instinct, and that confession, which they profess
to derive from, and to fasten on it. I must, however, first
call attention to their no less fallacious endeavour to bring
the two nearer together by professing to prove that this
simple instinct is a moral duty.^ This they do by the
same analogies of the lawyer and physician, and the
same words of St. James (see page 23), which, as I have
said above, they also erroneously apply to confession. So
that the validity of these pleas in both cases may be

' I will en passant call attention to an argument which is sometimes used
to throw the desired colouring of duty over the disclosure for sjTiipathy or ad-
vice. It is said that those who thus consult others are bound to make a full
disclosure of all the circumstauces of the case. Whether this is so or not will
be touched upon presently : suffice it now to say, that supposing that such a
full disclosure is matter of obligation, it does not prove that the disclosure itself
is obligatory. This is the point which they ought to prove, but which their
proof does not touch.

Another method which is sometimes used to throw the notion of duty over
these disclosures, is to insist on the necessity of following the advice given (see
p. 45). Of course if a man discloses a pressing difficulty for the sake of being
relieved from it, it is so much his wisdom to follow the advice given that it may
be loosely spoken of as his duty. And the notion of duty being thus vaguely
thrown over the last part of the transaction, it is still more vaguely reflected
back on the first part ; the notion of duty is thus connected with the whole
matter in hand, and minds with not very acute powers of distinction — and
these are the minds whom the Confessionalists generally lay wait for — accept
this confused notion into which the Confessionalists wish to lead them.

CONFESSION.

Shadowy ]
cliaracter
of the
analoy;ies
adduced.

Thej' are

indirect.

Do not
touch point
required.

disposed of together. These analogies of the lawyer and
physician play so important a part, in all apologies for
the Confessional, recurring in almost every book or tract
on the subject, that they require a longer examination
than they are intrinsically worth, and I will first dispose
of them.

I will not, however, weary my readers with the process
which I have myself gone through in testing this favourite
weapon of the revivalists, but merely give an outline of
the considerations which have led me to the results at
which I have arrived. The great difficulty in dealing
with such arguments is their impalpable nature. One is
compelled to analyse these shadows to see what they
really mean, on what they really rest, and what is their
real logical force and value ; to reduce them, in short, to
something like a substantial form which admits of their
being grasped by logic, or tested by the touchstone of
common sense. It is harder to fight with shadows which
assume the shape of realities than with realities them-
selves.

At the very first glance it seems strange that so
weighty a theory should be made to rest on grounds so
indirect as the analogy of these two arts in a completely
different subject matter; in itself it creates a suspicion
that it is unsound ; and such a suspicion is in no way
removed by the fact that it is not shared by those who,
having pledged themselves to the system, are glad to
catch at anything which seems to provide a ground for it
to stand upon.

And when we come to look into the matter, we find
that the analogies, even if correct, would fall far short of
a satisfactory proof of the point required ; or rather, they
would leave this point altogether untouched. For, as I
said before, what the Confessionalists have to prove is,
that it is obligatory to have recourse to a priest ; what

ANALOGIES OF LAWYER AND PHYSICIAN. 29

they do prove, assuming that they prove anything, is that
if such recourse is had, the disclosure must be full — a
proposition which would be equally true (that is, as far as
it is true at all), of a voluntary disclosure, and therefore
can have no bearing on the point of the disclosure itself
being obligatory.

Again, they argue from a prudential necessity in the Argue
case of the lawyer and the physician to what they assert to dentiai to

, •■. . 1 j-1 r • J. • • 'i_ o an intrinsic

be a religious, and thereiore intrinsic, necessity of con- obligation.
fessioii to a priest. It is true that they sometimes pretend
that confession is prudentially needed in order to give
the priest the information necessary to judge of each
man's particular case ; but this is very quickly seen to be
a mere pretext : and that the real value of the necessity
of a full disclosure arises from the theory, that it is part
of a religious ordinance and act, and not from any merely
prudential motives. And hence we may see that, even
supposing these analogies did establish this duty in Confi-
dence, it could not be passed on to Confession in its techni-
cal sense ; for this would be to argue from a prudential
obligation depending upon circumstances to an intrinsic
obligation not depending upon circumstances ; so that I
think my readers will agree with me in the conclusion to
Avliich I have arrived, that the alleged analogies fail in
their application — that they are not applicable in the
shape of j)i"oof to the point which they are alleged to
establish — not to Confidence, because at the most they
only prove the ]3rudential duty of a full disclosure, if
any disclosure at all is needed — not to Confession, because
a prudential obligation does not imply an intrinsic
obligation.

Next, the analogies fail in their facts. Total disclosure The anaio-
is not always necessary in applications to a lawyer or a their facts.
physician — in irrelevant or unimportant particulars, for
instance, or particulars already known : or where the

30 CONFESSION.

question submitted is merely an abstract one ; or where
the medical man may be in possession of some panacea
which is applied irrespectively of particulars — such as the
celebrated root which in India is the unfailing specific for
the bite of a snake— and in no case is total disclosure
necessary for its own sake, as it is held to be in the case
of Confession.
And in Again, everyone knows that an analogy — especially a

their rela- ., ., , .,.,,,.

tiona positive analogy ' — requires an identity of relations be-

tween what may be called its two sides ; but here one
relates to the body, the other to the soul ; one to things
natural, the other to things supernatural ; one to matters
in which, ordinarily speaking, there is no alternative, such
as matters of health or legal aflPairs — anyone who wants
to be cured must, ordinarily speaking, apply to a physi-
cian ; anybody who has law business must apply to a
lawyer— to assert such a necessity of applying to a clergy-
man in matters of spiritual health or spiritual interest is
simply assuming the very point to be proved : it certainly
cannot be allowed by those who maintain only the occa-
sional use of the confessional. This may be illustrated by
referring to the exceptional cases, either in law or physic,
where people can manage to settle their private affairs
without the aid of a lawyer, or cure themselves without

* By positive analogy I mean an analogy used to establish independently, as
here, some fact or phenomenon, as distinguished from an analogy used to
obviate objections to a fact, resting on other grounds. The use of positive
analogy is more restricted and uncertain than of the other sort. For instance,
it cannot be argued from some fact in the rational creation to the same fact in
the irrational creation, without first showing that they stand in exactly the
same relations to Him who created them. But if this same fact has been esta-
blished on other grounds in the one order of Beings, the analogy might be used
to prove that there is nothing incredible in the notion of all created beings, and
therefore the irrational creation, being thus constituted — I have always thought
this distinction very necessary in estimating the value of analogical arguments
— it is clear that the positive analogy is much inferior to the other, both in its
use and its force.

ANALOGIES OF LAWYER AND PIIYSICLiN, 31

the aid of a physician : such persons might, without any
violation of prudence, have recourse to neither.

Nay, these analogies do not even furnish iustification Donotjus-

. . . *ify special

for the assigning a particular time or particular place, in aimnge-

. . monts for

defence of which our Confessionalists are never tired of Confession.
alleging them. It will be seen in a moment that these
arrangements of the lawyer or physician arise from the
ordinary and necessary requirements of their profession ;
and this cannot be assumed in the case of the clergyman
without, as before, assuming the very point to be proved —
that the hearing confessions is an ordinary, necessary, and
legitimate exercise of the office ; for such arrangements for
private interviews can only be held to be justifiable when
the object for which they are held is in itself justifiable.
Supposing a lawyer was detected in arranging private
interviews for the purpose of organising a rebellion, he
would hardly escape the penalties of treason on the plea
that such arrangements were as natural as those of his
ordinary business ; or if a physician were to advertise ap-
pointments for some illegal branch of his profession, the
case against him would be none the weaker for his being
able to show that such interviews occurred in his ordinary
business. It occurs to me that the betting and gambling- Bettin"--
liouses present truer analogies to the private interviews nXe^^
with the priest, than the office of the lawyer or the con- "'i^os^*^^-
suiting-room of the physician, with which the Confession-
alists try to identify them. The law recognises single bets,
and views them, in certain cases, as binding between man
and man, but prohibits the setting up betting-houses for
the systematic transaction of such business, as temptations
and steps to evil and ruin. So the Church recognises
confidential communications as extraordinary resources in
religious matters, without recognising arrangements which
represent a system of confession as part of the ordinary
exercise of the ministerial office : or even confidential

CONFESSION.

IIow far
these ana-
logies ap-
ply to
Confidence.

Scripture
passages al-
leged.

Language
held on
this text.

communications as everyday incidents in pastoral work :
for sucli an arrangement would represent as a universal or
a usual practice that wliicli is only an exceptional remedy ;
a practice, moreover, wliich, however innocent in itself, is
in the present day suggestive of, and a step to, if not an
actual opportunity for, the confessional, with which it is
so studiously confounded by the Confessionalists.

The conclusion to which I think we may come is this :
that this Confidence, and these confidences, even in the
definite phase of pastoral intercourse and influence, may
be possibly justified, or perhaps illustrated, by the analogy
of the lawyer and physician as far as they are voluntary and
prudential, but no further ; as far as they are not recog-
nised as acts of religion or devotion, or as a supernatural
means of grace or pardon, or as a necessary, or even
healthy, stage in progress heavenwards, but as differing
herein from the confession of the Confessionalists not in
degree but in kind ; as long as they are not recognised as
necessary for all, or binding on any, nor even as desirable
or advisable for most, nor yet as the surest way for reliev-
ing and guiding the conscience.

We must now turn to the question whether Scripture
contains any mention of the general duty of private con-
fession to men, whether clergy or laity, of sins committed
against God. The Confessionalists adduce St. James v. 16,
* Confess your faults one to another, and pray for one
another that ye may be healed.' The very way in which
they treat the text is almost sufficient evidence against
their interpretation of it. On the warrant of this text it is
stated, by one whom I should hardly class with the most
advanced of his school, that those, who refuse confession,
would do well to acknowledge that they only obey so much
of the Bible as is not unpleasant to them — that they have
an expurgated Gospel of their own. Of course this piece
of verbiage is merely an assumption, somewhat childishly

ST. JAMES V. 10.

and insolently expressed, that the passage can only mean
what the writer says it does, and nothing else. The.
writer does not seem conscious that, if it has any other
meaning,^ then the charge, thus brought against others of
expurgating their Bible, changes into the fact of the inter-
polation of the Bible by the Media3valists ; nay, even if the
text is fairly capable of another interpretation, the charge
has no logical foundation: it is merely an impertinent
piece of rhetoric.

It may, I think, be admitted that prima facie there are ^^^ two

•^ possible

two possible meanings for the passage. meanings.

1. A command to confess all offences against God to
one another, naturally implying equality and reciprocity
between the parties, as such offences must exist on both
sides.

2. A command to confess our offences against our
brethren, each to each, naturally implying equality and
reciprocity between the parties.

The difference between the two is, that the offences Difference

between
them.

' The words ' confessing their sins ' in St. Matthew's account of the Jews
flocking to John the Baptist, as well as those in Acts xix. 18, 'and many
that believed came and confessed and shewed their deeds,' can scarcely need any
argument to show that they have no bearing on the Confessionalist theory of
confession being enjoined as a duty. In the first place both are stated as facts, not
as injunctions or even exhortations; in the next, there is no proof that in either
case the act was private. In the case of St. John's baptism it could not have
been so ; in fact it is more than probable that what is meant is that the Jews
were baptised as a confession of their sins. The original certainly is capable
of this meaning, and the Baptist could hardly have heard the individual con-
fessions of all those who flocked to his baptism ; at all events there is no injunc-
tion. In the Acts the passage evidently alludes to the pretenders to, or be-
lievers in, supernatural powers, who, warned by the fate of Sceva's sons, came
publicly forward, confessed publicly their faults and (some of them) their deeds,
and showed the tricks and juggles whereby they had deluded the public
{e^ofxoXoyovufvoi Kol auayyeWoj/res — both of these words imply publicity),
some even burning their valuable books; here, again, there is no injunction;
on the contrary, it is a single occasion under peculiar circumstances; so that it
cannot establish even the practice of confession, much less the duty thereof :
still less of private confession, as a preliminary or part of sacramental forgive-
ness of sin, consummated by formal absolution.

CONFESSION.

Meaning of
the passage.

TheConfes-
sionalist
interpreta-
tion not
practical!}'
recognised.

The confes-
sion spoken
of is recip-
rocal.

differ in kind, or at least in relation : the one including all
offences against God, the other extending only to those
that are not only against God, but also against some defi-
nite person, and in relation to him. These differ also in
the persons to whom confession is to be made : in one, it
is to each other indiscriminately, or as some of the school,
in defiance of the original, construe it, ' to others ; ' in the
second, only to those to whom offence has been given or
injury done.

The first of these interpretations places the text up to
a certain point on the side of the Confessionalists — valeat
quantum ; the second deprives it of the bearing they wish
to give it. Which of these is the true or the probable one
must be decided by the terms of the passage, and the
light thrown on it either by the context, or the practice in
Apostolic times, in which we may assume the true mean-
inof to have been reflected. I think that a sufficient clue
to a sound judgment upon it will be found in the consi-
deration, that if it expresses universal obligation applying
to all sins, we shall find such private Confession universally
taught, enforced, and practised, as an essential duty of
common Christian life ; if it only applies to individuals
under exceptional circumstances, we shall be prepared to
find little or no mention of it as a matter of public interest,
but only under the peculiar circumstances to which it
refers. Now, as a matter of fact, it is not spoken as of
universal obligation (see page 56 sqq.), or recommended
except under peculiar circumstances, of which instances
will be given hereafter (see page 68), while almost side by
side with any persuasives to it, there exist the strongest
dissuasives from it, which could not have happened had
it been recognised as obligatory.

Again, it is evident that if the passage contains an
injunction to general confession, the duty is reciprocal —
the priest must confess to the penitent no less than the

ST. JAMES V. 16. 35

penitent to the priest — -as is observed in the Homilies,'
speaking" of this passage— and this is inconsistent with
the Confessionalist theory. But if we take it to mean that
one man is to confess his sins to another, whom he has
injured — and vice versa, if the case so require — this inter-
change of confession and forgiveness does not involve any
difficulty ; for whether a priest injures a layman, or a lay-
man a priest — a beggar a prince, or a prince a beggar —
there is the same duty in both cases : Christian charity,
as well as the Apostle's command — as well as the higher
instincts of humanity — enjoins upon the greater the duty
of thus reconciling himself to the less, quite as much as if
their respective relations were reversed.

The language, which is found in the second Homily Language
of repentance on this passage, embodies the general views ijes. *^'"*
of the ancient writers on this subject : ^ As if he (St. James)
should say, "open that vjhich grieveth you that a remedy may
he found; and this is commandedhothfor him, that comj^laineth
and him that heareth, that the one should show his grief to
the other ; " the true meaning of it is, that the faithful ought
to acknowledge their offence, whereby some rancour, hatred,
grudge, or malice have arisen among men, one to another,
that brotherly reconciliation he had, ivithout tvhich nothing
will he acceptahle to God as our (Saviour, Jesus Christ, doth
witness. St. Matt. v. 23. It may also he thus taken : we
ought to confess our infirmities one to another, that knowing
each other^s frailness we may the m,ore earnestly pray
Almighty God our Heavenly Father that He will vouchsafe
to pardon our i7ifirmit,ies.' This latter interpretation I

' Second Homily on Ivepentance. ' Then the laity liath as great authority
to absolve the priests as the priests have to absolve the laity.' In the Romish
Ordo Missse the priest confesses to God &c., and the ministers — ' Confitcor Deo
^c, et volns fratres,' the ministers then answer with the precatory form of abso-
lution, which is not, however, termed absolution in the rubric. TIio ministers
then confess to God &c. 'and to thee, 0 Father.' The priest I lieu uses the
same precatory form, which is then termed absolution.

I) 2

CONFESSION.

Even if a
command,
no sanction
to Confes-
sion, tech-
nical 1 J' so
call. d.

St. James'

language

indefinite.

think must be held to be the less reasonable of the two ;
but whichever of the two be taken, there is not thrown
upon Confidence, nor upon Confession, that shade of obliga-
tion and duty which the Confessionalists try to extract from
the passage. If the first be true, then because the class
of offences is different : if the second, because such inter-
communication is not spoken of as a duty enforced, or
arising from a positive command, but only as a voluntary
act recommended to those who desire a particular benefit,
namely, intercessory prayer, under particular circum-
stances.

At all events, the apostle is not speaking of Confession
in the technical sense of the word. Even if St. James
were enjoining, as a duty, mutual disclosure of sins against
God, as Augustine takes it,' it would not go further than
that Confidence among Christians for mutual edification
and counsel and prayer which is practised, I believe, in
some Nonconformist bodies in the present day ; it cannot
be carried on to a system, the two essential points of
which find no place in it, viz. private confession to a priest,
and private absolution by a priest. The object of the
confession here mentioned is not absolution, but mutual
prayer. Nor is the disclosure spoken of as private : in the
circumstances of the context the elders or presbyters of
the Church, and not one single presbyter, are spoken of as
present ; and ' others,' even if we suppose that this is a
possible translation, is not singular, but plural. Nor. is
modern Confession sanctioned by the language of those
Fathers who, on the authority of this text and of that
in which our Lord directs His disciples to wash one
another's feet, speak of Confession being made, not to a
priest, but to one another.

Further, had the Confession which they advocate been

' Atigustin, Tract Iriii. in Joannem ; of. Eingham vi. 481.

ST. JAMES V. 16. 37

known in the early Church, it is impossible to believe
that St. James, who gave such straightforward directions
for the anointing with oil as the means of mu^aculous
cure, would not have written with equal plainness, ' Con-
fess your sins to a priest, and receive absolution for them,'
instead of using words which can only assume the Con-
fessionalists' meaning by a degree of twisting and squeez-
ing, which is in itself sufficient to show that the meaning
is not the real one.

The Confessionalists, too, generally speaking, allow
that this apostolic command, supposing it to be such,
would be satisfied by a girl making a confidant of her
father or mother — an acknowledgment which at once
bars its application as a command to the far weightier
matter which they rest on it. If a command is satisfied
by going to a certain point, it cannot be a command to go
any further. If the command to confess is satisfied by
doing so to a layman, then it cannot carry any obligation
to confess to a priest as such.

I think my readers will now be satisfied that the
Medieevalists are not to be heard when they try to throw
around the simple instinctive practice of one man opening
his heart to another the religious obligation of a definite
command of Scripture; or carry it on to that system
which they pretend to trace back to these simple begin- confes-
nings, so that their auricular confession may present itself uTe"of'the
for acceptance, only as the natural growth of a practice teuaMe.
scripturally enjoined, innocent in itself, and universally
recognised and adopted in the everyday affairs of life:
in other words, this passage furnishes no foundation or
apology for that in justification of which it is alleged.

38 CONFESSION.

CHAPTER IV.

Fallacy of passing from Confdaue to Qivfetidon — Gaiu to the Confessioualist
Cause in identifying them — Confidence ii\hi\/i\h\e under certain Conditions —
Not peculiar to Christianity, though possibly more effective under its
Auspices— Arises not from sacerdotal Prerogative — Butfrom the natural Sym-
pathies and Yearnings of Humanity — To he disconnected from sacerdotal No-
tions— Distinction betvreen Confidences for Relief of Mind, or for the 8;ike of
Advice — The Clergyman the proper Person to apply to, but the having
Recourse to him a Sign of Spiritual Weakness — Opportunities for good insxich
Confidences — Recourse to Clergymen for removal of Doubts of Forgiveness —
No Sign of Spiritual Health, but the Reverse — Cure for a morbid State —
Any System of Training or Preaching which creates the Need of such a mor-
bid State bears Witness against itself — Confidences to be received iinder
certain Limitations— How they may approach to Confession — Care must be
taken not to confound these two diiferent Things — Danger at present day iu
Confidence — Differeuces between Confidence and Confession, and Itetween
Pastoral Advice and Direction — Importance of realising tliese Distinctions —
This Confidence only once suggested by our Church to Persons iu Health and
Strength — Practical Transition from .Confidence to Confession.

Atkmpt To adduce arguments in favour of this pastoral Con-

to identifv

Confidence fidcnce and then pass on to Confession as if it were the

with Con- . , /. .

fessiou. same thing, or to allege conjidence as sanctioning confession,
is a mere fallacy ; the same iu kind as the attempt to
identify it with a natural instinct, and no less transparent.
But transjjarent as it is, it is insisted upon with the
most confident pertinacity by the Confessionalist School,
for the simple reason, that if they could establish this
identity by sound argument, they would gain a position,
which would not only enlist on their side the sympathies
of our moral nature and the facts of our moral life, but
would make it impossible to object that it is alien to
Confidence "the mind of our Church. For when we proceed to analyse
allowable"*^ Confidence, and determine its nature and claims, we find

CONFIDENCE. 39

tliat the seeking- counsel and aid in spiritual or mental
difficulties from others to whom, from their natural rela-
tions to us, or from their superior age and wisdom, we
look up, is a good deal more than allowable ; provided
that it is clearly kept in view that it is iio part of the
supernatural scheme of Christianity for the salvation and
comfort, and forgiveness of sinners, but flows directly
and simply from the natural yearnings for sympathy — the
natural recourse of the weaker to the stronger, whether
physically or morally — which are instincts of humanity,
energising in all states, all religions of the human race.
It is uou specially connected with Christianity except so
far as the desire is heightened by the stronger sympathies
of Christian love, or by the greater amount of benefit
which may be expected from Christian wisdom, or which
may be won for the suflPerer by Christian prayer. In the
case, indeed, of a clergyman being the person to whom
recourse is had, doubtless there comes in the feelinsjr
that he, whose aid we are seeking, has received by his
office a special obligation to aid and comfort those who
come to him ; and that, cceteris j^arihus, an especial blessing
may naturally be expected from the aid and sympathy of
one whom God has appointed to watch over our souls ;
even apart from any superior qualifications for the office
of comforter, which may be supposed to arise from his
especial professional knowledge of religious needs and
difficulties ; and so far, the aid of a clergyman in such
cases may be superior to that of a layman. But this
arises not from any special prerogative, attached to his
offices of hearing and forgiving sins, but from its general
character and duties, and opjDortunities of showing men,
as a minister of the Gospel, how doubts may be solved,
difficulties removed, despondency corrected, and faith in-
creased : in short, it is pastoral and not sacerdotal.
That this is so, is clear from the fact that it is admitted

40 CONFESSION.

to be in the power of a layman to perform this oflfice, so
that it cannot arise essentially from any prerogative in
the clerical commission. It must be carefully discon-
nected in our notions from forgiveness of sin, except
so far as a soul may be thereby led to comprehend its
need of God's mercy, and accept the pardon v^^hich God
promises on the sole conditions of repentance and faith.
Keeping this in mind and speaking generally, it may be
said that our Church tacitl3% if not expressly, contemplates
this communication between the pastor and his flock at
all times ; not, as I said before, as anything peculiar to
Christianity ; far less as a sacramental or definite ordi-
nance of grace, but as a practice almost co-extensive with
human nature, which there is nothing in Christianity,
but the contrary, to forbid or discourage : for which the
peculiar relations existing between the clergyman and his
flock present the same opportunities and facilities which
exist, not only in Christianity, but in all religions, or rather
so-called religions, between the wise and the ignorant,
the teacher and the taught, the priest and the people.
To say that the Church does not, generally speaking,
exclude or discourage such confidential intercourse between
the pastor and his flock, is simply to say that it does not
discourage one of the simplest instincts of thoughtful
minds. ^

We must distinguish too between confidential commu-
nications made for the relief of a burdened conscience by
another's sympathy, and those made for the sake of
spiritual advice, how to meet a temptation, or how to get
rid of a habit. In both these cases, certainly in the last,
the clergyman is generally — nay, were it not for personal

' I say 'generally speaking,' because it is perfectlj' conceivable that a bishop
might recommend abstaining from such confidential communications with a
clergyman whoso known opinions and tendencies made it likely that he would
abuse such communications to the gradual introduction of the system of Con-
fession.

CONFIDENCES. 41

circumstances, always — the most proper person to Lave re-
course to : and recourse to liim is in itself a wise and
good method— the wisest and best for those who do not, for
some reason or other, find guidance and help from above
in the ordinary means of grace. The having such recourse
to a clergyman, though indicating a certain amount of spi-
ritual feebleness, is not, in itself, an indication of spiritual
disease, nor likely to produce any spiritual evil, provided
that care is taken that it does not pass into Direction.

Such confidences may open to the pastor great oppor- Such con-
tunities of promoting the spiritual progress of those whom beaefidai.
it is his business to guide, so long as his guidance is not
carried so fiir as to destroy the personal energies of the
individual conscience, or to deaden or blind the power of
personal moral perception ; but it must not be forgotten
that the love of power and personal influence will often, if
not generally, present a strong temptation to a clergyman
to disregard in practice the moderation which he may
profess in theory.

A third sort of this confidential communication is for For soiu-
the solution of a doubt as to the forgiveness of this or doubts of
that sin, or course of sin. This, we must recollect, is P'''"^°"-
not a sign of spiritual health, nor yet a healthy stage in
spiritual progress ; it is not, I think, to be recommended
as such to either young or old : far less ought the youno-
to be trained in, or habituated to it : for it arises from is a cnre
that lack of perceptive fiiith in the soul, which is able bid'state,
to see and comprehend the unlimited and always ready
mercy of God ; able to read the word ' pardon ' in the
promises and invitations in which God's Word abounds ;
a lack of that receptive power of faith which apprehends
and aj)propriates that mercy. It is easy to form a notion
of such a spiritual state by bodily ailments — blindness,
deafness, paralysis ; none of these are states of health ; no
one would think of representing them as states of health.

42 CONFESSION.

or bringing a patient to liealtli through them, or speak-
ing of relief from them as preferable to the ordinary exer-
which is cise of the ordinary powers of the physical frame. And
eticou- so if a boy is induced to believe that a sj)iritual state,
which is really a state of morbid incapacity, is an exhi-
bition of spiritual life, then I think he is misled rnther
than led ; and any preaching, or teaching, or training,
which results in the production of this morbid state,
whether chronic or intermittent, is not healthy teach-
ing or training, in accordance with God's will, but un-
healthy and contrary to it ; and if the result of any
preaching or teaching, is that, while consciences are
awakened to a sense of sin, there are not almost at the
same moment awakened those perceptive and receptive
powers of faith of which I have spoken above, then I
cannot help thinking that such preaching must have been
radically wrong, or singularly powerless and unfortunate.
Nor do I think that any man may dare to bring a re-
deemed soul to such a state ; yet if, from some cause or
other, a soul has brought itself into this state of incapacity,
then a minister of God's Word may be sure, not only that
Coufiiiences \^q jj^^y reccive, but that he may not refuse, such confi-
ceived denccs, in cases where the person offers them, not with

any notion of their being acts of obedience to an ordinance
of God ; or as being beneficial as acts of obedience to God's
will ; or as acts of humiliation to another man ; or as
having in themselves any talismanic power of deepening
the spiritiial life ; or as being acts of religion spiritually
certain bcueficial for their own sake ; or as being the better for
limitations, "[^eing made to a clergyman, except so far as they are
means for removing those doubts and difficulties which
stand in the way of the acceptance of that pardon, of which
the clergymen are the authorised ambassadors. Provided
too that from these communications is excluded the notion
of their being anything but wholly voluntary ; . that they

CARE TO BE EXERCISED IN CONFIDENCES. 43

are neither given or received under the impression that
they are the only, or the safest, or surest means of pardon .
or escape from sin, or of leading a religious life ; in short,
there must be a total absence of any of those notions
which distinguish Confession, and whereby the Con-
fessionalists manage to destroy the practical voluntariness
of the action, while they make it in words to depend
wholly upon the free will of the agent. If any of these How tiiey
notions are allowed to insinuate themselves into the con- ^oachTo
fidential communications between a pastor and any one " «ssu)ii.
of his flock, they either become Confession in its technical
sense, or approach more or less nearly to it. And we may
observe that it does come nearer to this confessional sys-
tem, as it is founded on, or encourages, that superstitious
regard for the priesthood which is common to all the
phases of imperfect or false religion. I must again repeat
that in all cases the distinction between this Confidence Care to be
and that Confession must be carefully kept in mind,
by the clergyman and the people alike ; both to prevent
the misuse of what is right, and to get rid of the notion
that he, Avho admits the usefulness and blessedness of the
one, is bound consistently to admit the practice and the
claims of the other. Care too must be taken by the pastor
to mark the differences between such Confidence and
Confession, and to make the applicant understand that it
is the former and not the latter to which encouragement
and response is given, so as not to lend any sanction to the
Medisevalists, when they try to lead weak minds into the
fallacy of arguing from one thing to another, from which
it differs in the most essential points : into arguing from
the Church's sanction of pastoral confidence followed by
advice, to confession to a priest as a devotional exercise
and discipline, and an ordained means of grace ; the first
step in an act of religion, of which, according to them,
absolution and direction are the conclusion and consum-

CONFESSION.

Danger
of it.

Recapitula-
tion of
dirfeiences
between
Confidence
and Confes-
sion.

mation. For there is in the present day a clanger even
in Confidence, whicli must limit its use, viz., that the Con-
fessionalists take advantage of it, both in theory and
practice, as an introduction to, and apology for, that
confession with which it has no connection, save nominally
and accidentally, however perseveringly the school try to
connect the two essentially together.

This makes it, perhaps, all the more necessary to state
at once the difference between Confidence and Confession,
in the technical sense of the word : they are clear and
marked enough. In the former the applicant addresses
his pastor and guide, the minister of God's Word ; in the
other, he is supposed to address himself to the priest as
God, or to God in the priest ; he kneels before the priest,
as a being of another mould to himself, vested in sacer-
dotal garments, as emblems of the sacerdotal power with
which he claims to be clothed. The notion of discipline is
wholly excluded from Confidence ; it is an essential notion
in Confession. In the former the applicant does not con-
fess, but consults ; he opens his grief, but not necessarily his
sin ; in the latter it is the reverse ; he does not consult, but
confesses ; it is a list of sins which he details, not a grief
which he opens. The subject-matter of the one is a
difficulty, or doubt, or danger, to be solved or set at rest,
or met ; of the other, sins to be forgiven by absolution,
and atoned for by penance. In the one, there is an affec-
tionate trust in the sympathy and wisdom of the pastor ;
in the other there is a superstitious submission to the
power and will of the priest. The end of the one is the
quieting of the conscience, or the receiving that advice
and counsel which may lead to freedom, the soul j^earning
to be free, by the acceptance of pardon from God Himself ;
the other is the receiving pardon from the judicial fiat of
the priest. The conditions of the one are a full, unreserved
disclosure for its own sake, as an act of duty or as an act

PASTORAL ADVICE. 45

of humiliation and penitence ; in tlie other there is no
condition of its effectiveness, save that the difficulty or
the doubt should be stated as far and as clearly as the cir-
cumstances of the case require. It is not the better in
itself for being unreserved, nor the worse for not being so.

Nor must we omit to notice the difference between the Between
advice following on Confidence, and the Direction and the advice and
Penance which are parts of the supposed sacramental ordi- direction.
nance of Confession, In Direction the benefit follows
chiefly from the act of submission to the supposed divine
authority of the priest, standing in the place of God, the
same in kind as that which is paid to God Himself — no
matter whether the act enjoined over-rides the commands
of God, or the dictates of conscience, or the laws of man.
The pastoral advice is followed not as an act of obedience,
but as an act of prudence, subject to the dictates of con-
science, and the known principles of right and wrong. I
do not say that in Direction the advice given is generally
contrary to morality ; ' but unless I am much mistaken,
sometimes it is purposely made so, in order to test the
completeness of the obedience of \h.e penitent. To think
whether direction is right or wrong, or whether it shall
or shall not be followed, is 'in itself a sin to be con-
fessed. Nor do I say that sometimes the advice given in
Confidence may not have the force of command, when the
person is deeply imj)ressed with the superior wisdom or
experience of him whom he consults ; in both cases the
advice may be sought and implicitly folio wed in faith; but
this does not do away with the essential difference between

' I have heard of a case in which, to a girl's plea that to do what the
priest ordered her would involve disobedience to her parents' wishes, it was
answered that this woidd make it all the more meritorious, according to the
well-known passjige, ' He who loveth father and mother,' etc. Those who thus
iise this text forget that it is not dut}' to parents, Ijut earthly affection to them,
which is contrasted with the heavenly love of God — in fact, obedience to
parents and duty to God are, speaking generally, coincident.

46 CONFESSION.

the one, as an act of unreasonable submission, and the
other, as an act of reasonable prudence. And hence care
must be taken also that compliance with advice given is
not represented, or understood, as being in itself an act of
ordained obedience to the vi^ill of God or of the pastor
consulted, but adopted by the reason of the recipient,
either .on its ov^^n merits as a recognised injunction of
Scripture, or as the opinion of a vs^ise man, whose judg-
ment on such matters must have weight with a person
less learned or experienced ; in short, that the advice be
received and acted upon as it would be if read in a book
written by a person of valued wisdom,
importance It is all the morc important to realise these distinctions
tiiesc differ- bccauso it is this Confidence which so many divines have
view. meant, and do mean, when they speak of Confession being

retained in the everyday system of the Church of England.
I do not mean that this holds good of all who assert or
have asserted this ; most, if not all, of our Mediseval
school contend for Confession in that technical sense of
the word in which it is distinguished from Confidence ;
but I believe that a large number of divines of the present
day have hesitated, and still hesitate, to denounce this
Confession, because under this term is included in their
mind that Confidence, the usefulness of which they cannot
and do not wish to ignore, either in itself or as recognised
by the Church ; the reasonable practice of which, it would
be a misfortune, if not an impossibility, for any Church
unreservedly to exclude from its system.
Confidon- j^ uiust morcover be remembered that though our

CCS only »

once sus- Cliurch does not discourage these confidences, vet in one

pested l)y _ ^ ' •'

the Church, case alouc is the expediency thereof suggested, at least
to persons in health and strength ; ' and that only as a last
resort, after the ordinary ways of quieting the conscience

' The case of the Spocial Confe.s.sion in tlio Visitation of the Sick will he
treated of hereafter.

FROM CONFIDENCE TO CONFESSION. 47

have failed to produce the blessed result of a full trust in
God's mercy.

I am of course aware that the i^assage in the exhor- p^ssaice in
tation to the Holy Communion, to which I am alluding, uTioSo'the
is claimed by the Confessionalists as unmistakably and ,uSo?""
decidedly in favour of Confession with a view to absolu-
tion— that is, Confession Proper. I shall defer the full
consideration of this to the time when I shall have to
weigh and test the arguments of the school in support of
that Confession. For the present, I will content myself
with asking my readers to turn to the passage, work out
carefully the meaning of each word and sentence, and see
whether they cannot discern the fact, that what is re-
commended to the doubting soul, and the method pre-
scribed to the minister, not only do not authorise the
method recommended and prescribed by the Confessionalist,
but do positively and definitely exclude it.

The transition fronr these confidences, which may exist Transition
between the pastor and his flock, to the mutual benefit deTce^o"''
of both, into Confession, is easy enough ; especially when
a notion of obligation, both as regards the act and the
matter, has been cast upon them. I must request my
readers to bear in mind that by Confession Proper I mean
that which in connection with absolution, commonly so
called, is viewed as preparatory to, and necessary for, that
forgiveness of sins, which the Confessionalists assert is to
be obtained — some of them only, others most safely and
surely — through that channel, by virtue of words of abso-
lution pronounced by the j^riest ; the necessity of whicli
is especially insisted upon as a purification of the soul
before the Holy Communion. It is in this connection
that Confession acquires its peculiar characteristics and
importance and value in the sacerdotal system ; so that
the whole relations between the pastor and his flock are
as the Confessionalists themselves assert, completely

Confession.

48 CONFESSION.

altered. The clerg-yman is no longer the friend, from
whose mouth words of wisdom and peace are looked for,
but the judge, by whose fiat we learn whether our sins are,
or are not, forgiven; no longer the ambassador, who pro-
claims to sinners God's free mercy, and persuades them
to accept it as freely as it is offered; but he is the agent
for God, who is to arrange the terms on which a sinner
is to be pardoned, to settle the exact price which is to be
paid for each sin, and to keep out of sight the sinner's free
discharge, till he has made him feel that it is not free.
It is not that ministry of reconciliation which says to the
trembling soul, ' Throw aside your doubt, tarry not : there
is Christ calling you ; go to Him while he may be found ; '
but it is the stern minister of justice, speaking to the
soul, who with trembling steps is drawing near to the
Father's house : ' Whither so fast, my friend ? are you sure
Christ will receive you ? beware of drawing near to Him
without my countersign ; wait awhile, till I can weigh
your sin, and see at what price God's justice estimates it ;
till I can see how much of the price you have paid, and
how yon may be able to discharge the remainder.' If this
is Christianity, then the Bible is false. Practically, it is
pretended that our Lord has delegated His prerogative of
forgiveness in favour of certain men whom He has ap-
pointed personally to represent Him on earth ; and such a
pretension, by its very audacity and weight, presses itself
on the acceptance of those who are tender and fearful of
heart. The process is easy enough : it is only to bid us
shut up the page of the Bible, where we may read the
parable of the prodigal son, or any of the parallel illus-
trations of God's unlimited and unconditional mercy — to
bid us lose sight of such passages as, ' Come unto me all
that travail, and I will give you rest,' as not adapted or
intended for us ; and then to open it at the passage,
* Whosesoever sins ye remit, they are remitted,' as giving

STEPS TOWABD CONFESSION. 49

the only hope of remission of sins — and the formal part of
the work is done. It only remains to create and encourage
in what has well been called a feminine heart in either Leading a
sex — but let us take the most common case — to create or fession.
encourage in the heart of some pious girl, a doubt of God's
willingness and readiness to pardon her sins committed
since baptism, or, in her daily life — to kee]3 out of view
God's, so to say, impatience to forgive her — to throw cold
water on any hopes of forgiveness she may have found,
or be trying to find, in Christ's own words — to check any
step she may have been by Christ's own invitation induced
to take towards Him — to bid her stop outside her Father's
house, and to shrink from His loving presence till they,
the hired servants, have found out whether she may
venture in- -to make her doubt whether her repentance is
such as God will accept — to suggest sins she may have
committed without knowing them — to enlarge her know-
ledge of sin, and sins — to represent Christ as deaf and un-
sympathising towards those in whose favour they have not
exercised their priestly power and privilege — to create a
yearning for some more tangible and material grasp of
forgiveness than that which faith can find in the revealed
love of God, and the revealed efficacy of Christ's atone-
ment as set forth in the Gospel, j)reached in the' Church,
and sealed in the Sacrament of Baptism — and then to ofier
her at their hands that forgiveness which she is desiring
above all things, in the tangible form of absolution, ad-
dressed by them as priests personally to her as penitent ;
to encourage the vine-like instinct of clinging to some-
thing seemingly stronger than herself, and then to offer
her the aid of their supernatural agency ; and she will
soon be brought to the feet of her Father Confessor, even
though at first she felt some repugnance to the notion.'

' I shall never forget overhearing at one of the Congresses a notorious
Confessionahst speaking of the Cardiff mission as a great success. • There

50 CONFESSION.

And these are the triumphs which these men pride them-
selves upon, and boast of; this is the work which is being
incessantly, actively, though often covertly, carried on by
men, who either really believe that they are doing God's
work therein, or who have rested their own personal
prestige on bending souls to their views, and securing
the triumph of their party.

■were,' he said, ' some fifty cases of confession, all most satisfactory. One in
particular, a girl, came to us {i.e. the mission priests) ; we told her there was
nothing for it but confession. She kicked against it at first, but she was soon
brought to.' The impression produced on my mind by this, which was spoken
on a public platform loud enough for those around to hear, was deepened when
1 found, from the bishop of the diocese, that these mission priests had given
him a pledge that confession should not form part of their mission teaching.

CHAPTER V.

SecoDd Plea for Confession as part of a Divine Ordinance for the Forgiveness of
Sin— Tlie Theory displays much knowledge of human Nature and human
Wants— Might hare recommended itself to our acceptance had there been
no Revelation— The ignoring of God's revealed Cure for Sin the real Ob-
jection to it— No Trace in Scripture of any such Ordinance for Pardon as
private Confession to Man, or any such Practice being used, or recommended
by the Apostles— Nor yet any Trace of it in the really Primitive Church-
Primitive Practices recognised by our Church as a Witness to Facts— Espe-
cially valued by Mediasvalists— This finds no Place in Primitive Practice-
No private Confession practised or recognised except as preparatory to
public Discipline, and this not in the earliest Ages— Evidence of Mr. Carter
on this Point— Of E. B. P. in a Note on Tertullian— This shows, not
only that private Confession was not compulsory as in Eomish Church,
but that it did not exist at all.

I WILL now turn to the second plea for Confession, in
its connection with Absolution, as an essential part of a
divine ordinance for the forgiveness of sin. It need not
be said that this is its most important aspect, both in its
nature and bearing. Nor can it be denied that the sys-
tem exhibits much knowledge of human nature, much
familiarity with its secret impulses and instincts; and
were there no such thing as a revelation of that way and
those conditions of obtaining pardon, for which these men
have substituted this soi-disant ordinance, it might be
accepted as an effective device for gaining control over
the unruly wills and affections of sinful men; for relieving
guilty consciences from the burden and distress which the
fear of unforgiven sin must always cause, even to the
natural man, unless he has lost all religious feeling, and
all sense of a future state ; and for which so many reme-
dies were by men invented in the various religious
systems in order to supply the lack of that revealed

B 2

.'i2 CONFESSION.

Counsel and Method of God, which they had been ignorant
of or rejected. The fact, indeed, of that pardon depend-
ing on, that control being irresponsibly exercised by, the
wills of no less sinful men, would create a doubt of its
substantial value, even though we were without the
Avitness which the history of the world for many ages
bears against it. This witness alone would be enough to
make us hesitate before we allowed it again to take root
Revelation among US ; but still the main objection — the real objec-

furnishes • i -i • ji • p

the real ob- tion — agaiust it IS, that it forms no part of the scheme
Confession, revealed by God for the salvation of the world ; no part
of what is revealed by God as the rule for making that
salvation our own, or working it out ; that in the very
presence of the heavenly, it is of the earth, earthy ; that
it ignores or contravenes some of the leading features of
the Gospel as given us iix the writings and practices of
those whom the Holy Ghost led into all truth.

Had it been otherwise, I should not have been now
writing what I write. Whatever has been revealed by
God, I feel myself bound to accept, not merely from
religious sentiment or moral considerations, but because
I should feel it to be a negation of my rational being
to deny or refuse it. The Word of God stands alone
in the world, firm, as demanding rational acquiescence
and belief. It is indeed an essential requisite to such
trust in Scripture, that great pains and care be taken
to ascertain what the sense of Scri23ture really is, in
other words what God really tells us ; and it is part of
our intellectual trial not to allow mere human conceits
and theories to set us upon squeezing out of Scripture
what is not of God, or getting rid of what is ; if we do
so, it is on our own responsibility and peril. This is
no place to enter into the principles which ought to
guide us in our interpretation of Scripture, and must
guide us, if we are to pass through our trial safely ; suffice

CONFESSION NOT REVEALED. 53

it to say, tliat we are not only permitted but entitled — and "^'"ice of

Scripture

more than that — expected by God, to use our reason ; nor decisive.
is there any limitation to this, provided that it is used
reasonably : that it is not allowed to exercise a final judg-
ment on matters which are beyond its sphere, but is con-
fined to enquiring and deciding whether this or that point
is or is not revealed. On matters beyond the sphere of
sense and reason (and these include the whole world of
supernatural and sj^iritual being and agency) the Word
of God claims, on rational grounds, our assent to whatever
we find written in it, interpreted by other passages of
Scripture : (as the passage of St. Paul where he explains
the words of our Lord's institution by telling us that the
bread is the Communion of the Body of Christ), or by the
facts of history which are, ijpso facto, an interpretation (as
in the case of the prophecies fulfilled in the fall of Jeru-
salem), or by the facts of science (such as expressions
which imply that the sun goes round the earth). If then
the Confessionalist system had been revealed — if we found
in Scripture what the Confessionalists teach — such as, ' if
anyone wishes to be forgiven, or wishes to be sure that
he is forgiven — or is travailing and heavy-laden — or if any
man sin — or if any man wishes to come to the Holy Com-
munion— let him confess his sins to a priest, and have
pronounced over him the words of the formal remission of
sins by that priest,' then these questions would be settled.
Whatever objections might present themselves in the
abstract, whatever evils might seem to have practically
developed themselves from, or attached themselves to, this
system, it would to me matter not at all.

Deus est locutus, causa est finita.
My main objections then to Confession are not founded Main ob-

-,• fi 1 • 1 • • jection to

on any abstract dislike or practical suspicion, nor yet on confession
the evils flowing from it in various ways, but simply that „otoi God.
it is not of God. It is true that the evils flowing- from it

54 CONFESSION.

would suggest and demand a most careful enquiry into the
fact of its having been revealed and ordained by God ; but
this fact being ascertained, no other objections would hold
good : all we could do would be to consider how far the
evils introduced into even a divine ordinance by human per-
versity might be guarded against, avoided, remedied ; but
against the thing itself I, for one, should not dare to speak.
Question It will be neccssary then to consider the question

settled as , ^

far as Scrip- whether private confession to men of sins against God, as
cerned. held by Confessionalists, is a revealed and appointed ordi-
nance for obtaining pardon for sin ; whether there is any
promise attached to it, as there is to confession of such
sins to God. The answer is clear ; There is not a single
trace in Scripture of any such practice by the Apostles ;
there is not a single instance of their requiring such
Confession, or of their encouraging it or receiving it, or
apparently being aware of its existence, though the occa-
sions where they must have done this, had they known
of it as ordained of God, occur in almost every chapter of
the Acts of the Apostles : and I need hardly point out to
my readers how conclusive an answer this total absence
supplies against all abstract probabilities of its having
formed part of the Gospel scheme. Those who say the
contrary have only to give the chapter and verse where
it is plainly commanded or recognised by the Apostles ;
till this is done, in harmony with the ordinary rules of in-
terpretation, so as to recommend itself to learning and
common sense, the matter may be considered settled as
far as Scripture is concerned.

But though it may have no claim upon us as a
Scripture ordinance, it may have a claim, though a less
decisive one, as a point of early discipline — a point of
accidental, though not of essentia] importance and obliga-
tion— on which every branch of the Catholic Church has a
right, as far as its own members are concerned, to make

WITNESS OF PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 55

what rules and requirements it pleases, provided that
there is no interference with any doctrine or duty laid
down in Scripture, or any ascription to God of what He import-

. . ance oCthi

has never said, or any limitation or alteration in the question.
scheme and terms of salvation which each branch of the
Catholic Church is commanded to proclaim and minister
in its own sphere. Generally speaking, those particular
Churches act most reasonably and prudently, who conform
themselves to the really primitive Church, except where
changes in domestic or social life make so manifest a
difference in the Christian's relations to those around him,
that what was practicable and desirable and edifying in
the first centuries is no longer so now; or where the
errors, superstitions, scandals of later ages can be reason-
ably traced to their rise, in certain notions, opinions,
usages which recommended themselves to the uninspired
judgment of early Christians : for we must bear in mind
that such notions, even when harmless or even edifying,
are recommended to us on the score of prudence, not of
obligation. The authority is human, not divine — it can-
not contradict facts, or neutralise the witness of expe-
rience or history.

We therefore have next to consider the practice of
the truly primitive Church, and the mind of our own
Church in the matter. The first point is all the more Primitive
important because our Church recognises primitive an- recognised
tiquity as a witness to the teaching of Scripture,^ with to the' '"^^"^
the limitation that the writers of those times must not scdptme.
be so understood as to contradict the sense of Scripture
ascertained by sound reason and legitimate interpretation.

' It is important to recollect that tho negative witness of antiquity is more
valuable than the positive. If there is no evidence of a certain docti-ine or cer-
tain practice in the Early Church, there is the highest degree of probability
that it is not Scriptural. A far higher degree than can be derived from the
mention of a doctrine or practice in primitive writings, for there is always the
possibility of its having grown up from human fancies, iu post-revelation ages.

56 CONFESSION.

And not only so, but the Medisevalists carry this principie
to such an extreme, that the records of the Church, after
the Canon of Scripture was closed, and the writings of
men far more removed from the Apostolic Church, are
to them of equal, nay, almost of greater value than Scrip-
ture : for if any trace of a favourite doctrine or usage can
be found in these writers, they force the sense of Scripture
to harmonise with this presumed witness of antiquity, in-
stead of allowing Scripture to mould and correct their
notions of the meaning of these writers : Scripture is
interpreted by the Fathers, not the Fathers by Scripture.
Therefore they above all others are bound to admit and
abide by the witness borne by the early Church in this
matter ; and it will be a most decisive argument against
there being anything in Scripture which can either directly
or indirectly give countenance to Sacramental Confession,
even in its modified form, if no such practice is traceable
in really primitive antiquity — if the date can be fixed at
which it was introduced.

And the mind of our own Church is scarcely less im-
portant, because of course men who receive their authority
to teach and feed the flock from that Church, can hardly
reasonably or honestly think themselves justified in
teaching what it does not teach, or claiming for them-
selves an authority different in kind from, or exceeding in
degree, that which it has commissioned them to exercise.

We will first consider the first point, whether private
Confession finds any place in the practice of the primitive
Church. In the early Church — that is, the Church of the
first three centuries — there is not to be found the smallest
real reliable recognition of the system which they so con-
with public fidently, or rather audaciously speak of, as if it were e
confesso a primitive Catholic practice. It is true that they
can find a few sentences, expressions, phrases, which at
first sight seem to be in their favour ; but when these are

WITNESS OF PEnJlllVE CIWLCH. 57

compared with the context, and interpreted by the known
realities of the Christian life of the age, they are found to
denote, or refer to, something so essentially different from
the thing they are brought to support, that they cannot
honestly, or reasonably, be alleged or accepted in its
favour. This fact is admitted by leading men among
themselves, but seemingly without any consciousness of
its bearing on their own position. Mr. Carter quotes Admitted
approvingly from Marshall, ' that in the earliest times there Oar.er.
was no private confession except in connection with public
discipline ; ' which is to say, in other words, that modern
confession, which has no reference whatever to public
discipline, did not exist in the early Church ; ' it ivas
made either because the sin needed public fenayice, or to re-
lieve the mind of the penitent from the fear of having com-
mitted such a sin.' What is meant, I suppose, by this
somewhat awkward sentence is, that when a man was
in doubt whether his sin did or did not require public
penance and reconciliation, he consulted some learned
and discreet person, in most cases probably a presbyter
of the Church, on that point; if it was decided that
it did require such penance, this was the remedy pre-
scribed to him ; if it was decided that it did not, he was
relieved of the apprehension of having committed such a
sin, and it was left to his own conscience and faith to do
what was needful for the obtaining pardon of his sin.
But it does not require much exercise of the loerical Thistotaiiy

^ , , , ° different

faculty to see that the voluntary communication of a sin from

modem

or sins to a priest, in order to be satisfied whether the confession.
character of some sin or sins is such as to require public
confession and public penance, as an offence against the
Church, with a view to obtain the Church's forgiveness, is
quite a different thing from the confession to a priest of
sins against God, as a religious act and a religious duty,
with a view (>f obtaining remission of sins from God, by an

58 - CONFESSION.

act and sentence of forgiveness announced by the afore-
said priest. Of this we shall have to say more presently.
The Editor also of the notes on Tertullian in the * Li-
brary of the Fathers ' (Oxford, 1842), whom, from the
initial letters E. B. P. affixed to the preface, I take to be
Dr. Pusey, not only admits, but very ably maintains, the
same vieAv.' After having set forth from the ancient
Fathers the nature and object of public discipline, and
Positive having proved by a vast array of authorities, that for

6vid.cncG. •

sins between a man's own conscience and God, confession
to God did in the usage of the ancient Church alone suf-
fice, he goes on to complete his case with the following
Negative remarkable passages : ' Even neg-ative evidence has much

evidence. j. o o

' weight when the materials are adequate ; if, under
' parallel circumstances equally detailed, and in a suffi-
' cient number of instances, mention is uniformly made of
' a religious practice at one period, while it is omitted at
' another, it does imply a different view as to the virtue of
' the practice. Eeligious persons would not, without some
* adequate ground, uniformly ^ neglect at one period what
' was practised at another ; and such ground is furnished
' by the different view of the Church respecting it ; at the
' one time, when recommended by the Church, they per-
' formed it ; if, at another, they neglect it, when obedience
' to the Church was equally recognised as a duty, it would

' Notes on the Translation of Tertnllian, 'De Penitentia' (Library of the
Fathers), A'ol. i. pp. 379-407. The note begins Ly the following statement
of the difference between the Eomanists and the writer on Confession : ' I'he
' point at issue relates not to its general advantage, or its necessity in parti cn-
' lar cases, or its use as a means of discipline, or to the desirableness of public
' Confession l^efore the whole Church, or the great difficulty of true penitence
' without it, or the duty of individuals to comply with it if the Church requires
' it, biit whether Confession to man be so essential to absolution that the benefits
' of absohition cannot be had without it.' It will, I think, be seen presently
that the real question raised in this most remarkable dissertation is, whether
private confession, except for the purposes of public penitence, existed at all in
the early Church, and that the nog;itive conclusion must be drawn.

^ The italics are mine.

WITNESS OF PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 59

' be because tbe Church did not require it.' I must

just interrupt E. B. P. for a moment, to observe that if ■

it had been a Divine ordinance, the Church must have

required it, and that he might have added ' or recommend

' it.' ' The instances, then, being in each case very

' numerous, the absence of any mention of Confession in the

' early Church under the following circumstances does,

' when contrasted with the uniform mention of it in the

' later, put beyond question that at the earlier period it was

' not a received practice. The evidence is given at great

' length by Daille.^ ' Secret Confession has, among the Quotations

* modern Latins, a chief place in the religious acts of DaiUe.

' the faithful; clergy, monks, lay; princes, private persons;

'nobles, people; men and women; but nowhere in the

' ancient Church ' (Daille iv. 3) ; ' especially at the close of

' life, as a bounden duty, it is universal among the moderns,

'unknown among the ancients' (ib. c. 5); 'or in

' sudden perils, as sickness, ivars, shipwrecks, journeys, &c.^

(ib. c. 6) ; ' in persecution or by martyrs ' (c. 7) ; ^ at great

'festivals ' (c. 8) ; ' and certainly the details are given so

'fully, that it is inconceivable that the practice of Confession

' should have been so uniformly mentioned with praise in the

' later, and wholly omitted in the earlier Church, had the

'practice of the earlier been the same as that of the later.

' An argument of the same sort is deduced from the body of

' tvritings, the great number and variety of questions and dis-

' cussions, to which the modern Confessional has given rise,

' and from its very nature must give rise.' (Daille iv. 14.)

' It ao-ain is inconceivable that with the large remains of

' antiquity which we have, and the notices of lost works,

' there should be no vestige of anything corresponding to

' all this, had the practice which occasioned it existed.' Again,

E. B. P. adopts Daille's observation that 'penitence' in

the early Church signified 'public penitence,' because public

' Daille, 'Do Confess. Auricular," note to TertuUian, nt supra, p. 406.

60 CONFESSION.

penitence alone existed — then when penitence was either
public or private, it was distinguished accordingly — and
when public penitence had been dropped, the word signi-
fied private penitence, without any distinguishing epithet ;
whence he draws this most decisive conclusion, ' This varia-
tion would not have been had the modern private pe^iitence
existed in the early Church.''^ The argument seems to be,
as E. B. P. says, ' unquestionable,' no less so in 1874 than
in 1842.
Conciusioa In the conclusion which E. B. P. draws from this,

drawn by

E. B. P. which I subjoin below,^ two things are observable ; first
of all, that he limits the application of his argument to
obligatory Confession, whereby he gives the direct nega-
tive to the position now advanced by Confessionalists
that their Confession is enjoined by Scripture ; for had it
been so, it would have been obligatory in all circum-
stances which gave occasion for its use, just as any other
enjoined ordinance ; and further that it is not easy to see
logically be by what legerdemain of logic the argument is limited to
obHga'toiy obligatory Confession, and not extended to the voluntary
on esbiou. pj^^g^gg . f^j. voluntary Confession to men of private sins
against God finds no more place than obligatory Con-
fession, unless, indeed, it is meant to be inferred that the
negative argument has a positive side, and that, because
obligatory Confession was not recognised in the early
Church, such voluntary Confession was ; an argument from
contraries which is not only unwarranted by the rules of
formal logic, but contradicted by the facts of his case ; for
this turns on the total absence of any mention of private

' Page 406.

^ 'Although, however, it is certain from the above evidence that the early
' Church had no obligatory Confession except that of overt acts of sin with a
' view to public penitence, and consequently that Confession as now practised
' in the Roman Communion is not essential to the validity of the general exer-
' else of the power of the keys, still as a matter of discipline it belongs to the
' Christian prudence of any Church to imitate or lay it aside, &c.' See
page 407.

WITNESS OF PRIMITIVE CHVRCH. 61

Confession whatever, not only on the absence of obliga-
tory Confession. My readers will observe that E. B. P.'s ^°^® ""'^

'' go so far as

premiss ffoes a g-ood deal farther than the conclusion thePre-

_ ^ miss.

drawn from it ; I simply take his premiss, which is the
conclusion I want. It is the verdict of the early Church — -
not only against its absolute necessity, but even its general
advantage, and its use as a means of discipline, or the
notion of true penitence being very difficult without it —
which is read clearly enough in the fact that ' there is no
vestige corresponding to all this,' ' that it was wholly un-
known among the ancients,' 'wholly omitted in the early
Church,' ' that in the earlier period it was not a received
practice.' I do not know how the case against the Con-
fessionalists, in respect of the witness of antiquity, could
be more decidedly expressed.'

The writer says, indeed, that as a matter of discipline,
it belongs to the Christian prudence of any Church to imi-
tate or lay aside the practice.^ Are we then to believe that
the early Church judged rightly in these matters ? if so,
the Romish practice, even if not enforced, is contrary to
the judgment of the early Church, and cannot be adopted
by those who defer to that judgment ; if not, the argu-

' This note is much prized amoug Confessioualists as establishing their
case against Eome's enforced confession ; but thej' cannot evade as against
themselves the condemnation which they insist upon as against Kome ; for those
who are acquainted with the manuals of Confession circulated by the Mediaeval
Clergy, will see liow little their system differs from that of Rome, except in the
point of not being, professedly at least, enforced. And this is not the point in
which the Eomish system fails of finding any warrant in antiquity. The
Confessionalist writers, indeed, argue as if its being enforced was the only point
treated of, whereas it does not enter specially into the discussion at all. The
bearing of the note is to prove the total absence of any recognition of any of the
points in which E. B. P. says (see above, p. 58, note) there is no difference be-
tween him and Rome. And the witness of antiquity being against Rome in
these points, they must admit that it is equally so against themselves.

^ I conclude that the practice of obligatory private Confession in the
Romish Church is what is meant ; it cannot mean ' private Confession as in
antiquity,' for what has been proA'ed not to exist cannot be imitated : but the
sentence is not easy to interpret with any certainty.

CONFESSION.

Auricular
Confession
excluded
by an-
tiquity.

ment from antiquity, as regulating the practice of after-
ages, fails altogether, and Medisevalism and Eomanism
collapse at once. Is it not rather manifest, that it can-
not enter into any Church which fashions itself on the
injunctions of Scripture and practice of genuine antiquity ;
and that the practice of Confession, as held by the Con-
fessionalists, invalidates, so far, the claim of any Church
to be called Catholic, just as Mariolatry excludes, so far,
the Romish Communion? It may, perhaps, occur to
most minds, as it has to my own, that the reasonable
dictates of Christian prudence would lead a Church in
dealing with a practice never sanctioned in Scripture, un-
known to antiquity, to lay it aside if it had been intro-
duced, rather than introduce or imitate it ; especially one
which has produced so much domestic, social, and political
evil, that even those who have drank it in with their
mother's milk are now striving to get rid of it.

CHAPTEE VI.

Fiirther Examination into the Ancient Practice — Both Persuasives to and Dis-
suasives from private Disclosure of Sin — Solution of this is that Disclosure is
recommended in certain Cases with a View to public Confession — Discour-
aged as a Means of obtaining Pardon from God — Threefold Phase of Sin —
Against a Brother — Against the Church — Against God — Threefold Phase of
Guilt — Different Means of obtaining Remission of these several Phases of
Guilt.

Sins against the Church were Matters of penitential Discipline — Remitted by the
Church as the Party offended — Remitted by indi^'idual Christians, when the
Sin and Guilt arose from private Injuries — Sins against God remitted by
God alone on Confession to Him — Prominent Place held by Sin against
the Church — Afterwards the Notion of such Sin died away, and the peni-
tential Discipline fell into Disuse — Persuasives to disclosure of Sins origi-
nally had reference to public Disclosure, Dissuasives had reference to the
Requirements of God by Confession to Him alone.

Proofs that public Discipline dealt only with Sins as against the Church — Not
with Sins as against God — Line drawn between these — Passage from Cyp-
rian— Differences between Public Discipline and Auricular Confession —
Too wide to admit of one being any Warrant for the other.

With this proof of the fact that Confession, as advo-
cated and practised by the Confessionalists, was unknown
in the early Church, my readers might dismiss from
their minds this part of the case. It will, however, I
think, be more satisfactory to go into it a little more in
detail, and bring forward a little more clearly and logically
the points of distinction between the modern system and
the primitive practice with which they endeavour to con-
nect it, or rather with which they have of late years
assumed off-hand its connection.

It must first be observed, that one of the phenomena to
be accounted for is the existence, almost side by side, in
early writers, of the strongest persuasives to, and tlie
strongest dissuasives from, the disclosure of secret sins to

Question
though
settled
must lie
gone fur-
tlier into.

Contradic-
tory- lan-
guage of
ancient
writers.

G4 CONFESSION.

men,' and I think it will be felt tliat no exposition of the
system will be satisfactory which does not furnish a solu-
tion of this contradiction. Nor is this, I think, done by
supposing that the persuasives refer to auricular Confes-
sion as voluntary, the others to it as obligatory : for Con-
fession would be beneficial, if beneficial at all, to the
person using it, though he took doctrinally a wrong view
of it ; the dissuasives would have taken the shape of point-
ing out the doctrinal mistake of supposing it obligatory,
not of forbidding or disparaging what would have been
otherwise beneficial. Both persuasives and dissuasives
are didactic not doctrinal ; they are quite general and
absolute, and do not enter into the points of difference,
optional or not optional — this person or that ; so that the
difference cannot be that the one is viewed as applying
to those who want it for its own sake, the other to
those who do not. The persuasives are worded as if dis-
closure of secret sins was necessary for all under certain
circumstances ; the dissuasives, as if it was necessary for
Solution of nobody. I think the solution may be found in the dif-
ference between certain sins and certain other sins, and the
aim and result of the disclosure of each respectively. The
disclosure of certain sins is enjoined under certain circum-
stances, with a view to certain results (see page 77 sqq.) :
where the character of the sin is different, and there are
no such circumstances or results, then confession to God
alone is enjoined — confession to man forbidden. The
question is, can such a difference between sin and sins,
and their circumstances, be established ?

The Note on Tertullian recognises such a difference
when it is said that there was no private Confession, ex-
cept with regard to public penitence : we shall see hereafter
that Confidence (not Confession in the technical sense),
was, in certain cases, recommended and practised. But
we may go further than this.

' See Bingham, yi. 469-485. Usher, 83. Note on Tertullian, 388-529.

THREEFOLD PHASE OF SIN. 65

We shall scarcely form a complete notion of the an- Andont
cient penitential discipline, and the position which it Spihi'e!'
held in the Ministry for the remission of sins, unless we
take in the fact, that most sins have a threefold phase of
offence, and taint of guilt. First, they are transgressions Threefold
of God's holy law and will— simple offences against God; £."' "*
secondly, they are injuries done to a brother Christian,
as well as offences against God ; thirdly, they are scandals
and dangers and injuries to the Christian commonwealth,
the Church. Corresponding to this triple aspect of sin,
there are three acts of forgiveness mentioned in Scrip-
ture, whereby the guilt attaching to each phase is seve-
rally and separately remitted. When a sin is not onlv
against God but also against a brother, the forgiveness of
the guilt attaching to such a sin in this aspect or relation —
the loosing the sinner from his sin — is procured by the con- sin affainst
donation thereof by the injured person, on the acknow- peisoi"'^'"^
ledgment, and, if possible, the reparation thereof, by
the person injuring; and where such an offence is thus
forgiven by the injured person, this forgiveness is ratified
in heaven, and the guilt belonging to it in that relation
blotted out, according to our Lord's promise given in St.
Matt, xviii. 18.'

But if a sin is not only against God and ao-ainst a A-ainstthe

•^ "^ o r'i,.,,...i.

brother, but against the Church, as causing scandal with-
out, and evil within, then such a sin requires the forgive-
ness of the Church,'^ in this aspect and relation, and public

' See Bingham, vi. 578, note s ; Usher, pp. 110, and 130. This interpretation
of the promise given in this passage isas old as Origen (seeBingham, ^■^. 579), and
it is found also in St. Augustine (see Bingham, vi. 578, note u) and Chrysostom,
ad loc; Jerome also, cid loc. 'Si peccaA'erit in nos frater noster, demittendi
habemus potestatem — si autem in Deum quis peccaverit non est nostri arbitrii,'
quoting 1 Sam. ii. 25. It is the one which the context suggests : the whole chap-
ter from verse 15 treats of the duty and the benefit of the forgiveness of pri-
vate injuries on repentance, and the danger of refusing personal reconciliation.
* See Fell's note on Cyprian de Lapsis, p. 136, given in Bingham, vol. viii.
414, note q.

Cliiucli.

ciliatioii.

GQ CONFESSION.

reparation, provided the Cliurcli chooses to demand and
exact it ; and this the early Church judged it necessary
to do with ever increasing severity. The sin of the Co-
rinthian, for instance, was a sin against God, as being a
. violation of the seventh commandment ; it was a sin against
his father : it was a sin against the Church as bringing
scandal upon it : and it was probably in this last aspect and
relation that St. Paul took cognizance of it ; first, punishing
and excommunicating the sinner, then forgiving him and
re-admitting him on his public confession and repentance.
Tiibiic Now, it pleased the early Church — with what reason

Discipline -xi i x • t • -i -

and neon or With what views we need not stop to enqun^e — to devise
penitential discipline as a means whereby satisfaction was
made to the Church for sins against herself — the scandal
removed, the evil remedied, and the dangers, which
threatened the communion therefrom, prevented. This was
analogous to the acknowledgment and reparation which
passed between private individuals. Such sin in this
aspect was remitted when the oflFender was reconciled to
the Church by the public lajing on of hands by the priest,
always followed by a prayer (see p. 165), and re-admis-
sion to the Holy Communion, as soon as the severity
of his penitence seemed not only to have testified and
tested his repentance before man, but also to have coun-
teracted the evil to which the commission of such a sin
might, in the way of evil example, have exposed the com-
munity. Doubtless, another object in inflicting this dis-
cipline was to awaken the sinner to a sense of his sin as in
God's sight and against God, and thus to save him from the
destruction of impenitence ; the sin, however, was viewed
as a sin tfgainst the Church, visited with Church censures
and deprivations, and forgiven by a formal public act of
reconciliation and re-admission to Church privileges.
Such public discipline has been adopted b}- Churches most
hostile to private Confession, and therefore cannot be

PUBLIC DISCIPLINE. 67

identical witli it. And where such sins in their ecclesias-
tical relation were thus remitted bj the offended party — :
the Church — it was part of God's promise to the Church
that such remission of what may be called the ecclesias-
tical guilt should be ratified by God; while the guilt
belonging to the sin, as an act of disobedience against
God, has the promise of forgiveness on simple repentance
or change of heart, and confession to Him. Hence, the i'^'^"''-
work of forgiveness being between God and a man's own giVen to it
conscience, when God was the offended party — and between
the offender and the Church when the Church was the
offended party— or between brother and brother when in-
dividual Christians were the offended parties— it naturally
happened, that ecclesiastical or canonical discipline held
the most prominent jjlace in the public life and public
ministrations of the Church. The peculiar position of
the Church in early days increased its prominence and
importance : for in the times when the Church was on its
probation before the world, this aspect of sin in its re-
lation to the Church was of more vital consequence than
afterwards ; hence the offences against God's moral law
for which ecclesiastical discipline was enforced, were those
sins which most directly and seriously affected the charac-
ter and progress of the Church in the world at large, such
as apostacy; while the sins which either in their own
nature, or from their not showing themselves in outward
acts, did not affect the character and interests of the
Church in the world, were not taken cognisance of by the
Church, but left as matters between the sinner and God,
such as envy, covetousness, pride, and even carnal lusts,
lasciviousness, drunkenness.' As time went on, and Chris-
tianity became identified with civilised society, the injury
done to the Church by such heinous sin was seemingly, and

' See Bingham, x\. pp. 471 and 478 and note v. Note on Tertullian pp
392 and 394.

G8 CONFESSION.

perliaps really, less, inasmuch as both, the scandal and
the danger were diminished ; and this being the case, it
followed that, as soon, and in proportion, as the incon-
veniences and the scandals and abuses of this public
penance, were felt to be greater evils than those which
they professed to remedy, it was, partly by canonical
authority, and partly by spontaneous disuse, allowed to
pass away, except on a few extraordinary occasions, from
almost the whole of Christendom ; but it does not follow
that what was substituted in its stead can claim the
sanction of the previous practice from which it differs
so essentially.
Difficulties I venture to ask my readers whether a good deal of the

disdpUne indistinctness and contradiction which mark most disser-
here'Sr*^ tations on the ancient discipline, is not got rid of by what
has been suggested above ,on the phases, or threefold
relations of sin to the several parties who are, or who may
be offended by it ; to each of which three different
methods and conditions of forgiveness, were severally at-
tached. In this light the penitential discipline, with all
its adjuncts, will be viewed as the condition imposed by
the Church to obtain condonation of an offence committed
ao-ainst the body politic ; while the forgiveness for sins
committed against God's will and law, which belongs to
God to give, as the party offended thereby, was to be
sought for, and obtained by other methods ordained and
required by God Himself. This at once accounts for the
earnest exhortations to disclosure of sin where necessary, as
in the case of known sinners who refused to submit to the
discipline of the Church — or salutary, as in the case of men
whose consciences might be relieved by public Confession
(see page 76), or where it was desirable to ascertain, by
disclosure of sin to a fit person, whether such discipline
was necessary ; that is, whether the offences were such, in
kind or deo"ree, as to require ecclesiastical condonation as

FOR SINS AGAINST CHURCH. 69

against the Churcli. It accounts too for the no less earnest
declarations that confession to God alone was the method
to be pursued, and not Confession to man; that is, for
offences in their rela-tion to God.* At the same time we
can see why, and how, the forgiveness of sin by God, and
the forgiveness of sin by the Church, are spoken of as
not identical, nor even always coincident.

That public discipline had to do with sins in their re- Distinction
lation to the Church, and was founded on considerations ?insagainst
of the common weal, is clear, from the limitations affixed sinsaj^ainst
to the condonation, even on repentance, of certain offences,
or the repetition thereof. In such cases, the ecclesias-
tical forgiveness was withheld from men even though
they were held to have been j^ardoned by God;^ or men
were encouraged to seek from God that pardon which
the ecclesiastical system forbade them to hope for from
the congregation.^ Here we see a distinct recognition
and distinction of sin in its relation to God, and par-
doned by Him, and against the Church, and not pardoned
by the Church. This, too, appears in the fact that such
sins as drunkenness, covetousness, &c. (see above, p. Q1),

' It would be difficult otherwise to account for the utter repudiation of the
Mediaeval notions of confession, penance, and absolution, which we find in
passages of ancient writers, of which the following are specimens: 'Neither
do I constrain thee, to discover thy sins unto men, unclasp thy conscience before
God, show thy wounds unto Him, and of Him ask thy medicine.' ' Do I say
confess them to thy fellow-servants, who may reproach thee therewith ? confess
them to God who healeth them.' ' Confess thy sins to mo (God) alone in pri-
vate.' ' He commaudeth us to give an account thereof to Him alone.' ' To
Him to make confession of them.' (Bingham, vi. 469.) These words of Chrysos-
tom leave untouched public discipline as required by the Church ; he had in his
eye sins for which no such satisfaction was demanded by the Church, sins be-
tween God and the sinner alone. My readers will see in a moment that such
passages could not have been written, if confession to, penance from, absolution
by, a priest, had been an ordained or recognised method for the remission of
sins, as sins against God.

* 'Augustin, Epist. liv. ad Maced. (Bingham, ^-i. 475). He is speaking
of those who after public reconciliation had fallen again, 'Even over these
God makes His son to rise, and gives them the gifts of life and salvation no
less than he did before.'

^ Bingham, vi. 475, and viii. pp. 408 and 409.

CONFESSION.

which are the gravest sins against God, were not re-
garded as sins against the Church.'

A passage in Cypi'ian is still more explicit.^ Certain
' La]3si ' had obtained from martyrs, or confessors, man-
datory letters for their restitution to Church fellowship,
and presumed on them as superseding the necessity of any-
thing more. Cyprian protests against the notion that such
men's sins are pardoned before they had gone through the
discipline required by the Church for the sin as committed
against it, and the method ordained by God for the sin
as committed against Himself. ' Let no one deceive
himself, He who bore our sins can alone forgive those
which are committed against Himself: the servant cannot
forgive the heavier sins committed against the Lord : it
is written. Cursed be he who puts his hope in man : the
Lord must be prayed to, the Lord must be appeased by
our satisfaction.' Hence it would seem that the sins
Avhich a man commits against God were remitted, as
against Him, in the Church.^

On the whole, I think we should gather from the prac-
tice of the early Church, and the passages in the patristic
writings which bear upon it, that God has appointed
repentance and confession to Him, as the sole means
and conditions of obtaining the pardon of sins as against
Himself. That the Church, acting upon the powers and
constitution which Christ gave it, a^jpointed penance,
public confession, public reconciliation, for sins against
the Church. That individuals were taught to forgive sins
against themselves on the acknowledgment and repa-

' It must be confessed tLat the estimate of sin in God's sight, where the in-
ward soiu'ce of the sin is more sinful than the sin itself, contrasts strangely
with the theory of ecclesiastical discipline, where the inward sin is not ttiken
cognisance of, unless it shows itself in some outward action injurious in some
way or other to the Church in its relation to the world.

2 Cyprian de Lapsis, Ed. Fell. p. 129.

' See also Cyprian, Test. iii. c. 28.

ANCIENT DISCIPLINE— MODERN CONFESSION. 71

ration thereof. Further, the forgiveness granted by the
Church of sins against the Church, or by an individual of.
sins against himself, carried with it pardon from God of
that degree of guilt attaching to them in these several re-
lations. And the expressions which recommend disclosure
of private personal sins to a brother Christian, or to a
priest, refer to public Confession, as the satisfaction to the
Church, as the party oifended, and not to any requirement
of God, for the pardon of sin, as against Himself.

But if we thi-ow aside these distinctions, and hold Essential
that penitential discipline had direct reference to sins in betweeir
their relation to God, still the difference between the an- djin'e ami
cient ecclesiastical discipline, and the modern system which confoJinli
our Confessionalists advocate, is so marked and distinct, '" theory.
that the one can afford no argument or precedent for the
other. It is mere waste of time for our Confessionalists
to prove the penitential discipline — this is an undoubted
fact, indisputable and undisputed — but it does not x^rove
their position ; and to argue from one to the other is at
once a sophistical attempt to impose upon the careless,
and a logical confession of weakness. No amount of in-
variableness in exacting this public satisfaction for no-
torious sin gives the slightest sanction to private confes-
sion of secret sins with a view to the forgiveness thereof
pronounced j^rivately by a priest. No opinion entertained
of the necessity of such public penance and absolution
for notorious offences, proves any necessity or benefit
of private confession or absolution for secret offences.
No confession to the Psenitentiarius for the jDur^^oses of
ascertaining the nature of a sin in its relation to eccle-
siastical discipline, can prove the practice of confession
to a priest of a sin as a means to, and a condition of, for-
giveness from God. No amount of inexorable severity
enforced by the Church as a satisfaction and security
to itself, on offenders against the public weal, can jus-

72 CONFESSION.

tify or excuse the placing a single hindrance in the way
of God's mercy, or attaching even a feather-weight
condition to what is laid down in Scripture as sufl&-
cient to obtain forgiveness of sins against His Divine
Majesty ; to what our Lord Himself, by promises, and
doctrines, and prophecies — by parables, and miracles —
so constantly and clearly set forth. That which was re-
quired in foro ecclesiw to satisfy a nescient Church of the
sincerity of a sinner's repentance and the reality of his
amendment, proves nothing as to anything of the same
kind being required in foro cceli to assure an Omniscient
God of a repentance, or to make it such as to obtain His
forgiveness. Such a necessity may, or may not, exist, but
it cannot be argued from the public discipline which the
Confessionalists assume as the undoubted proof — the exact
exemplar of it.
Ami de- And when we come to look into details the differences

tails.

and distinctions stand out still more intelligibly. The
acknowledgment of the sinfulness of notorious sin differs
essentially from the disclosure of secret sin. The acknow-
ledgment of sin against the Church, as a party injured,
differs essentially from the disclosure of sin to a priest by
whom the sin is to be forgiven, as the soi-disant represen-
tative of God. The acknowledgment of a notorious sin
in order to obtain public reconciliation from the Church
as the act of the whole Church through the agency of its
officials, is different from the disclosure of secret sin, in
order to obtain forgiveness from God, through the private
exercise of a power for life or death supposed to belong to
every priest. The disclosure of a secret sin in order to be
satisfied, whether from its kind or degree it requires public
confession, is different from the disclosure of secret sin as
for its own sake, a necessary element of repentance, the
surest method of obtaining forgiveness from God. An
act of reconciliation given by a bishop or priest, as the

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THEM. 73

oflficial representative of the Cliurcli, is essentially different
from a grant or sentence of pardon by a priest pretend-
ing to act as the representative of God. So that even if
all these practices were taken as having existed from
the beginninof, they would furnish no warrant for a The one no

" . . . warrant for

practice which is essentially different from them — one the other.
and all — in spite of the assumption of their identity ; the
antiquity of the one, however conclusively proved, does not
prove the antiquity of the other.

CONFESSION

CHAPTER VII.

Mediicval
Confession
resulted
from the
public dis
cipliue.

Primitive

penittntial

discipline.

Nature and Decay of PuLlic Discipline— Case of Corinthian Sinner — DeA-olopcd
in tlie Century after the Apostles- — Lapsi — Sciiudalous Offences — Those
which caused no Scandal, left to private Conscience and Discipline — No pri-
A^ate Confession, for the Sin was notorious — Public Disclosure of secret Sins
for Relief of Conscience — This only allowed on Recommendation of some wise
Layman, or afterwards Priest — Private Disclosiu'e of Sins to such Persons for
this Purpose — Not followed by Absolution — Multiplication of such Cases —
Appointment of Psenitentiarius — His Office that of ' Juge cV Instruction^
— Advance towards Mediaeval System, but not to Absolution — Scandal
caused by this Office — Abolished — No Avarrant for Confession, but the con-
trary.

Private personal Discipline for Offences not against the Church — Same as that
recommended by our Church as Preparation for Holy Communion.

Confidencein Early Church — Primitive Usage retained in our Church, except as
regards Public Discipline.

Abolition of Pseniteutiarius — Private Confession assumes a substantive Form —
Public Confession less frequent — Public Reconciliation for notorious Offences
superseded by private — Change in the Notion of Public Reconciliation — Pri-
vate Confession for notorious Offences authorised — Change of Doctrine as
well as Practice — Reconciliation or Absolution still precatory, not indicative,
and so up to end of twelfth Century — This is a Matter of Ecclesiastical
Arrangement, not of Scriptural Obligation — Hence we must see what is the
Practice and Teaching of our own Church.

Attempt to distinguish occasional from habitual Confession — Flaws in the
Argument.

It is nevertheless an undoubted fact that private Con-
fession, as it existed in Mediseval times, was the offs23ring,
or rather the result, of the old penitential disci^^line, the
place of which, as it passed awaj, was usurped bj its coun-
terfeit ; this will be best explained by a brief sketch of the
nature and decay of public discipline.

The case of the Corinthian furnishes us with the
earliest example of the satisfaction demanded of a noto-
rious sinner, with a view to his own spiritual benefit — by

ANCIENT DISCIPLINE. lb

awakening him to repentance towards God — and to the
general welfare of the Church, by the removing of the
scandal, and neutralising the example, and by the restora-
tion of the member, in whose loss all the members suf-
fered loss. Of the Corinthian precedent I shall have
occasion to say something presently : it sufficeth now to
say, that here there is evidently no trace of private Con-
fession or private absolution.

1. In the century immediately following the Apostolic At first.
administration, that which at first was only an occasional
and extraordinary exercise of ecclesiastical power, assumed
the shape of a systematic ordinance, which was day by
day developed and worked out with more and more exact-
ness and inflexibility. The lapsi, or apostates, furnished
most of the cases for this discipline, on account as well of
the notorious nature of the offence, as of the scandal and
injury it brought upon the Church. Of course other
sins of deeper die, if notorious and scandalous, were dealt
with in the same way, as offences against the Church.
But the sins of every-day frailty, as not causing any
scandal to the Church and therefore not being regarded
as sins against the Church, were not matters of ecclesias-
tical discipline or forgiveness, but were left to the ordi-
nary remedies for sin against God, Confession to Him,
and acceptance of His mercy through Christ, proffered
to them by the Church or by God's Word; or possibly to
the mutual prayers of those who disclosed then- infirmities
one to another. And sins of a more serious character, if
unknown, were, of course, also left to treatment by indi-
vidual consciences. (See page 69.)

We may suppose indeed that this was the case with No private

Confession

by far the majority of sins, unless we suppose that the of private
majority of the Church were at the same time under
ecclesiastical discipline. However, there was no such
thing as private confession and private absolution ; the

CONFESSION.

Disclosure
of secret
sins of a
heinous
dye.

acknowledgment of the sin, and the reparation, were as
public as the sin was notorious ; in fact, the notoriety of
the sin precluded private Confession; the confession
required was not the disclosure of offence, but the sinner's
acknowledging that he felt it to be a sin, that he repented
of it, and promised to avoid it in future.

2. One great characteristic of the sins subjected to
public discipline being their heinousness, and the neces-
sity of their being atoned for in public, it followed that
secret sins of a heinous dye frequently presented them-
selves to awakened consciences as needing public expiation
and reconciliation.* Men could not feel their consciences
at ease without performing that public penance, which their
sins, if notorious, would have demanded, as sins against
the Church. They felt that the guilt which attached
itself to their sin, as against the Church, was un forgiven.
They did not like to avail themselves surreptitiously, as it
were, of the Holy Communion or other Church privileges,
from which they felt themselves virtually excluded. They
therefore publicly accused themselves of the sin which
was on their conscience, and accepted that j^enance at
the conclusion of which public condonation would restore
them to the rightful possession of the privileges of full
Christian fellowship. And this voluntary accusation of
themselves, so far from being viewed as an ordained point
of religion, was regarded as a singular proof of tenderness
of conscience, and a most meritorious act of repentance.
Nor can it have any j)lace except where public penitential
discipline exists. Here, then, there was a disclosure indeed
of secret sins, but not in private, nor yet followed by
private absolution of a priest, but when necessary by the
public absolution of the Church.

3. In course of time, as the energies of internal faith
in God's promises of forgiveness waxed cold, and were

> See Usher, p. 86.

VOLUNTARY PUBLIC PENANCE. 77

supplied by tlie artificial aj)pliances of an external and
ceremonial pardon, this public disclosure of secret sins. Prevalence
more and more recommended in certain cases, and even piatuitous
enjoined bj the teachers in the Church,^ became so pre-
valent, that the public attention was occupied bj sins not
of that heinous dye, which, if they had been notorious,
would have required such solemn expiation ; and, on the
other hand, the public disclosure of certain secret sins
might have been, and many times was found to be, scan-
dalous and injurious to the Church. Thus it was considered
advisable that no one should confess his secret sins publicly,
before it had been ascertained, by some one competent to
judge, that such sins were proper to be so confessed : and
for this purpose those who were thus uneasy in their con-
sciences were advised to open their souls to others ; but it
was a matter of Confidence, not of Confession in the Con- itwasCon-
fessionalist sense of the word : not as in itself a healing c<»nfess "°
or cleansing process, for then other remedies would not
have been suggested — in the cases of sins of sufficient
importance, public discipline and condonation — or in other
cases, the ordinary means of making one's peace with
God. It was not an act of discipline, but an act of
prudence for the sake of its results : just as a man with
a serious disease would have recourse to some one to tell
him whether this or that remedy would be likely to work a
cure, without expecting to receive any benefit from the
mere act of seeking advice. And as such a one would
most naturally and wisely go to some one who was
acquainted with the nature of the remedies, so persons
who were thus sick in their consciences were advised to
go to some one who, not by virtue of his office, but by

' Greg. Nyssen. de Psen. ' recommends, at once, public penance in order
' to gain the prayers of the people, and private disclosure to the priest that ho
' may prescribe the fitting remedies, but the whole relates to public penitence.'
Note on TertuUian, p. 385. The latter clause refers to the question -whether the
case was one for public penance or not. See also Note p. 381 ; and Usher, p. 86.

ession.

counsel.

78 CONFESSION.

reason of liis knowledge and skill, would be most likely to
understand whether public discipline would be proper for
the case. It was not that every priest virtute officii,
as commissioned by God to receive such confessions, was
to be consulted, but ' one who being tried had proved him-
self a skilful physician and a merciful ; ' nor yet, as far
as we can gather from the writings of the times, is there
any mention of its being necessarily a priest at all. Nor is
Een^.cdy the remedy private absolution, but ' if he should say

not absolu- •n ii -i

tion but ' anything or give thee any counsel, thou mightest follow
' it,' ^ evidently making the following it not an ordained
act of duty, but a voluntary act of prudence, inasmuch
as it resulted from a conviction of the person's prudence
and skill. Here again, then, there is a private disclosure
of sins but entirely differing in nature, theory, object,
and result from modern Confession, approaching far nearer
to Confidence — a disclosure for advice. Yet it is impos-
sible not to see herein the fact, full of warning, that
to this humanly devised method of dealing with sin may
be traced the seed of the evil which afterwards overcast
the Church and even Christianity itself,^ more and more
as it was developed into its full growth of Auricular Con-
fession, Sacramental Confession, Penitence, Penance, and
Direction.

Cases of this sort multiplied so much as persons sought
more and more to substitute external and formal penance

' Oi-igeu, on Psalm xxxvii. See Usher, p. 83, note 33.

^ The first author iu whom we find any definite exhortation to confidence is
Origen (230), but neither he nor Basil (370) makes any mention of a priest
being the person to be applied to, but simply some one skilled in such matters.
The spurious epistle of Clement to St. James recommends the president (or
priest) as the person to whom such confidential disclosures are to be made. The
remedy to be applied, however, was not absolution, but the word of God with
wholesome counsel, ' ut ab ipso per verbum Dei et salubre consilium curctur '
(see Bingham, vi. 484, note o ; Usher, p. 84, note 36). It was, in fact, the
confidence which is recognised in the exhortation to the Holy Communion (see
p. 103). We shall soon see how this too was merged in the so-called sacra-
mental confession.

PENITENTIARY PRESBYTER. 79

for internal repentance, that about the year 300 it was
judged expedient to take the matter ont of private hands,
and to appoint for this sj)ecial purpose a priest or pres-
byter, who was called Pcem^enfiarms,^ to whom such ques- Appoint-
tions were submitted : so that, during the eighty years for Paniitenti-
which. this office lasted, the cases which had formerly been
decided by private judgment were referred to the officer
thus commissioned to decide upon them with authority.
The tendency of this was, of course, to give a colour and
authority and system to private Confession, which it had
not before, especially as under its auspices the custom
grew up of allowing the reparation to the Church to be
made in private instead of public. And this is the nearest
approach, to the Mediseval system which our Confes-
sionalists assert to be primitive, though the practice itself
was not of really primitive, but rather of after growth.
But the distinction between the two is marked and clear
enough. The former was not viewed as an act of neces-
sary religious discipline, beneficial in itself by God's
appointment, but as a preliminary to an ecclesiastical
reparation, if the sins w^ere of sufficient importance in
their relation to the Church, to justify permission being
given to the applicant to avail himself of it. This Official
was not to hear confessions as conditions of sins being
forgiven, but he acted as a judge — what the French call a
* juge d'instruction ' — to see if the case was one to require
public discipline,^ Nor was the confession made with a
view to receive formal absolution from the Psenitentiarius ;
this officer did not go farther than to recommend public
discipline if it was fit matter for it.^ If this was the case,
his office towards the applicant ceased, except possibly so

' Bingham, ri. 490 ; Sozomen, lil). vii. c. xvi. ; Bingham, ri. 492, note q. ;
Note on Tertvillian, p. 380 ; Socrat., lib. v. c. 19. See Usher, p. 87.

* Note on Tertxillian, p. 381 ; Origen, on Psalm xxxvii. See Usher, p. 86.
» August, ' Lib. de Fcen.' See Usher, p. 84.

80 CONFESSION.

far as to give him instructions as to tlie proper way of
performing that public penance to which he was desirous
to submit himself.^ Where the sin was not of this cha-
racter he left him, as before, to the ordinary remedies
contained in God's word, or at the most he recommended
some private penance,^ which might relieve a weak con-
science from the feeling of having deserved canonical dis-
Disciosure cipline without having undergone it: and therefore I

to him not ,-,•■, -, .-,-, i , . ti

Confession think mv readers will see that the private disclosure to
dence. the Pseniteutiarius, being in reality only an act of Con-

fidence, differed essentially from that which it is now
sought to introduce among us on the plea of its being
primitive. I think, however, there can be very little
doubt that in this working of the Psenitentiarian system
we can detect a further advance towards the substitu-
tion of the modern private sacramental confession in
place of the former primitive public discipline. This, of
course, is more clearly seen in those cases in which the
sins disclosed were of so scandalous a nature, that the
bringing the offender and the offence to public cognisance
would have been to the serious detriment of the Church.
In these cases, it was permitted to the Psenitentiarius to
assign in private a penance, proportionate to the sin,
which carried with it the same benefit which would have
resulted from public and formal remission by the imposi-
tion of hands, viz. restoration to Church privileges ; but
still it must be remembered that this remission was of the
sin as committed against the Church, and in lieu of that
public penance which, according to the strict primitive
rules of the Church, could only have been attained by a
long course of public humiliation. And even this slight
approach to, this shadow of, the Confessional produced so
great scandal and injury to the Church that, after it had

' 'Apocryphal Epistle of Clement I.' See Usher, p. 84.
* Sozomen, lib. vii. c. xvi. See Bingham, vi. 492.

ABOLITION OF PENITENTIARY. 81

lasted about eighty years, it was by common consent, as Abolition

n 1 IT n • 1T1T in 1 •• of I'iL'uiten-

well as by public autkority, abolished ; and from that time tiarius.
the penitential discixDline of the Church gradually lapsed
into that Confessional discipline, which was fully developed
under the auspices of Mediaeval Eome. It is cui-ious to
mark that no sooner had public discipline admitted, as its
handmaid, private confession to a priest, than it began to
wither, and, as we shall see presently, soon fell. Of
course, nothing like this preliminary disclosure, with a view
to public disciiDline, can find place where public discipline
has been abrogated in the Church, by virtue of its power
to arrange such matters; so that the disclosure to the
Psenitentiarius can furnish no warrant for the Confession
of these days, even if the differences between them were
less marked than we have seen them to be. In fact,
the appointment of such an officer as the Psenitentiarius ?fnit™-
tells against the Coufessionalist notion, that confession *Ja^i"u"?or
of some sort, either private or public, was required as a toniession;
duty from every member of the Cliurch ; for if it had been
the former, so that each person had his father confessor,
that confessor would have been able to decide the question
with authority, and thus there would have been no neces- i>^,ijp,.
siby for the ofl&ce of Pienitentiarius ; and if public confes- '^s^'^^'^^ '*•
sion had been required of all, there would have been no
question for this ofiicer to decide.

Side by side with this public ecclesiastical discipline, pj-i^ate
on which, as we have shown, private disclosure of sins to ^^^sc'-^li'ie
man accidentally and gradually fastened itself, there
existed a private personal discipline, from which confession
to man was wholly excluded, consisting of private examina-
tion, private repentance, private confession and prayer to
God, with reparation of sins against others, consum-
mated by approaching the Holy Table on the private
witness of each man's personal conscience ; ' in short,

' Nute on TertuUian, p. 399 sqq. (See also above, page 69, note 1.) In

CONFESSION.

As in the
Eni;-lish
Prnver
Book.

Which fol-
lows the
primitive
system.

Confidence
in Early
Church.

exactly tlie same as is set forth in the exhortation to the
Holy Communion, as the way and means to being received
as worthy partakers of that Holy Table. As the public
discipline has wholly ceased, the only one that has been
handed down to us from the really primitive Church is
this private and personal one : for the Prayer Book con-
tains no directions or recognition of any other discipline
whatsoever, though, as we have before shown, it does
recognise confidential communications between a clergy-
man and individual members of the Church : not, how-
ever, as a discipline or an ordinance ; exactly following
herein the practice of the really primitive Church. For by
the side of this enforced public acknowledgment of and
reparation to, the Church for scandalous ofiences, and
these disclosures of private sins with a view to a volun-
tary public acknowledgment, which have, in the nature of
things passed away, there existed, of course, that spon-
taneous, almost instinctive unburdening of consciences
for the purposes of relief and spiritual counsel, to learn
how some doubt might be solved, or some temptation met,
or some evil conquered. But it was not an act of con-
fession for its own sake, nor yet for absolution, nor yet as a
discipline, and therefore it differed in kind from that into
which it in course of time merged, when private confession
had usurped the place of public discipline, and private
absolution that of public reconciliation. In the Church,
then, up to the year 350, there existed 1. Public disci^Dline.

2. Disclosure of sins with ^ a view to public discipline.

3. Private personal discipline — Confession to God. 4. Con-
some of these passnges Chrysostom uses the word comfd, ' God does not compel
us to speak out our transgressions before men.' From this the writer argues that
he rather implies voluntary private confession : but it is evident that he is not
coiTtrastin" compulsory private confession and voluntary private confession,
but is speaking of compulsory public confession before witnesses, which though
compulsory in the eyes of the Church, was not compulsory in God's siglit, in-
asmuch as confession to God alone procured the remission of sin as against
God.

PRIMITIVE PERSONAL DISCIPLINE. 83

fidential communications. The two first have passed
awaj ; the two last are retained in our Church.

After the abrogation of the office of Psenitentiarius, D(cayof
private confession became more a recognised form of the lussion.
Church discipline in lieu of public penance. The scandal
which frequently attended the public disclosure furnished
a reason for sins which should have been disclosed as a
matter of public discipline, not being made public. To
this was added the fear that if publicity was enjoined on
every private disclosure, men would be deterred from sub-
mitting to it, and thus sin would evade the penalties
which the Church demanded, as a security against similar
offences in future, and, as far as these penalties were known,
a means of deterring others from sinning;^ and the public
disclosure of sins thus being dropped, the principle and
the aspect of private confession was changed. The con- chancre in
fession, which had been made to the Psenitentiarius, with Coufesi..!.
a view to the question whether public discipline was
desirable or admissible, assumed a substantive and inde-
pendent phase ; and becoming in itself an act of satisfac-
tion, insensibly took the place of public penance : and this
not only with respect to secret, but also notorious offenders.
Of course the notion of public satisfaction to the Church Ciiann;e in

public cen-

for personal sins, whether notorious or otherwise, became si""es-
weaker and weaker as excommunication became more and
more sparingly exercised in such matters, and became
more and more applied to offences against the supremacy
of the clergy, or used as an instrument of attack or defence
in polemical disputes among rival parties or rival bishops,
or even rival sovereigns whom rival bishops favoured.
As this public satisfaction to the Church was dropped, it
naturally happened that the notion of sin as an offence Public re-
against the Church was lost sight of, and penance and superseded
reconciliation, which at first were conditions of the Church's ^ ''' '^ '^^^'

> Usher, p. 89, note 50.
g2

CONFESSION.

Personal
discipline
possibly
contem-
plated by
Nectaiius.

forgiveness of sin as against the CliurcL, began to be
viewed as conditions of forgiveness from God of sins
against Himself; and the sin to be forgiven being thns
viewed as against God, tlie public act or sentence of the
bishop or priest, which formerly was pronounced by him
as representing the Church, and carrying with it the
remission of sin as against the Church, gradually came to
be regarded, when this public discipline was thus all but
gone, as the act and sentence of the representative of
God, carrying with it God's forgiveness of sins, as against
Himself — a most portentous change, and one that brought
the most fatal evils upon Christendom. It would even
seem as if Nectarius, when he abolished the Pseniten-
tiarius,^ contemplated the permitting everyone to partake
of the Holy Mysteries on the witness of his own con-
science : a near approach to the system of our own
Church, which would have got rid of the evils and scandals
of public discipline, without bringing still greater evils and
scandals upon Christendom. But this was not to be— for
the great blow to the ancient public discipline seems to
have been struck about the year 440, when by Leo I.^ pri-
vate confession was distinctly authorised in lieu of public

' I do not think that there is any historical evidence that this was formally
done. Socrates (Lib. v. c. xix. ; see Eingham, vi. 490) says that a certain Pres-
byter, named Eudfemon, recommended it to Nectarius : but he does not record
its being actually done. Chrysostom, however, writing about this time, re-
cognises it. 'Let each one examine himself, and then approach.' Homil.
xxviii. on 1 Cor. xi. And again, ' Within thy conscience none present but God

search out thy sins . . . and then with a pure conscience approach the holy

table, partake of tliB hallowed sacrifice.' See Usher, p. 88, notes 46 and 47.

- Usher, p. 89. Leo Ep. 136 (or 80) ; see Note on Tertullian, p. 390. The
whole of this Letter of Leo discloses a departure from primitive antiquity, not
only in the practice, but in the nature and principle of the remission of sins,
as well as the confusion which waits on a state of transition. Two sorts of
confession are spoken of: confession to a priest, as sufficient up to a certain
point, probably as standing in place of public confession and penance, and so
procuring condonation for sins against the Church; but three lines lower down
confession to God is spoken of as taking precedence of confession to the priest,
probably as procuring remission of sins from God.

CHANGE AUTHORISED BY LEO I. 85

discipline, and as the condition of obtaining- forgiveness of

sin from God.^ Of course the confidential communications, Private

' Confession

wliich I have spoken of above, rapidly fell into the same ^^d pen-
ance recog-
groove, and the man who disclosed his sins to the priest "is'^ci ^y

Leo I.

was at first counselled, and then directed, to undergo some
private penance, as a satisfaction to God thereof, and was
then reconciled. A pracfcice, however, which in this phase ^^''^. '"^ P""

^ ' ^ i. mitive

did not begin till the year 440 can hardly be called a pr«ttice.
primitive one, or be alleged as any evidence that modern
Confession, in the technical sense of the word, has the
sanction of that previous practice of primitive antiquity
from which, though it was its source, it differs in object,
in nature, in result. Mr. Carter admits that there was a
change of doctrine, as well as practice, in this new organi-
sation of private confession in lieu of public discipline, -
not seeing that this cuts from under his feet his assumed
ground of primitive precedent.

But even in this new organisation of private confession Distin-
we find an element which entirely distinguishes it from fronVmo-
the modern system. The priest was not to pronounce any fos'LiTv
formal absolution carrying with it or implying forgiveness absoilitio^n.
of sins from God, but to approach God in prayer for the
penitent.^ This prayer for the forgiveness of God rei^laced
the formal forgiveness of the Church by imposition of
hands, and this was the form whereby the benefit of • •

absolution was conveyed up to the twelfth century, when the
former prayer, * May God give thee remission and absolu-
tion,' was changed into ' I absolve thee ; ' ^ and this preca-

' Leo ut supra and Ep. 108 (or 91) ; see Note on Tertullian, p. 391. ' The
succour of the divine goodness being so ordered that the forgiveness of God
cannot be obtained but through the supplication of the priest,' to this he
immediately joins private confession, and identifies private restoration of
the penitent witli the former public act of reconciliation.

2 See Note on Tertullian, p. 391. Usher, p. 89.

' This form is still used in public absolution in the Eomau Mass. (See
page 35, note 1.)

86 CONFESSION.

tory — or rather optative or invocative form, for it partakes
rather of tlie character of a solemn wish or invocation
than of a direct prayer — has been retained in our own
Church in the absolution in the Communion Service.
TuricSar I think it will be seen that this failure of Scriptural

on"th™ic and primitive warrant is a most serious breakdown in the
bein!!"^ Confessionalists' case, especially when it has been adduced
voiuntarj'. -^^ -^g favour by its supporters ; in fact, it would furnish to
most thinking men a reason for rejecting the system alto-
gether. Nor is the difficulty met by saying that it is not
pretended that habitual or enforced confession is enjoined
in Scripture, or sanctioned by primitive antiquity : that
what they advocate is only occasional and voluntary, not
habitual and enforced. They forget, first of all, that the
evidence of antiquity goes, as we have seen, against any
auricular Confession, whether occasional or habitual, op-
tional or enforced — there was no such thing ; and next,
that a Church has no more right to set forth an occasional
and voluntary practice as a divine ordinance without
divine warrant, than one habitual and enforced; and again,
that if it were a divine ordinance at all for the remission
of sins after Baptism, it must be of universal application
on all who sin — obligatory and not voluntary.

CHAPTER VIII.

This a Matter of Canonical Arrangement — Argument from this — Pleas, that
this accounts for the Absence of Primitive Sanction, and that our Chiirch
has a Right to enjoin the Practice — Logical Effect of these Pleas — If so,
it cannot be a Sacramental Ordinance of Divine Appointment — Plea, that
Language of the Church may indicate a Eecognition of its Scriptural Obli-
gation, or makes it binding on us, answered — Effect of such a Plea —
Necessity for examining our Church's Language — Positive Assertions of
Confossionalists on this Point — Mistaken Proofs they adduce — What it is
they assert to be taught by our Church — Visitation Office — Method pre-
scribed— Inquiry into the Fact of the sick Man's Repentance, not any Detail
of his Sins — Special Confession — Not necessarily private — Absolution to be
reluctantly applied — Pardon not given — But prayed for after the Absolution
— This Prayer the Relic of the old precatory Form — Argument of Confession-
alists about this Prayer answered — Why it is untenable — Precatory Form up
to twelfth Century shows that Forgiveness washeld to be aMatter of Petition,
not as a ' \fait accoyniM " — Change to " ego te absolvo " — Caution of our Church
in this Matter — Instances of the Nature of Absolution in other Passages of our
Prayer Book — Morning and Evening Prayer — Must be essentially the same
in Visitation Office, differently applied — Not Forgiveness, but God's Promise
and Offer to forgive — Difference between Absolution and Pardon — Instances
of this in the Prayer Book — In the Visitation Formida —The Special Con-
fession comes nearer to Confidence— 'But at all Events it would furnish no
Precedent for Cases essentially different — Certainly not for Confession in the
only Case in which even Confidence is recommended by our Church.

The changes thus made by the Church, in even public Tiiese were
confession of sins, mark, as Usher observes, that this was canonical
held to be a canonical matter, appertaining to the external ment.'' ~
discipline of the Church, which might be changed on just
occasion ; it therefore was not of dogmatic or Scriptural
obligation, as in that case it could not have been in the
power of the Church to change it. For instance, if public Therefore
discipline had been a definite part of our Lord's will for ">"'.i'ne
His Church, then the Church in abrogating it failed of our ^'^'^^'^ti''"-
Lord's mind for His Kingdom ; but as it was only an

88 CONFESSION.

ecclesiastical institution, it was liable to change and
abrogation.
This results This, howevcr, may give occasion for the Confession-

also from ^ a

other pleas alists to saj, that the absence of their private confession

d the

subject, from the primitive system may have been a matter of
such ecclesiastical arrangement, and, therefore, does not
furnish any proof that either Scripture or apostolic practice
was against it. But first, this reason for the omission,
inadmissible though it be, admits the fact : and further,
though it evades the difficulty which arises from the
absence of primitive warrant, yet, at the same time, it
lays the axe to that which they hold to be the great
characteristic of their system, namely, that it is the
divinely ordained ordinance for the remission of sins ;
it negatives that sacramental character which is assigned
to it ; for the foundation of that position is, that it is of
divine obligation and not of Church appointment,
and from The fact, however, of the early Church thinking itself

for"m"own at liberty to make what arrangements it pleased upon the
optional ^° subject furnishes, of course, to our Confessionalists fresh
tabHshV^' standing-ground. If it is a matter of ecclesiastical
arrangement with which we have to deal, then, of course,
our Church has a right to make for its own members what
arrangements it pleases. But this plea, again, is an aban-
donment of its sacramental character, and leads them
into fresh difficulties. The principle, indeed, is true in
itself, and is logically sound as an answer to objections
against non-essentials, drawn from the silence of Scripture
and the absence of primitive sanction ; but if it is attempted
on the strength of the right thus inherent in the Church
to establish a practice as of divine obligation, and there-
fore essential, then it is clear that one claim negatives
the other. The logical result of pleading the authority
of the Church for a practice claiming, both in its origin
and results, to be divine, is that the claim is abandoned —

CANONICAL ARRANGEMENTS, 89

a see-saw argument, alternating between ecclesiastical
arrangement and divine obligation, is fatal to both. If it
owes its existence to mere ecclesiastical arrangement, it
cannot be recognised as a matter of divine appointment :
if it is a matter of divine obligation, it cannot fall witbin
tlie province of mere canonical arrangement : and there-
fore, it is of no gain to their canse to make out, either
that the early Church had a right to omit it, or that our
own Church has a right to enjoin it ; for, in either case,
there is a clear admission of the fact that it is human
and not divine, which deprives it of the place which they
would give it in God's scheme of salvation.

There are, however, two other points of view in which Two points

1 1 p 1 /-NT °° which

the language of the Church may seem to bear upon the our Church

mnv b6

question ; it may be taken as indicating the mind of our supposed
Church as to its being a divine ordinance for the remission spoken.
of human sm. This could only hold good if our Church
recognised it as of universal obligation, which is con-
fessedly not the case. Or it might make the practice
binding upon us as members of the Church, but this would
prove nothing as to its possessing any of those super-
natural properties and effects which the Confessionalists
attach to it.

I am not sure whether the question might not be held Xecessity
to be settled by these abstract considerations, but the case ing this in
of the Confessionalists depends so much on the assumption
that the practice which they advocate is the law of the
Church, and their chance of success depends so much on
the recognition of this assumption, that it is necessary to
examine it in detail.

And the Avay in which the matter is often handled
makes this all the more necessary. The use of language
which unreservedly invests it with divine powers, and presses
it on our acceptance as an ordinance of God, is mostly
confined to those Ultraists who think to carry their point
by uncompromising opinions and unflinching language.

CONFESSION.

Confession
at first
repre-
sented as
an ordi-
nance of
ourCliurch.

Mistake
herein.

The five
points
adduced
by Confes-
sionalists.

Men of more caution and less candour, and we may say of
more feeble logic, generally keep Ultraisms in the back-
ground, until tliey liave got their proselytes under the in-
fluence of their fascination by putting it before them in the
modified form,.as an ordinance of their Church ; and then,
when they have secured them, they gradually open it out
little by little, until the advisable, desirable, compassion-
ate, comfortable provision of tender Mother Church, oJ
which those who want it have a right to avail themselves^
passes into the divine ordinance for the remission of sins,
which no man can neglect without peril to his soul. At
first, however, the language of our Church is put in
the front, or rather the injunctions which they assume
to be contained therein : and therefore to this point 1
must now address myself.

And here, on the very point on which the Confes-
sionalists are positive even to arrogance — viz. that the
X3ractice they advocate is the law of our Church — it will, I
think, on examination appear they are utterly mistaken;
it will appear that the Auricular Confession they advocate
is not only not recognised as of universal or general, or even
occasional obligation, but that it is not recognised at all,
any more than it was in really primitive antiquity ; that
it is among the Mediseval corruptions which were excluded
at the Reformation; so that any clergyman, who endeavours
to restore it to our reformed system, is not acting in
harmony with the injunctions and directions and mind
of the Church, but disregarding and violating them both
in the letter and the spirit.

The Confessionalists adduce, as expressing the will of
the Church in favour of their Sacramental ordinance, the
Of&ce for the Visitation of the Sick — the last paragraph
in the first exhortation to the Holy Communion — a Canon
which provides for certain cases in which secret and hidden
sins have been confessed to a minister — a passage in a

LANGUAGE OF OUR CHURCH. 91

homily — and the form used in the ordination of priests.
These are the points to be considered.

Let us again lay down clearly what we are talking about. Auricular

1- , 1 . , -p . , ,-s, n Confession

1 tlimk 1 am not misrepresenting the Confessionalists' view as asserted
of our Church's teaching on the subject, when I say that fe^sioLi-""
they hold that our Prayer Book recognises a poAver given
to our priests of privately and personally forgiving sins by
a form of words; that this is the ordinary and most
sure means of pardon, which no man can safely or wisely
neglect ; and that private confession is so closely connected
with it as a necessary condition, that it partakes of its cha-
racter as a necessary means of pardon. Here we have two
points which the Confessionalists assume as determined
by the Church in their favour. First, the superior efficacy,
if not the absolute necessity, of the private forgiveness
of sins agamst God, by the judicial sentence privately
pronounced by a priest, carrying along with it God's
actual forgiveness of the sins in question, or declaring
that forgiveness as a>fait accompli ; secondly, the necessity
of private confession to the priest as an antecedent and
a condition thereof — an essential part of the supernatural
ordinance, an ingredient in the pardoning and cleansing
process. What we have to consider is, whether these
two points are recognised by our Church, first remarking
that the absence of such an ordinance in the early Church
creates an a priori probability against its being recognised
by our own.

When we turn to the Of&ce for the Visitation of the visitation
Sick, we find that confession of sins and absolution form
no part of the method ordinarily prescribed to the minister
in dealing with the sick man : he is not, in the first
instance, to hear the sick man confess his sins, but to
examine him whether he has truly repented of them. He
exhorts him to repentance — to examine himself as to his
state toward God and man, to condemn and accuse himself

92 CONFESSION.

toward God, and if necessary towards man, both being
parts of necessary repentance. That this examination is
not an exhortation to disclose his sins, we learn from the
last rubric, where in a certain case the man is to be
TheConfes moved to make a ' special confession ' of his sins, in case
spoken of, liis conscience is troubled with any weighty matter ; but
the Con-° ^^^u then this confession need not be that contended for
istf. shown ^y *^^ Confessionalists — part of the supernatural ordinance
by the f^j. pardon of sins made up of confession and absolution :
for it need not be followed by absolution : nor yet need
it be, vi terminorum, secret, for others may be priesent ;
indeed, the prayers rather suppose the presence of others
to pray with the priest and the sick man. But even here
the priest is not to urge him to seek and accept the remis-
sion of sins at his hand and voice : but he is to give
the sick man absolution only when he humbly and
earnestly desires it. These expressions, surely, mark a
reluctance and holding back as contemplated by the
Church, rather than any encouragement to it, far less any
suggestion of it, or any notion of its special benefit, far
less of its absolute necessity.
Formula of Further, the formula pronounced by the priest is not

absolution ; • -i o • i> ' p • n • • i

conceived oi as conveymg lorgiveness oi sins, lor in its
first clause this is specially prayed for by the priest as
* a gift from Christ. He does not regard it as ajDper-
taining to his authority, though he does so view absolu-
tion. Nor can the Church be suj^posed to view it as having
by the taken place on the pronouncing of the formula, for in
Fowlngthe the Very next prayer which the priest is directed to
if pro- '""^ ^^6? i^ ^ petition that God will not impute unto the sick
nounced. ujaii his former sins ; and it is worth noting that in this
prayer the man's repentance is assumed, yet forgiveness
is prayed for, as something yet unfulfilled; this clearly
marks that pardon or forgiveness which the Confessional-
ists hold to be consummated, or implied as consummated.

ABSOLUTION NOT FORGIVENESS. 93

in the utterance of the priest, has not yet been absolutely
given. The old precatory form (see page QQ) is retained ■
as far as the forgiveness of sin goes ; ^ while as far as
absolution goes, an absolute form is used. And indeed we
may observe en -passant that if the Church did believe that
our priests had this power of thus forgiving sin, it is incre-
dible that the seeking for and exercise thereof should
not be enjoined, as it is in the Eomish Church, as in-
dispensable, generally speaking, for all death-beds, instead
of being permitted only in special cases, and not in all of
these.

I have lately seen it advanced that this petition does not Confes-
affect the supposition that forgiveness has actually been notion that

' ' The prayer which immediately follows the prescribed form is, in feet,
the primitive prayer on which was founded the precatory form M'liich has been
giren to dying penitents for more than thirteen hundred years in the Western
Churches. This ancient absolution or reconciliation of a penitent near death
is not only found in the old formularies of the English Church, where it was
used long before the preceding indicative form was introduced, but in the
Sacramentary of Gelasius, a.d. 494 ; and for many centuries was commonly
used in the Churches of the West.' — Palmer, Or. Lit. ii. 226.

If anyone compares our form with that of the Sarum Missal given in
Palmer, he will see that the sentence in the Latin form, ' the remission of
sins having been received,' is omitted, and the conclusion of the prayer, 'admit
him to the sacrament of reconciliation,' is replaced by ' impute not unto him his
former sins : ' this also practically occurs in the present Eomish form (as
given in Guillois, ' Catechism,' iii. 342), which probably is an interpolated relic
of the old prayer, adopted at the change of private reconciliation to tlie
Church instead of public, after the abolition of the Paenitentiarius. If we
compare onr form with the Eomish form we find that in our prayer, 'putting
his full trust in His mercy,' spoken of as the ground of the petition for the
forgiveness of sins, evidently referring to the assumed effect of the formula
of absolution, does not occiir in the Eomish prayer.

The Eomanists (see Guillois, ' Explication du Catechism,' vol. iii. p. 342),
retain this prayer somewhat modified in the same conjunction -with the in-
dicative absolution, ' I absolve thee,' and therefore it might be lu-ged that as
the Eomish Chiirch uses this prayer, and at the same time recognises absolute
forgiveness of sins in absolution, so our Church may do the same. The answer
to this is, that the formal and direct teaching of the Eomish Church on this
point prevents this prayer having any bearing upon the point ; they use it
without being conscious that it furnishes a direct contradiction to their
teaching on absolution ; while, as in our own Church there is no such teaching,
the prayer, of course, has its natural and logical bearing on the preceding
formula.

94 CONFESSION.

the prayer wanted ill the absolvino' formula: inasmuc'i as it is oiilv

IS otiose, ^ o ' J

answered a prayer that God would ratify what the priest has done.

passages But when we compare the language of our Church, in

Prayer cases wliere certain effects are held to attend on, or rather
to be realised in, certain acts or forms, we find that no
such prayer for divine ratification is attached, but thanks
given to God for the benefit received ; so in the Baptismal
Service we find ' seeing that this child is regenerate '
(whatever that may mean), *let us give thanks,' and then,
in the following prayer, the regeneration is assumed as a
fait accoTYijpli. So in the marriage ceremony there is no
prayer for the ratification of the act of the minister ; nor
yet in the ordination of deacons or priests or the consecra-
tion of bishops. And in the Holy Communion, before the
administration, there is a prayer that we may eat His
Flesh and drink His Blood ; then m one of the prayers of
the post-Communion we thank God that this has been
done.

On other The position is untenable on more grounds than one :

grounds. ^ =

Either the forgiveness pronounced by the priest is perfect
and complete — is ipso facto ratified in heaven, as indeed
the terms of the promise taken in the Confessionalist
sense imply, and then the prayer that God would do that
which has already been done, is mere surplusage; or it must
have been incomplete, and then it would not have been
actual forgiveness, but only possible forgiveness : then
the literal sense of our Lord's words, for which the Con-
fessionalists so stoutly contend, is negatived, for in these,
taken literally, the pronouncing and the ratification are
coincident. Again, if it is necessary that such ratification
should be prayed for, forgiveness is not absolutely given,
but only contingently ; and contingent forgiveness is, in
reality, only that declaration of God's will ' and purpose

* Cyprian de Lapsis, p. 130, 'adeo uon omne quod petitur in prsejudicio pe-
tentis est, sed in arl itrlo dantis,'

ANCIENT PRECATORY FORM. 95

set forth in the Gospel, which I have maintained to be the
essence of absolution. Nor could the ancient iuvocative,
or the still more ancient precatory, form be viewed as a
prayer for the ratification of any sacerdotal formula, inas-
much as no such sacerdotal formula existed. In fact, the Ancient
ancient forms seem to settle beyond a doubt that any abso- ^"""''
lution pronounced by a priest from sins as against God, did
not imply or convey the actual forgiveness thereof. It was
nothing more than the setting before the sinner, in an
impressive and direct form, the ambassadorial message of
the possibility, or rather certainty, of being pardoned on
repentance— the setting forth God's unlimited mercy as
attainable by those for whom he was praying. And we
may observe (though this rather belongs to another part
of my subject), that as the invocative form of absolution
from private sins was, from the date of its introduction into
the Church up to the twelfth century, exclusively used, it
exactly defines the nature and extent of the ministry which indicates
the Church practically believed to be committed to the t,ons"fth'e
priesthood in dealing with sin as against God. If the Ce°s^
commission given by our Lord had been, in the early
Church, conceived to convey actual forgiveness of such
sins, it is clear that the formula would have been shaped
to express forgiveness as 21. fait accompli, and not as a pos-
sibility or a promise wished for or invoked ; in fact, when
the modern notion of the judicial office of each individual
priest had been developed and established, the formula
was so shaped, and ' tribuat tibi Deus remissionem et ahsolu-
tionem ' was changed into ' Ego te ahsolvo.' Our Church,
retaining (perhaps unfortunately) this indicative form in
the visitation to the sick, has guarded, as we shall see
presently, against the danger of being supposed to favour
the erroneous doctrine, by putting into the mouth of the
priest in the morning service a formula of absolution
simply declaratory of God's general mercy, as well as by

96 CONFESSIOy.

retaining in the Communion Service the invocative form,
and bj the prayer after the absolution in the Visitation
Service.
What are If, then, ' I absolve thee from thy sins ' does not convey

the results „ . . • n • i t • mi •

of ' I ab- forgiveness or nou-miputatiou of sins, vv^hat does it ? This
turns on the meaning and force of the word ' absolve.' To
ascertain this we cannot do better than refer to some
instance of the actual exercise of, and the results supposed
to follow on, the power implied in this word. This we
find in the absolution which follows the general confession
in our morning and evening services — a full consideration
of the nature of which I must defer to its proper place,
when I consider more particularly the powers exercised
in absolution (page 1 76) ; suffice now to remind my readers
that this power is there exercised by an authoritative de-
claration of God's unlimited mercy as being within the
reach of all who repent and believe. So far from the
forgiveness of sins being viewed as having actually taken
place by virtue of the priest's words, there follows a
petition that God ' will grant us true repentance,' with-
out which forgiveness does not take place. So here in
the words ' I absolve thee ' there must be an exercise
of the same power in the same way, mutatis mutandis,
that is, it must be a declaration of God's unlimited
mercy. His promises of actual pardon, not actual pardon
itself; with a special application of that promise to a
man whose conscience is burdened with a sin so weighty
that he fears that it is too heinous for God's mercy. ^
The result must be essentially the same ; the conscience

' There seems to be an inherent flaw in alisolntion if taken as equivalent
to forgiveness of sins. Why cannot a repentant sinner draw comfort from
God's own promise ? Is it not because his sins prevent him from believing in
God's mercy? If so, how can absolution profit him without faith? What
the repentant man wants, and what the priest has to create in him, is faith in
Christ's promises ; what the Confessionalists create is faith in the power of the
priest. But faith in llio priest's power canaot compensate for want of faith in
Christ's promises.

ABSOLUTION AND PARDON. 97

is relieved bj the declaration of God's ambassador that bis
sins are not what he fears they are, and he is set free from'
the bonds wherein his sin is keeping him back from God's
promises; but the thing promised — the forgiveness or non-
imputation of sins — is made the subject of a special prayer,
as for something not yet accomplished. Thus, the abso-
lution which sometimes follows this special Confession
not reaching to the actual forgiveness of sin, the Confes-
sion itself is not part of any such ordinance as the Confes-
sionalists pretend. The Confession, which they teach, is
not recognised even in the place in which they are most
confident of its recognition.

This leads us immediately to the distinction between Distinftion
pardon and absolution : between remission of sins by God paifion aii.i
and remission of sins by man. These are not identical,
though in a particular combination so closely united that
in other combinations the distinction has been lost sight
of. The former is the remission of the guilt and punish-
ment of the sin by God — its penal consequences. The
latter, absolution, is the^ loosing and unbinding, by the
Gospel message of remission, the conscience from the
fear and despair with which the notion of a sin being
unpardonable weighs down the soul, and keeps it bade
from God and from amendment of life — the moral con-
sequences of sin. When God is spoken of, pardon and
absolution — pardon and peace — go together ; as ' He par-
doneth and absolveth all them that truly repent,' &c. ;
that ' they, whose consciences by sin are accused, by Thy
merciful pardon may be absolved ; ' ' Grant unto thy faith-
ful people pardon and peace,' and other expressions of the
same sort. So the old invocative form runs, ' May God

' Augustin, Homil. 352, De Util. Psen. ' Absolution freeing him from the
bonds of the sins which he has committed.' Note on Tertullian, p. 394. St.
Ambrose de Psenit, ii. 6. ' Confession (to God) looses the bonds of sins.' Note
on Tertullian, p. 384.

98 CONFESSIOl^.

give you remission and absolution.' Absolution comes
from, or in, pardon : but tbat is a totally different pro-
position from the assertion tliat pardon comes by abso-
lution, wbich is implied in the theory that when a priest
absolves he pardons. The difference is recognised in
the Visitation of the Sick, where absolution is spoken
of as a power committed to the Church, but the forgive-
ness of sins as the prerogative of Jesus Christ : as well
as in that prayer in the Visitation ofl&ce, which, after
absolution, speaks of all former sins as yet to be par-
doned, • and we shall presently see that the forgiveness
of sins is not recognised as identical with, or even an
absolute residt of, the other forms of absolution, which are
by our Church put into the mouths of the priest.

We may further remark, that if absolution is restricted
to the technical proclamation or declaration couched in a
form of words used by a minister commissioned to use
them, then the man to whom this form of words is used
would be said to receive absolution (not forgiveness) ; and
where no such form of words is used, but some one of the
other methods applied, then the man would be said to re-
ceive, not absolution, but the benefit of absolution : that
is, that realisation of God's mercy as applicable to his
sins, which sets his soul free from the fears which are
keeping him from God.
Conclusion If, then, we review all that I have said on the form in

Visitation the Visitation of the Sick, the conclusion we shall come to
^^^^^- ^jii -^e, that it lends no sanction to the theory of sacra-
mental Confession as set out above (pages 19 and 91), for the
Church evidently views the confession it spealcs of as not
necessarily private, or made with a view to absolution, and
does not view absolution as conveying pardon.

■ This is the view of Thomas Aquinas on this point — ' it is not sufficient
to say " may God give you remission or absolution " ' (he is speaking of the old
form), ' because by these words the priest does not signify that absolution ' (he
means forgiveness of sins) ' has taken place, but asks that it may take place.'
See Usher, p. 115, note 97.

SPECIAL CASES NO PRECEDENT. 99

For, if pardon is not lield to be conveyed, it follows Tiie Ccn-
as a matter of course tliat tliere is therein no recog- therein
nition of sacramental Confession, that is, of Confession be more
as part of a sacrament, wherein and whereby forgive- fideac^°"'
ness of sins is ijpso facto, or ijpso verbo, conveyed to the
sonl. In fact the Confession here spoken of does not, as
a general rule (that is except where absolution follows)
exceed that natural method of relieving the conscience
which I have termed Confidence, in order to distinguish
it from Confession with a view to absolution; it need not
be followed by absolution at all, if this method of relieving
the conscience satisfies the patient: but where it does not
so satisfy him, then what is technically called absolution
is to be given : but this, as I have shown before, is not
forgiveness of sins, and therefore there is herein no
sacramental or auricular Confession, as the Confession-
alists set it forth.

Before I proceed with this subject I wish to ask mv ^''^''"■''ns of

^ .... these oil

readers to keep these essential differences in mind as bear- ti;e popuhu-

view.

ing on the popular mistake of the Coufessionalist theory
being recognised in some cases, though not in all ; in other
words, the difference which is so commonly drawn, and
that even by high authorities, between habitual and
occasional Confession — admitting the one, while denying
the other.

And even if it could be made out that the Church
did enjoin the special Confession with a definite view to
that absolution — which, as we have shown above, is not
the case — and if the absolution thus pronounced was an
absolute sentence of the sins being pardoned coincidently
with the words being pronounced — which also, we have
seen above, it is not — yet supposing such a case of sa-
cramental Confession to be established, it would not furnish Fumisii no
the least analogy for other cases in which all the essential or*^anaioliy
particulars are different : that is, the cases, for which the s"^i, j^" ''"'

H 2

100 CONFESSION.

every-day Confessionalists think, or pretend to think, they can find
in it a sanction and a precedent. I need hardly point out
the difference between the sick man lying in extremis,
with some heavy sin on his conscience, with but little
time, and possibly but little power, to realise mentally
the promises contained in God's word, to which he has
perhaps, for many years of his life closed his eyes and
ears, and the young pious girl or boy in health and
strength ; or even a conscience-stricken sinner, with,
humanly speaking, abundance of time, and abundance of
power, to realise God's promises set forth in God's word,
or proclaimed to him by the Church in our daily services
and formal teaching. The circumstances which justify
the use of the personal formula of absolution in the one
do not exist in the other. And of course the precedent
and the analogy for sacramental Confession in every-day
life fail still more utterly, when the confession and abso-
lution, permitted in the Visitation office, are viewed as
being nothing more than we have shown them to be.
The suggestion to a dying man that if his conscience is
burdened, he should relieve his soul by confiding its secret
to his spiritual pastor, or if he cannot thus find relief,
that he may receive a personal and authoritative assurance
from God's minister that his sins do not bind him as he

Differences fears — is a totally different thing from telling, as these

betweea

them. Confessionalists tell young girls and boys that their sins

may be beyond the ordinary methods of God's mercy, that
the only, or the best, and the surest way of finding pardon
and being sure of it — the only safe preparation for the
Holy Communion — is a disclosure to a priest of every sin
they have ever committed — or fancy they may have com-
mitted— as an essential part and condition of a solemn
sacramental conveyance of actual pardon, through words
spoken by the priest, standing in the person of God and
forgiving sins, with the same power as God Himself would

EXHORTATION TO THE HOLY COMMUNION. 101

exercise, if He were again to descend upon earth. It shows
great trust in the slovenly acquiescence of the popular
mind when one is urged as a precedent for, or as the
same in kind with, the other.

Even if these points of difference did not forbid the a different

method

arguing from the one to the other, no one would be prescribed
justified in suggesting this special Confession, and applying hortation
absolution to the relief of the conscience in ordinary < ases : Holy Com-
for in the other case in which the Church recommends
the having recourse to a spiritual person, a perfectly
different method is prescribed ; and this brings me to the
consideration of the well-known paragraph at the end of
the first exhortation to the Holy Communion, which has
been a stronghold of the Confessionalist position, ever
since the revival of the practice ; not only as seemingly
giving them a locus standi, but as, perplexing those who
would otherwise have opposed the system unreservedly.

102

CONFESSION.

CHAPTER IX.

Exhortation to Holy Communion— Wrongly claimed by Confessionalists as de-
cisive in tlieir Favour — The best and indispensable Preparation set forth
in the preceding Paragraphs — Case in which Confidence is recommended —
estate of the Man's Mind — ^Wliat he is directed to do — The Eemedy not Ab-
solution, but the Ministry of God's Word conveying the Benefit of Absolution

Directions clear and precise, to the utter Exclusion of any Sacerdotal Action

Why and how diiferent Interpretation has been admitted — Counter-
balanced by the Fact of the Interpretation put upon it by general Usage.

Key of the Confessionalist Position — Benefit supposed to be meaningless — Abso-
lution supposed to denote the Exercise of the Power of Forgiveness.

Exhortation may be road by a Minister — Confessionalist Argimient on the use
of this Term — Changes in the Terms in this Sentence — Other Alterations —
Prayer Books of 1549 (1652), 1 559— As revised in 1662— All these Altera-
tions, Additions, Omissions, Point the same Way — Why ' Absolution ' was
chan"-ed into ' Benefit of Absolution ' — Attempt of Laud to introduce a
Formula of Absolution — Meaning of the Term ' Ministry of Word ' — Lan-
guage of Homily — Passage tells against the Confessionalists, and not for
tliem No Clergyman is here authorised to pronounce any Form of Abso-
lution—Canon of 1603— Language of Homily.

This
wrongly
claimed by
the Con-
fessional
ists.

It is perfectly incredible tliat the Medisevalists should
have been allowed, unchallenged, to claim this passage as
sanctioning, and even enjoining. Sacramental Confession
and Absolution. It is astonishing that so many sound
men should have accepted their ruling, and felt themselves
thereby precluded from opposing them in this point as
decidedly and fully as they wished. Many, probably, will
be, at first, startled by the position which I have taken
up, and yet I have no doubt that it is the sound one :
and I must request the patient attention of my readers
while I lay before them the grounds on which I ask them
to discard as untenable that which hitherto they may

ORDINARY PREPARATION ENJOINED. 103

have received as undoubted. I am encouraged in tins,
by many persons having received with ready, and even
grateful, acceptance a solution on which at first they
looked with sus^^icion.

I must first again ask my readers' attention to the Method
fact that, whatever be the method prescribed in the con- coinnunded
eluding paragraph, it is not represented as the best, or firstVr
recommended as the one to be usually practised. ^'^**'

It must be observed, that in the exhortation to the F-xhorta-
Holy Communion, the clearest directions are given as to Holy Com-
the method of preparation to be pursued in ordinary cases, on'iy'recog-
where, if ever, it might be expected, auricular confes- "oMidls-
sion, if it were a general or the best rule, would have thlVai-
been prescribed or recommended. Nor is there any "hoi™'''
case in which this method is not enjoined. The way and
means thereto is — self-examination — not examination by a
priest: to examine our own lives and conversations by
the rule of God's commandments — not by the questions
put to us by a priest: to humbly confess ourselves to
God — not to the priest : to resolve within ourselves to
amend our lives — not to have our amendment dictated to
us by a priest: penance finding no place at all, except
so far as our offences are not only against God, but also
against our neighbour : ' then, we are to reconcile our-
selves to him, and to make such reparation as is in our
power. It is quite clear that there is not here one word
of confession to man, except in the sense and on the occa-
sion, which T contend is the reasonable interpretation
of the passage in St. James.

Now, the man who thus contents himself with the Language
method prescribed by his Church, is, according to the sionaiists
Confessionalists, utterly in the wrong; he ignores the *'" ^'''

' The distinction between sins as against God and sins as against man (see
p. 65), is clearly recognised liere.

104

CONFESSION.

Case ill
whicli it is
recom-
mended.

Directions
ill the ex-
liortation.

plain directions of his Church, the plain commands of
the Bible, sets at naught Christ's commission to His
clergy, Christ's provision for man's forgiveness, and is
unable to feel that sure trust in God's mercy which is
the result of the consciousness of true repentance combined
with a lively faith.

But in some cases, a man of weak faith and timid
conscience, though thus prepared — though these ordinary
and necessary means have been all gone through — is un-
able to have that full trust in God's mercy, without which
it is requisite that no man should come to the Holy Com-
munion ; and without which repentance, however sincere
and fruitful, will not relieve a conscience from the chains
in which his sin has bound it, inasmuch as, lacking faith,
it does not bring with it any assurance of pardon : and
this it is which troubles his mind ; he cannot bring him-
self to believe that his sins can be pardoned, though he
has repented of them; that God's mercy is greater than
his provocation. In consequence of this inadequate view
of God's mercy, he has not that full trust in it, without
which his preparation, however complete in all its other
parts, does not make him fit to approach the Lord's table.
This is his grief. And what is he to do ? To whom is
he to go ? To a priest in the Confessionalist sense of the
word, that is, a clergyman looked at in a sacerdotal charac-
ter, and as invested with a sacerdotal power of forgiving
sins — being as God on earth? No, but to a clergyman
looked at as a ' minister of God's word.' And what is he to
do when he comes to this minister? Is he to confess all
his secret sins, small and great, or any particular sin,
kneeling at his feet as an act of discipline and penitence,
an act of religion, the same in kind as confession of sins
to God ? No — but to open his particular grief, namely,
that though he has repented and confessed his sins to God,
he is unable to have a full trust in God's mere v. And

ANALYSIS OF THE PASSAGE. 105

wliat is the minister to do ? To suggest a special Confes-
sion ? there is no such direction. To question him as to
all the details and particulars of the sin, or of his life, or
as to his having committed any of the sins which, through
the weakness and wickedness of human nature, may pos-
sibly enter into human imagination ? I think not — this
would be to burden and defile a conscience, not relieve
and cleanse it ; to increase the distrust in God's promises,
to aggravate the morbid state which makes the ordinary
method of preparation incomplete for him. Such a practice
seems to me to be founded on a misconception of our
Lord's message to sinners, and the office of Lhe messengers
of that message. Or is the minister to pronounce a form
of absolution, whereby the man, trusting in the priest's
power, instead of Christ's invitation and the words of the
Spirit, may be reassured ? I think not — for then he would,
as Cyprian says in reference to this very matter, fall under
the sentence, ' Cursed be he that puts his trust in man.'
Nor is it so directed. No — the minister is to use the
ministry of God's word, the * comfortable salve of God's
word,' as the Homily calls it. He is to bring before him
as a.pplicable to his case, suitable passages of Scripture,
such as the parable of the prodigal son, or the four sen-
tences after the invocative absolution in the Communion
service or the like declarations or illustrations of God's
unlimited mercy in Christ. And what does the man re-
ceive at the minister's hands ? Not a formal absolution
— for there is not, as in all other cases of such absolution,
a formula put into the priest's mouth— but the benefit
of absolution : that benefit which, under the modern Medi-
seval system, absolution, in the technical sense of a decla-
ratory, prescribed formula, professes to give : in one word,
comfort ; and the minister is to give him, if he needs it,
ghostly counsel and advice, to the quieting of his con-
science and the avoiding of that scruple and doubtfulnebs

106 CONFESSION.

which, arising from a conscience disquieted by heinous
sin, made him fear that he was out of the pale of God's
mercy: this being-, as I said before, the grief from
which relief is sought. Not a word about the forgive-
ness of sins, or penance, or direction, in the technical
sense of the word. Nothing can be clearer or more
precise.

Nothing can be clearer or more precise — every word
and every notion point the same way. The particular
grief to be opened — the status of the person to be applied
to — what is to be sought from him — how it is to be ad-
ministered— all point the same way, to the utter exclusion
of any sacerdotal action, any formula of absolution : clearly
laying down the ministry of God's Holy Word to the re-
pentant man, as the source whence he is to receive com-
fort.
How dif- But anyone may very reasonably ask. How is it that

terpretation this passage lias, especially of late, received a different
admitted, interpretation? The answer is, that the word 'absolu-
tion ' was taken as the emphatic word of the sentence, and
allowed to give the clue to its meaning ; thus at first
sight it seems to imply that which the Confessionalists and
Sacerdotalists contend for. In fact, for very many years
the whole thing was so obsolete that few, unless writing
professedly upon it, troubled themselves much about it ;
and even those who noticed it in their writings, rather
as a matter of traditional polemics against the Roma-
nists on one side, or the Puritans on the other, did not
attach any very clear or definite meaning to it. The
notion of sacramental or auricular Confession was so
contrary to the theory and the practice even of men who
thought most about religion, that they were content to let
the passage pass with a very cursory and vague notice ; not
caring formally to guard or protest against a meaning
being put upon it, contrary to what it received from general

GENERAL USAGE AS INTERPRETING IT. 107

opinion and usage. Thus, when the Confessionalists were

seeking about how to revive the ante as well as anti -

Reformation practice of auricular Confession, they were
able by a dexterous and bold stroke to seize on this
passage, and, appropriating it to themselves by the weight
of their assumptions, to give it a force which the words,
read carelessly, seem to convey, but which we have
seen that every word really refutes and excludes.

But even if the fact of the acquiescence of the present Counter-
generation in the Ritualistic interpretation is in its favour, geuwai ^
then the fact of so many former generations having never
regarded it in this light, or recognised absolution as an
element in the preparation of the Holy Communion, is
still, at the least, as strongly against it. U o within th e
last few years, and previously to the modern Confessionalist
revival, it has not, at least in the sense in which the
Ritualists understand it, been generally acted upon as a
practical part in the preparation for the Lord's Supper ; ^
nor in the books of preparation was it usually men-
tioned or recommended. Self-examination is constantly
insisted upon, recourse to a clergyman in exceptional
cases occasionally, formal absolution very seldom, if ever.

The key of the Confessionalists' position in this ^vssumed
passage is, as I said above, the word ' absolution ' (the ^'^'^'fj ?^*|J'f
word ' benefit ' being supposed to be simply otiose), denoting ^'^^"tio" '
the employment of some formula or other as an exercise
of a priestly power of privately forgiving sins, supposed
to be conferred at ordination.

Now, without stopping to enquire, or even to express E^horta-
an opinion, whether this power is so conferred or not, it is t'"" need

i- ' ^ ' not be read

placed beyond a doubt that it is not supposed to be exer- ^y " priest,
cised in this passage by the fact that it is expressly stated
that the ministration, whatever it is, maij be exercised by .

' For the Primitive Preparation for Holy Coramuuion, see Note on Tcrtul-
liau, p. 403.

108 CONFESSION.

the third order of the clergy to whom the priestly power
(whatever it is) is not committed in ordination : for the ex-
hortation may be read by a minister. Of course it is
easy to say that the word minister here signifies priest.
One Confessioualist writer, whether instinctively or dis-
honestly, uses, in explaining the passage, the word

* priest' instead of 'minister; ' itshowsthat he felt the
word priest was essential to his point, and so it is : in all
other cases of absolution being pronounced the word

* priest' is used, even when 'minister' is used on both
sides of it. It is true that a priest is a minister : but
it is laid down and accepted by Confessionalists, if it suits
their purpose, that when the exercise of sacerdotal powers
conferred on the second order of the clergy is supposed to
be meant, the word priest is always used.' I will not stop
to enquire whether this is so or not, contenting myself
with remarking, en passant, that assuming it to be true, it
settles nothing as to what these conferred powers are,
which is the real point to be presently considered. At
present, I am willing to accept what they say about the
word, as at the very least binding on those who propound
it ; and I will call my readers' attention to the decisive

'Priest' fact that the word 'priest' originally stood in the rubric

changed to

'Minister.' in the first Book of King Edward VI. In 15c 9 ' curate ' is
substituted for priest in the rubric prefixed to this exhorta-
tion— curate of course being either deacon or priest, as in
the prayer for all bishops and curates, ' priest ' still stand-

' My readers will detect the usual Confessioualist fallacy in their reasoning
on this point. Instead of proving the point necessary to their position, they
prove another, and then assume the other as proved. The point to be proved
is that the Church regards the second order of ministers as invested with
sacerdotal powers ; and this might be done either by proving that the second
order of ministers are so regarded, or that the functions entrusted to them are
sacerdotal ; instead of which they prove that certain powers are confined to
the second order of the clergy, and draw from this first one conclusion, then
the other ; arguing in a sort of double circle that the functions are sacerdotal,
because committed to priests, and that our own is a sacerdotal priesthood,
because these sacerdotal functions are assigned to them.

MAY BE READ BY A DEACON. 109

ing in the rubric before the exhortation in the service. In
1662 the ' curate ' was struck out, and the word ' minister '
substituted, and not 'priest' restored, as might have
been reasonably expected, out of the second rubric ; while
at the same revision, in the rubric for the absolution
at morning and evening prayer, the word ' minister ' was
struck out, and the word Spriest' substituted. It is
scarcely possible to have a more decisive proof of the force
of the word ' minister ' in this exhortation than the com-
bined light thrown on it by these two alterations.

But we have not yet done with alterations. There father

11 1 • n 1 changes,

were several such made m the passage mostly m (1552)
1559, probjjbly to guard against the very practice which the
Confessionalists try to fasten on it. Every expression
in favour of the Medisevalist system of confession, which
clung like ivy to a tree after its roots had been cut, was
struck out. I give the passage as it stood, in the Prayer
Book of 1549: 'And if there be any of you whose
conscience is troubled and grieved in anything,
lacking comfort or counsel, let him come to
me, or to some other discreet or learned priest,
taught in the law of God, and confess and open,
his sin and grief secretly, that he may receive
such ghostly counsel, advice, and comfort, that
his conscience may be relieved, and that of us
(as of the ministers of God and of the Church),
he may receive comfort and absolution, to the
satisfaction of his mind, and avoiding of all
scruple and doubtfulness. Requiring such as
shall be satisfied with a general Confession not
to be offended with them, that do use to their
further satisfying, the auricular and secret
confession to the priest: nor those also which
think it needful and convenient for the quiet
of their own consciences particularly to open

no CONFESSION.

their sins to the priest, to be offended with
them that are satisfied with their humble con-
fession to God, and a general confession to the
Church.'

Compare this with that of (1552) 1559: *And be-
cause it is requisite that no man should come
to the Holy Communion but with a full trust
in God's mercy, and with a quiet conscience:
therefore, if there be any of you, who by this
means cannot quiet his own conscience herein,
but requireth further comfort or counsel, let
him come to me, or to some other discreet and
learned minister of God's word, and open his
grief; that by the ministry of God's holy word,
he may receive comfort and the benefit of ab-
solution, together with ghostly counsel and
advice, to the quieting of his conscience, and
avoiding of all scruple and donbtfulness.'
Compari- When WO Compare the old form with the later one, we

son of the

two foims. find alterations— omissions — additions ; all pointing the
same way. It will be seen at a glance that in the old
one, the grief is not specified ; it is any grief, any trouble
of conscience ; in the present form it is the definite grief
of not having a full trust in God's mercy, and the distur-
bance of conscience consequent thereon. In the old form
the person to be applied to is a priest, now it is a
minister of God's Word; there he is to confess
his sins; here to open a particular grief above de-
fined; there he is to do it secretly, here this injunction
is omitted — there he is to seek the relief by the formal
sentence of the minister of God and the Church, as
given in the rubric in the Visitation service in Edward
VI. 's first book, ' and the same form of absolution shall he
iisecl in all 'private Confession ; ' here from the minister of
God's Word, hj the ministry of that Word; there he

ALL POINT THE SAME WAY. Ill

is to receive absolution, here the benefit of absolu-
tion. There we find added a direct recognition of
auricular confession, and an exhortation not to speak
against it ; here this is omitted ; in short the only point
in which the old form, which has been thus altered,
differs from the revived Medisevalistic theory, is that
Confession is not definitely spoken of as a discipline as in
the modern school. It need not be said that the fact of
these alterations has a direct bearing on the meaning of
the passage, and would make the interpretation I have
suggested almost unavoidable, even were the terms of the
change in themselves less express and definite.

Turning now to the revision of 1662 — the word ' curate '
in the rubric, 1559 (formerly, 1549, 'priest'), is altered to
* minister,' and the word ' comfort ' before * the benefit of
absolution is ' struck out, for the simple reason, that the
benefit of absolution being comfort, it is tautology to
keep both words, unless by the ' benefit of absolution '
was meant technical absolution, and not the results held
to follow on it; so that the striking out of ' comfort and'
indirectly throws light on the meaning of ' benefit of ab-
solution.'

I do not think that anyone who really looks into ' Benefit of

absolu-

the subject will be inclined to accept the suggestion that tion.'
the phrase ' benefit of absolution ' is simply a periphrasis
for ' absolution ; ' if so, why was it altered ? One can
understand a person writing originally, ' benefit of abso-
lution ' and then shortening it into ' absolution,' but we
cannot understand a person altering * absolution ' into
' benefit of absolution ' without some definite reason.
Why — contrary to the rule discernible in the other altera-
tions— is the longer form preferred to the shorter ? The
clue to the change is, I think, found in the fact that in
every alteration some element of auricular confession and
sacramental absolution is excluded. The reason for the

112 CONFESSION.

Why ' ab- alteration of ' absolution ' into * the benefit of absolution '

s-olution

was altered is clear onough, when we consider that the new method

into ' the

benefit of prescribed — the ministry of God's Word, not the ministry

absolu-
tion.' of absolution — actually and definitely excludes absolution

in its technical sense — especially when contrasted with
the formal act of priestly power, prescribed by the Visi-
tation Office rubric of 1549. When this formula was
abrogated, the alteration became absolutely necessary ;
while it was no less necessary to mark that the result of
this ministry of God's Word was the same as that sup-
posed formerly to result from absolution ; that they who
were comforted by the ministry of God's Word receive the
benefit which absolution had been supposed to bring.
The method is clearly marked out — is it absolution ? No.
The result is clearly marked out — is it the same ? Yes.*
I would ask, in what other words or phrase could this
difference of method and identity of result have been
equally well expressed ? ^ Besides which it is remarkable

• The following anecdote illustrates the benefit received by the minis-
try of God's Word, as identical with that held to.be given by absolu-
tion. When Bishop Butler was on his death-bed he called for his chaplain
and said, 'Though I have endeavoured to avoid sin, and to please God to the
uttermost of my power, yet, from the consciousness of perpetual infirmities, I
am afraid to die.' ' My lord,' said the chaplain, ' you have forgotten that
Jesus Christ is a Saviour.' ' True,' was the answer, ' but how shall I know
that He is a Saviour to me ? ' ' My lord, it is -vvritten, " him that cometh to me
will I in no wise cast out." ' ' True,' said the Bishop ; ' and I am surprised that
tliough I have read that Scripture a thousand times, I never felt its virtue till
this moment, and now I die happy.'

^ The non-otiose use of the term benefit to express, not the thing itself
viewed in its beneficial aspect, but the beneficial effects attached to the thing,
is illustrated by the obsolete legal term, benefit of clergy ; that is, the benefit
enjoyed by being clerks ; and we find it also in a passage in ' Macbeth,' act v.
sc. 1 : A great perturbation of nature, to receive at once the benefit of sleep atid
do the effects of watching. And Wheatley, ch. xi. 5, p. 437, recognises this in-
terpretation of the passage, though I was not aware of this till it has impressed
itself on my own mind as the only one consistent with the change of ' absolution '
into 'benefit of absolution' taken in connection with the other coincident
changes to which I have called the reader's attention. Usher also, p. 110,
says : ' That the Church might pray for them, and impart the benefit of abso-
lution unto them.' The Confessionalists pretend that the phrase is taken from
an obscure Council in Spain, whence Bonner introduced it into his writings ;

BENEFIT OF ABSOLUTION. 113

that Laud, conscious of the bearing of this passage against
the Media3valisni which he was trying to re-introduce,
proposed to get rid of it by adding after 'absolution'
* according to the form prescribed in the Visitation
service ; ' an attempt in which it need hardly be added he
failed. He evidently wished to restore the formula pre-
scribed in Edward VI. 's first book to be used in all cases
of private confession. The Confessionalists have to ex-
plain why this was omitted, if, as they say, the practice
was intended to continue.

The Confessionalists sometimes try to interpret ' the
ministry of the Word ' as meaning the ministry men-
tioned in the Word; that is, the priestly office.^ It may

but my readers will judge whether the Reformers were likely to adopt a phrase
from Bonner, except to use it in a sense different from that in which he used
it. He probably meant to call attention to the notion that there was a definite
benefit attributed in the Eomish system to absolution — they may have taken
the words from him to indicate that the same benefit resulted from the ministry
of God's Word as from formal absolution.

' The terms in which this expression is treated of by the Confessionalists,
is a remarkable instance of the way in which they try to throw dust into their
readers' eyes. ' It nuiy be useful to obstrve that the Ministry of God's Word
^ does not mean the reading of exhortations from Scripture, hit the exercise of the
' Ministerial Office, which, among other designations, is termed the Ministry of
'the Word.' Acts vi. 4. (Gray's Confession.) 'May be useful'!! as if it
were a trifle scarcely worth notice. It would have been a good deal more true
if it had been said, ' It is absolutely necessary to our in terjjr elation, that the
' words Ministry of God's Word shall not be taken to mean, ^r.' Of course
' the ministiy of the word' in the Acts cannot mean the reading of the New
Testament Scriptures — any more than it can mean the ministerial office men-
tioned therein — for these Scriptures were not then in existence ; but it may, or
rather does, mean the Ministry of the Word which God spake through Christ,
which was preached by the Apostles, and afterwards embodied in the New
Testament. From the Confessionalist interpretation it would follow that
prayer was no part of the Apostolic Office. Another writer boldly asserts it is
a technical term used in Scripture to express the ministerial office. He must
have been hard put to it to get rid of its natural and obvious sense, when be
assumes that a term used only once can be a technical term. A technical term
is a word in common use in some particular art or science. But even if it were
what they say it is, there would be no proof that this Ministerial Office was
the sacerdotal power claimed by this school. Why should it not be used to
denote the ministration of the word and sacraments (see page 171)? It is ob-
servable that in the document lately put forth in the 'Times' the 'ministry' of
the Sacraments is spoken of. Again, the clergyman is to be consulted as the

114 CONFESSION.

be true tliat when the word is used absolutely, or in con-
nection with words implying persons or institutions, it
Meanina; of signifies an office, performed in the service of those per-
ofGoIi's'^ sons or institutions, as when St. Paul speaks of himself as
Word.' p^^|. -j^i-Q ^i^g ministry ; or of the ministry of the saints.
But in conjunction with other words — and I think it is
not too much to say that this is the case with all words
which are capable of such an interpretation — it means
the ministering that which is signified hj the words
joined to it, as where the Apostles gave themselves to the
ministry of the Word and to prayer ; so here it means
The minis- that particular part of that clerical office. If the mean-
Goci'sWord ing contended for by the Ritualists was the one intended
or ospe . ^^ ^^^ framers of the passage, there can be no reason
why the words ' of us as the ministers of God and the
Church ' should have been struck out, only to substitute
the phrase ' ministry of God's Word,' used in a very un-
usual sense. The Homily of Repentance, Part II., indi-
cates, I think, the sense in which our Church intends it to
be used, ' I do not say hut that if any do feel themselves
troubled in conscience they may repair to their learned curate
or pastor, or to some other godly man, and shoiv the trouble
and doubt of their conscience to him, that they may receive at
their hands the comfortable salve of God's Word.' ^
Results of I am inclined to hope and to think, that anyone who

of^thi's'pas- has followcd me through my analysis and examination of
Exhorta-^ tliis passagc, SO triumphantly pressed by the Confession-
*'°°' alists as setting the matter beyond doubt, will see that it

does indeed set it beyond doubt, but exactly in a different
way to what has been assumed. I do not, indeed, suppose
that the Confessionalist school will admit that I am right.
It is seldom that those who have taken a decided view of

Minister of God's "Word, and not as priest : and if the ' Minister of God's
Word' is merely a periplirasis for 'priest,' why is the long phrase substituted
for the single word ?
» Homilies, p. 489.

RULE PRESCRIBED. 115

any subiect from an offhand superficial glance, without
condescending either to test it or support it by analysis
and argument, will listen to anything advanced on the
other side ; but my object is to show those whom the Con-
fessionalists dazzle by flourishing this weapon m their
face, that they may easily wrest it out of their hand,
and inflict a deadly blow on their assailants. In other
words, this passage, so far from obliging them to bow
their heads in submission to the sacerdotal yoke, in reality
frees them from it. So far is the Church of England from it excludes
prescnbmg, or even recommendmg, m this passage sacra- tai Confes-
mental Confession to those who stand in need of comfort, ^^°°'
that a different method, simply excluding it, is the one
suggested ; or, if they like it, prescribed.'

Further, it will be remembered that since the Confes-
sionalists urge this passage, interpreted in their sense, as
decisive in prescribing a positive rule for dealing with
certain cases, it may fairly be urged against them that
they cannot in common honesty, logical or moral, refuse
to accept the contrary conclusion as a positive rule, unless
they can dispute or disprove what has been said above.
They cannot say, ' All this may be very true, but what we
advocate may be proved in another way ; ' they must abide
by the force which they themselves have given to the
passage ; if it is not for them, it is directly and conclu-
sively against them. So that if there be any reality in if so, no
the point urged so warmly by the Confessionalists, that cln'teaciT
with this passage so directly, as they say, sanctioning f"

sucli Con-
ssion as a

' This formal direction for the ministry of God's word, as the method to be
used in cases of despair of God's mercy, seems to have been foreshadowed in
Edward VI. 's injunctions, ' That the damnable vice of despair may he dearly
taken away, and firm belief and stcaclfast hope surely conceived of all their
parishioners, being in any danger, they {the curates) shall learn and have ahvays
in readiness such comfortable pilaces and sentences of scripture as do set forth the
mercy, benefits, and goodness of Almighty God, towards all penitent and believing
persons' See Card well's I)oc. Ann. i. 219.

I 2

116

CONFESSION.

private confession and absolution, no clergyman can con-
sistently with his duty to the Church and his ordination
vows, refuse to practise their system, or decline to pro-
nounce a form of absolution ; they must, unless they wish
to stultify themselves, admit that if a directly different
method, excluding absolution, is enjoined in this para-
graph, they cannot teach, or off'er, or nse their system
consistently with their duty as ministers of the Church
of England. The rule that they have framed to guide
public opinion in its judgment of the anti-Confession-
alists, must be applied by public opinion in its judgment
on themselves, so far as it accepts the view of the para-
graph, which I have put forth, as resting on the strongest
foundations of logic and common sense. And further,
Nor in any it may suggcst in the way of analogy, confirmed by the
case. '' abrogation of the formerly ordained formula for any cases
of private confession, that, in any analogous case which
may occasionally arise of a troubled mind disclosing its
difficulties to a pastor, the pastor must minister com-
fort, not by any formal exercise of sacerdotal power, but
by the ministry of God's word. In saying this, however,
we must not lose sight of the fact, that this is the only case
in which the .Church suggests to persons in health that
they should have recourse even to confidential communi-
cations with a clergyman. These may be natural, and in
themselves occasionally useful, but there is no rule pre-
scribed, nor even advice given by our Church in their
favour, unless it be by implication in the Canon to whicli
I now turn- — I say by implication, because the case con-
templated by the Canon may be nothing more than what
is suggested in the passage of the Exhortation, or in the
Visitation of the Sick, when the special confession is not
followed by absolution, and therefore is not technical
Confession.

This allegation in favour of Confession is found b}^

CANON ALLEGED. 117

tliem in one (113) of tlie Canons of 1603,^ ^ If any man Aliened
confess his secret and hidden sms to the minister for the icoo.
unburdening of his conscience, and to receive spirit^ial
consolation and ease of mind from him, we do 'not in any
ivay hind,' &c. &c. On this, it may be observed, the
Canons furnish but a very doubtful authority for establish-
ing the actual consent of the Church to the revival of
anything which has become practically obsolete; in the
72nd Canon, for instance, ministers are not allov^^ed with-
out licence to attemiyt, tipon any pretence whatsoever, either
of possession or obsession, by fasting and prayer, to cast out
any devil or devils. Can it be argued from this, that if
anyone attempted to revive this truly Mediaeval practice,
the above Canon would justify him in applying for a
licence for it, and maintaining that he was only doing
what the Church of England sanctioned ?

Further, it is to be remarked that the Confession Not to the
spoken of is not necessarily, nor by the terms used. Con- '^^''^ "
fession in the technical sense of the word, but the reverse ;
for the confession is spoken of as being made for the un-
bui-dening of the conscience, that is. Confidence ; which is
distinguished from Confession, which is with a view to for-
giveness of sins by absolution. And it is to be made to a
minister, and not to a priest. If the Confession of the Con-
fessionalists was intended, why was it not spoken of as
made to a ' priest, to receive absolution from him ? ' And
the force of this observation is much increased when we
remember that at the time these Canons were composed.
Mediaeval confession had all but, if not wholly, passed
away, and therefore the Canon must be taken as indicating
the practice of recourse to a priest, not for absolution but
for counsel.

' I give the date of the Canons, because the Medisevalists are fond of quoting
the Canons of 1640, under the term of Canons, as if they were binding on the
Church ; they were simply a manoeuvre of Laud's, in which he was checkmated
by the refusal of Parliament to allow them.

118 CONFESSION.

Another point advanced is a passage in the Homilies,^
wliich is thus quoted by the Confessionalists. " Ah solu-
tion hath the promise of forgiveness of sin.' But the pas-
sage reads verj differently with the context ; instead of
the unconditional proposition, ' Absolution hath the pro-
mise,' &c., my readers will see it is ' Although absolution
hath the promise;' so that the categorical form becomes a
conditional one, and the word ' hath ' is used in a sub-
junctive force. It is clear that the writer is looking at
absolution as it existed in the mediaeval reconciliation by
the imposition of hands, which is retained in the Romish
sj'stem by the holding the hand over the penitent ; and he
means to say that even supposing the rite to have one of
the requisites of a sacrament — the spiritual grace con-
veyed— it lacks the other, a visible ordained sign : the im-
position of hands was not ordained. This is no straining
of the passage to escape its legitimate meaning, but is
forced upon us by what is said ten lines lower down,
where it is distinctly asserted that the promise of remis-
sion of sin is given to no other ordinance save Holy
Baptism and the Supper of the Lord. And in the
end of the passage. Visitation of the Sick, of course in-
cluding the absolution contained therein, is classed among
those ordinances which make not for the forgiveness of
sins — but for the instruction, comfort, and edification of
the whole Church ; nor must we lose sight of the passages
in the second homily on Repentance,^ in which two sorts
of Confession are mentioned ; one. Confession to God,
another, the acknowledgment of offences against a brother
Christian ; while shortly afterwards auricular Confession is
spoken of almost contemptuously.

' ' Homily on Common Prayer ;ind Sacraments,' p. 324, Oxford edition, 1832.
2 Pajre 487. Oxford edition, 1832.

119

CHAPTER X.

Ground of the Discussion shifted to private Absolution— Confessionalist Argu-
ment from Ordination Formula— Question at Issue— Rehition between our
Lord's Words in St. John, and the Ordination Formula— Analysis of the For-
mula—Relation of the third Paragraph to the second— Twofold Power con-
ferred—These were held in Early Church to be exercised by the Dispensa-
tion of the Word and Sacraments, and in our own— Not by any Sacerdotal
Power or Sentence— This Method exhausts our Lord's Commission as far as
- private Sins are concerned— No private Power of repelling from the Holy

Communion contemplated in the Exhortation to the Holy Communion

Language of our Church on this Point—' Discipline of Church ' in the Promise
made by the Candidate for Ordination — How limited— These Limitations
confine the Exercise of any Power to notorious Sins — Directions before the

Communion Office — Summary of the Argument — Practice of our Church

Does not recognise actual Forgiveness as the Result of the Power in any of
the Places where it is exercised — Reason and reasonableness of this Pos-
sible Translation of the Formula does not affect this View— What the Power
isnot — Notjudieial— Not operative or effective— Not a Grantof Pardon— Not
Supernatiu'al— Not Sacramental— Private Confession to a Priest not neces-
sary to the Exei-eise thereof^Special Confession in Visitation Office not
necessarily Private— Not necessary as giving the Priest Information on the
Case— Knowledge of a Man's Sins not recognised as necessary to the telling
him he can be saved — Nor to determine the Amount of Penance or Penitence.

We have hitherto been considering private Confession in
its relation, indeed, to Absolution, and as part of an
assumed sacramental ordinance, but still, rather in respect
to the pleas and proofs which are adduced directly and
independently in its favour. We must now rather shift
our ground, and follow the Confessionalists in their
attempts to prove the other part in the sacramental ordi-
nance— the forgiveness of sins by private absolution. It
is clear that if this part of the sacramental ordinance
cannot be established, and there is no such sacramental
ordinance, then, of course, all arguments in favour of
private confession as part thereof, fall to tlie ground as

120

CONFJ^SSION.

baseless. From private confession, then, we turn to private
absolution, as a grant of actual forgiveness of sin.

The argument on which the Confessionalists lay most
stress — amounting sometimes to an arrogant defiance,
which betrays to those who have really studied the question
that these men know next to nothing about it — is this; that
Christ gave to the Apostles this power of remitting sins,
and that the clergy of the Church of England are invested
with this power at their ordination : and that therefore
those who speak against, or refuse, sacramental Confes-
sion, speak against the express words of the Bible, and
refuse God's ordinance, while the clergy are guilty of the
additional sin of ignoring their ordination vows if they
deny and disown the powers which have been thus
solemnly conferred on them. This proposition stated
with an oracular confidence, which challenges denial as
impossible, seems at first sight solid enough : and yet at
the first touch of logic it shakes to its very foundations : for

Real issue, its whole force is derived from a misstatement of the ques-
tion. It is not what they assume it to be, whether our
Lord invested his Church with any power of remitting sins,
nor yet whether our Church confers an especial authority
on the second order of our clergy — the establishing of
these points does not settle the matter in the off-hand way
they thmk. The question is, whether the power conveyed
by our Lord's words, and by our own Church in the form
of ordination, is the power they contend for ; or, to put it
in other words, whether the mode in which they exercise
their office is the way intended by our Lord when He
spoke these words, or by the Church when these words are
used in the formula of ordination. My readers will im-
mediately see the fallacy on which their argument is con-
structed ; it is technically called ignoratio elenchi, the

Whnt they proving One point when they ought to have proved another.

ought to They ought to have proved that the power intended by

tioil
luniiula.

MEANING OF THE ORDINATION FORMULA. 121

our Lord, and conferred by our Churcli, is the forgiveness have
of sins by means of a form of absolution privately pro- ^'"^^'^ '
nounced by the priest, consequent on, and conditioned by,
a private confession of sins to that priest. It does not The extent
serve their purpose to prove the existence of some power they do
of remission of sins; they ought to have shown that i'''"^^*
their particular exercise hereof was recognised in the early
Church, or contemplated by our own.

The two questions — the power conveyed in our Lord's Our Lord's
words, and the authority intended to be conferred on our {V,e OTdin*a-
clergy by the Church — so overlap one another that a
separate consideration of them is somewhat difficult :
though at the same time it is necessary to separate them
as far as practicable, especially as each throws light reci-
procally on the other. If we have evidence of the true force
of the original words, we may argue this to be the sense
in which our Church uses them ; or, if we find in our
services proof of the sense in Avhich our Church uses them,
that is to us, at least so far as our Church is concerned,
an argument as to the meaning of the original: for I sup-
pose that the Confessionalists would be willing to accept
the proposition, that our Church uses the words in the
same sense and with the same results, as were intended
when they were originally spoken : and that those clergy
of the Church of England who are ordained to their office
by this formula receive the same po^vers as those who
were ordained in the early Church — with the exception,
of course, of any miraculous gifts which might have been
attached thereto in those ages : the same powers and no
more : so that whatever powers were attached to the
clerical office in later ages do not derive any validity or
sanction from our Lord's commission, as expressed in the
well-known words of St. John. We will first examine
the force of the ordination formula, in itself, and as evi-
denced by the way in which our Church in our services
contemplates the exercise of the power conveyed thereby.

122 CONFESSION.

Three WliGii WG examine tins closely we see that there are

(iidination three distiiict parts.

First — the office is conferred by the gift of the Holy
Spirit : ' Eeceive the Holy Ghost for the office and work of
a priest in the Church of God, committed to thee by the
imposition of our hands.'

Secondly — the power requisite for the execution of
that office — the authority to exercise the ministry of the
forgiveness of sins — is given in words nearly, though not
exactly, equivalent to those in which our Lord originally
gave that power, whatever it was, to his disciples :
' Whose sins thou dost forgive (remit) they are forgiven
(remitted) ; whose sins thou dost retain they are retained.'
I say nearly equivalent, because the notion of forgiveness
is slightly different from that of remission, and the latter
is the more accurate translation of the original term,
especially in relation to the word * retain ; ' and it is
clear that our Church's words must be interpreted as
nearly as possible in exact accordance with the original.

Thirdly — an exhortation to be faithful in the execu-
tion of that office, and exercise of that ministry ; the parti-
culars being specified in which the office is to be executed,
and the powers exercised : ' Be thou a faithful dispenser
of the word of God, and of His holy sacraments.'
Bearing of Tlic view here taken, that the third paragraph does not

paragruph. confer the power of dispensing the Word and Sacraments,
as something distinct from the power of remitting or
retaining sins conferred in the second paragraph, is clear
from the views, the language, the usages of the primitive
Church as well as our own. In the commission of the
keys, there are two separate parts and powers — one the
remission of sins, the other the retention thereof.
Remitting As to the first, the remission of sins by the Word and

bowTeco" - Sacraments was distinctly recognised by the Early Church
early ^" auioug the ways (see page 166) in which the powers con-

POWERS CONFERRED THEREBY. 123

veyed by onr Lord's words were exercised ; ^ tliis same church by
power was also held to be exercised in the remission of tioror'
ecclesiastical pains and penalties, signified by the im- sacraments.
position of hands — a method which cannot enter into the
present question — and by intercessory prayer, which is
founded on, and is the application of the general promises
to prayer in God's word, and does not depend on any
private sacerdotal power enjoyed by him who utters it, or
any sentence pronounced by him. At all events, it is not
the absolute granting of pardon, but the asking that
pardon maybe granted. So that, according to the view of
the ancient Church, the dispensation of the Word and
Sacraments exhausts the positive or remitting power
conferred by the ordination formula, as far as it deals with
sins other than those against the Church, or is not
exercised by intercessory prayer.

And those who admit or hold that our Church in such So in our

own.

matters must, and does, follow the primitive Church, must
also admit that no power of remitting sins is given in our
ordination formula save the dispensation of the Word and
Sacraments, whereby remission of sins is ministered — in
the first by presenting to nations, or congregations, or
individuals, being penitent, either publicly or privately,
the promises of forgiveness — actual offers, and certain
promises— to all who repent and believe. In the other by
administering Baptism, whereby the promises of forgive-
ness are visibly signed and sealed to those who, professing
their repentant belief in Christ, desire to be accepted into
the faith and fellowship of Christ ; or admitting to the
Lord's Supper those who desire to be restored thereto ;
and this is manifestly a different thing from a priest's
granting forgiveness of sins by a form of words expressive
of an act of sacerdotal power.

The same holds good, too, of the power of retaining ; ^J^^^^'^l^'^s

' Ubhcr. 109.

Also bv

124 CONFESSION.

for this is exercised in no other way tlian by refusal of the
sacraments to, or withholding the promises of God's mercy
from, impenitent nations or individual sinners ; and this
faithful dispensation of the word and sacraments im-
plies the withholding them from the impenitent, as well
as administering them to the repentant. In the early
Church this power of retaining sins was also exercised in
public discipline by the formal exclusion of notorious
offenders from the Holy Communion and Church fellow-
ship ; and in our own Church this faithful dispensation of
faithful the sacraments — this exclusion from the Holy Communion

dispensa- *'

ti„„ of — the candidate for orders promises to administer as the

word and

sacraments. Church, with the Sanction of the State, shall direct. This
gives no power of retaining sins privately, inasmuch as it
is limited to certain cases of the open repulsion of no-
torious offenders until public satisfaction has been made,
when they are to be admitted to the Holy Communion
without any definite sentence of the priest (see page 127).
Thus the dispensation of the word and sacraments ex-
hausts the power both of retaining and remitting sins of
individuals, otherwise than by intercessory prayer.

We may observe, too, that in the exhortation to the
Holy Communion the minister has no authority to repel, nor
is he contemplated as repelling, the repentant or doubting
person with whom he has to deal ; his office is to explain
and solve his grief; to relieve his conscience from the doubt
of God's mercy, so that he may come to the Holy Table
without any scruple or doubtfulness. He is not to repel
him — that is, to exercise any power of retaining his sin
by excluding him from the Holy Table — but to do his
utmost to persuade him to come. So in the Visitation office,
the priest has no power to refuse absolution by reason of
any sins confessed, or for any cause save lack of earnest-
ness (to exclude mere formalism), and humility (to exclude
the notion of a man having a right to it).

OUR CHURCirS PRACTICAL VIEW. 125

When we now turn to the language of our own Church Xone other
we shall find that in the other passages, in which the by our
particulars of the priest's office are given, there is no men- other parts
tion of anything besides the administration of the word and prayer
sacraments, so that in all such passages according to the
view of the Confessionalists, the most important and essen-
tial part of the priestly office and power is wholly omitted.

Thus, in the passage immediately after the ordination
formula, which we will call the second ordination formula,
giving episcopal and ecclesiastical authority to do what is
necessary for the due execution of the priestly office by
the due exercise of the priestly power, we find ' take thou
authority to 'preach the word of God, and to Tninister the
holy sacraments.'' Why no mention of absolution in the
sense which the Confessionalists put upon it, namely, the
actual forgiveness of sins ? The omission is accounted for,
if we suppose our Church to mean by absolution that au-
thoritative holding forth of God's promises, so as to free
or loose the repentant conscience from the chains of sin,
which falls under the dispensation of the Word. So again
in the prayer for the Church Militant, ' that they may set
forth Thy true and lively word, and duly administer Thy
holy sacraments ; ' and in the Articles, preaching of the
word of God, and the due ministration of the sacraments
are alone mentioned, to the exclusion of any other method
of exercising the priestly office as conferred in our Lord's
original commission.

In answer to this last point, it may be said that in the iMention of
questions put to the candidate previous to his ordination, of church
he is called upon to promise that he wiU ' minister the doc- ilm'inary
trine and sacraments and discijplivie of Christ as the Lord P*^"""*^*
hath commanded, and as this Church and realm hath re-
ceived the same according to the commandments of God.'
But it must be observed, first, that the menmon here of
the discipline of Christ makes the omission of any definite

126

CONFESSION.

Analogous
to ecclesi-
astical
tenures.

Express
the reten-
tion of sins
not tlie ab-
solution.

mention of it in the formula, as well as in the other
passages in which the particulars of the clerical office are
specified, still more remarkable. But not so, if we take it
to signify, not what the Confessionalists contend for — the
exercise of a power conferred on every individual priest
of dealing out pardon to private sins in his personal and
sacerdotal capacity, after the confession thereof privately
to himself — but the administration in the congregation of
an ecclesiastical system : answering somewhat to the public
discipline of the primitive Church, by excluding offenders
from Church privileges, especially from the Holy Com-
munion : this would fall under the faithful dispensation
of the sacraments ; a system not to be regarded as a
divine ordinance for the forgiveness of sins against God,
but a Canonical enactment or arrangement, instituted in
the Church, for the punishment of offenders against itself,
and exercised with more or less publicity by those who
ex officio held the chief place in the several congregations ;
and this is not what our Confessionalists contend for.

Again, the term 'the discipline of Christ,' in the preli-
minary promise, cannot be reasonably supposed to represent
the exercise of any separate power conferred in the second
clause of the formula, other than the dispensation of
the word and sacraments : for then it would have occu-
pied the same place in the promise which, on the Confes-
sionalist theory, it does in the formula. It would have
run * minister the discipline, and doctrine, and sacra-
ments of Christ,' corresponding to the paramount impor-
tance which the Confessionalists attach to it : nor would
it have been omitted in the other passages in which these
particulars of the priestly ministrations are mentioned.

Again, what the Confessionalists contend for is the
power to forgive sins, while the words ' the discipline of
Christ,' as far as they bear on the subject at all, express
rather the retention of sins.

' DISCIPLINE OF CHRIST: 127

Again, the application of this discipline — this retention xo private
of sins, by exclusion from the ministrations of the Church rS'hiV^
• — is not entrusted to the priest to be exercised privately ^'"^'^^''*
after confession, as a punishment for secret sins : but he
is bound by the express words of his promise before his
ordination, and by the corresponding word * faithful ' in
the ordination formula, to minister it as the Church
has accepted and the national law has recognised it —
* as this Church and realm have received the same.' And
when we come to look into the cases in which the Church
has accepted and allowed this discipline, we shall find
that it is to be exercised, as it was exercised in the
earliest days of the Church: not in j)rivate, but in public;
not after private confession of secret sins, but on the
notoriousness of certain sins or states of sin.^ Thus, in Directions
the rubrical directions before the Communion, the first (.^,^"''® ^^^
case is that of a notorious evil-doer who has scandalised "'?."

Olnce.

the congregation : the curate having knowledge of this
scandal is to advertise him not to come to the Holy
Table ; nor does his admission to the Communion depend
on the private judgment of the curate, or on that full know-
ledge of the facts of the case which private confession
might be supposed to give ; he is not to be admitted to
the Hol}^ Table till he hath openly (not privately) declared
himself to have repented to the satisfaction of the congre-
gation. The other case, where the curate perceiveth malice
and hatred to reign between two persons, puts the matter
in exactly a similar point of view. There is no mention
here of private confession as a ground of exclusion from
the Communion : nor is he to requii-e any private confession
of sins before he administers the Holy Communion — he
must ascertain either that they are reconciled or willing to
be reconciled. And, again, in the Canons ^ the discipline of
the Church requires that in certain cases — not to be ascer-

' L':ii\l\vc'll'« -Synod,' i. 221. '■^ Canon 27.

128

CONFESSION.

No private
ahsolntion
or Confes-
sion here.

Arijnment

(teciucible

thence.

Summary
of what has
been said.

tained by private confession, but matters more or less of
notoriety — the curate is not to administer tlie Holy Com-
munion to the oflfenders : nor are they to be admitted until
they shall first acknowledge their repentance to the
minister, not by himself or by private confession, but be-
fore the churchwardens, and in writing, if they can write.

It is clear that in all these cases the ministry of dis-
cipline has nothing to do with the hearing of private con-
fession or private absolution : so that if anyone should
insist that the power contemplated in the second clause
of the ordination formula is the ministration of the disci-
pline spoken of in the preliminary promise, it is clear that
he must be held to admit further, that private confession
and private absolution is no part of that power ; for the
discipline sanctioned by the Church and realm, which thej-
thus identify with this power, is to be exercised only in
cases of sins notorious, not secret — perceived, not con-
fessed. If there is no exclusion from Church privileges,
except in cases where confession is not needed, the power
conferred by the second clause of the ordination formula
cannot, if identical with the discipline mentioned in the
pi-omise, be held to confer any power for cases of admission
to Church privileges depending on private confession of
the sin and private absolution.

We may sum up what has been said as follows : — Two
powers are conferred in the ordination formula, viz. :
' Whosesoever sins thou dost forgive they are forgiven, and
whosesoever sins thou dost retain they are retained.' The
former power is exercised by the ministration of the word
and sacraments — the authoritative preaching of the remis-
sion of sins, and the authoritative administration of
baptism for the remission of sins, and admission to the
Holy Communion,^ in which there is a remembrance of

' I confess that to my mind there is great doulot whether remission of sins
is actually conveyed in the Lord's Supper; it ma}' indeed be considered as a

POWER CONFERRED AT ORDINATION. 129

that death and passion of Christ whereby our sins are
remitted, and which is thus an act of faith in that remis-
sion, and therefore of acceptance of it^a renewal of our
Baptism. The second power woukl be exercised by faith-
fully dispensing the word and sacraments — that is, the
not setting before persons openly disbelievers, or impeni-
tent, the promises of God's word, as applicable to their
case; nor administering to such persons, at least until
they are repentant, the sacraments of baptism and the
Lord's Sapper; and this refusal, as far at least as the
notion of discipline is concerned, he who receives his or-
dination from our Church has promised to exercise
only as the Church directs, and not accoi'ding to his own
fancies or theories — that is, only in cases which exclude
private confession. It will be seen in a moment how
foreign and fatal this is to the theory which the Confession-
alists maintain, and to the ])ractice they adopt.

And, when we come to look at the power which the Practical
Church practically believes to be exercised by virtue of the tiie power
ordination formula, we find that in no case does our Church aTordu *^
recognise the power of forgiving the sins of this or that
person, in the sense of the word in which the Confession-
renewed act of profession of faith in Christ's death, and therefore may be
said to convey remission of sins just as any other act of faith may : or the
Presence of Christ in our souls may be taken as a proof that our sins are re-
mitted ; but still, in either case, this is distinct from the actual remission of
sins itself. Remission of sins is not mentioned in the address to the commu-
nicants at the time of the Holy Communion, nor yet is it specified in the Articles
or Catechism, while, both in the Articles and in the Services remission of sins
is distinctly attached to Baptism on the authority of the Apostolic words of
Scripture ' repent and be baptised for the remission of sins,' and in the prnj-er
in the post-Communion Service there is a distinct petition for the remission of
sins. This notion probably was attached to the Holy Communion, in con-
sequence of the admission to this Holy Ordinance being the result, and in
some sort the witness, of the condonation of sins against the Church. It is
not attached in Scripture to the Holy Communion, which is stated to be the
Communion of the Body and Blood of Christ, the remembrance of Him, and the
showing forth the Lord's death till he come. I think the point deserves
more accurate consideration tlian perliaps it has hitherto had.

nation.

130 CONFESSION.

alists use it : or conceive that the actual forgiveness of sins
of this or that person dej)encls on, or is effected by, the
priest's pronouncing a form of absolution ; or can be re-
garded as a fait accompli when such a form has been pro-
nounced. It is not so in the absolution in Morning or
Evening Service, for this is simply the declaration of
God's general promise of mercy, without any application
even to those who are present ; it is not to you who are there
present, but to all ; and it is made to depend upon a repen-
tance which is yet in the future, and prayed for as being
such. In the exhortation to the Holy Communion we
have seen that there is no formula given, but that a rubric
which prescribed such a formula has been abrogated, and a
totally different method — the ministry of God's word —
prescribed in place of the exercise of a priestly power of
formal absolution. In the Holy Communion the earlier
invocative form has been retained. And in the Visitation
of the Sick the forgiveness of sins is still only invocative,
' Our Lord Jesus Christ — of his great mercy forgive thee thine
offences ; ' and the form of absolution pronounced by the
priest does not extend, as we have before shown (page 92),
to the actual forgiveness of sins.

The reason, and the reasonableness, of this are clear
from the nature of the matter. Supposing an absolute
sentence of forgiveness thus i^ronounced, it may be false,
and cannot be pronounced beyond doubt to be true ; for
the sins may not be forgiven, in consequence of the repen-
tance not being real ; it is impossible for anyone, unless he
can look into the human heart, to say absolutely and
judicially that any man's sins are actually forgiven him.
That they may be forgiven him — that they are not beyond
God's mercy — that God's mercy is certain if he repents
-^is absolutely true, even though he does not repent ; but
to say the same thing of absolution, taken as absolute for-
giveness of sins — to say that the sentence of this or that

THE REASON AND REASONABLENESS OF THIS. 131

priest as to tlie forgiveness of the sins of this or that
man holds good, if he repents, is merely to say his sins
are forgiven if they are forgiven. The proposition ' If
he repent ^ his sins are forgiven,' does not admit of any
conclusion being drawn unless the antecedent is assumed —
unless the repentance is certain, it states nothing as certain.
But to say that the sins of these men (or of that man)
may be forgiven if repented of, holds perfectly good even
though they are never repented of.

' Logically we might state it thus : — 'If this man repents his sins are for-
given' is a perfectly pure conditioual premiss ; but no conclusion can be drawn
unless the antecedent, viz., the repentance, can be affirmed, which it cannot;
a defect which is not cured by any sentence of the priest. And even if the uni-
versal be substituted for the particular, ' if men repent they arc for-
given' still no conclusion can be drawn, nor can the premiss be stated cate-
gorically without too an undue assumption of the repentance. To say absolutely
' all these persons are pardoned ' would be to assume their repentance. But ' if
men tridy repent they will be forgiven' is not really a conditional premiss, but
only a form of stating the iiniversal, ' The sins of all repentant simmers are
forgiven,' and this, as we have said in the text, holds true, whether the
repentance is or is not a reality.

This view of the Commission conferred by Christ being a general declaration
of the Gospel fiat for the remission of sins harmonises likewise with what is
possibly the grammatical force of the original etrrai XeKvfjLeva shall hat'e been
loosed, earai SeSe/xeVa, shall have been bound, a.<pieurai they are already ranittcd,:
KiKparnprai they are already retaitied.

Two points would follow from this very decidedly.

1. That which is spoken of in Absolution already exists as a fact in heaven,
and therefore Absolution is declaratory and not efficient.

2. That whatever is declared must be of such a nature that it can be de-
clared infallibly by the fallible minister pronouncing it.

But after all there is not so much ditfei-ence between the two cases as ap-
pears at first sight : for such a fiat as ' He pardoneth and absolvcth' presented
for a 'man's acceptance, is in its relation to man, a promise or offer: so that
whether we admit the possible grammatical force of the original, or our no liss
possible translation (whereby the declaration is rather of a promise or offer
than of a fiat), it still must be of such a nature as to be true in all cases, and
under all conditions, so that it may be pronounced without any possibility of
error ; now this cannot be actual pardon, because this depends on the person
accepting the offer in repentance and faith ; but it may be the fiat of that remis-
sion of sins which is the Gospel — the remission of sins to all who repent and
believe. It is equally true, whether addressed to a penitent or impenitent man,
that God has immutably decreed to pardon all those who repent and believe ;
and I need not remind my readers thai this is the shape in which absolution is
usually presented to us in our Church.

K 2

132

CONFESSION.

What

absolution
is not.
Not ju-
dicial.

It may serve to complete our notion of what it is, if we
go a little further in defining what it is not. It is not
judicial. First, because the absolution is not so in the
Morning and Evening Services, for the minister is com-
manded to pronounce what has already been willed and
settled and promised by God — God's will that men should
be saved by turning from their sin — the promise, and
the conditions of that promise, repentance and faith; he
has no choice but to pronounce it ; his office is merely
that of a deputed minister empowered to declare, as by
authority ; he has not to decide as to the repentance
of any one. It is not so in the Communion office, because
it is merely invocative. For here of course he decides
nothing. Nor is it so in the Visitation office ; first, because
it may, I think, be taken as a settled point that all abso-
lutions, though differing in form, must be essentially the
same ; and next, because the priest has no power to
withhold it from anyone who humbly and earnestly desires
it. It is not operative or efficient of that which it
declares ; it would not be so even if it were an absolute
declaration of pardon as a fait accompli; for this from
the very terms of the formula is Christ's reserved pre-
rogative ; still less if we take it as a ministerial, official,
declaration of God's mercy being open to the penitent ;
for God's mercy, as well as the purposes of that mercy
exist, and must in the nature of things exist, prior to
the ministerial declaration thereof. It is not a grant
Notapinnt of pardon, or an assurance of pardon granted,
except so far as God is pledged to the fulfilment of the
message which He has entrusted to His Church. Nor,
though resting on a supernatural commission, is it in itself
either supernatural or sacramental; not super-
natural, because the effect produced is natural, the same
in kind as that produced by our Lord's miracles — it is not
accepted by virtue of any supernatural action on the mind,

Xot opera-
tive.

Not super-
natural or
sacramen-
tal.

NOT SACRAMENTAL. 133

but in obedience to the law of our rational and moral
nature, the result of a message from God, delivered by one
whose authority to deliver it is acknowledged — it is not
sacramental; first, because it is not supernatural in its
operation, and next, because there is no visible sign or-
dained bj our Lord.

Before we leave this branch of the subject we must Auricular
observe, that even had it been our Church's intention to nofnece"
convey in ordination the power of actually forgiving sins exercSe^of
contended for by the Confessionalists, yet this would not offic^'evei?
imply or necessitate previous auricular confession to a fesfonS"
priest ; for not only is it perfectly possible to conceive such '**^* '^^'V
a power being exercised without any such confession, but
the power, whatever it is, which is actually exercised in
our Church by her ministers in pursuance of their ordina-
tion commission, is in two cases preceded by public con-
fession to God only, namely, the absolution in the Morning
Service, and that in the Communion Office ; and even in the
third case, the Visitation to the Sick, there is nothing to
show that the special confession is not to be made in the
presence of other persons besides the priest. Special con-
fession is not the same with private confession : on the
contrary, the Office implies the presence of others.

The Confessionalists, however, think to make out their Confession
case for Confession by representing it as necessary to give

not neces-
sary as

the priest a knowledge as to whether a man repents or not Ihe""""'

-whether he may pronounce him forgiven, or refuse to
do so : but first, the priest is never authorised to represent
forgiveness as unattainable by the sinner, or to exclude
from the Holy Table, except for notorious sins in which
private confession to the priest is out of the question, for
it is known to him already as being notorious. And it is
evident that at the very best it only gives an approxima-
tion to that knowledge, and this a very uncertain and
deceitful one ; at the best it cannot justify an absolute

priest,

134

CONFESSION.

or as (riab-
lini; him
to judge
■wlietlitr
the sin
is unpar-
donable.

The know-
le.lge cf
eaoh case
not recog-
nised as
necessary
in our
Church,

declaration of any sins being actually forgiven, nor yet any
absolute declaration that they are not forgiven ; and if so
the alleged ground fails. Confession cannot enable any-
one to say that a man's sins are not within God's mercy,
by reason of the repentance not seeming to him as perfect,
as he arbitrarily chooses to think it ought to be : the
only sin that excludes from this mercy is the sin against
the Holy Ghost ; and as no man knows, or even guesses,
what this sin is, it is impossible that any completeness, or
any minuteness of the detail of sins can enable anyone to
say that they constitute the sin against the Holy Ghost :
for this being unknown it is impossible to compare the
sins with it. All that can be said is, that as Christ has de-
clared that if any man come unto Him, He will in nowise
cast him out, so no man can have committed the sin
which shuts him out from the hope of mercy so long as he
comes, or wishes to come to Christ. And any clergyman
who ventures to say on his own judgment that the sins
of a man seeking forgiveness are not forgiven, seems to
fall under the ancient Canon,' which says, that if any
presbyter rejects a man who is turning from his sins,
' let him be deposed as grieving Christ.' Nor, indeed, do
the Confessionalists profess to a man who applies to them
that his sin is, or may be, unpardonable, but that they
can point out a special way of procuring the pardon,
which their very ofier thus represents as pardonable.

Nor do I see in our own Church any recognition of
the notion of a knowledge of each man's particular sina
being necessary to the exercise of the clerical commis-
sion ; nay, the language and directions of our Church
seem to me to exclude it. Thus, the absolution in
the Morning and Evening Services and in the Communion
Service is pronounced without any such knowledge being
required ; here evidently it finds no place. In the occa-

' Bingham, vi. p. 432.

NOT NECESSARY FOR PENANCE. 135

sioiial preparation for the Holy Communion in cases of
morbid distrust of God's mercy, the point submitted to the
minister is not the insufficiency of the repentance — this
is assumed to be real and sincere ; the knowledge of the
particular sin is not held necessary for the proper doing
of that which the minister has to do. In the Visitation
to the Sick the minister is supposed to be satisfied of the
man's repentance, as to the fact, though not the details
of which he has examined him, and the reality of which
has been tested by any acts of reparation which may be
necessary. The special confession of any particular sin
is primarily intended only to relieve the conscience from
the burden of unrevealed sin, or from the fear of which I
have spoken above, or it may be sometimes as an act of
reparation to society : it is not necessarily followed by
absolution. It is evident that the special confession is
not made to enable the priest to judge whether God's
mercy is or is not applicable to the case ; for that which
would follow on such judgment being in the negative, viz.,
refusal to absolve, is not contemplated or permitted.

Still less is it recognised by our Church that the
details of the sin or sins must be made known to the
priest for the purpose of penance, that is to enable him to
fix the proper amount of reparation and satisfaction due
to God for the sin which has been forgiven, as they say,
by the priestly absolution. The notion of penance, in the
Confessionalist sense of the word, is utterly alien to the
views of our Eeformed Church, the language of our formu-
laries. It is true that the word penance is once used in
the Commination Service, but this is in the sense of re-
pentance, or change of mind, as is seen by the original of
which the Avords used are a quotation ; but jjewcnice,^ in the

' I recollect a Spanish priest -n-itli -whom au acqiuiintanco of mine had
conversed on the sacrament of penance, saying on being told she was going to
Christ, 'Eh done! vous faitcs iKnitencc aussl'

136 CONFESSION.

ecclesiastical sense in which the Confessionalists use it
— bodily acts of fruitless toil and self-inflicted pain, which
under these auspices assume the garb, and thus discredit
the name of genuine devotion and piety — weariness and
heaviness — not the sighings of a contrite heart, known to
none but God, but artificially created by external self-
inflicted mortification as a reparation to God for sins
committed against Himself — sometimes, alas ! the saying
prayers to God — is unknown to our OAvn as it was to the
early Church. For the penance then required — having in
it more of pagan severity than Christian mercifulness, more
of earth than heaven — belonged wholly to public discip^
line, in which it was attached to forgiveness of sins against
the Church, by the will, and authority, and act, of the
Church. No penance was exacted, or performed, for sins
which did not touch the Church, even though they were
of the gravest character before God — such as avarice,
lustful feelings, luxury, and the like (see page 67) — though
if penance were required by God for any sin it surely
would be required for these. In the scheme, then, of
forgiveness from God of sins as against Himself, penance
finds no place : and this is the forgiveness with which our
Church and our Clergy have to deal, except in one or two
specified cases of the public condonation of grave offences
by admission to the Holy Communion (see page 12), to
which our Church has in no case attached privately
imjjosed penance. But more than this, it is an absolute
negation of the freeness of the pardon procured, of the
sufficiency of the satisfaction offered, by Christ ; it is an
assertion of the inadequacy of the price paid as our
ransom — it is, in fact, an act of disbelief in a vital point
of revealed Christianity.

It might be thought that no greater despite could be
done to Divine Mercy than thus to doubt what it had
revealed of Itself; but I think the notion of jpenitence to

NOR FOR PENITENCE. 137

which the Confessionalists sometimes shift their ground as
a defence for confession, is still worse. The notion that the
priests ought to know the exact details of the sin, in order
to estimate the exact amount of the debt due to God — in
order to arrange equitably the terms of payment on which
God will forgive this or that sin, or sinner — to strike a
balance between what the sinner is able and willing to pay
in his own person, and what God can be expected to
forgive him, or will forgive him — seems to me to betray a
disregard for, or ignorance of, the Gospel scheme which
borders on infidelity — a misrepresentation of God as He
is revealed to us, which borders on blasphemy. There is
not — we may thank God for it — the smallest trace of any
such thing in our Church's teaching. The system, which
adopts and embodies such notions as these, carries with
it its own condemnation. If Confession is needed for
these, then Confession is not of God.

138 CONFESSION.

CHAPTER XT.

Sense of our Lord's Words iu St. John xx. — Bearing of this Toiut on our
Church's View — Keal Question at Issue — Poii^ts required to prove the
Confessionalist case — Twofold Question — To whom were the Powers giren—
And what were the Powers — Powers given to those addressed — This assumed
to be the eleven Apostles — Admitting this, the Power might have been con-
fined to them — They had Faculties whereby they could pronounce absolute
Forgiveness — Which Priests now have not. ' I am with you always ' does
not carry on this Power — Others addressed besides the Apostles —
Others were with them — Power conferred on the Church — This Difference
Important — What were the Powers given — Clearly the Power of remitting
ecclesiastical Offences — But this not exhaustive — Comparison of Accounts of
different Evangelists — St. Luke states the Commission to have been preach-
ing Repentance and Remission of Sins — St. Matthew and St. Mark relate
tlie giving this Commission to the Apostles on other Occasions — How the
Accounts maybe reconciled — Both embodied by our Church — How the Power
was exercised in apostolic Age — Confessionalist Assertion — Negatived by
Facts — No such Power exercised or claimed by Apostles — Simon Magus —
Case of Corinthian Penitent — Tells against the Confessionalists, not for them,
even on their own View of it — Literal Meaning of St. John's Words — Not
taken by anyone — St. Matthew ix. 8 — Practical Test of the Power claimed
iinder this Passage — 2 Cor. v. 18 — ' As my Father sent Me, so send I you' —
How far the Mission of Church is identical with that of Christ — Con-
fessionalist Position assumes that the Power they claim is the only Method
of exercising our Lord's Commission — How answered — Flaw in the Position
that this Way is one out of many — Practiciil Test of this Argument.

Such, then, are onr Clim^cli's views on the functions
conferred on the priest at ordination, as far as they can
be gathered from the formula itself — the mode of exercise
prescribed by the formula — and the actual exercise thereof
in the services.
Meaning ot The next point is to ascertain the sense in which

our Lord's n,i -, -, ,i .., ..

words in our Lord uscd the words when the original commission
was given, in order farther to see whether the sense
in which our Church thus seems {irrima facie) to use

Church's
view.

MEANING OF OUR LORD'S WORDS. 139

tliem is in liarinouy with the sense so ascertained. For it
is clear that our Lord's words must govern, or over-ride,
the view or scheme of any particular Church ; and therefore
if our Lord's words contradict what has been said above,
we must admit, either that the above view of our Church's
meaning is not the true one, in spite of all the evidence
and facts to the contrary, and that therefore the Con- Bearing of

_, -. .,....,. - these words

lessionalists are right m insisting on and maintaining their on our
view ; or that our Church is wrong, and that therefore the
Confessionalists are in some sort justified in trying, as they
are trying, to re-introduce it among us ; I say in some
sort, because I think it more than doubtful, as a point of
divine morality and of human honour, whether a person,
holding his Church to be wrong in so essential a point, is
justified in exercising his oflSce and holding places of trust
and profit, with the view and hope of altering it without
any sanction from those to whom the government of the
Church is entrusted, tJie doctrine and practice which he has
promised to uphold. Our readers may be helped in forming
a judgment on this point by supposing a Jacobite, 130
years ago, obtaining his commission in the army with a
definite purpose of restoring the Stuarts ; or the Irvingites
having taken advantage of some legal quibble or techni-
cality to retain the position of incumbent, in order to
supersede the doctrine and ritual of our Church by their
' Catholic Apostolic ' system.'

At the very commencement, however, I must recall to Question

raised in

my readers a point to which I have already more than our Lord's
once called their attention. The question is not whether
our Lord intended by these words to create and convey
some powers to the Church, but whether He intended

' However mistaken vre may think the Irvingites to be in their views of
truth — as much mistaken, we will say, as the Eitualists— yet we must do them
the justice to acknowledge the reality of their professed love of truth. They
have not stultified themselves by alleging their love of trutli as an apology for
insincc-ritv and evasion.

140

CONFESSION.

Points
advanced
\)y Confes-
siunalists.

Points into
which the
question
divides
itself.

to convey to every ordained priest that particular power
to which every Confessionalist priest pretends, as vested in
him, and which he claims to exercise, personally and
directly, jure divino. Unless it is certain that our Lord's
words did convey this power when they were spoken, then
the Confessionalists' case cannot be sustained by them.

The principal passage which is brought to support
this momentous claim deserves the most careful consider-
ation in all its parts ; a more minute consideration than
can have been given to it by those who allege it offhand,
as decisive in favour of a view to which it is in reality
opposed. I will take the points which are sufficient for
my present purpose. To prove the Confessionalist case
the passage must mean —

1 . That when our Lord spoke the words in question a
certain power was conveyed specially and personally to
the Apostles ; or to the Church, and delegated by the
Church to the Apostles.

2. That this power was continued and perpetuated to
priests in all succeeding generations by right of succession,
or by successive delegation.

3. That this power is the private forgiveness of secret
sins, on the condition of these having been privately con-
fessed to themselves.

The failure of any one of these points will overthrow
the Confessionalist position as to the special functions and
powers which they claim as appertaining to the second
order of the ministry at the present day, by virtue of a
divine right inherent in ordained persons, or delegated by
the Church to them as its ministers.

A double question then occurs at the outset —

a. To whom the powers were given.

h. What powers were given.

The first subdivides itself again into two questions —
Whether the powers were given to the Apostles, and

POWER OF REMISSION CONFERRED THEREIN. 141

thence appertain, jure sacerdotali, to pi'esbyters, as the
successors of the Apostles, independently of the Church ;
or to the Church, and thence delegated to Apostles, as
now to their successors the presbyters, as officials of the
Church.

The second also subdivides itself into the questions
whether the power conveyed was —

1. A particular special commission and power — actual
forgiveness of sins,

2. Or a particular special commission and power of
declaring private sins foi'given,

3. Or only a general ministry or dispensation {oiKovo/j,ia)
of reconciliation in the forgiveness of sins — a general com-
mission to publish and administer the Gospel scheme of
mercy, as by divine and not by human authority.

Now, so much, I think, must be admitted, that some To wiiom
great promise was given, and some great power was con- words
ferred on the persons addressed ; and as there is no limita-
tion implied or expressed, the words must be taken to
have been addressed to all those who were then and there
present on that occasion, as in the parallel, though not
identical, occasion given in St. Matthew xviii. Here
is the first flaw in the Confessionalists' position, or at
least in the position of that portion of the school who
maintain that the power of each priest proceeds directly
from our Lord, and not mediately through the Church.
It is assumed as a fact patent on the surface, which needs
neither search to find nor proof to maintain, that the
words were addressed to the eleven Apostles exclusivel}' :
though, first of all, it is beyond doubt clear that all the
eleven Apostles were not present, St. Thomas being absent ; ^"^ *" ^^^
and I think' it will strike my readers that it is hardly likely alo"e.
that our Lord would have chosen this moment to give
such a commission to the Apostles by breathing on
them, when one of them at least could not have felt the

U2 CONFESSION.

divine influence of his breath, nor personally have been
partaker of the gift.
But sup- "W'e ^N\\\. however, first allow it to be assumed that our

posiiii^^they

were so Lord's words were addressed exclusively to the eleven

addressed,

Apostles ; even were it so, we are not bound to concede
the same sacerdotal prerogative to every priest now ; for
we can see good reason for supposing that the power of
forgiving sins — supposing for a moment that it were quite
certain on other grounds that such power could be exer-
cised by men — might be thereby conveyed to tlrem abso-
lutely, without its being passed on from them to those
who succeeded them : for they had that which is abso-
lutely necessary for such absolute forgiveness, or for the
Why to be declaration thereof to any given individual. For that
confined to whicli puts absolutc forgiveness, or the power of declaring
it, as an actuality, to aay individual out of the power of
any clergyman at the present day is the impossibility of
his knowing whether the repentance is real : without this,
the infallible declaration of actual forgiveness of this or
that sinner is an absolute impossibility (see page 130) ;
the man who pronounces it, does not know whether his
sentence is, or is not true : for it is not surely maintained
that the pronouncing the sentence cures the lack of
repentance, or that a lack of rej)entance does not
cancel the sentence. But the Apostles had no such
Apostles' difficulty : for the same miraculous power (probably that
discerning of disceniing Spirits) which enabled them to see that
a man had sufficient faith to be healed, would enable them
to see whether a man's repentance was real; so that
taking our Lord's words as addressed to the eleven, or
rather the ten exclusively, the commission may be under-
stood in its literal sense, and in a way which gave them
the power of declaring absolute forgiveness, while it does
not give it to those who are not similarly endowed. It is
quite clear that those to whom this formula is now

spirits.

MIGHT BE EXERCISED BY THE APOSTLES. 143

addressed at ordination have not the gift of the discern-
ment of spirits, or any other miraculous powers whatever ;
and therefore the commission cannot give to them the
same power and autliority as it might have done to the
Apostles, inasmuch as in the very nature of the case they
could never exercise it. And, as I have before said, it
is clear that the meaning of any such j)assage must be
modified by the admitted possibilities or facts of the case.
And I think that no one, not even the most sturdy Con-
fessionalist, who reflects on the subject, will deny that
the validity of any priestly declaration of forgiveness must
be modified by the known validity of the repentance ; and
if so, our Lord's words at the very utmost cannot go, as far
as regards the clergy of the present day, farther than to
convey a power of declaring the possibility of any sins
being pardoned ; in other words, the declaration of the
unlimited extent of God's mercy on condition of repent-
ance— exactly the phase in which, as I contend, our .
Church sets it forth in the morning and evening service.

But then the Confession alists urge that the powers Om- Lord's
given to the Apostles were continued to their successors am viii'i
by the words, ' I am with you always unto the end of the even unto

T T , the end of

world. the world.'

Now, allowing that these words have this force, it is
sufficient to call my readers' attention to the fact that they
were not uttered by our Lord at the time when He said,
' Whosesoever sins ye remit,' &c., but at a la ter period, when
he conferred on the. eleven Apostles alone the commission
of preaching and baptising. So that if these words are
to modify or interpret our Lord's commission, and through
them the ordination formula, then the powers attached to
that formula must be those to which the words Avere
criginally attached, viz. preaching and baptising ; and the
Confessionalist deduction of an authority to forgive sins
in any other way than these falls to the ground : or if they

144

CONFESSION.

But not
spoken
to the
A postles
alone.

Difference
material.

are, as is most natural, to be referred to those words in
the context of which they occur, then the Confessionalists'
application of them to our Lord's other words becomes
clearly inadmissible; the former argument remains un-
answered, that no inference can be drawn even from the
admitted possession of these powers by the 'Apostles, the
exercise of them by whom is conceivably possible, to the
]30ssession of them by those of whose exe'rcise thereof there
is no such conceivable possibility.

But when we look into the matter a little more closely,
and compare and harmonise the accounts, given by different
evangelists of that memorable evening of the first day of
the week, it seems perfectly certain that the ten Apostles
were not alone when the Lord appeared to them, for the
two disciples returning from Emmaus found ' The eleven
gathered together and them that ivere with them,' ' and there-
fore it was not to the Apostles only that the words were
addressed ; and this is brought out still more strongly
by the fact that when our Lord afterwards gave the eleven
Apostles their personal authority to preach and baptize,
it is expressly mentioned by the evangelists ^ that He was
alone with them ; so that our Lord's words were addressed
and the powers committed to, not the Apostles jDcrson-
ally, but the whole Church.

The Confessionalists say it makes no difference
whether the words were spoken to the Apostles or to the
Church. This is nothing more than a device usually
exercised by them for evading a logical defeat by pre-
tending, when arguments utterly fail them, that they
entirely agree with a man with whom they have been
arguing, calmly saying, ' We mean the same thing.' But
if anyone uses this plea with the notion of its having any
logical force, he means that the powers are the same, and

' St. Luke sxiv. 33.

* St. Matt, xxviii. 16; St. Mark xvi. 14.

TO WHOM THE COMMfSSIOX GIVEN. 145

can be exercised with the same force and result by those-
to whom the Church has delegated them, as they had been
if conferred directly on the priesthood. But with due
deference I would say, this hardly meets the question,
and that the Confessionalist view is very greatly affected
hereby. First of all, they can no longer pretend, as they
have pretended, that the formula used by our Church in
delegating these powers is to be interpreted by the exist-
ence of an essential right, vested directly by onr Lord in a
sacerdotal caste, and held directly from our Lord by those
whom the Church at ordination admits to that caste. The
words used by the bishop and presbyters must be inter- the^ch",.ch
preted according to the powers which the Church autho- tate/'^c^-
rises them to confer, and by the powers which, according j|^''^'"S ^Z
to the offices of the Church, they have power to exercise: theCimivh
and these we have seen above do not include the actual
forgiveness of sins, but the proclamation and offer, in one
form or another, of the unlimited mercy of God on re-
pentance.

Again, if the power be delegated by the Church it No other
must be the same in kind as that possessed by the Church, eiven io
The Church cannot delegate that which it does not itself
possess : and this is only the power of absolution, not that
of forgiveness, as expressly stated in the formula of the
Visitation office.

Again, the exercise of such powers vested in the The exer-
Church must primarily and essentially be public : and rhinvh
these public ministrations, to speak generally, exclude
private absolution ; and where, in the particular case of a
dying man, the private application of these public minis-
trations is permitted, the former must be essentially the
same in kind as the latter : and if privacy can enter in at
all, it is only accidentally, in consequence of the excep-
tional nature of the circumstances, and not of anything
essentially inherent in the power of the priest, ass i«! the

must I)
public.

146 CONFESSION

theory of the Confessionalists. In fact, such an ex-
ceptional exercise cannot govern the general nature of the
power to which it is, accidentally and up to a certain
point, in opposition ; the private must be the same in kind
as the public ; and the public we have seen is nothing more
nor less than an official declaration of God's mercy, and
therefore the private must be the same, applied indi-
vidually.

We now come to the second point, though, as I have
before observed, the points so overlap one another that it
What are is difficult to keep them entirely distinct. What were the
Ri'venT"^ powers given ? It is evident that certain powers were
granted, conferring upon the Church authority to carry on
in some way or other His scheme of salvation as already
revealed by Him, or to be revealed — either by His per-
sonal revelation or by the guidance of the Spirit of
Truth — to those whom He had chosen to be His Apostles,
and who in the Early Church were universally recognised
as the exclusive channels of revealed truth, so that what
they taught while they were alive, and after their death
what they had left behind them in writing, was received
by the Christian world as the sole rule of faith. In the
undisputed formula, ' What is written we receive, what is
not written we reject,' there is a distinct recognition both
of the authenticity of the Scriptures, and of no other
teaching or writing being accepted as inspired.

If we consider, as I think we may, with all but certainty,
that the commission of St. John was given primarily to
the Church, and by the Church delegated to the ministers
thereof, then its most obvious force would be to give au-
thority for public discipline, and public Confession, and
public reconciliation with the Church, as the body against
whom the offence had been committed : but it would give
no sanction to what the Confessionalists contend for, private
discipline, private confession, and private forgiveness of

REMISSION OF ECCLESIASTICAL CENSURES. 117

sins, and private reconciliation to God by a priest. It ^»'" ^-ovd'^

■ words refer

is true that public reconciliation to the Church would ac- to the

remission

cording to the terms of the promise be followed by the ofecciesi-
forgiveness of the ecclesiastical guilt incurred by an cenmres.
offence against the Church : and this reconciliation was
signified by public imposition of hands, followed by a public
prayer, by the bishop acting as the recognised head of
the Churcli, or a priest acting as the recognised officer of
the congregation, not by virtue of any power personally
attached to the priest, quoad priest; and perhaps this
might have been accepted as a meaning sufiiciently obvious,
and satisfactory, and exhaustive to preclude the necessity
of looking for anything farther : and our ordination formula
might be taken to refer simply to the official remission of
ecclesiastical censures and penalties, just as the analogous
passage in St. Matthew refers to personal reparation by
the person injuring and personal forgiveness by the
person injured. The sin, in its relation to the Church,
would be forgiven in heaven, even as it had been forgiven
on earth by the Church against whom the sin had been
committed ; and I again put to my readers whether it
is not perfectly clear that if this is the force of the
passage, it can give no sanction to that which the Confes-
sionalists contend for — private Confession, private penance
as a condition of forgiveness — private absolution as the
exercise of a personal sacerdotal power.

But though such an interpretation would satisfy all
the definite requirements of the passage, yet, as in the
primitive Church, reference is frequently made to it as the
ground for expecting effective resvilts from certain public
ministrations of the clergy, other than the public reconcilia-
tion of aotorious sinners by the laying on of hands and
admitting them to the Lord's Table, it would seem that the
interpretation above given does not exhaust the force of the
passage. And as our Church (though ecclesiastical censures

I. 2

But also to

sometliing

more.

148 COXFESSIOX.

have all but ntterlj disappeared from our system) still re-
tains the words in the ordination formula, it would seem
they are supposed to apply to some more particular exercise
of the clerical functions : so that passing by the question
whether their main reference was not to the remission of
ecclesiastical censures, I Avill address myself to the point
whether they contain any sanction to what is usually
called Auricular Confession.
Compari- If -^e Compare the account o-iven by St. Luke of what

soil of tlie _ f . .

accounts in took placG in the company which the two disciples from

tlie Evan-
gelists. Emmaus found assembled at Jerusalem — viz. the eleven

(or rather the ten), and others with them — we shall be
struck by the absence of the commission which holds so
prominent a place in the account given b}'^ St. John ; there
is not the smallest trace of it in St. Luke, in the shape at
least in which St. John gives it; that it occurred, we must
believe, without an atom of doubt, and we cannot suppose
it to have been unknown to, or to have been forgotten by,
St. Luke ; the question is, whether he expressed the same
thing under a different aspect, and in different terms.
If so, this may give the key to the meaning of the passage
in St. John. Thus we find in St. Luke that our Blessed
Lord on that evening personally addressing the Church
together with the Apostles distinctly ordered that re-
pentance and remission of sins should be — not given or
granted by the sentence of the Apostles — but preached
among all nations ; in other words, He instituted the saaie
ministry of reconciliation, the same ministry of forgiveness
of sins, as St. John records in the well-known passage.
St. Luke, taking in what may be called its practical
phase the commission, which, according to St. Matthew
and St. Mark, was also conferred in the same way upon
the eleven separately, gives the methods whereby the
ministry of forgiveness of sins was to be exercised, while
St. John, in a more doctrinal spirit, though not with

ACCOUNTS OF THE EVANGELISTS. 149

more essential correctness and truth, records the words,
Avhereby the commission was doctrinally, so to say, con-
ferred, and in which the Holy Ghost was given for the
execution thereof; just in the same way as, omitting
the institution of Baptism and the Lord's Supper, he
sets forth with more distinctness the theory and nature
of both these sacraments. Hence, taking the two evan-
gelists together, we find that on that evening our Lord
conferred upon His Church, first, the power, ' receive ye
the Holy Ghost,' secondly, the office or ministry of recon-
ciliation, 'whosesoever sins ye remit, &c.,' and thirdly.
He ordained the means whereby the office was to be exe-
cuted the preaching authoritatively repentance and forgive-
ness, in other words, God's mercy in forgiving sins: to
which St. Matthew and St. Mark add the administration of
Baptism : and thus we get the whole ministry of recon-
ciliation, whether we view it as conferred by Christ on the
Apostles and continued to their successors, or as delegated
by the Church to those who are ordained to the ministry.
And this is the view which our Church seems to take in
the matter. The absolution in the Daily Prayers recog-
nises in the commandment to declare and pronounce, i.e. OurCiunch

■■• embodies

set forth by authority, St. Luke's statement of the powers both ac-
counts.
given, namely, preaching repentance and remission of sins ;

in the Visitation office, the absolution puts forward St.
John's practically identical commission for remitting sins.
Again, the former takes St. Matthew's and St. Mark's
account of this authority being given to the eleven per-
sonally, at another time and place : it is said that the power
and commandment is given to the ministers : in the latter
we have the account given by St. John and St. Luke (of
course referring to the same occasion as St. John) of
its having been given to the Church : and it is spoken of as
only committed to the minister : the reason of this diff'er-
ence probably being, that in the one case both the pub-

150 COXF]^:SSION.

licity of the ministration and the form of the absolution
mark that the power is exercised by the ministers as
officers of the Church and the congregation : where a
more private, though not necessarily altogether private,
exercise of this power is permitted, our Church has
thought fit to state the fact, that the authority is given
by the Church and only committed to the ministers, lest it
should be supposed, either by the sinner absolved or by
. the priest absolving, that it was exercised in virtue of a
sacerdotal power conferred directly on every single member
of a priestly caste or order by Christ Himself.^
How it The point, however, practically resolves itself into the

cis'cd!^^'^ question how the power so conferred was exercised : for in
the early ages of the Church, and especially in the
Apostolic age, under the immediate supervision of those
unto whom Christ had committed the organisation of
the Gospel Kingdom, it is impossible to conceive that
whatever Christ intended in those words should not
have been definitely ordained, or should have lapsed
into desuetude ; impossible, that that which was instituted
and ordained by the Apostles should not have been the
exhaustive development of the commission : so that, by
seeing what was taught by them, and practised in the
really early Church, before error had time to establish
itself, or forgetfulness to creep in unrebuked, we shall
ascertain what the passage really does mean : while by
observing what is not so taught and practised, we shall
find out what it does not mean : we shall be able to detect
the falsity of any modern theories and practices, which,
pretending to rest on St. John's words, have, in reality,
no such foundation.

' This use of the word ' commandment' would rather lead us to think that
the power to be exercised is to be received as being imposed upon the Apostles
as a command. Now, they are never commanded to forgive sins in the Con-
fessionalist sense, but they are commanded to preach and baptize : these
being ways which, as we shall see presently, the Early Church accepted as the
legitimate exercise of the power of remitting sins.

PRACTICE OF THE APOSTLES. 151

The Confessionalists certainly lose nothing for want Assertion

(, .. • f> n • • 1 ■^ , 1 o^ Confes-

ot assertion : it anything is needed to support their case, sionaiists.
they immediately assert the fact of its existence ; and there
is no stronger instance of this than their prompt state-
ment that, as might be expected, the powers thus given
to the Apostles were not allowed by them to lie dormant :
the matter of fact being that throughout the records of
the Early Church as given in the Acts of the Apostles —
throughout the records of the Church for three hundred
years — there is not a single instance or the slightest trace
of the exercise of the power claimed by the Confes-
sionalists, though there are numberless occasions in
which, had it existed, it must have been exercised and
recorded.

Thus — had the Apostles believed themselves to have Private
had this power, is it credible that in healing diseases andabsoiu-
tliey never once used the formula which our Lord had reTOffnised
Himself consecrated to the exercise of this power, ' Thy Apostles.
sins be forgiven thee ? ' Again, if we look to Acts viii., we
shall find that though Simon -Magus was evidently anxious
for forgiveness, he does not ask for absolution at St. Peter's
hands, but requests his prayers ; and though St. Peter is
no less anxious for Simon Magus' restoration, he does not
suggest to him auricular confession of his sins, and the
receiving thereupon absolution, but prayer to God for
forgiveness. Anyone who reads the Acts with a thought-
ful eye can scarcely fail to observe how many cases there
are in which, if the Confessionalist system were true,
confession would have been enforced and absolution
requested : and yet in no one of them is there the smallest
hint of either the one or the other.

There is, indeed, one case seemingly in their favour,
which is disingenuously quoted as if it were one of many,
and not a singular one. It is astonishing that men of any
logical power whatever, should not see at a glimj)se that

152

CONFESSION.

Case of

Corinthian

penitent.

Meaning of

Other pas-
sages al-
leged as
giving
power to

even this tells directly against them. It is the case of
the Corinthian penitent, in Avhich St. Paul, after speaking
of a punishment inflicted on him by many,^ afterwards
speaks of himself as forgiving it in the person of Christ.'*

First. The word used for ' forgive ' {xapi^sadai), what-
ever else it may signify, does certainly not signify forgive-
ness by St. Paul of a debt due to God, but of a debt due
to the person forgiving. That is, it was forgiven by the
Corinthian Church and by St. Paul as the head of that
Church, as an ecclesiastical offence against the Christian
Commonwealth in Corinth, and against St. Paul as the
chief pastor thereof, who by his miraculous powers had
inflicted a temporal punishment upon the sinner, in order
to bring him to repentance : there is not the very smallest
trace of any auricular confession submitted to by the
penitent : and even the sorrow which is spoken of seems to
have been principally that of the congregation themselves,
Avho had allowed the sin to go uni^unished and unnoticed.

I confess it is with reluctance that I feel myself obliged
to take this view of the force of the word translated ' to
forgive,' for if St. Paul could be viewed as forgiving the
offence as against God, it proves beyond a doubt that the
power of forgiving sins, which the Confessionalists main-
tain CA^ery priest has, suo jure et arhitrio, was not possessed
by the Corinthian priests, since they were obliged to have
recourse to St. Paul to ratify what they had done ;
nothing could be more complete ; and thus is disposed
of the only instance in which they even pretend to find
a recognition of a power which, if it existed at all, must
liave been of the utmost importance, and of perpetual
occurrence in every one of the Churches.

In spite, however, of the absence of any trace of the
exercise of this powex* of forgiving sins by private priestlv
absolution, the Confessionalists think to make out their

' 1 Cor. V. 4.

' 2 Cor. ii. 4.

CORINTHIAN PENITEXT. 153

case by alleging passages which they interpret as giving forgive
this power to the priests, forgetting (to rej^eat what I
have said above) that if they are right the power must
have been perpetually exercised ; so that even if the pas-
sages were verbally as distinct as the well-known words of
St. John, yet it would not follow from these passages, any
more than from that, that the power given was to be
exercised in the way in which they pretend to exercise it,
but in which it never was exercised in the early Church ;
if there had been any trace of its exercise in the early
Church, then these passages might be used as probably
referring to it : but even if the meaning affixed to them was
as clear as it is shadowy, they cannot, either separately
or together, neutralise the fatal fact, that the practice,
founded on this interpretation, was unknown to Primitive
Christianity.

I have already considered the jjassage in St. John, and LiterMi
I would, in addition to what I have there said, suggest a the^pas^a^ie
complete answer to the stress which the Confessionalists "' ' ^' " '"'
lay on the naked literal meaning of the passage, saying
that the literal meaning of our Lord's words cannot and
may not be evaded. This sounds all very well ; but, as a
matter of fact, neither by themselves, nor by anyone else,
are the words taken in their literal sense : for this gives
the priest the absolute unconditional power of forgiving-
sins without one word of faith or repentance : and this
I believe no one has ever claimed. Again, if the naked
literal sense is to be adhered to, the priests forgive sins
by their personal authority, whereas even most advanced
Confessionalists disclaim, in words at least, any ascrip-
tion of this power to any but Christ.

Another passage is in St. Matthew ix. 8, where, after Such power
our Lord had healed the paralytic man by the formula, man. St.
'Thy sins he forgiven thee,'' St. Matthew adds ' the mid- ^ '^ ' '^' '
titudes saiu it, and mar v ell ed and rjlorificd God who had given

154 COXFESSION.

such power unto man.' From this the Confessionalists
argue that the power of forgiving sins is given to the
priests. Thus — the multitudes marvelled at the power of
forgiving sins being given to men ; and as there is no dis-
approval or correction of these thoughts of the multitude,
therefore this expression of St. Matthew is to be taken as
a revelation of the power of forgiving sins being given to
man. I think the first impression of most of my readers
must be that it is incredible that rational beings could, on
so serious a subject, use reasoning, which savours of jest-
ing ; my own personal impression was that it was so silly
that the only way of answering it was by letting it answer
itself; gradually, however, one or two salient points dis-
closed themselves on which a definite refutation may be
based.
What it First, it is clear that the Jews marvelled not at the

Avi'ddi\he inner unseen power which, according to our Lord's words,
veiiecr**'^* ^''^^ implied in the miracle which was worked by these
words, but rather at the outward manifestation of the
power of healing ; and in the parallel passage in St. Mark
ii. 3 it is said, ' We never saw it in this fashion,' and in
St. Luke V. 26, * We have seen strange things to-day ; '
both of them referring rather to what they did see — the
healing of the man — than to the power of forgiving sins,
which they did not see ; at all events, it is clear that the
common people were not familiarised with even our Lord
possessing the power which, according to the Confession-
alists, they recognised as commonly given to men : for on
a later occasion (St. Luke vii. 49) we find them exclaiming,
' Who is this that forgiveth sins also ? ' — what they mar-
velled at and glorified God for, was the power of curing
incurable diseases by half-a-dozen words.
Unreprov- Further, if the thoughts of the Jews, unless definitely

ances of" rcprovcd and contradicted, are to be taken as indicating
no^indTca- revealed truth, strange consequences would follow ; for our

ST. MATTHEW IX. 8. 155

Lord was not here recognised by the Jews as a man who, tion of
being God, had power to do what other men could not do,
but at the most as a man endowed by God to work mira-
cles ; it struck them as wonderful that a man — one of the
human race — should have had such power given him ; and
if their thought is to be recognised as establishing a truth,
it follows that our Lord is not God and man, but only a
man empowered by God.

Again, the principle on which this argument rests does
not hold ; it is not true that every opinion or saying of
the multitude, which is not directly denied or reproved by
the evangelists, is indicative of revealed truth; as my
readers study the Gospels, they will find many instances
to the contrary ; here is one : ' We hioiv that God heardk
not sinners ' passes without comment. Is this true '?
Again, in St. John vii. 26, ' When Christ cometh, no
man knoiveth ivhence He is.' Is this true?

But after all, what they want to establish is easily Practical
tested ; they claim for certain men — ordained priests — ^that possessing
they have the powers at which the Jews, according to St. power.
Matthew, marvelled, and spoke of as being given to men — -
the same powers in this respect as our Lord. Nothing can
be easier than to try. Let them go to the Hospital for
Incurables, or even any of the ordinary Hospitals, and pro-
nounce over some bed-ridden person the words, ' Thy sins
be forgiven thee,' and see whether he does take up his
bed, arise, and walk ; nothing can be easier ; if they have
the power, let them exercise it. In fact, if there had been
any reality in the practice of touching for the king's evil,
which survived the Reformation up to the reign of Queen
Anne, the power attributed to our anointed kings would
have been far more like a continuation of the Apostolic
powers, than anything enjoyed by the spiritual successors
of the Apostles.

Another passage is no less weak — more so, it cannot pa"°a'e'in

156 CONFESSION.

2 Cor. V. be. St. Paul says, ' He has o-iven unto us the ministry of

18, 1!:', iO. ... .

reconciliation' (2 Cor. v. 18), and ' hath committed to us
the word of reconciliation ' (v. 19). Who doubts that the
ministry of reconciliation is given to Christ's ambas-
sadors? Nay, I will go farther, and say that it means
the ministry of the forgiveness of sins — the forgiveness of
sins by God,' and the acceptance and grasping thereof by
man. But how does this prove that this ministry is to be
exercised by the auricular Confession and private forgive-
ness of sins of the Confessionalists ? that is, by a method
of which there is no mention or instance in Scripture, nor
in the early Church? In this fact we see what this ministry
is not ; what it is, or at lea^t one method of it, is told us
in the commission to preach the Gospel of repentance and
remission of sins, and in the order to baptise, with the
light thrown upon it by the text, ' Arise, and he bap-
tised and wash away your sins.' Another phase of this
ministry we see in the next verse,^ in which St. Paul
speaks of himself and Timothy as in Chris b's stesid pray-
ing them to he reconciled to God, as though God or Christ
Himself were beseeching them to listen to Him. It is
significant that some of the most dishonest of the Con-
fessionalist school leave out the notion pray, and para-
phrase the passage,^ as if St. Paul spoke of himself as
reconciling them to God as Christ did, that is, by forgiving
their sins ; though if the passage did stand thus, and had
that meaning, the reconciling men to God as Christ did
must carry with it a good deal more than merely forgiving
i.osicai sins — death on the Cross, for instance. My readers will
of these easily see that the interpolations and alterations that

' ' To wit, that God was in Christ reconciling the world unto Himself, not
imputing their trespasses unto them.'

2 V. 20.

^ ' He ' (the Confessor) ' is the ambassador for Christ, and is sent in Christ's
stead to reconcile you to God.' ' Pardon through the Precious Blood.' Edited
by a Committee of Clergy. Palmer, 32 Little Queen Street, 1870,

OTHER PASSAGES ALLEGED. 157

the Medievalists are so fond of makino- in certain passages Confession-

^ ^ ° . alistargu-

botli of the Scriptures or the Prayer Book are uncon- ments.
scions, but unequivocal confessions, that the passages as
they stand are against them. The break-down of such
arguments not only deprives their position of the weight
they would have added to it, but adds greatly to the
weight of the other scale.

It is true, that our Lord said to His Church, just As my

P ather

before he breathed upon the assembled disciples, 'as my hath .sent
Father hath sent me, even so send I you : ' this text is some- i you.
times used — or rather misused — to give a colouring to the
interpretation of the Ministry of Reconciliation of which
I have just spoken ; but our Lord's power to forgive
sins did not arise from His being sent by God, but from
His own divine Prerogative and Being, whence it is held
to be a proof, not of His Mission, but of His Divinity.

Nor does this prove that God's Mission of His Son, in what

respects

and Christ's Mission to His Church, are so identical that our Lord's
all the works and powers attached to the one are attached ami the
to the other; and without this being so, the text cannot mission
be used to prove that because our Lord had this or that
particular function or power, the Church or the Apostles
had it also. The word as may signify only th(5 fact of
the Mission and not its details. In some points our
Lord's Mission and that of His Church are the same : but
the points of similarity must be proved each by itself,
and cannot be deduced en masse from the passage alleged.
For instance, our Lord's Mission was prophetic. He
published the good tidings of the work He was about
to woPii for the remission of the sins of the whole world :
the Mission of the Church is prophetic, to publish the
work which Christ has wrought, the remission of sins
attached thereto ; but Christ's prophecy was that of Omni-
science, that of the Church is interpretative. Christ's
Mission was sacerdotal to offer the one Sacrifice for the

are tlie
same.

158 CONFESSION.

sins of the whole world ; the Church's Mission is not
sacerdotal, but still prophetic, to publish Christ's death as
the one sufficient satisfaction and oblation. Our Lord's
Mission was regal ; that of the Church is not. Our Lord
came forth from the Father, Himself being God with all
the powers of the world visible and invisible at His com-
mand. He came forth as a monarch to establish His king-
dom— to set forth His Word as its Master — to ordain
Sacraments — to attach grace to that Word and those
Sacraments ; the Church has only a ministerial and
executive of&ce, of ambassadors and stewards. Christ de-
stroyed both the penal and moral consequence of disobe-
dience to God — the Church can only remove the moral
results thereof by the ministration of the Word and
Sacraments, except so far as in the latter sin is washed
away by virtue of Christ's ordinance ; and here the office
of the Church and its clergy is purely ministerial, offering
and ministering the means whereby sin is by our Lord's
special ordinance forgiven. In short, I doubt whether the
word ' as ' expresses much more than this — as Christ's
Mission was divine and not human, so is the Mission
of the Church.
Fallacy in nnj^g logical fallacv which marks the reasoning: of the

the argil- to J &

nients Confcssionalists from the passages of Scripture which

grounded

on this they allege, is this : they ought to prove that the parti-
passage of ., I'll ^ • T'l

Scripture, cular commission which they claim was distinctly attached
to their office, whereas their strongest passage only proves
that some commission was given. They ought to prove
that this commission can only be exercised, and was only
exercised in the particular way they claim ; instead of
which, they merely assert that the words of the commis-
sion do so limit it to that method, which is a mere as-
sumption, contradicted by the nature of the commission
itself, and the facts of the case. It is just the same as if
a Baptist were to call upon us to admit that our Lord's

FALLACY OF THE CONFESSION ALLSTS. 159

commission to baptise enjoined baptism by immersion, as if
this were the only way in which our Lord's command could
be fulfilled. Of course, if this power which each priest if the Con-

fessional-

claims for himself — th.is sacrament of penance, for such ist'ssystem
it really is — were the only method in which the ministers onij'
of Christ could effectually minister to men the forgiveness which our
of their sins, it would be certain, from our Lord's words, mission
that the ministration of this (would-be) sacrament was conceiv-
part of the clerical office. Further, if what they say is true, out^ then'^'^
then St. John's words must mean what they say they do : ^orc^^'^'^'^
and the fact of there beino: no mention in the Apostolic ^^'""'"^ ?'y®

» i warrant for

writings of any sacrament of penance, must be accounted ''^•
for (however improbable the solution) by supposing it to
be the result of accident. Again, if their system had been
the only way of carrying out the commission, and the sacra-
ment of penance had been incidentally mentioned in other
parts of Scripture, it would of course have been referred
to this passage of Scripture as the authority for it. But But there
where there are other methods of carrying out the com- method^
mission in St. John, and the sacrament of penance is not ^vo"ds'do
mentioned as an Apostolic institution, it does not follow "ot^^'^'"'''''"*

•■- ' t Jus system.

that it was actually conferred by Christ, or included in the
words of St. John, merely because it might have been so
conferred and included. All these arguments proceed
from certain possibilities which are negatived by the facts
of the case, to a supposed actuality, depending on these
possibilities being realised in those facts.

ISTor will it do to establish the Confessionalist system Arguing in
on our Lord's words, and then to determine the sense ^ '^^'^° ^'
of those words by the very system which they have just
been used to establish. The meaning of our Lord's words
must be determined by other evidence, even were it
admitted that the 'prim.a facie lorce of the passage is in
their favour. My readers need not be reminded that
there are many other passages of Scripture in which the

IGO CONFESSION.

])rima facie literal meaning-, or that which is assumed
or asserted to be such, is not the real one. It is true
that thej are most consistent and most logical who
assert that this is the only way in which sins can be for-
given ; then in order to disprove their inference from our
Lord's words, we have only to show that this is not the only
Avay in which this commission of forgiveness can be exer-
cised : and their case utterly fails in its very foundation if
we can show, not only so much as this, but also that the
primitive Church never recognised it at all, and that our
own Church follows the primitive Church.

Those again who claim for this method that it is only
one way among many, while they at once give up the
only way in which the case can be maintained, I do not
merely say logically, but consistently, are easily met by
the same practical answer, that neither the Primitive
Church nor our own Church recognise this particular
method as included in or intended by our Lord's com-
mission.

It is easy to test this argument of theirs in a very
practical way. Supposing a number of fanatics or im-
postors were to revive among us a practice very similar to,
if not the same as, that of indulgences before the Reforma-
tion, of remitting sins by papers under their hand and
seal, they might if they liked, refer to ' Whosesoever sins
ye remit, they are remitted,' and say that this mode of
remitting sins was appointed by Christ : and they may
justify it by arguments every bit as good as those used by
the Ritualists — such as that when our Lord forgave the
woman. He wrote on the ground ; that St. Paul's for-
giveness to the Corinthian penitent must have been con-
veyed in writing ; really these are not one bit more absurd
than some of those advanced by our ' Catholic ' school,
such, for instance, as the David and Nathan argument.
And now how would any rational Churchman meet such a

PRACTICAL TEST OF THE ARGUMENT. IGl

system ? Would he not say that though not denymg that
a power of remission of sins was given in some way or
other to the Church, yet he denied that this power was
given ? and he would appeal to the judgment of any
reasonable being whether he could be accused of denying
the former because he denied the latter — or whether the
latter followed from the former. He would say that there
was not a single instance of this particular exercise of
this power in Scripture nor in the Primitive Church, and
I think the argument would be absolutely conclusive, and
far outweighing any supposed advantages which might be
pleaded in its favour : and my readers will see that it is
verbatim and literatim the argument I use against our
Confessionalists.

162

CONFESSION.

Practice
of earh'^
Church.

What it
did not re-
cognise.

CHAPTEE XII.

Witness of the practice of the post-apostolic Early Church as to the meaning
of our Lord's Words — As to what was not lield — As to what was held—
Interpretation put upon our Lord's Words — In their widest sense — Direct
remission of ecclesiastical offences — Mediate and indirect commission — By
preaching of repentance and remission of sins — Baptism — Intercessory
prayer — Result of the power exercised — By the proclamation of God's pro-
mises— By baptism — Intercessory prayer — Retaining power — Exercise and
results of — Power not to be exceeded — What is absolution — Not mere
preaching — Not merely reading the Bible — Proclamation of the Gospel by
the Church before the New Testament Scriptures existed — Under our Lord's
special commission and authority — This proclamation afterwards embodied
iu the written Word — Authority of the Church and of the Scriptures — The
written Word does not supersede the voice of the Church, but bears witness
to it and protects it from corruptions — Essential duty of every Church
still to publish the message which our Lord put into its mouth — This pro-
phetic office of the Church exercised in absolution — Conferred in our own
Church on the second order of ministers — Couched in a formula of words —
Difference between this and preaching on the one hand, and the sacra-
mental theory on the other — Not antagonistic to the written word.

We have already seen what is the witness borne by the
Apostles' practice as to their interpretation of our Lord's
words ; I will now consider the practice of the Early
Church : and I am very much mistaken if the result will
not be the same.

And first, negatively : we have already seen that there
is no trace or hint, either in the Scriptures or in the Apos-
tolic Church, of our Lord's words being recognised as
giving authority to any priest to forgive sins privately, by
virtue of any sentence or formula embodying or implying
any such authority. Nor do we find any recognition of
such practice in the Church of the three first centuries.
We have seen that there is no trace of private Confession
for the purposes of private absolution in these centuries

VIEWS OF THE POST-APOSTOLIC AGE. 1G3

(see page 57 sqq.). In explaining the office and the func-
tion of the Psenitentiarius, we have seen that the witness
of the early Church is the same as that of Scripture ; and
that though confidential unbosoming of the soul to others
was practised and occasionally recommended, yet it was
not with a view to any remitting power to be privately
and formally exercised by a priest, but either for the sake
of comfort or counsel — which is the aim of Confidence
as distinguished from Confession — or else to ascertain
whether it was necessary or advisable to have recourse to
public discipline ; and therefore as far as the Confession of
the Confessionalist is essentiall}^ connected with private
absolution, the absence of the one bears witness against
the recognition or practice of the other ; and so far I think
my readers will deem the question settled as to what was
not held.

And when we turn from what was not held in the ^^''lat it
Church to what was, we shall, I think, arrive at such a
clear and correct notion of what was believed to be
included in and intended by our Lord's words, as will
settle the special obligations towards the Church imposed
on the English clergy by the use of these words in the
Ordination office — in other words, what obligations our
Church intended to be imposed and accepted.

In general terms, our Lord's words were held to give to interpreta-
those to whom they were addressed — the Church and upoiwmr
the Apostles, and Christ's ministers and stewards in His ^vords!
Church — the power to proclaim and bring home the minis-
try of forgiveness — of the remission of sins on repentance —
effectually to those to whom they speak in Christ's name as
ministers ; and our Lord meant to express that the mission
of His Church carried with it divine authority even as Their
His own had done ; that this ministry was not merely
a human one, but that whatever consciences were loosed
from sin thereby, were loosed as effectually and surely as

M 2

■widest
sense.

164 CONFESSION.

when our Lord Himself preached the same opening of
eyes to the blind, the same delivery from the guilt and
power of sin by the work which He came on earth to
accomplish.

In their We must not lose sight of the fact, that in their

widest acceptation our Lord's words in the first clause
of the sentence — ' whosesoever sins ye remit, they are
remitted ' (and this is the point to which I wish at present
to confine our attention)— were loosely talcen to include
all those ministrations within the range of the Gospel
scheme, which by bringing men to Christ, exhorting them
to, and producing in them, repentance and faith, are thus
mediately and instrumentally the means of their sins being
forgiven. All these were held to fall under our Lord's
promise, as by them men were loosed from their sins ;
this would hardly have been the case, had those words
been conceived to institute a special and peculiar sacra-
mental ordinance of immediate and direct forgiveness.
The mere exhortation to virtue was held to be an act of
loosing.' And this ministration of loosing might sometimes
even be exercised by a layman, not only in the case of
an injured man forgiving the injury done to him, in which
case the forgiving of the injury on earth carried with it,
according to Christ's promise, the remission of the guilt
which was attached to it as a sin against a brother — but
even by a layman praying for another man. A man is
even said to break the bonds of his own sins ^ when by the
energies of his own conscience and reason he is led to
repentance and faith. But still the definite fulfilment of
the promise — the formal carrying out the commission — was
something more than this. The Church had a special
function, as contrasted with the pious energies of indi-
viduals, in bringing the Gospel home to souls. The results
might be the same, but there was in the one ex officio, a

' Usher, p. 121, note 133. ^ Bingham, vi. 578.

ACCEPTED MEANING OF OUR LORD'S WORDS. 165

certainty and authority wliicli was lacking in the other.
Passing by then, what may be called the informal results
of our Lord's words as scarcely apposite for our purpose,
we shall find that those acts of official remission, which
are limited to the Church in its corporate capacity, and to
the clergy in respect of their ministerial office in that
corporate body, were held to be :

1. A direct and immediate remission of sins committed t)irectre-

. mission of

against the Church, signified by a public imposition of e<eiesiasti-
hands before the congregation, and admission to the Lord's fences,
Table, exclusion from which had been part of the punish-
ment inflicted. This public reconciliation was performed
as an act of the Church and congregation by a presbyter
or president thereof — always followed by a prayer.' This
method of exercising the power given in the text of St.
John is foreign to our subject, inasmuch as public dis-
cipline in the congregation has passed aAvay, not only
from our own Church, but from most of the Churches of
Christendom.^

' Bingham, \\. 533. This prayer must either have reference to the sins
condoned by the Church as ecclesiastical oifences, or to other sins which are
not taken cognisance of by public discipline. In the one case the notion would
be that the condonation of sins against the Church did not extend to the re-
mission thereof as against God ; in the other, the notion would be of secret sins
which were left to each man's conscience. The words of the liturgical prayer
seems to me to mean the latter, as it includes all sins. It is observable that
our Lord's words are quoted as a warrant for the prayer, which seems to in-
dicate that they were not conceived to confer the power of absolute remission
as a. fait acco^npli.

2 On the disuse of the direct power of loosing from the ecclesiastical pe-
nalties and guilt, this direct forgiveness of sins against the Church, and for that
phase of guilt against God arising from such sins — which was granted and con-
summated by the will of the clergy, and signified by the imposition of hands —
was passed on to another class of sins, namely, those immediately against God,
which had hitherto been left to other ministrations of the clergy in indirect
discharge of our Lord's commission. The dispensation of the Word and sacra-
ments, as an independent, though indirect, mode of remitting sins against
God, was more and more merged in a direct sacerdotal prerogative of granting
directly that forgiveness for these sins which had previously been given for sins
against the Church. Thus sacerdotal absolution became the only way in which
forgiveness was granted to repentance and faith, though the old precatory form

166 CONFESSION.

2. A ministry of mediate * and indirect remission of
sins — of personal sins as against God — by proclaiming
and pronouncing and presenting authoritatively, as the
mouth-pieces and ministers of Christ, the Gospel promises
of forgiveness of sin and sins against Himself to all the
world on certain conditions of faitli, repentance — not as a
sentence of the minister's own will or word, but as God's
will and offer to all mankind.*
Prociama- This consists in either the general proclamation of

pentance God's unlimited mercy, on certain terms prescribed by
si'on oTsins. God, from which there is no authority for varying ; set
forth either by j)ublic ministration, by preaching, in the
scriptural sense of the word, or ministration of the doc-
trines, facts, promises, and precepts of the Scriptures,^ or
by a more particular assurance thereof to individuals — such
as to the jailor by St. Paul at Phillippi, and the eunuch
by St. Philip.
Bant ism ^^j ^^^^ administration of Baptism. As, for instance,

when St. Peter, on the day of Pentecost, answered the
question, 'What shall we do? ' by the public proclamation
of repentance and baptism, causing those who asked it
to be baptised in the name of Christ for the remission of
sins — there was repentance, faith, and acceptance on their
part, and instant forgiveness on God's; not a word of
confession or forgiveness of sins by formal absolution. And
in accordance with this notion, we find Cyprian dis-
tinctly recognising baptism as one of the ways in which our
Lord's commission was executed. Admission to the Holy

M'as retained as a witness and a relic of the primitive view that pardon of such
sins was not granted by man, but though sought for by prayer from God (see
p. 75).

» Usher, p. 109. Bingham, vi. p. 538, p. 646.

2 If this indirect ministry had not been so recognised, it M'ould follow tliatour
Lord's commission would for the first four centuries have been held to warrant
nothing more than public discipline, and then of course no warrant can be drawn
from it for the private exercise of a sacerdotal power of private forgiveness.

' Usher, p. 121 sqq., notes 133, 13-1. Bingham, vi. 538.

DIRECT AND INDIRECT REMISSION. 1G7

Communion was also viewed as a mode of exercising this
power, as being- the consummation, or sign of it.' See
page 129, note.

Or, the praying ^ ministerially in their public office,
that God would pardon the sins of those for whom they
prayed ; and this is sometimes prefaced by the declara-
tion of God's mercy as the foundation of the prayer.
Sometimes it stands alone, but even when standing alone interces-

' " son'

it virtually implies the former, inasmuch as prayer for prayer.
pardon must be grounded on a belief in the possibility of
God's mercy thus prayed for, just as baptism implies a
firm belief in those promises of which it is the seal.

Taking then this as the view of the early Church on Result of

the ])Ower

the commission and powers conferred by our Lord's words, exercised.
' whosesoever sms ye remit,' we shall have not much diffi-
culty in arriving at a clear view of the results expressed
in the words ' they are remitted.'

First. If a man is moved to repentance and faith in the pro-

.. - . clamatiou

and acceptance of the mercy thus, either publicly or pri- of God's
vately, proclaimed to him, the promise of forgiveness of
sins, thus set before him as in God's name and by God's
authority, becomes to him an actual offer on God's part.
He may know that there is no power in his sins to bind
him, but that he may come to God in full confidence that
forgiveness of his sins awaits him in foro coeli, not by the
virtue of the proclamation, but by the absolute certainty
of the mercy which the proclamation tells him is pre-
pared for his acceptance.

Secondly. If a man accepts Baptism in repentance and in baptism.
faith he may trust that his sins are forgiven him in this
sacramental exercise of the ministry of reconciliation,
combining the offer and the acceptance thereof, ordained
and prescribed by Christ Himself, and specially committed
to His Church and ministers. If he lacks repentance and

' Bingluim, vi. pp. 531 and 535. * Uther, p. 110 sqq.

jjower.

168 CONFESSION.

faith, then this exercise of the ministry of the forgiveness
of sins by the Church is null and void, not by reason of
the uncertainty or failure of the offer or promise, but by
lack of the conditions necessary to its effectiveness.
Inter- Thirdly. If a man earnestly desires the fruition of

cessory

prayer. God's mcrcy, and discerning in the formal prayer the expo-
sition of that mercy in its full extent and reality, lays-
hold thereof by a corresponding act of intelligent faith,
then he may trust that his sins are forgiven him in foro
cceli. If he lacks repentance and faith, the prayer passes
away ineffectively. It does not itself give him forgiveness
of sins, though it may lead him to that change of mind to
which the promise is made.

Retaining Onco morc — with regard to the second part of the

promise ' Whososoever sins ye retain, they are retained.'
If the Church finds men obstinately and hopelessly deter-
mined not to receive Christianity, as in the case of the
Jews from whom St. Paul turned to the Gentiles, then
the sins of these people are retained, the bonds of their
sins are not loosed, they remain exactly as they were. Or
if a man seeks for Baptism obviously from merely worldly
motives, without either faith or repentance, then the
Church, or the ministers of the Church, in refusing to
baptise him, would be refusing to loose him from his sins :
and the judgment of the Church, provided that it were
true and just, would be only the echo of that truth which
came down to us from heaven, that there is none other
name under heaven whereby men can be saved but that of
Jesus Christ. It would be in vain for a man to seek
escape from his sins by any other way than that which
Christ has proclaimed to be the only way. Or if there be
reasonable evidence or a reasonable presumption, that a
man is still in unrepented sin, then the refusal of the
Church to pray for him, or to tell him formally that God's
mercy is still applicable to Lis case, is a refusal to hold

EETAININQ POWER. 1G9

oat to liiin officially, the Gospel message of remission of
sins : sucli an act must of necessity give his sins a firmer
hold over him, unless indeed it should awaken him to that
repentance and faith, to which the Church could, without
breach of trust, hold out God's promises. In each case
the Church's judgment on earth, provided it be true
and just, is the expression of what the sinner is sure to
find in heaven, not by virtue of its being the Church's
judgment, but by virtue of the nature of the Gospel thus
ministerially, and not judicially, set forth. ^ If there are
repentance and faith he is, on God's own promise and fiat,
sure that pardon is prepared for him. If there are not,
he remains in his sins — they are by the same fiat retained.
Of course the Church or the ministers must not exceed Power

not to be

their authority, and must proceed on no other considera- exceeded.
tion than that of the absence of repentance and faith. If
other elements are introduced, then the authority is ex-
ceeded, and the judgment is null. Thus, for instance, if
the Church refuses to proclaim God's promises to a nation
on grounds of policy or revenge, or if a priest refuses to
j)roclaim those promises except on the condition of con-
fession to him, then the man who is thus repelled is none
the worse for the refusal — the sin attaches to the priest.

We' have now, I think, examined sufficiently into the
functions and powers committed by our Lord to His
Church by His words in St. John to enable us to form a
clear notion of what are the powers exercised by, and
the benefit received from, absolution.

What then is Absolution? We have seen (page 132)
what it is not — let us now see what it is. The Con-
fessionalists try to make out that those who do not hold
their sacerdotal theories on the subject must maintain
that it is merely preaching ; and since this would be
generally denied, and is, moreover, contradicted by the

> Usher, p. 134, note 241 ; Ibid., p. 107, note 48.

170

CONFESSION.

Commis-
sion to
Church
before the
writtea
word.

places whicli absolution and preacliing severally hold in
our services, they imagine that we are driven into the
conclusion that it must be what they say it is. I think
that they are mistaken ; for though our Church — ignoring,
in harmony with, primitive usage, any direct exercise of
a sacerdotal power of forgiving sins against God privately,
by virtue of a form of words pronounced by the priest —
has returned to primitive usage by taking the dispensation
of the word and sacraments as the execution of the com-
mission for the remission of sins, yet it does not follow
that every such dispensation of the word is absolution in
the eyes of the Church. It is true that the benefit of
absolution (see page 111) may be, and often has been,
produced b}^ preaching, without any definite authority :
by letters or books ; but still we must not confound such
ministrations of pious men, whether clergy or laity,
with absolution. Neither is reading the Bible to a man
in grief of conscience absolution, however decided and
marked may be the spiritual result of such a dispensation
of God's word. One obvious difference between such,
ministrations and absolution is, that the latter is always
couched in a formula ; but I think the real difference lies
deeper than this, and that on examination we shall see
that absolution is, in our theological language, confined
to some peculiar declaration or dispensation of God's
scheme of mercy, in which is called into play, not the
power ' (in the proper sense of the word), but the office
and authority of the Church and its ministers as the
warrant for the message really being God's word and
will.

We shall, I think, best arrive at a clear notion of the
nature and extent of that authority if we go back to the
time at which that commission was first given, before the
word of the New Testament existed in its written shape,

' See Usher, p. 107, note 48.

Testament.

PROPHETIC OFFICE OF THE CHURCH. 171

containing the full revelation of the Gospel scheme, as
the comi^lete source of all religious knowledge and the
rule of all faith. In those daj^s the Gospel message of
the remission of sins was set forth to men on the per-
sonal authoritj^ of the Apostles, or of those whom they sent
out to found churches in the several localities, or of the
churches so founded ; and to the reality of this authority
witness was borne by miraculous powers, and the testimony
of those who had seen and heard our Lord.

We must keep steadily in mind the existence of the The writ-
authority of the Church under our Lord's direct com- o'Arxew
mission, and then go on to the time when the written
word was called into being by the formation of the canon
of Scripture, containing the sum and substance of what
fell from the Apostles' pens and lips under the immediate
leading of the Holy Spirit of Truth ; thus perpetuating
and transmitting in all generations to the end of the
world the teaching and guiding which they had re-
ceived : whence men could draw by the aid of their
spiritualised ]-eason exactly the same message which the
Church was authorised to pronounce — Eepentance and
Eemission of Sins. We cannot fail to see that the
written word embodies the same promise of remission of
sins to individual faith, drawn from personal study of the
word, as was attached in our Lord's commission to the
authoritative declarations thereof by the Church.

There was then in those early times an authority dis- These two
tinct from that of the New Testament Scriptures, and
yet substantially the same. It was the voice of the
Church, and those whom the Church sent forth under the
commission for the publication of the remission of sins,
given, as we have seen, with a promise that the message
published, though it was by mere men, would hold good
in Heaven.

This voice and authoritv of the Church still exists

distinct.

172

CONFESSION.

Relations

between

them.

The office
of the
Church
still exists,

ond is
exercised
ill all
Churches.

side by side witli the voice of the written word, which
perfectly embodies its utterances. The written word was
not meant to cancel or supersede the personal office, or
the authority or the message of the Church, but rather to
establish it, to bear witness to its having been conferred,
to stereotype it, to protect it against the danger of
being perverted or altered, to which it is exposed by being-
committed — a treasure in earthen vessels— to the un-
inspired ministry and agency of men of strong passions,
eager fancies, blind wills ; and the real function of the
written word ever since has been not only to enable men
to read God's message for themselves, but to prevent, or
at least to bear witness against, any misuse of the personal
prophetic office of the Church, against perversions and
distortions of the message committed to its authority
which th© best and most divine things are apt to suffer at
the hands of men.

As then before the publication of the written word it
was part of the absolute duty of the Church and every
branch thereof— the final cause and condition of its ex-
istence as a Church — to carry out our Lord's commission
for the remission of sins by the publication ©f the message
which He put into its mouth ; as it was the office of every
minister of that Church, according to his vocation and
mission, to act on the authority which the Church gave
him for this purpose ; so now, the same commission
and duty appertains to every Church and its ministers, to
proclaim the remission of sins by the exercise of that
authority, which was from the beginning, and is still, an
essential attribute of the body which our Lord called into
existence for this purpose ; however much the message
which the Church was commissioned to declare has been
in some ages and countries added to and falsified, in spite
of the protest of the written word ; nor do I believe that
there ever has been, in any country, a Church, whatever

EXERCISED NOW IN ABSOLUTION. 173

may have been its constitution, which has not, and, as far
as it was a Church at all, claimed to act on this divine
commission, and to exercise in some shape or other this
prophetic office ; distinct, indeed, from that of the written
word, but still in subordination to it, derived from our
Lord Himself, in an age anterior to that of the written
word itself.

It is then the personal prophetic office of which I have This office
been speaking, confined to, and bearing directly on, the inateoiu-
remission of sins — that is the very Gospel itself — which ^^'^^'
our Church exercises in our absolution, by the authoritative
declaration of that class of ministers whom we term pres-
byters or priests, to whom it has been thought fit to confine
it, couched in a formula of words ; the effect of such for-
mula being to mark that it is not the energy of the in-
dividual will of the minister pronouncing it, but that the
authority to put forth such a declaration belongs to the
Body Corporate of the Church, and not to every individual
priest jure sacerdotale. This differs both from preaching Thus differs
on the one hand, and the sacramental system of Eome and preaching.
the Confessionalists on the other. From the former, in
that though the message of the priest and the preacher
is the same, yet in the one it rests on the prophetic office
of the Church — on the individual, though official, resj)onsi-
bility of the minister ; in the other, it rests directly on
the written word set forth by those to whom this par-
ticular ministration is committed. And our Church, by
thus claiming the mission and the prerogative with which
our Lord Himself invested it, presents itself to the eyes
of man as being what our Lord meant it to be, and doing
what our Lord meant it to do, but does not place itself
in any antagonism or rivalry to the written word, but xotinan-
rather in harmony and unison with it. For to the creation, [o^OTas^iu-
the existence, the exercise of this prophetic office of the of^the^*^"'
Church, the personal and prophetic office of the clergy so w^^i"en.

174 CONFESSION.

authorised, the written word bears witness, as well as to
the limits of the office, and the nature of the message to
be proclaimed. And it is by reference to this written
word, as fixing what was taught by the Apostles, that we
are able to draw out most significantly the difference
between our personal absolution, and that which bears
the same name in the system of Rome, and of our Con-
and also fessionalists. As absolution differs from preaching mainly
sacerdotal- "^ ^^^ difference of the authority in which the message of
Rom"e! ^^^^ comes forth, so in this last the difference is, that the
utterance is different. In the one it is the proclamation of
the remission of sins as God's free gift to all who repent
and believe by virtue of Christ's atonement ; or to any one
who falls under that class : it is the witness of the Church,
superadded, where needful, to the witness of God's word.
In the other, it is the actual remission of sins, granted by
the priest to those to whom he speaks certain words, by
virtue of those words, in excess, if we are to believe
apostolic and primitive practice, of the commission which
our Lord conferred upon His Church; and therefore, con-
trary to its duty and office as a Church, and, pro tanto,
destructive of its claims to be considered a sound and
faithful branch of Christ's Body.

175

CHAPTEE XIII.

How this power is exercised in our own Church— In a formula expressing the
unlimited mercy of God— In a formula of prayer— In a formula addressed
personally to an individual— In the Morning and Evening Service— In the
office of the Holy Communion— Confirmed by the comfortable words of
Scripture— Visitation office— State of the man— Nature and result of the
absolution— Not granting of pardon, not declaring it absolutely granted—
Not a sealed pardon but a sealed offer of pardon— How far it affects the
state of the individual— Illustrations— Not required by men of strong faith
—Hence only permitted in cases of morbid doubt— How far an assurance
of repentance— Doubt of God's mercy not to be suggested— Pardon not to
be represented as given through the minister— Not to be suggested with a
view to future influence— Absolution not to be pronounced over unconscious
persons— Argument thence as to its nature— Confession and absolution not
recognised as a preparation for the Holy Communion— Doubts not to be
suggested or aggravated— Why absolution permitted on a death-bed.

Now let us see, a little more particularly, what is held h
and taught by our Church in this matter, and how this {Hxe.
power or ministry committed to the Church is viewed and nf "^.'f """^
exercised. In other words, what is the absolution, formally
and technically so termed, of our Church ?

The authoritative dispensation of God's Word and its
promises may be made in any one of three ways :

1. In a formula expressing the unlimited mercy of God
on repentance and faith.

2. In a formula of prayer or invocation, implying the
same promise, or prefaced by a declaration of the same.

3. In a formula addressed personally to an individual
whose spiritual state is too morbid, and his faith too weak,
to believe that God's mercy is greater than any sin he
may have committed, and repented of: or to apply to
himself the general dispensation of God's word and its

ow this
>wer
IS exer-

176 CONFESSION.

promises by either of the two preceding methods. Such a
declaration is not in itself more absolute, or efficacious, or
a more direct exercise of our Lord's commission than
the other, but only to the man who stands in need of it.
in Mornin^ ^^ '^^^^ Morning and Evening Services the officiating
Service. priest (for the Church has in all cases thought fit to entrust
the formal absolution to the two first orders of the minis-
try) is ordered to pronounce and declare God's unlimited
mercy to all those who have repentance and faith. It
is the message — the exercise of Christ's commission and
commandment — in its widest and broadest shape : there is
no application thereof to anyone : the promises are set
forth as loosing the bonds of sin, and suggesting and
authorising to all who repent and believe, an immediate
access to God for forgiveness : and that in this message
the priest views himself as included, is shown by the use
of the words us and we in the concluding paragraph of
the passage, in which, as I must again (see page 130) re-
mind my readers that forgiveness is not supposed to be
conveyed by the words pronounced, but, a certain condi-
tion, viz. repentance, being attached to the realisation of
the proclaimed promise, it is suggested that we should all
pray for the assistance of God's Holy Spirit to enable us
to perform that condition, without which the forgiveness
spoken of to us is only in posse — a possibility, not a
reality.

I have already claimed (page 96) my reader's assent
to the proposition, that this most abstract and undefined
exhibition of the power, which the Church conceives our
priests to have authority to exercise, must run through all
the more defined and applied phases of it, unless there is
some distinct provision to the contrary. If in the Morning
Service absolution is pronounced in the words, ' He par-
doneth mid ahsolveth all those that truly repent/ then the
absolution in the Communion and Visitation offices must be
essentially the same, however differing in certain accidents.

ABSOLUTION IN OUR CHURCH. 177

We now turn to the absolution in tlie Holj Communion in the HoU
ofl&ce : and here we shall find that there is a more defined nion.
application of the promises than in the former case ; there
it was addressed to all, definitely applied to none : here it
is addressed ' to you,' that is, those who intend to be
partakers of the Holy Communion. We find first of all
the same proclamation of God's promised forgiveness of
sins to all them who with hearty repentance and true faith
turn unto Him : and then assuming that those, who have
drawn near and have made their confession to Almighty
God, have the necessary faith and repentance to which
they were exhorted, the priest is directed to use words
which bring the promised forgiveness nearer, but do not
actually put forgiveness iuto the hand — for such an invo-
cation or prayer is the act, not of one who gives, but wh o
seeks in hope that it may be given. I have already pointed
out how this ancient form negatives the theory that the
priest announces judicially sins to be forgiven, or does
miore than found on God's fiat of general forgiveness an
invocation with regard to those who have confessed their
sins to God ; so as to quicken their faith for the effectual
and personal reception thereof, by creating an assured
conviction of God's merciful purposes towards them. And
this is pointedly confirmed by what immediately follows :
the minds of those addressed are immediately thrown back
upon comfortable words of Scripture, containing the
written promises and mercies of God in Christ as the
foundation of assured forgiveness, and not referring to
any power and authority of the priest absolutely to grant
forgiveness, or declare it absolutely granted. If these
had been believed to have been operative elements in
the preceding absolution, surely the comfortable words
quoted would have been, ' Whosesoever sins ye remit, they
are remitted,' &c. &c.

Next, in the Visitation of the Sick, the application of Vi-^.itation

178 CONFESSION.

God's promises as a means of loosening sins is still more
personal.^ We may observe, too, that in this setting forth
of God's mercy as directly applicable to an individual, the
independent prophetic authority committed to the Church
and to the clergy, is, by the use of the direct formula,
' I absolve thee,' prominently brought forward as the
warrant for the man's putting his trust in God's mercy :
while the message itself, which in the Morning Service
forms the prominent part of the absolution, to the com-
parative exclusion of the office of the priest, is left in the
background. We may remark further, that ecclesiastical
history furnished such strong proof of the misuse to which
the direct ambassadorial formula was liable, and the errors
and superstitions into which both clergy and laity might
be, as they have been, led by its use, that it is permitted
only in that particular case, in which the ordinary means
of producing trust in God's mercy are, from the state
of the man's mind, combined with the urgency of the
moment, ineffective. When grievous sin is weighing
down a dying man's conscience with a burden that is not
removed by the disclosing it (which has been suggested as
8tate of j)ossibly all that is wanted), but he earnestly and humbly
desires something which may make him feel that his
peace may be made with God as well as with man ; then
the priest is empowered to tell him that he, by the autho-
rity committed to him, looses him from the bond of his
sins : does not forgive them, but absolves him from them
by an ambassadorial declaration — sets before him God's

• Some persons think that the absolution here is the remission of ecclesias-
tical censures : it is an easy and therefore a tempting explanation. It is fairly
urged in answer, that the sick person is not supposed to be under such censures,
but only under the pressure of his own conscience. I think the answer is deci-
sive, though it is conceivable that it is framed with a view to those who may
feel that they have committed offences against the Church, and who wish to
have this feeling removed before they die. This would be analogous to the
practice in primitive times which led to the estal:ilishment of the Psenitentiarius
(see page 70).

ABSOLUTION OF THE SICK. 179

promises' in tlie form of an ambassadorial assurance— r-
solemnly pronounced in the name of the Father, and of the
Son, and of the Holy Ghost ; so that the notion which
he had of his sins being an impassable barrier between
himself and God, is contradicted by the message of recon-
ciliation of which the ]3riest is the authorised minister :
and he thus receives the comfortable assurance that he Nature ami
is as free to accept God's mercy as the man who has no the"absohi-
such grievous sin on his conscience — as the man who has '"""
by God's grace believed and appropriated the promises
of pardon, either set forth in Scripture, or in the more
general proclamations thereof in the Church : that he may Not grant-
reject with absolute certainty — as absolute as if Christ pardon.
Himself told him so — the notion that God will not grant
him the pardon which he so earnestl}^ desires ; and for
the granting of which a petition is presently offered up
to God. But there is no actual or assured forgiveness of
sins in all this, beyond the assurance which faith in God's
promises, thus personally applied to his case, gives him.
The assurance of forgiveness is not a talismanic effect Notde-
of the priest's words, but is an act of the mind created absoiixtJiy
by them, but which might have existed without them. ^"^^^ ^"^^

It is sometimes said that absolution is not, indeed, the
granting the pardon, but the declaring who are pardoned :
and this, up to a certain point, is perfectly correct, if it
means that it defines authoritatively the class who are
within the limits of God's pardon — ' God pardon eth and
absolveth all them that truly repent and unfeignedly
believe,' &c. — which may be called a major premiss ; but if
it is meant that there is a judicial declaration or sentence
that this or that man is actually pardoned, essential to

' Ferus, ' Comm. Matt.' cix. lib. ii. apud Usher, p. 149, note 313. An-
nmicio tihi te habere propitium Beum, et qticecunque Christ us in haptismo et
evangelio iwhis promisit nunc per vie annunciat et promittit. I avnoimce to you
that you have a God propitious to you. Whatever Christ in baptism and the
Gospel hath promised to us, He now by me proclaims and promises.

X 2

180 CONFESSION.

the reality of the pardon, or making it more real than it
would otherwise have been, then, as we have seen above,
it goes beyond the possibilities of the case (see page 130),
and the language of our own Church (see page 176). It
is perfectly true that the absolution in the Visitation of
the Sick may be viewed as an absolute minor premiss,
stating that the person addressed is in the class whom
God pardoneth and absolveth : but this is a totally different
thing from granting him pardon, either as exercising an
act of mercy in pardoning him, or judicially declaring
him pardoned. The absolution may, indeed, be said to
set the man free from his sins by assuring him that he is
free, but not in the sense of making him free. The priest
does not even open the door, he merely declares that the
door is open : he opens the eyes which sin has blinded,
so that the sinner can see clearly the way which hitherto
he has been groping for in vain : with the sword of the
Spirit he cuts the Gordian bandage which the sinner has
Xot a hitherto been trying in vain to untie for himself. The

ckin'^hutT pi"iest does not by the formula of absolution present the
or^ardon^"^ sinner with a sealed pardon, but a sealed promise — an
offer of pardon, sealed by his authority as a minister
of Christ and His Church. It is applied to an indi-
How far it vidual without the least affecting the question of the
state of actual remission of sins, for this is still a matter of
vidud.' prayer: without altering his state in any way, except
the loosing his conscience froin the fear of some weighty
sin being unpardonable though repented of : even though
the sincerity of his repentance is witnessed to himself by
his confession, not necessarily private, of something, the
concealment of which has hitherto rested as a burden upon
his conscience; and which makes him fear that if the
minister of God knew the extent of his transgression, he
could not tell him that God's mercy was still open to
him, and therefore makes him desirous of the formal

ILL US TR A TIONS. 1 8 1

declaration, in the formula prescribed by the Church,
that his sins, this grievous one included, do not shut him
out from God's mercy.

It resembles nothing so much as the act of a steward iiiustra-
or authorised agent who should declare to an. assembled
tenantry, his master's will and pleasure to remit all arrears
of rent on certain conditions (say the presenting a petition
pleading their inability to pay) ; and then finding a tenant,
the amount of w^hose arrears prevents his believing that
he is included in the offer, should go and say to him per-
sonally, ' In my lord's name, who ofi'ers to cancel all your
debts, I absolve you from them, as far as they create any
doubt of the reality of his offer as regards yourself — go
and present your petition to my lord.' It is the answer of
God's minister to the suggestions of despair — to the
accusing voice of sin, that the sinner is his captive and
bondsman.

Another illustration may be found in commissioners
authorised to settle a revolted province by promise of
amnesty on certain conditions. For ordinary purposes a
general proclamation, or general invitation would suffice ;
but to the leaders in rebellion, or those who were — in spite
of the proclamation — disloyally distrustful of the merciful
intentions, or the good faith of the sovereign, they might
certify, not the pardon, but the promise under their hands
and seals as commissioners, without exercising any autho-
rity different in kind from what had been exercised in the
general proclamations. I hope I shall not be supposed to
be guilty of the logical fault of adducing these illus-
trations as proofs, or for any other purpose than to put
what I mean clearly before my readers : and I am inclined
to think that the view implied in these illustrations will
furnish a solution of this difficult subject.

The man whose faith is strong enough to realise for xot ro-
himself the fact of God's unlimited mercy, does not stand in meiTof''"'

182 CONFESSION.

stion- need of any sucli formal absolution ; lie is not thus bound in

faiih. -^ ,

the chain of his sins, and therefore does not need in this
sense to be loosed from them : and this is the reason why
this ' I absolve thee ' is reserved for those cases of troubled
conscience, where the trouble arises not only from the sick
man yearning- after the relief of telling others his sin, but
Hence only from the doubt whether his sin is not beyond pardon. If
In 'cases'^of tliis formula conveyed the actual forgiveness of sins, which
"loiibt. is equally needed by everybody, it would be equally en-
joined for all; as it is, it is only where pardon seems out
of a man's reach, that this absolution is permitted. And the
whole of the absolution formula bears out this view of
the case. The Church does not claim the power to forgive
sins, but only to absolve and set loose the man ; the power
of the forgiveness of sins is reserved to our Lord Jesus
Christ alone, and is not spoken of as given to the priests
as a prerogative or function of their sacerdotal office.
Not to be' Again, when a man is troubled at the seeming approach
toTsick of death, if the minister neglects or avoids putting before
less, with a him the promises of God's free mercy in the hope of
<;a'ining driving him to have recourse to the sacerdotal powers
over mm. which he claims ; if, instead of waiting for the sick man's
humble and earnest desire for absolution, he tells him
that he cannot hope to die in peace without absolution :
or, at all events, that his peace and hope cannot be assured
unless he is absolved: or even that he will be more assured
and peaceful if he is absolved , and that absolution is out
of the question unless he confesses his sins to him, pro-
mising to absolve him if he does so ; then such a minister
seems to me to exceed his office, to be untrue to Chris-
tianity, disloyal to his Church; and my impression is
that something like this will be found at many death-beds
at which Confessionalist clergymen minister. So again,
where a clergyman finding a man on a bed of sickness, in
his judgment not unto death, deals with him as if he were

ABSOLUTION PROVIDED FOR WEAK FAITH. 183

dying, and taking- advantage of his weakness, gets him to
confess his sins to him, in the notion that on his recovery
he will be more amenable to his counsel and discipline :
then, however good his intentions for the future may be,
he would seem to me to be acting more like a Jesuit priest
than an English clergyman ; he would be hunting the
man's soul with deceits which can hardly be justified by
the way in which he hopes to deal with it when captured.
There is another point which, I think, comes inhere. The Effect of the

absolution

sick man, though he has testified his repentance by every on doubt of

the suffici-

means in his power, may yet feel, as he has no means enc3-ofthe
of proving that repentance to himself by amendment
of life, a doubt whether his repentance is such as to
outweigh his sin ; this doubt too is met by the authorised
minister of God assuring him that it need not disquiet his
soul, or keep him bound and tied by the chain of his sins.
From these chains, as God's minister, he looses him, so
that, his repentance being such as his circumstances admit
of, he is within the sphere of God's mercy : and hence
this special declaration of his state in God's sight is not
conditioned by the man's repentance : this is assumed.

I think my readers will now see that the question which
Confessionalists, with an epigrammatic arrogance, put to
clergymen who deny their theory, ' Pray, have you ever
been ordained P ' may be easily answered to the confusion
of the questioner : ' Yes, I have been ordained, and the
' power then committed to me, whatever it may be, I

* exercise, if the Church is to be trusted, every time I

* pronounce the absolution in the Morning Service, or use
' the form in the Communion office, and this without
' any other previous confession save to God ; and I believe

* that I exercise my office in the visitation of the sick when
' I use the form the Church has x^rescribed, though I do not
' — could not— exercise the office, or claim the power, of
' forgiving the man's sins ; therefore, though T deny auri-

184 CONFESSION.

' cular Confession, I do believe myself to have received a
' power in ordination, and exercise it accordingly.'
Doubt of Further, it is quite clear that there is, in vphat is here

mercy not prescribed, no warrant for the minister trying to create
created or "^ ^^^ ^i^^ man's — in any man's — mind a doubt of God's
suggested, mercy, by telling him that he cannot be saved without
absolution : or suggesting to him its benefit, so as to lead
him to avail himself of the special ambassadorial power
committed to the priest by the authority of the Church, to
be used in cases where sin obscures faith, and in no other.
This were only to throw down a house to build it on a less
sure foundation. On the contrary, that power is only to be
exercised where the man's earnest desire shows that he
cannot realise for himself the fact of God's mercy out-
weighing his sins. And, we may observe farther, that
there is no authority given to the priest to refuse this
exercise of his absolving power, except there should be any
lack of earnestness and humility in the patient. He assures
him of God's willingness to pardon him, undiminished,
unhindered by the seeming inadequacy of his repentance.
Pardon not There are some other important points, which follow,

to be repre-
sented as I think, from what I have said. One is, that no minister

through thus officiating at what he believes to be a death-bed (and
ter, in no other case is he authorised thus to officiate) is jus-

tified in using this absolution without calling the sick
man's attention to the prayer he is about to use, and the
fact implied in it : not only, that the actual forgiveness of
but im- sins comes from Christ, not from him, but also that it is
tvom (locfto ^^^ through him that it comes from Christ ; but is a distinct
and separate gift of God immediately and personally to the
sick man. The minister indeed prepares the sick man for
seeking the promised pardon, but he does not interfere,
either judicially or mediately, between the pardoned sinner
and the pardoning God — he may absolve and loose him
from his sins, but it is God who through Christ pardons
them on the man's full trust in His mercy.

the sinner.

CONDITIONS OF ITS USE. 185

One tiling seems to me to be almost axiomatic ou tlie
subject. It is tbis : Tbat tlie conditions, on wbich God's
mercy is proclaimed or prayed for, must not be added to or
altered — tlie message must embody God's promises as He
has actually set tbem fortb to us. If tbese conditions
are varied or altered, tbe authority is exceeded, the com-
mission cancelled, and the message loses whatever value
and power ^ it may have, or may be supposed to have, as
an ambassadorial communication from God Himself. For
instance, if a priest ventures to add to the conditions pre-
scribed by God Himself — faith and repentance and con-
fession to God — those of humiliation before, and confession
to, himself; or if he assumes to himself the power of
directly forgiving sin, or attributes to his word any
power of removing by his fiat or sentence the penal
consequences of sin ; or of declaring by any such fiat that
God has done that which in consequence of the man's lack
of repentance He may not have done — then any formula
of absolution in his mouth becomes a mere sounding
phrase, without any of the power or virtue or efFectiveness
he may suppose to be attached, either in kind or degree, to
tbe commission he believes himself to have received.
Even supposing the Confessionalists to be right in holding
that our Lord's words give them a judicial power of re-
mitting sins, the conditions on which they exercise it being
in excess of what God has laid down as the terms of
forgiveness, deprive the sentence, they suppose themselves
to have pronounced, of the power and virtue they suppose
to have been inherent in it. The arrow which destroys
their pretensions is winged with their own feathers.

Asrain, care is taken to provide against the super- Absolution

*= ' ^ _ . ^ ^ not to be

stitious use of this formula over persons who have already pronounced
entered so far on the passage oi death, as to be uncon- conscious
scions, and therefore incapable of knowing what is going P®''^°"^-

> Usher, p. 128, note 200.

186 CONFESSION.

on around them, or of seeking God's pardon by faith. This
saperstitions use is perhaps a reasonable development ot
the Confessionalist system : for it is not the body but the
soul that is pardoned : and if a priest can pronounce
judicially and effectively the actual pardon of sins, there
is no reason why it should not take effect after the soul
has departed from the body as well as before. The care
that the Church has taken to guard this point by inserting
the words ' if he humbly and earnestly desire it,' marks
Argument that absolution is not to be regarded as a judicial pardon

thence as to

its nature, pronounccd over the soul, for in that case it might be
with as great propriety pronounced over an unconscious
as a conscious man. The conditions prescribed by the
rubric imply that the effect of the absolution is moral and
not judicial, so that an unconscious state, where no such
moral effect is possible, precludes the possibility of its ap-
plication.
Confession I must again call my readers' attention to the fact that

tion not re- there is Only one other case in which the Church suggests
a prepara- to a person in spiritual trouble to have recourse to a
Holy Com- clergyman : and that is before the Holy Communion, when
a person, in spite of his repentance, lacks faith or trust
in God's mercy, in consequence of his conscience being
unduly disquieted by the pressure of sin : here neither
confession nor absolution are recognised. I have already
gone through this so much at length (see page 100 sqq.)
that I may content myself with a very brief statement of
it ; less than this I cannot do, because it is necessary to a
complete comprehension of the part of my subject of which
I am now treating. The grief is a doubt of the extent of
God's mercy — the disquiet is caused by the presence of
scruple and doubtfulness, produced by sin : not only hin-
dering belief in God's mercy, but disquieting the mind
by the apprehension of the punishment of unforgiven sin.
The theory of the Confessionalists admits this to be the

munion.

ABSOLUTION CONFINED TO DEATH-BEDS: 187

source of the disquiet, otherwise their pretended forgive-
ness of sin would not quiet the conscience. We agree
so far — but they meet the doubt by asserting their own
power — we by magnifying and enforcing God's mercy out
of God's word. The person applied to is a minister of
God's word ; whereas all the formal acts of absolution —
that is of absolution technically so called — are not entrusted
to anyone below the second order of the clergy. The sin
is not to be confessed : in fact, it need not be, for the hue
and the circumstances of the sin do not set the least limit
to God's mercy short of the unpardonable sin ; that, in any
such case, this does not exist is clear, from the fact of the
man himself desiring forgiveness, and having repented of
his sin. What the troubled sinner is to do is perfectly clear ;
what the minister who is applied to is to do, is also per-
fectly clear ; he is not to give absolution, for this, as we
have seen before, is confined to the cases where a formula
is put into his mouth. He is to strengthen doubting
faith by the ministry of God's word, and the result will
be that he will receive the same benefit, though by a
different method, which is conferred either in the Morning
and Evening Services, the Holy Communion, and the
Visitation of the Sick. It is, too, perfectly clear that the f^^^^^^""}
minister consulted is not to pry into the particulars of the g^sted or
sin, to aggravate it, to put it before the sinner in its
worst colours, to make him doubt whether he is fit for the
Holy Communion. For the object of the further comfort
or counsel which he may give him is not to increase the
sense of his sin being of too heinous a dye to allow of
it being pardoned : not to keep him back from the Holy
Communion till his confession to God and his general
repentance already performed is supplemented by confes-
sion to the priest personally ; but it is to make that repent-
ance effectual to the laying hold of the promises of God's
word by adding to it the faith which it lacks. No one

188

CONFESSION.

Why abso-
lution is
permitted
on a death-
bed.

No absolu-
tion per-
mitted in
the pre-
paration
for Holy
Commu-

word which, ministers utter to the sinner who consults
them ought to be such as to increase his scruple and
doubtfulness, but to the avoiding thereof. Nor have they
any power to refuse the Holy Communion to such a man ;
their part is to persuade him to draw near without scruple
or doubtfulness, having, ex hypothesi, gone through the
means required.

I have in another place pointed out how carefully the
alterations in the passage are framed to exclude the system
which the Confessionalists ground upon it — a claim to
which many Churchmen have inconsiderately assented.
Nor can there be the smallest doubt that the Church does
not intend the doubting man to be relieved in the same way
as the dying man ; and the reasons of this may be easily
seen, the man whose time on earth is short, and whose
mental vision is perplexed by the coming change, and
perhaps also distracted by pains and weakness, often needs
to be dealt with more rapidly and more distinctly, and to
have the power of his sins broken more swiftly and briefly —
more palpably so to say — than the man, who in health and
strength 'has time to take in the meaning of the word of
God put before him, and to let it do its work on his soul.
At all events, it is absolutely certain that no form of
absolution is permitted to the minister ; there was, as I
have before said, formerly the rubric in the Visitation
Office recognising such a practice, and prescribing a form
for it (see page 112) ; but it was deliberately struck out;
and Laud, who saw that its absence from the passage,
combined with its having been expunged, was fatal to
the Confessionalist view, tried to have a form prescribed in
the exhortation paragraph, but failed. Hence it is not
unreasonable to suppose that when the Church took away
the form of absolution, and used ' minister ' in place of a
* priest,' it was to guard against the very thing which the
modern school are trying to establish.

189

CHAPTER XIV.

Summary of tlie proofs and arguments on each side — Case of the Confession-
alists — Case on the other side — Practical conclusions — Difference between
Eome and Confessionalists one of degi-ee not of kind — Between Confession-
alists one of kind not of degree — Powei's conferred by ordination — How ex-
ercised in oxir Church — Absolution does not convey pardon — Not even in /
absolve thee — Confession — Confession as viewed by the Confessionalists and
in the Church of England — Special confession in the Visitation Office — Ee-
cognised nowhere else— Difference between confidence and confession — Be-
tween what is suggested in the Communion Office and that permitted in the
Visitation Office — The question is not between habitual and occasional con-
fession— How this notion arose — Flaw in the theory of occasional auricular
confession — Solution of the difficulty in which Ritualists plead they are
placed by the importunity of applicants — Unreality of the plea — Danger of
even confidential consultations in these days — Laity not responsible for the
revival of the practice — How clergymen may deal with those who consult
them — For relief of mind — For disclosing a doubt — Auricular confession a
misuse of the clerical office — Cannot be claimed by the laity as a right-
How such an applicant to be dealt with — This method pursued since the
Reformation — Distinction between mortal and venial sin — Does not autho-
rise auricular confession — Nor do the Confessionalists confine the practice to
mortal sin — Plea for absolution as a restitution to a state of grace. '

Mt readers are now in possession of the proofs and argu-
ments wliich are urged on each side the question, and will be
able to decide for themselves whether auricular confession,
or sacramental confession — call it wliich you will — as held
by our Confessionalists (see pages 19-91), is or is not a part
of the revealed economy of God for the salvation of souls ;
whether it is ordained, or recommended, or recognise dby
our Church ; whether it is in accordance with the mind of
our Church to restore the system to the place which it
held before the Reformation. I cannot help thinking that
men of calm judgments and clear thought will have not
much difficulty in making up their minds on the matter.

190 CONFESSION.

Case of the Oil the oiiG Side tliere is adduced a passage of Scrip-

(Jonfes- . , . ,

siouaiists. ture, taken professedly in its strictest literal sense, as
giving to priests personally the power which they claim to
exercise jure divino — one or two other passages of Scrip-
ture which they interpret with still less reason in the same
sense — a certain number of passages in writers of the
third and fourth centuries, which, taken apart from the
context and the facts of the time, may be understood in its
favour — its universal recognition and adoption in the
Mediseval Church up to the time of the Eeformation — the
use of our Lord's words in the ordination formula of our
Church — the directions given for preparation for the Holy
Communion — the prescribed use of a definite formula in
the office for the Visitation of the Sick — and some ex-
pressions in a canon and a homily which do not fairly or
reasonably bear the interpretation put upon them. I believe
this fairly exhausts the case of the Confessionalists, as far
as concerns its being an ordinance of God, or recognised
as such by our Church.

Case on the Qii the othcr side, there is the fact that the Confes-

other side.

sionalists themselves do not take in its simple literal
sense the very passage in St. John, the literal meaning
of which they maintain it is impossible to disguise or
evade : and that the other passages cannot be, and, in the
judgment of sound divines of all ages, do not admit of being,
thus applied. The fact, too, that there is not in Scripture
the smallest trace of this sacerdotal power being exercised
by the presbyters, or even by the A2)ostles themselves,
except once in the remission of ecclesiastical censures b}^
St. Paul, which, of course, is entirely beside the question ;
that the passages which are quoted from the Fathers in
support of the practice, refer without exception to the pub-
lic discipline, in no case to private absolution, in no case
to private confession as an ordinance of God : these too
are clearly beside the question : that there are, at least, an

STATEMENT OF THE CASE. 191

equal number of passages in Patristic writers of that ao-e
denouncing private confession to man of sins against God ;
that, whereas early writers mention several methods of
exercising the commission given in St. John, the power
of giving absolute forgiveness of sins on private confes-
sion to a priest is not among them ; that the growth and
prevalence of this practice in the Church was coincident
with the decadence of Christianit}^ into Mediaevalism, so
that its recognition and adoption in those corrupt times,
so far from being any proof of its being from God, is
exactly the reverse. That even when private confession
had taken the place of public discipline, the power, techni-
cally termed that of the keys, was exercised not in a judi-
cial form, but in one which implied not the actuality,
but the possibility of pardon. That our Church in the
Ordination formula must be held to use our Lord's words
as He used them, and that they cannot be held or in-
tended to confer a greater power on the priest of the
present day than the Apostles believed themselves to be
invested with ; and that this a priori view is confirmed
by the fact that the Church does not claim the power
to forgive sins, but only to absolve, the former being
reserved to Christ Himself; and consistently with this,
in no one of the cases in which the clergy are allowed to
pronounce absolution, is it represented as conveying or
declaring absolute forgiveness of sins, not even in the
Visitation office ; that in the exhortation to the Holy
Communion it is so far from being the fact that pri-
vate confession of sins to a priest for its own sake is re-
commended or suggested, that a formerly existing direc-
tion to that effect was expunged, and the communication
to the priest confined to the opening to him some parti-
cular grief, not with a view to its forgiveness, but to its
solution — to comfort and counsel; and the method directed
to be used by the minister to remove any such doubt of

192 CONFESSION.

God's mercy is not a formal absolution, but the ministry of
God's word. This is the case which my readers will have
to decide: — for myself, I cannot conceive any theory to
have more completely broken down than that of the Con-
fessionalists'.
Summar3' The practical conclusions which I wish to put before

of conclu-
sions, my readers, or rather the conclusions, to which I trust the

foregoing pages may have led them, may be summed up

as follows : —

Difference 1. The difference between the Eomanists and the

between

Rome and Confessional School among ourselves is one only of degree,

Confession- „,._ ,, ^ •

aiists in not 01 Kind. In the former, auricular confession (that is,
in kind. private confession and private absolution, together form-
ing a Divine ordinance and spiritual discipline for the
salvation of souls and for the forgiveness of sin after
baptism) is canonically necessary and indispensable : in
the latter, it is — in theory at least — not canonically neces-
sary, but only morally — only optional, not obligatory —
occasional, not habitual ; though from the way in which it
is put forth and insisted upon it is, to all practical intents
and purposes, necessary, obligatory, and habitual.
Between 2. That the diflPercnce between the system and prac-

aiists and ticc of the Coiifessionalists and the authorised teaching
England in and practice of the Church of England is one not of
degree only, but of Tcind. Auricular confession being in
the one a — sometimes the — divinely appointed method
of absolute and direct forgiveness of sin, and absolute
assurance of individual sins being actually pardoned : in
the other no such method is recommended or recognised.
Power con- 3. That the powers conferred by our Lord on His

ferred bv

ordination, Church by the commission given in St. John, and com-
mitted to the second order of our clergy in Ordination,
are exercised by the faithful dispensation, whether general
or special, of the Word and Sacraments, and public inter-
cessory prayer, as in the early Church ; while in the Con-

PRACTICAL CONCLUSIONS. 193

fessionalist system tliey are held to be exercised by a according

, ., . , "^ ■ to Confes-

diviiiely conferred privilege of bearing confessions, and a sionaiists.
divinely conferred power of forgiving sins, actually and
immediately, or pronouncing them to be actually forgiven,
by virtue of certain prescribed words pronounced sacer-
dotally by a priest, which did not exist in the early
Church.

4. That the exercise of the power specially conferred How exer-
on the second order of the clergy is by our Church con- ciuuch.
fined to cases in which the promise of God's mercy on
repentance and faith is to be set before and offered to a con-
gregation or individual, by being declared or prayed for in

a prescribed formula by a minister authorised by Christ
and His Church to do so ; which formula is not, however,
conceived to convey that actual forgiveness of sin or that
actual assurance of having received pardon, which are
essential elements of the Confessionalist theoi-y.

5. That while confession in the Confessionalist method Confession.
of dealing with individuals is always the recounting of

sins, as part of a supernatural ordinance for the forgiveness
thereof, and therefore always with a view to formal abso-
lution, and necessary to it — always, where held to be com-
plete, sufficient, and effective, followed by it, in our
Church's system — in the single case in which it is recog-
nised— it is the disclosure, not necessarily private, of some
particular pressing sin or sins, or doubt or scruple —
primarily with a view to relief by unbosoming a secret
burden, or to the reception of spiritual comfort from the
minister, without consequent absolution being necessary
to its completeness or effectiveness ; nor yet to be followed
by absolution, except where it has failed of producing its
proper effects of relieving the man's conscience from a dis-
trust of God's mercy and a desj^air of pardon.

6. That absolution in the Church of England is in no Absoiutio
case held to convey actual forgiveness of sins or the

floes not
ronvev

^ pardon.

194

CONFESSION.

Not even in
' I absolve
thee.'

Special
confession
in Visita-
tion Office

actual assurance of pardon as a fait accompli : and that
while in the Confessionalist theory, absolution is virtute
signi — by virtue of the words used — held to do away with
the penal consequences of sins previously confessed, in
the Church of England it is not so ; but with us, it is
only held to remove the moral consequences of sin — i.e.
the doubts of the possibility of pardon which sin naturally
produces in the human mind : and this result is pro-
duced not by any inherent virtue in the priest's words,
but by virtue of the certainty of God's promise thus ex-
pressed— virtute significati, and not virtute signi.

7. That the words ' I absolve thee ' do not, as in the
Confessionalist system, convey the actual pardon of sins, or
the actual assurance of sins being coincidently pardoned,
but only, where necessary, put before a despairing- sinner
the offer and promise of that pardon sealed by the personal
exercise on the part of the presbyter of the authority —
given by Christ to His Church, and committed to such pres-
byter at ordination — to declare authoritatively and defi-
nitely to all and singular, as need may be, the message of
the remission of sins — that God pardoneth and absolveth
all those that truly repent ; and that this case is no ex-
ception to the message so committed to his ministration.
That there is no power in the priest to grant pardon —
no power to assure pardon, except so far as the Divine
faithfulness, justice and mercy are pledged to the message
which He has entrusted to His Church and its ministers —
from which the minister officially declares to the doubting
man that his sins do not exclude him.

8. Hence the special confession in the Visitation
Office differs from the Confession of the Romanists and
the Confessionalists essentially and invariably ; it is not
that, when used, it is the same as that of the Confession-
alists ; but, even when used, it differs from it in nature,
aim, and result — in nature, as not being an act of disci-

PRACTICAL CONCLUSIONS. 195

pline, or part of a sacramental ordinance ; but very little
removed from confidence, and that only in the accident
of being sometimes followed by absolution — in aim, as
not necessarily or primarily contemplating absolution —
in result, as not, even when followed by absolution, having
anything directly to do with the actual pardon of sin, but
only with the dispelling, on the common principles of
man's moral nature, that morbid distrust in God's mercy,
which, taking into account the nature of the message, the
evidence of its reality, and the ambassadorial character
of those who officially bear witness to it, it is a violation
of right reason to entertain.

9. That in no case, except that of a sick bed, is special Special

. , . confession

confession recognised or recommended, whether with or nowhere

else rGco"'-

without absolution, even limited as above; and that in the nised.
exhortation to the Holy Communion the opening of the
grief, suggested by the Church, differs in kind from the
confession of the Confessionalists, inasmuch as in no case
is it more than Avhat T have termed Confidence, generally
followed by the remedial ministry of God's Word.

10. That Confidence differs from the Confession of the Difference

r^ n • f ' -t • n . . -,. , . between

Confessionalist in not being an act of discipline or humi- Coafi<ience
liation or penitence, or a preliminary to, or an essential fession.
condition of, an ordinance or rite of pardon, but only the
opening of a grief, or a burden, or doubt, or difficulty to
a minister, with a view to receive counsel : or in certain
cases, that comfort and release from a distrust of God's
mercy, which in the Visitation service, and only there,
are sometimes conveyed, as I stated above, by formal
absolution, when the mere unbosoming of the burden does
not produce the desired result.

11. The difference between what is suggested as an Difference
occasional resource in the preparation for the Holy Com- wha7L'^
munion, and what is permitted in the Visitation Office is fn^he*'^'
not, that, absolution being given in both, in the one it is uion'omce

o 2

196 CONFESSION.

and what is ministerial and pastoral, while in the other it is iudicial,

permitted , . J '

in the sacerdotal, and sacramental : so that this latter, being con-

Visitation n -< -i

Office. fined to a deathbed, is not contemplated as a preparation
for the Holy Communion. It seems to me that we
cannot exclude from the preparation for the Holy Com-
munion that which is permitted in the Visitation of
the Sick, by any such distinction. The facts are mis-
stated, and the distinction seems arbitrary and illusory.
I think the point may be more truly established on
less slippery ground. The difference between them is,
that in the one absolution is never permitted, in the
other it occasionally is. The doubt and distrust are
the same in both, but the way of meeting them is dif-
ferent. In the one a sinner is led and encouraged to
draw what he needs by the energies of his own repentant
reason from God's own words, j)laced before him by His
minister, without this one interposing his special autho-
rity. In the other, the priest, formally and by abso-
lution, puts before the doubting soul the same message
on the warrant of the authority which the Church and the
clergy have received, thus to minister to those who need
it. In the one the written promises of God are placed
before the man as applicable to himself; the other is a
special application, or rather the authoritative declaration
of the applicahiUty (if I may venture to coin a word), of
those promises on the authority committed to the Church ;
and so far this is an exercise of a priestly office which
is wanting in the other. ^ In the one the convictions of re-
viving faith are more immediate, fresh, and personal ; in
the other, these convictions are mediate and second hand,
so to say. Nothing comes to the sinner which might
not have come to him in a better way — for I venture to
think that the faith which comes to a sinner from the

1 Why this is permitted to a dying man we haA^e already considered (page
188).

PRACTICAL CONCLUSIONS. 197

active energies of his own inner man is better and liiglier
than that which he takes in passively from the formal
utterance of another man — had it not been for that ex-
treme lack of faith, caused by his great sin, which made
him distrust either God's will or power to forgive him.
The distinction between the two is thus real and intelli-
gible. They both indeed differ from the Confession of the
Homanists and of our own Confessionalists — the one, inas-
much as no absolution is pronounced : the other because the
absolution, when pronounced, is different in kind and
essence from that of the Romanists, in not being sacra-
mental, judicial, or effective, set forth as a grant, or as
an assurance, of actual pardon.

It is not, therefore, merely against the extreme view of Xotmeie-

Iv til 6 €X-

the Confessionalists that the Church bears witness — that tVeme view
Sacramental Confession is the only or the surest appointed chmch
means of obtaining pardon ; nor yet merely against its i-eTO"^*ise.
being practised habitually : but actually there is no case in
which the Church either contemplates confession to a
priest, as part of an ordained rite for the forgiveness of
sins, necessarily followed by absolution : nor yet any case
in which the absolute judicial forgiveness of sins is attri-
buted to absolution, as a result implied and contained
in, and granted by, the priest's words — a fait accompli when
those words have been spoken. In fact, those who in de- The ques-
fining that which our Church recognises in individual between
cases — whether it be the Confidence of ordinary spiritual and'ocoa-
life, or the Confession in the Visitation Office — make the fession. "'^'
difference between the Romanists and us to consist in the
habitual and the occasional use thereof, are either con-
founding technical Confession with Confidence, or Con-
fession essentially joined to absolution with Confession
essentially independent of it : or are taking a superficial
view of the passage in the exhortation in the Communion
Office ; or fail to realise the fact that the absolution and
pardon are different things.

198 CONFESSION.

How this It is true, indeed, that in Auricular Confession, and in

Cunfes.sioii . • i o

lias come that which our Church recognises, there are pomts oi ex-
0 pasb. ■t^Qj.jjf^i and accidental identity, and one of these is that both
may be viewed as occasional. In the Church of England,
both confidence and special confession are only occa-
sional, and it is possible to form an illogical conception of
Auricular Confession as being only occasional. This,
perhaps, has suggested the too general solution of the diffi-
culty, which supposes that the former is only a modified
use of the latter ; but I trust that I have shown that this
accidental resemblance does not justify anyone in arguing
an identity, which is contradicted by a comparison of the
nature and use of the two systems ; and that Auricular Con-
fession is so utterly alien to the Church of England that if
it were used but once, it would be as real a contravention
of what the Church teaches as if it were used habitually.

Flaw in the Those who admit occasional and deny habitual Con-
distinction . Til- ±^ C 11 IT

between fession are m reality playing the game ot the most ad-
and occa- vaiiccd school : for in the view which admits the occasional
fes.^Mu'^'^" use of confession as a means of forgiveness of sin, there is
a fatal flaw. If Confession and Absolution be in any case
a divine ordinance for the forgiveness of sins, it must be
so in all, or at the very least no one can wisely or safely
dispense with it. It can only be needless or useless where
there is no sin — that is never. The occasional use of
Auricular Confession is a solecism — if true at all, it must
be habitual and universal, and the system which asserts
its occasional use is a negative of the whole claim. But in
the view which I have endeavoured to show to be that of
our Church, no such difficulty arises. For if absolution be
viewed as a formal way of setting God's promises and
offers, distinctly and absolutely before men, as by special
authority committed to our Presbyters, then it is clear
that, according to the temperaments of different men, the
most formal and direct mode of so doing, such as the form

PRACTICAL CONCLUSIONS. 199

in the Visitation service, may be very useful for some
sick men, and entirely out of place in others : it cannot be
habitual ; it must be occasional. If it is identified with
Auricular Confession, it must be habitual, or it is a delu-
sion.

This will furnish a ready solution of the difficulty in Plea tiiat
which the Confessionalists sometimes represent themselves Confession
as being placed, and by which they often puzzle the autho- upon the
rities who expostulate with them : pretending that this tife laitj-!
practice is, as it were, taken from them by force by the
numbers who come to them demanding to be confessed
and absolved. ' What are we to do ' — such is their
touching question — ' when a sinner comes to us in distress
of mind, and prays us to hear the tale of his sins, and to
give him forgiveness by absolution ? ' Of course the un-
soundness of this plea is easily seen through, even where
it is bond fide and not a mere sophistical pretence. There
would be no confession, say they, among the clergy if the
laity did not come to be confessed. The truth is, that
there would have been no desire for confession among
the laity, had there been no persons who set themselves
up for confessors ; if the doctrine and the practice had
not been recommended and carried out, at first secretly
among the young and inexperienced of either sex, and
afterwards more boldly, as the system took root, among
older men of mediaeval mind. It may be perfectly true
that it began by one or more young men coming to some
one who had a high reputation for sanctity and spiritual-
iniiidedness, to ask his advice in spiritual matters ; but
the responsibility and the sin of the system does not rest
with these, but with those whose answer was ' Let me con-
fess you ' ; especially the men whose restless sjjirit of inno-
vating Medisevalism have produced so much evil within the
last thirty years. Had they, at the very beginning, chosen
to deal with those who applied to them, as English clergy-

200 CONFESSION.

men,aiidnot as Eomisli priests, the evil (of wliicli at pres
we only see the beginnings), would have been checked in
its bud. The superstitious cravings of inexperienced minds
would have been directed towards those more true and
Sci'iptural methods of relieving their consciences and laying
hold of pardon, which the Church of England has carefully,
and to those in health and strength exclusively, set forth.
Faith in the act of a priest would not have taken the place
of faith in the promises of Christ. But then the priestly
temper in which superstition, delusion, and ambition are
strangely mingled, would not have placed its foot upon the
first step of the ladder.
Unreality j^ seems perfectly clear that such a plea cannot be

or such a ± ^ x

i*'^^- accepted as hond fide, except when it comes from men,

who are not accustomed to urge the practice upon
those who are placed in their charge or subject to their
influence ; and yet I am afraid that in very many, if not
most cases, the ]3lea is urged by those who have lost no
opjportunity by sermons, or conversations, or the circu-
lation of tracts, to represent it as an ordained means
of grace, an institution of the Church, if not absolutely
necessary, at least very useful for the development and
preservation of the spiritual life; who never lose an oppor-
tunity of preaching and teaching it in season and out of
season, continually exhorting and inciting to it, putting
temptations and facilities in the way of the people, espe-
cially the young, and more especially young girls. The
whole system of confessional boxes, of particular ap-
pointments for time, and place for hearing confessions,
the opening offices and consulting rooms (to use their
favourite illustration of the lawyer and the physicau) for
the purpose, are as much suggestions and encouragements
and temptations to the practice of Confession, addressed
to those who never would have thought of it, as betting
offices arc temptations to bet. Mind, I am drawing no

PRACTICAL CONCLUSIONS. 201

parallel between the two evils, but merely showing that
what is encouragement and temptation in the one case is
also temptation and encouragement in the other. And Danger of

-*■ ° cniindential

more than this — the suggesting confidential com- communi-

^° '^ . cations in

munications — distinguished though they be essentially these days.
from Confession — is in these days almost an invitation
and an encouragement to the evil from which it is very
properly distinguished. It is opening the door by which
our Jesuit clergy will not fail to try to lead men on.
When a well-meaning, short-sighted clergyman in the
present day proclaims to his congregation that he will
be ready in the vestry to hear what people have to disclose
to him, he ought to add that probably it will be the
first step toward the soi-disant sacrament of penance. I am
saying nothing against the practice itself in ordinary
times ; except that it is good only as a remedy against a
morbid state — a morbid state which it is better to prevent
than to cure — better to remedy in some other way than
this one so full of dauger. It is like restoring the health by
stimulants rather than by nourishing wholesome food.

I have seen an argument to the effect that as abso- Laity not

responsible

lution is only given to those who humbly and earnestly for it.
seek it, it could not have been given to the laity, unless
the laity had sought it ; this has the usual flaws of Ritual-
istic reasoning — a suicidal unconsciousness that if the
weapon were sharp, it would wound themselves, combined
with a logical incapacity of seeing the flaw which makes
it harmless. The very terms of the plea give up at once half
the position, for it contemplates Confession as confined to
a sick bed, which is one of the points which they are least
willing to concede. Passing by, however, this mistake, we
may observe that it loses sight of the consideration of how,
and by whom this appetite was created. Is it pretended
that the ritualistic clergy did not — do not — suggest it, i-e-
commend it, in-ge it, or that they ever tried to prevent or

202 CONFESSION.

persuade the laity from it? of course they could not force it
on those who were not willing to receive it, but if this
willingness was created by suggestions, arguments, exhor-
tations, representations of its necessity or benefit, then the
source of the evil is to be sought in those who set the stone
rolling. It is much the same as if the man who gave the
stone the first push from the top of the hill were to say
that it was the law of gravitation which was to be blamed
for the result. A vender of poisonous nostrums cannot
get ignorant people to swallow them against their will; to
have recourse to a gipsy fortune-teller is a piece of volun-
tary folly ; but the one would not be relieved from criminal
responsibility by the plea that his victims took them
willingly ; or the other by the plea that the dupes came to
the gipsies, and not the gipsies to them. Now that, thanks
to the exertions of the ritualists, the practice has taken
root, I have no doubt that persons who have listened to
Confessionalist preachers, or otherwise fallen into Confes-
sionalist hands, do occasionally come to a clergyman and
ask to be confessed : there is an old proverb about the
rapid propagation of folly that is nowhere more a propos
than here; and this is one thing among many which
should make fathers of families very cautious how they
allow their daughters to frequent ritualistic services, or
to cultivate the society of ritualising friends.
How a I confess I cannot help thinking that those who are

may deal really uuwilling to see it revived amongst us will find a
whocoiTsiUt very easy way of dealing with such applicants as I have
bosomi'iK^ a referred to above. For instance, if a troubled conscience
burden. i\ixis presents itself, it would be easy to ascertain whether
the trouble arose for that yearning for sympathy which
unburdens itself in that to which I have given the dis-
tinctive name of Confidence, or from a doubt of its being
possible to obtain pardon for some sin or some course
of sin, which seeks for solution in that same Confidence.

PRACTICAL CONCLUSIONS. 203

111 the former case it is perfectly easy to warn tlie ap-
plicant that this Confidence must ngt be considered as
an act of religion formino- a characteristic feature in
the Christian scheme : that though for many reasons the
pastor is, humanly speaking, the natural person for
such disclosures, yet he must not be considered as the
minister, but as the friend ; that it is not in his power
to give any other relief or consolation than that which
it would be equally in the power of any other faithful,
discreet, and learned Christian to give.

If it be the second case, it would be easy to tell him Disclosing
that this Confidence must not be looked upon as an act of
religion, in the sense in which confession to God is an act
of religion ; nor yet as an act of discipline in the sense in
which public confession was an act of discipline in the
primitive Church : but simply as an application for the
solution of a spiritual doubt on a point, which the ministers
of Christ and of His word and sacraments, are specially
commissioned and authorised to solve : but he must be
told that they are to be looked upon, not as judges, but as
ministers and ambassadors. He may, indeed, in cei-tain
cases be examined as to whether he has repented him of
the secret sins with which his soul is burdened ; such a
general examination into his repentance may be conceiv-
ably modelled on the way and means which are prescribed How to be
in the preparation for the Holy Communion ; but this
is no encouragement to Auricular Confession (see page 92).
In the case of those Avho come to a minister on the sug-
gestion contained in the exhortation to the Holy Com-
munion, even this examination is needless, inasmuch as
they come to him, after having gone through the repentance
prescribed in the preceding paragraphs ; but even in any
other cases, it seems to be worse than unnecessary to
enquire into the nature and particulars of the sin, inas-
much as the question is, not whether the sins Avhicli the

204 CONFESSION.

person lias committed are scarlet or not, but wlietlier lie lias
repented of them. And tlie mere fact of tlie man coming
to a minister with sucli a doubt on his mind and such a
desire for its solution, is in itself a proof of there being a
change of mind, which, as every one knows, is the proper
meaning of repentance. I say * worse than unnecessary,'
because the insisting on knowing all the details and cir-
cumstances of sin before it can be pronounced within the
limits of God's mercy, is to suppose that there is in this
respect a difference between the debt of the five hundred
pence and the debt of fifty — the Gospel message being that
the same mercy is ready freely to forgive both.
Auricular Is it iiot strange that men, the very men 'luthorised to

Confession n r^

an abuse of sct forth God's mercy in the light of day, should dare to
office conceal, alter, or disguise it for a moment ? For myself, I

no more dare do it — I no more dare tell a man that God 's
mercy waits on iny sentence, than I dare tell him that
Christ died for our sins, only if I say He did, or that He
is the sinner's Advocate with the Father, only if I say
that He is so. When to a man standing in the position
of an ordained priest of the Church of England there comes
a person in the bond of his sins, bound by a morbid distrust
of God's mercy — an unreasonable, because faithless fear of
God being unwilling or unable to pardon his sins — does
that priest fulfil the holy ofiice which God has put into
his hands — does he perform his duty to his Church,
which puts Christ's commission into his hands, when he
tells such an one that there is no hope to be found by him
in God's pledged word, no well of comfort open for him in
the Scriptures — that turning to a priest and trusting to
him, to his sentence and his word, is the only or the surest
way? Is it not his bounden office to tell him that, though
actual recovery from habits of sin may be difficult and
tedious, yet that the forgiveness of past sin is not so — that
forgiveness of his sins is absolutely ready for him on certain

PRACTICAL CONCLUSIONS. 205

terms ? And on what terms ? Confession to a priest ?
humble acceptance of his sentence ? humble obedience to
■what he enjoins ? Surely not ; but confession to God,
faith in Christ, acceptance of pardon, resolution to
amend.

And as for pressino- for formal absolution, or as some Cannot be

■*■ ° _ ... claimed by

put it, insisting on it as a right, even in the Visitation a layman

. , . ^ as a right.

office, the word ' humbly ' seems to negative the notion oi

any such rightful claim to the particular exercise of the

ministerial commission in formal absolution ; as far as the

minister is under any obligation to give it, this arises from

his duty to the Church who has directed it. And when it

comes to the practical question of dealing with such a

clamorous applicant, in any case save that of the dying man,

it seems to me perfectly easy for a clergyman to answer —

as he would answer a man who asked to be re-baptised for

the remission of post-baptismal sin — by telling him x^lainly h<^w such

that he is not authorised to reassure him by the pronouncing cant is to

be dealt

of any form of absolution ; he may tell him that formerly with.
there was such a form provided, but that it was deliberately
struck out, and that the remedy substituted was the
ministry of God's word ; that even were he authorised to
pronounce any such form, it would not be accompanied
by the absolute forgiveness of sins : that it would simply
be a declaration on his ambassadorial authority, that the
bond of sin, if repented of, could not really bind his soul
to itself; that no sin, if repented of, was any barrier How to be

' ^ answered.

between the sinner and God's miercy, or any limit to its
infinite extent : and that this assurance was not more
attainable by the use of a formal absolution than by the
remedy which is here directed : perhaps less so, except
in the only case in which he was authorised to use it, when
a soul was on the river's brink. And then he might ad-
minister the prescribed remedy — read to him those parts
of Scripture which set forth God's mercy most unmis-

206 CONFESSION.

takingly and toucliingly — the parable of the prodigal son,
for instance, the restoration of St. Peter, the forgiveness of
David, and all those other passages with which a minister
of God's word ought to be furnished (see page 115 note).^
And this, in fact, is the way in which for three centuries
in the English Church these doubts and difficulties have
been solved, and sick souls led to comprehend and accept
the infinite mercy of God. This is the way in which the
ministry of reconciliation in such cases has been exercised
by successive generations of the clergy, among whom were
thousands upon thousands of ordained men, not less
devoted, not less faithful to their God, their Church, and
the trust committed to them at their ordination, not less
honest, not less learned, not less clear-sighted and far-
sighted, not less successful in bringing souls to God,
and in quieting troubled, and reassuring doubting, con-
sciences, than those innovating Medieevalists of the present
day, who pretend to have rediscovered, not a royal, but a
sacerdotal road to heaven.

The Confessionalists, though most usually they speak
between of Auricular Confession as the proper remedy for all sins,

sins mortal ,. t- ,, tx-x- ij

and venial, are sometimcs driven to draw a distinction between siiis
which do require it, and sins which do not. It is true
that the distinction drawn by Mediseval and patristic theo-
logy between venial sins and mortal sins may have some
ground; indeed, our Church seems to recognise the dis-
tinction when deadly sin is spoken of in the Litany and in
the Articles, where it appears to be used to express sins,
humanly speaking, of a more heinous dye ; but the distinc-
tion can hardly be maintained with reference either to
their guilt or their pardon ; for St. James tells us that
he who is guilty of the least is guilty also of all ; and

' It is recorded of Bossuet that he adopted this method of dealing with the
Duchesse d'Orleans (daiigiiter of Charles I.) on her bed of sudden death, even
though she had been confessed and absolved by her confessor.

PRACTICAL CONCLUSIONS. 207

even if it were not so, it would hardly be possible or fitting-
for man to judge what were mortal sins in God's sight,
and what venial : nor yet as to the possibility or method
of forgiveness ; for we are expressly told that the sin
of five hundred pence is the object of the same free mercy
as the sin of fifty pence. The distinction probably arose
in the days in which some sins were held by the Pseniten-
tiarius to require public satisfaction to the Church, and
others were not. A mortal sin is clearly not the same
as the sin unto death, for that is so unpardonable that it
may not even be prayed for : and what it is — its very nature
and indications — is hid in the secret judgments of God's
knowledge ; and even if it were otherwise, it could not be
the subject of the Confessionalists' absolution, for this con- Does not
cems the pardon of sin, and, where the sin is unpardonable, AuricuLir
this could find no place. The distinction may hold with "'^ ^^*'""
reference to one sin being more fatal in its effects on the
soul than another, or as being a stronger evidence of a soul
being spiritually dead than another : but this has nothing
to do with the forgiveness of the sin, which the Confession-
alists pretend is the essence of private absolution ; though
it has something to do with private- absolution viewed as
the authoritative offer of God's mercy, which removes the
obstacles and looses the bands whereby grievous sins keep
the soul in bondage from God ; and thus our Church
wisely reserves private absolution for the case of such
exceptionally weighty or heinous matter. But the mercy
which is proclaimed, and the message of proclamation is
essentially the same in itself and in its results, in the
case of all sins, whether mortal or venial — God's will to
forgive which God's ministers proclaim in the Morning
and Evening Prayer.

Besides which the Confessionalists are very far from This not

. . . confined by

following the directions of the Church m restricting the Confes-

- , 1 T • 1 n /> • 1 sionalists to

uses of private absolution to those cases ol grievously mortal sin..

208

CONFESSION.

Absolution
as a resto-
ration to a
state of
grace.

disturbed consciences, whicli supposing themselves to be
out of the spliere of God's mercj, do without any priestly
admonitions, or suggestions, or j)i"omptings, humbly and
earnestly desire it at their hands.

They sometimes, however — losing hold for a time of
their real doctrine that absolution is the forgiveness of
sins — take occasion from this distinction between mortal
and venial sin to put it before us as merely a restoration
to that state of grace which had been lost by mortal sin :
thus thinking to steer clear of some of the difficulties in
which they are placed by their claim to pardon sin abso-
lutely. But this cannot be held to be more tenable than
the other : for this restoration to a state of grace follows
coincidently, either on the forgiveness of sins, or on re-
pentance, or on the recovery of the gift of the Holy Spirit
by some of God's appointed means. Of these pardon is
excluded by the view which they for the nonce profess to
take of absolution : and Auricular Confession is certainly
not ropentance, nor does it carry with it any special gift
of the Spirit. The sinner is not restored to a state of
grace by virtue of the act or words of the priest, as the
penitent was restored to church fellowship and privileges
by the imposition of hands. In fact, it can only be viewed
as a restoration to a state of grace as being the means
to that restoration, by encouraging or creating a full trust
in that mercy, for the acceptance of which it sets the soul
free, loosing the bonds of fear and distrust, by an official
declaration thereof.

209

CHAPTER XV.

Catena alleged in favour of it— Value of a catena overrated— Especially when
not contrasted with practice— Opposite catenae —Variety of views in English
divines— This caused by the want of a clear idea of truth— By a rapid and
fertile thought— Especially under pressure of opposition— This very per-
ceptible in English writers— Passages often taken without the context-
Conditions of value for a catena— All authorities to be struck out of the
catena who are speaking of something different to the point alleged— And
those whose views are based on probably erroneous grounds— Or where
they are at variance with the Church of England or with, history, or with
each other— On the other side, a large catena of practice— Occasional in-
stance of absolution— Not always in harmony with the Church teaching-
Catena of authorities on the other side— What the catena is worth at its
highest and best— Catena cannot supply evidence— Nor can any amount of
vague assumptions— Nor counterbalance the lack of it— Limitations intro-
duced by these divines fatal to their theory— Benefits alleged as arising
from the practice— See-saw argument of the Confessionalists— Testimony to
its benefits— Erom personal experience— From parochial experience— Not
necessary to parish work properly carried on— Perhaps necessary to public
discipline if it existed among us— Possibly useful for direction, but this not
recognised in our Church— Confidential intercourse admits neither sacra-
mental confession nor direction- Confession and absolution are not to be
directed as a condition of pardon, or used to get the secrets of a man's soul
—Alleged benefits counterbalanced by known evils— Question whether

it is not an intrusion on the revealed scheme of salvation This the great

question — The evil of this not counterbalanced by any great benefits What

God has given us is exhaustive and suflScient — Clergy not physicians, but
only errand-boys of the Great Physician— Have no licence to alter or add
to His panacefe — Certainty of methods prescribed by God — Dano-er of human
devices — Auricular confession implies disbelief in God's promises The im-
portance of this principle makes me defer the consideration of the benefits

of confession — Aj-gument for toleration is a sign of conscious weakness Not-'

likely to succeed— Apathy on the point quite unintelligible— Important re-
sults of the confessional : Theologically — Evangelically — Ecclesiastically

Religiously— Perssnally— Nationally— Socially— Danger of again allowing
it to take root.

We must now turn to another point alleged by the Catena
Confessionalists, viz. that there is a strong catena of {&vmT

p of it.

over-v

ated.

210 ■ CONFESSION

Englisli divines in its favour. They bring forward a list of
names in successive generations who have advocated Con-
fession, or at least tolerated it as allowable. Some advo-
cates of the system rest their case on this ground almost
exclusively; and its influence is felt by a still greater
number who, without themselves teaching it or practising
Confession, yet allow the occasional use of it.
Value of It seems to be a thing much needed that some accu-

a catena

generally^ rate notion should be formed of the worth of a catena,
both in its intrinsic value as embodying truth, and its
bearing on any particular points as an evidence in support
thereof. I think that many persons on reflection will be
inclined to think that very often more value is given to it
than it deserves. A beam of iron is made by a celebrated
firm. There is an a 'priori probability of its bearing a
certain amount of pressure in a vital part of the building,
but I should be sorry to employ an architect who took it
for granted that it would be so. If it bends, its being of
this or that manufacture does not prove that it is strong
or elastic enough. This is an illustration of my position
with regard to catenae. They very often, indeed, only evi-
dence the opinion of a particular school, the adherence
of a particular party to a notion which reflects some of
its peculiar characteristics. It often happens that a man,
of learning and power of a peculiar kind, lays down a pro-
position or an argument which, recommending itself to
minds of a kindred tone, is accepted by those who follow
him, either for its own plausibility, or on the faith of the
name with which it is associated, without being tested
or weighed. It is repeated generation after generation
in the same way — gathering weight and substance more
rapidly and solidly as it rolls on from one man to another,
until at last it seems to be as substantial as the truth
itself, or at least seems to embody the judgments of many
minds, whereas in reality it is only the notion of the

VALUE OF CATENAE. 211

single mind wlience it first sprung. It is therefore no .
disrespect to the eminent men, whose names are cited
as authorities to test anj position or notion by the evi-
dence which we should apply to it, if it were proposed
to us for tlie first time.

A curious illustration of how little trust can be safely illustra-
tion of this.
placed on a catena is to be found in the almost universally

received notion that the sufi'erings of our Lord on tlie
Cross are represented at the consecration of the elements
by the breaking the bread and pouring out the wine.
There is perhaps no point for which there is a longer or
more universal catena than this ; and yet the wine is not
thus poured out during the office of the Lord's Supper ; in
most cases not at all; in none, at the moment at which
the representation is supposed to be made.

And such opinions are all the more likely to be re- Esnecniiy
ceived on the credit of the names who sanction them, or coniniht^d
of the school with whose system they are connected, when, practice.
the practice itself having either altogether or almost fallen
into disuse, theologians are not bound to test an abstract
opinion by its practical working and tendency : when they
are able to hold an opinion without being led by its prac-
tical importance to look into the grounds upon which it
is based, or to define its exact nature as carefully as they
might and ought, and perhaps with as much care as they
would have thought themselves bound to use, had it pre-
sented itself to their minds in its practical bearings. Thus,
till within the last twenty years a theologian who held the
Divine authority of the ordained clergy would naturally in
general terms maintain, in opposition to the school which
denied it, that the clergy had a power .of remitting sins :
and his language might possibly seem to include the Con-
fessionalist system, in consequence of his taking no care
to exclude a point which practically did not present itself
to him. In such circumstances again men are often be-

p 2

212

CONFESSION.

Opposite
catenae.

Variety of
views in
English
divines.

This caused
by the
■want of a
clear idea
of truth,

trajed bj a spirit of opposition, to -whicli even a theolo-
gical mind is liable, into using exaggerated terms, in
maintenance of some theory, while the practical difficulties
which might have led them to modify such terms, do
not present themselves to their minds; and surely to
assert that these expressions necessarily express an opinion
in favour of a development or application of that theory,
in a way which was not present to their minds when they
wrote, is, I think, to misinterpret and misrepresent them.
Again, it results from the very nature of catense,
being as they are, a reflection of the changing shades of
human judgment, that it is possible to draw out opposed
catense on both sides the question, not only from the
writings of leading men in the same Church and in the
same generation, but even from different writings of the
same man, sometimes even from different pages of the
same book. I do not think that anyone can study the
writings of our English divines, who are adduced in favour
of Confession, without being struck by the fact that their
language, taken as a whole, does not exhibit clear and
definite views on the subject : they seem to be vibrating
between two notions, each of which they alternately wish
to assert, without denying the other so absolutely as to be
precluded from giving it prominence when its turn comes.
This would seem to arise partly from the general laws of
human thought, partly from the circumstances in which
controversialists are for the most part placed.

There are \erj few men who have so distinct and com-
plete an idea of truth in the whole and in all its parts, as
to be always consistent with themselves ; and of course
the more fanciful and mystical the mind — the more ab-
struse and abstract the subject — the more voluminous the
writer — the greater is the chance, or rather the certainty,
that his authority can be quoted on both sides the
question.

opposition.

CATEXjE contradictory. 213

Men of fertile genius and rapid thought, especially and rapid

•r>in -IIP 1.1 *"*^ fertile

II words flow quicklj from their lips or their pens, and thought,
there is, as I said above, no practical point to act as a
drag, are apt, when treating of some point in a particular
aspect, to press it to the utmost, to exhibit it in all possible
positions and colours ; and in another treatise handling a
different point to press that, too, to the utmost — to exhibit
it in all its relations and colours, and thus to say at one
time what is out of harmony with what is said at another.
And this is more likely to be the case when there is a especially
pressure from opposite sides, against one or other of which sure of ^
it was necessary to take up a strong position, and perhaps
to advance a little beyond the right line. Thus our divines
since the Eeformatioii have been subjected to pressure on
the one side from the Puritans, who denied altogether that
the office and powers of the clergy were of divine origin and
authority : and against these that office and those powers
were magnified, since the denial or the limitation of the
power of the keys, which was of course one of the points
denied by the Pui'itans, would have been up to a certain
point allowing them to have been right — a concession
which it requires a, perhaps, unusual amount of contro-
versial clearness to be able to make without carrying it too
far ; and a still more unusual amount of controversial fair-
ness to be willing to make. The Romanist, too, asserted
that we had with the Reformation lost the office and
powers of the old priesthood, and this led on the defenders
of the Reformed Church to claim the possession thereof
more strongly than they otherwise would ; while the Puri-
tans, again, by asserting that the Church of England
differed nothing from Rome, made it necessary for our
divines to draw in their horns a little, to reduce what they
claimed for the priesthood within more modest limits, and
to use language essentially opposed to the pretensions and
practices of Romish sacerdotalism. I think no one can

214

CONFESSION.

Tliis very
perceptible
in English
writers.

Passages
often taken
without the
context.

Conditions
of value
for a
catena.

read our Medisevalistic divines without seeing traces of
this see-saw, not only on the subject of Confession, but
on others of an analogous nature. For myself, I confess
that, for these reasons, catense have very little weight with
me in determining any disputed point. Nor can I accept
any such as even an indirect proof of the mind of the
Church, otherwise than is laid down in the Prayer Book
and Articles, or as interpreting the silence of the Prayer
Book, or as giving to the language thereof a scope and
meaning which it would not naturally and reasonably
have. In fact, I rather take it as an evidence that the
persons adducing it are conscious of the lack of that direct
proof on which such a system ought to rest its claims for
acceptance.

Again, the way in which this particular catena is
formed from isolated passages in the several writers,
detached from the context, and without any notice being
taken of the modifications or limitations elsewhere, creates
an a lyriori suspicion of its value, which ripens into actual
distrust, when it is subjected to the rigorous examination
which, if it were worth anything, it ought to be able to
bear.

For when we come to weigh the actual value of any
catena, alleged as a support of any system, it is evident
that there are certain obvious conditions which are neces-
sary to its having any value at all, even in the eyes of those
who are willing to give it weight. For instance, we must
make ourselves sure that the authorities are speaking of
the same point, in the same sense, in the same relations,
as the system in support of which it is adduced. It
is clear that those authorities who speak of the same thing
differently at different times have no real value. Thus
a writer who, maintaining Confession, alleges the dis-
closure of sins, as used in the early Church, preparatory
to public discipline, must be at once struck out of the list.

CATENAE UNSATISFACTORY. 215

inasmuch as what the Confessionalists advocate is some-
thing which did not exist in the early Church. So again, All to be

1 f> • 1 struck out

all those must be struck off, who by confession mean only of the
that which I have termed Confidence, for that which the alleged,

. - who are

Confessionalists recommend is, as we have seen, essen- speaidn.,'
tially difterent. Thus Bishop Andre wes, walking up and diffiLnt"^
down in St. Paul's to listen to those who wished to consult ^^^^ j,u
him, is no evidence in favour of anything more than of ^^^^'
Confidence. So again, those who hold absolution to be
merely the remission of ecclesiastical censures must be
struck off, inasmuch as the Confessionalists hold it as
the actual channel of absolute forgiveness of sins com-
mitted against God. And when all these are struck off,
the list is woefully diminished ; and when again we exclude
those who only held it in theory and never practised it
themselves, or recommended it practically to others, I
suspect that the catena will be found to consist of marvel-
lously few links.

Again, where a writer lends the sanction of his name to And tiu se
a theory which, adopted from others, rests on insufficient views are

. . . , . based on

grounds, his name, however weighty it may be, does not palpably

erroneous

add much strength to the chain. A curious instance of grounds.
this may be found in Bishop Wilson — whose name, if that
of any man, would be of great authority. Writing on the
ofBce for the Visitation of the Sick (for to this point alone
he seems to confine his approval), he quotes Usher and
Andrewes. The first he introduces as saying, that the
Church of England refuses not any confession, whether
public or private, which is necessary for the exercise of
the power of the keys: forgetting to add that Usher ^
distinctly speaks of the power of the keys as exercised by
the clergy solely in applying those means whereby God
does remit sins, viz. the ministration of the word of God,

» Usher, p. 109.

216 CONFESSION.

and tlie sacraments, properly so called, to wliicli lie
adds intercessory prayer and the remission of eccle-
siastical censures ; whereas what is meant by sacra-
mental confession in the ordinary sense of the term is a
power exercised by the clergy besides and beyond these :
so that Bishop Wilson is either not speaking of what
the Confessionalists mean, or he misrepresents Usher's
meaning.

And again, he quotes Bishop Andrewes as another
authority whom he follows : ' It is not said by Christ,
' whose sins ye wish and pray for and declare to be remitted,
' but whose sins ye remit.' Now if it be true, that the exer-
cise of prayer be no true exercise of the keys, then there
was no such thing in the Church till the indirect form
was changed into the direct ' I absolve.' If to ' declare '
is only a gloss upon the authority given by Christ, then
our Church is wrong in saying that authority is given to
declare and pronounce. If absolute remission of sins be
the power conferred in the formula of Ordination, then
nowhere does the Church authorise the clergy to exercise
When they that power — Certainly not in the Morning and Evening

are at .

variance bcrvicc : and yet, where it is distinctly said that the

Churcii, or authority is there exercised.

tory, or" The Same principle I think applies to those writers

other. who, in their defence of sacramental confession, have laid

down ^ something which is at variance with, or in excess
of, the manifest teaching of the Churcli of England, or
with the known facts of history,^ or even with what other
writers alleging the same catena, have laid down.

The two first cases almost speak for themselves.
Where a writer exceeds or contravenes the teaching of

> For instance, Bishop Cosin, ' if he has committed mortal sin, then we re-
quire confession of it to a priest.'

2 The duty of confession from the penitent to the priest has heen commended
hy the Church in the purest times of antiquity. — Dean Pierce.

CATENuE ON BOTH SIDES. 217

our Cliurcli, his value iu a catena on a point of Church
teaching is proportion ably diminished. With regard to the
third, the value of a catena must depend on the virtue of
the harmonious utterances of the several writers : so that
contradictory utterances mutually affect the value of each
other, and the catena perishes beneath the authorities
produced. Mole ruit sua. For instance, the man who says,
that the 'power must he used with great tenderyiess and dis-
cretion, and the rather because the sentence duly pronounced
on earth will he ratified in heaven, and determine their future
and final state,^ cannot be esteemed a very high autliority
by the man who speaks of an absolution as only decla-
ratory, conditional, and ministerial.^

And further, against this shaky catena of theory, we
are able to oppose a far larger unvaried catena of prac-
tice.^ I suppose that there can be no doubt that up to
the last thirty years it would be easy to count the cases in
which there is any mention or evidence of a person having
sought forgiveness of sins by means of sacerdotal absolu-
tion, or of any clergyman having taught it in the pulpit,
or urged it in private ; where mentioned, it is as some-
thing remarkable. The ordinary way in which a man Catena of
made his peace with God was by the reception of the other side.
Holy Communion after the ordinary self-preparation ; and
though there have been instances in which divines have
refused this to criminals who would not confess their guilt,
yet this was required rather as a reparation to society and
to justice, than as a condition to the exercise of any sup-
posed sacerdotal power.

> Dr Hole, 173f>.

^ Dr. Hakewill. These quotations are all taken from the catena put forth
by Mr. Gray.

* The Laudian divines admit that in their days the practice they recom-
mend was all but extinct. This shows what must have been the tenor, not only
of popular feeling, but of the practical teaching of the Church since the Refor-
mation.

218

CONFESSION.

Occasional

instances
of its use.

Not alwaj's
in harmony
■with tlie
Church's
teachiuLT.

Catena of
authorities
on the
other side.

Occasionally, indeed, there is mention of it in the
cases of one or two political criminals, to whom absolution
was ostentatiously administered by sympathising divines
of the Laudian or Jacobite school ; this was rather as an
exhibition of jjolitical religious feeling, than as securing to
the person absolved the spiritual benefits which it professed
to convey.

I doubt very much whether many of the divines who
are alleged in its favour availed themselves of it, or used it
in their ministrations. We have the records of the last
hours of many of these men, and, with a few exceptions,
there is not the smallest trace of it. And even where it
is recorded that certain learned men did avail themselves
of it, v/e must stop for a moment to consider whether the
controversial value of their practice is not affected by
their betraying a manifestly fanciful or incorrect notion of
what the Church permitted or recognised. Thus, for
instance, it is recorded of Saunderson and Hooker that
they both sought for and received absolution at the last,
though it is not recorded that they felt themselves under
that heavy pressure of mind which the Church recognises
as a condition of special confession and, of course, of
formal absolution ; on the contrary, Saunderson, two days
before, received the Holy Communion from his chaplain's
hands ; and of Hooker it is recorded that throughout his
ilhiess he had that submission to God's will which makes
the sick man's bed easy by giving rest to his soul ; and
surely the practice of such men cannot be considered as
the exponent of the views of the Church, the plainest re-
strictions of which it ignores or disregards.

I cannot help thinking that these considerations will
induce my readers to be slow in assigning to the alleged
catena much weight on the point in question; but even
were the catena much more perfect in all its links than it
is, still we should be able to bring forward on the other

DO NOT ALTER FACTS. 219

side no less weighty authorities, who either disapprove
sacramental confession, or entirely omit it from their
teaching.

And ao-ain — lose sight of all I have been saying — What the'/

o o ./ o catena is

take the value of the catena at the highest — allow all the worth at

_ Its hi.jhest

authorities which Confessionalists urge as advocating that and best.
which they advocate — what does it amount to ? That in
every generation since the Reformation, there have been
men, of learning and piety if you will, mostly, if not exclu-
sively, of what is called the Laudian school, who like our
Ritualists had a hankering after certain Mediseval doctrines
and practices which were dropped, or rather excluded,
from our Church as it came forth from the crucible of the
Reformation ; and who, in particular, were unwilling that
the hold which sacramental confession gave the clergy
over the common people should be loosened by its ab-
rogation, and would, like our modern Confessionalists,
have been glad to see it reintroduced, though not to the
extent to which these men carry it? I doubt whether
many authors can be found among those Anglican writers
who speak of it as our modern Laudian school do.

And again, it must never be forgotten that a catena. Catena can
however weighty and perfect it may be, cannot alter the evidence.
facts of the case : cannot insert into the Scriptures a single
instance of the practice : cannot turn confession to the
Peenitentiarius, as a preliminary to public discipline, into
confession as a discipline of grace — a condition of, and fol-
lowed by, absolute forgiveness; it cannot alter the method
prescribed by the Church in ordinary cases into a form of
absolution instead of the ministry of God's word; it cannot
even make the absolution in the Visitation service grant
that forgiveness of sins, which is in the next prayer spoken
of as a thing yet to be granted ; in short, it cannot alter
one jot or tittle of what the Scripture has spoken, or what
the Church has laid down.

can.

220 CONFESSION.

amou^nf of "^^ amount of vague generalities as to its being an or-

sum"tions ^^^^^ ^^*^ ^^^ ^^^ forgiveness of sins — of its being recog-
nised and sanctioned by primitive antiquity, or its being
prescribed or recommended by our own Church — however
dogmatically conceived and expressed — however plausibly
seasoned by pious denunciations of the sin and folly of de-
clining what is thus assumed to have been ordained by
God ; practised from the earliest times, ordered by our ovni
Church, used by pious men of all ages — none of these
plausible and well-sounding assumptions can create for
the system of sacramental confession that clear scriptural
authority — that continuous use in all ages of Christianity
— that well-defined recognition by our own Chui'ch — which
alone can justify an English clergyman in assuming to
himself, and telling people that he has, that power of for-
giving individual sins^ or declaring that they are forgiven,
sacramentally, sacerdotally, and absolutely, compared with
which all other powers conferred on, or claimed by, the
23riesthood in any age or country are as nothing : which
alone can justify a minister of Christ in claiming to be
anything more than a faithful minister and dispenser
of the promises and offers of the remission of sins set
forth in God's word, and of those sacraments, which Christ
has unmistakably ordained, as means whereby we receive
such spiritual gifts, and as pledges to assure us thereof.
Nay, more ; nothing less than positive proof can justify
those who take their views of Christianity from Chris-
tianity itself, in admitting or accepting such a claim, or
allowing themselves to be misled by a system which, finding
no sure ground whereon securely to rest, either in Scripture
or antiquity, takes refuge in a catena. If men in such a
matter choose to put their trust in a catena for that which
they cannot find in Scripture — that which the ancient
Church did not find in Scripture — it is much the same as if
one were to try to walk on the water, or fly in the air, on

NOR SUPPLY LACK OF PROOF. 221

tlie strength of the plausible demonstrations of the pro-
fessors thereof, that such performances must in the nature
of things be possible and practicable : or as if a merchant
were to trust to the axioms of alchemy for making his
fortune, or a statesman frame his policy on the predictions
of astrology. .

Nor can the absence of all those points of evidence, ^"o"" comi-

terbalanoe

which, had the system been true, must have existed, be the lack of
counterbalanced by any of these generalities and assump-
tions, any more than the lack of proofs in a legal case can
be fairly balanced by the vague rhetoric of a counsel, who
tries to throw dust in the eyes of the jury, in the hope of
getting a verdict, which after all would not satisfy honest
men of the justice of his client's cause, or be secure of not
being set aside as against evidence.

Nay, even supposing the catena alleged to be more Theiimita-
favourable than it really is to Auricular Confession, as an dm-e'i'i.y "
occasional sacramental ordinance for the forgiveness of viiusfiitai
sins, it would but bring out more decidedly the fatal flaw [heory,'
which arises from the endeavour to steer a middle course
between those who magnify the priestly power to the
utmost, and those who would reduce it to something less
than a minimum. They find themselves compelled to
limit to merely occasional use that commission and func-
tion, which, had it been given and instituted by Christ in
a sacramental and sacerdotal phase, must from its very
nature have been universally necessary — semper, iihiq^ie, et
ah omnibus^ as it has been from the beginning in its am-
bassadorial and ministerial phases of the dispensation of
the Word and Sacraments. If there is a special ordinance
for the forgiveness of sins, it must be universal, so that
the very limitations which are forced on the writers of this
catena disprove the very point which it is adduced to
establish. Whereas the clerical j)ower viewed as the dis-
pensation of the Word and Sacraments, though as a whole

222

CONFESSION.

and to their
interpreta-
tion of cer-
tain pas-
sages of
Scripture.

Benefit al-
let^ed as
arising
from tlie
practice.

See-saw
argument
of the Con-
fessional-

ists.

Testiaiony
to its
benefits:

universally necessary, may vary in tlie details of applica-
tion, without any limitation as to its universality (see page
198). The same follows from viewing the position ad-
vanced by the Confessionalists in relation to the words on
which they profess to found it. They take the words in
the most literal, unlimited sense, and finding it impossible
to maintain this, they limit the words in a way which
shows that the interpretation, on which their case is built,
is untenable.

There remains only one plea to be examined, and that
is the spiritual benefits which result, or are said to result,
from the system. The Confessionalist proposition on this
point in its mildest and meekest form — the form in which
it is often urged on inexperienced boys and girls — is this :
that it is not forbidden, that great spiritual benefits had
been found to result from it, and therefore it is no harm
to try it.

Some persons, perhaps, if they watch the Confession-
alists, will perceive something very like juggling in argu-
ment, of which I hope most of them are perfectly uncon-
scious. When they are driven out of their position ol
sacramental confession being a divinely appointed ordi-
nance of God, they bring forward the benefits of it as
a prudential motive for adopting it ; then, when this is
answered by showing that the alleged benefits of it are
more than doubtful, and that even if not doubtful they
are more than counterbalanced by the evils of it, they
urge its claims being an ordinance of God : and thus by
this sort of logical see-saw they manage to keep themselves
going, and to evade the grasp of that common sense which,
sharp enough in judging rightly of a single point, is often
confused when two are thus shaken in our faces alternately.

The benefits which are alleged in its favour, rest on the
testimony of two kinds of witnesses : one speak from the
results of their own experience of it, the other from their

ALLEGED EXPERIENCES IN FAVOUR. 223

observation of its results on others. With regard to the

first, I am not certain whether it argues much depth of

the spiritual life, when a man comes forward in public as

I have heard men do, to bear evidence to the value of a

system as having made him spiritually what he is, and

therefore, indirectly but really, sets forth his own spiritual

state, as something to be admired and imitated by others ; froi" Per-
sonal expe-
such evidence, practically in one's own favour is, I think, rknceofit.

suspicious, especially when the soi-disant model man is
known to have thrown in his lot with an innovating school,
of which this is one of the nostrums. It is a natural instinct
which pervades all religionists, from the Romanists to the
Mormons, from the Agapemone to the Trappist, to believe
in and to magnify the blessings which they find in the
religious system which they have adopted. Generally
speaking, the falser any modern phase of Christianity, the
more positive is the verbal evidence of its professors to its
spiritual powers and excellences, as realised in themselves,
for the simple reason that such pretenders lack that humble
estimate of themselves which prevents them thinking of
themselves as model specimens of spirituality : such evi-
dence, speaking generally, is of little value : of none at all,
when compared with facts patent in the thing itself. The
Confessionalist system must not be judged by the estimate
formed by those who are pledged to it, but must be tested
in all its parts, by its own merits and characteristics and
history.

There are others, however, whose evidence in its favour from expe-
is grounded on their own external experience, in the [trresuits
working of their parishes, and dealing with individual wol-k."^^
souls. What these men say in its favour is entitled to
much respect, especially at first sight. I hope I shall not
be held to mean any disrespect to them — I hope that they
will pardon me — if I say that it strikes me that they can
hardly be masters of their art, if they cannot exercise their

224

CONFESSION.

Not neces-
sary to
parish work
properly
carried on.

Mi,c;ht
be ne-
cessary for
public dis-
cipline.

Useful tor
Direction ;
liut not
re c-o Ionised
ill our
Cliurch.

ministry of reconciliation without using methods which
those who were entrusted with the same ministry in the
early Church never had recourse to, or thought of; they
seem to me to be like men who have lost the key, and are
obliged to have recourse to a picklock. It would indeed
be a totally different thing if, as in the early Cliurch,
they were required to decide, not whether the sin could
be pardoned by God, but whether it was one which
required public discipline, before the person could, without
detriment to the Church, be admitted to the privilege of
Church fellowship. Private confession might then have
its use, in order that the priest might know the extent of
the offence, and that the offender might not escape the
punishment due to his offences, and thus dej)rive the
Church of its security against its being injured and scan-
dalised by the offender's relapse.

But there is no such system as this recognised in our
Church; the essence of the Gospel scheme of pardon surely
is, that we are not dealt with according to our sins, or
rewarded after our iniquities. That change of mind,
which is called repentance, and confession to God, and
faith in Christ, are the conditions on which God's ministers
are empowered, and instructed, and commanded to tell a
man that he may enter, or re-enter, into the Kingdom of
Heaven. It may be useful indeed in, even necessary to,
the system which is called Direction — and it is for this
purpose that the Jesuits principally make use of it : but then
it is evident that this assumes that Direction is a benefit
to the Church, and to the individual souls that are under it,
and does not testify to Confession being in itself good.
And Direction, as part of the sacrament of Penance —
sacramental direction it might perhaps be called — does not
enter into the system of our Church, and he who uses it or
recommends it is doing what his Church does not autho-
rise him to do — is transsrressino' the bounds which the

CONFIDENCE NOT TO BE MISUSED. 225

Church has set up to secure the laity against the undue
interference and control of the clergj. Nor, as I have ven-
tured to say before, is he justified, who, without holding the
extreme view of the Confessionalists, yet uses Confession as
a means of unlocking a sick man's soul and heart, so as to
enable him to deal more effectively with the man should
he recover.

It is true, indeed, that confidential intercourse between Confiden-
the parish priest and members of his flock may, as comse'ad-
I have said elsewhere, be necessary to his giving them neUher
comfort and counsel. It may be used as a remedial benefit, memai
provided that it be not represented as being, or believed to J^^^"*'^^^io"
be, an act of religion or of discijpline, or of obedience, or ^"'ection.
of duty, or a part of repentance, or a preliminary of
pardon — in short, if care is taken to exclude from it all
the features which the Confessionalists give it. A j)astor Pastors
may indeed do well to win the confidence of a troubled ccnfidcnce'^
soul, may invite it, may even urge it, but he may not force repr" °ent
it — he may not obtain it on false pretences, or represent it an/^A^gX
as the only or the surest way to pardon, or so use it as to ti''",?^ ^

•' ./ i 7 condition

make it a possible stepping-stone to Confession. If, in- "fp'»'<ion,

^ J. i. o 'or use it to

deed, a man has been guilty of some notorious sin, the set at the

' ... secrets of a

pastor may examine him specially whether he has repented "la^'s sou).
of it; but, as it seems to me, he is not authorised to sug-
gest to him a doubt of God's mercy, or to trouble an un-
troubled conscience by the possibility of some weighty
matter being yet unrepented of, or urge him to confession
in order to discover whether it is so. Or, if instead of
waiting for the sick man's earnest desire for absolution
he represents to him that he cannot die in peace and hope
without it ; or at all events that it is a safe precaution — •
that his peace and hope will be better founded if he is
absolved — that absolution is out of the question unless he
confesses his sins to him, while he promises to absolve him
if he makes a full confession — then it seems to me that

226 CONFESSION.

such a mode of treatment does not differ much from that
of the extreme Confessionalists, who tell men that they will
die in their sins unless they disclose them to a confessor :
who hold out private personal absolution as a necessary
and a certain channel of pardon. He is putting into the
man's mind a delusion which may, and if it is rested on,
wiU, end in the omission of those acts of personal faith in
our Lord on which the promised pardon waits ; he is
Im-ing him on by false pretences to lay bare his soul to
him ; he is turning Confidence into a Confession, which
differs only from that of the Confessionalists, in that par-
don is not definitely attached to the formula spoken by the
priest : and again I venture to express my conviction that
such misrepresentation is scarcely justified by the hope or
the notion that, if the man recovers, the knowledge of those
details of his inner being and outer life will enable the
pastor to mould his advice so as to be more applicable to the
man's case, or make him more amenable to pastoral advice.

AUetred At all evcuts, it is clear, that against whatever benefits

may be supposed to result from it, must be placed its dis-
advantages and evils : the witness of those, who in foreign
countries, where it has had its full swing, have tried it, or
who have witnessed the evil influence it has exercised on
society, and on individual souls : all these must be placed
against the statements of those, who in its favour bear
witness, either that they have themselves personally found
the benefit of it, or that they have seen the good results
which it has produced in others.

Previous Before, however, I enter on' this branch of the subject,

question.

there is a previous question to which I must again call at-
tention. It is this — whether in matters relating to the
spiritual life and salvation of souls, any, humanly speak-
ing, possible or even probable benefits can justify us in
adopting any other method or rule than what has been re-
vealed to us as a definite part of the scheme of salvation ?

benefits
c<iuiitei"-
b.ilaiictd
liv known
e\ ils.

liEVELATTON THE ONE RULE. 227

I am not, of course, speaking of minor details, such as are intrusion

.on revealed

left to every Church to decide and adopt for itself : but of es- scheme of

,•1 .., , .1, ,. !•! salvation.

sential princij)les and weighty practices, which must exer-
cise great influence on the system which adopts them :
on the character and temperament and spu'itual life and
S2)iritual hopes of those who use them : under the auspices
and influences of which Christianity becomes a different
religion from what it is without them. In such matters — The danger
and surely the forgiveness of sins b}^ sacramental Con- counter-
fession is one of these — it is more than doubtful whether by any
that which is adopted on the ground of its seeming, hu- beneath.
manly speaking, likely to be beneficial, may not in some
way or other obstruct or neutralise the work of God's
revealed scheme in God's appointed ordinances. The
Gospel scheme of salvation is not an outline sketch, which
is to be filled up in detail by the clergy, or even by the
Church ; it is not a skeleton map in which the moun-
tains and rivers and roads and cities are to be filled in by
the guesses of human wit ; but it puts before us, exhaus-
tively and yet minutely, in theu* completeness the great
principles and powers of the Redemption of the world and
of every individual in it. In the eflScacy — in the certain ^^'hat (Jnd

lias given

result — of these principles and powers, it is the j^art of us is ex-
haustive
faith implicitly to trust — nay, it is the part of mere human and suf-

ficicnt.

wisdom. To introduce into it movements and powers of
our own, as if we could supplement what God has given
us, savours to my mind of human folly and human pride.
I confess I think there can be discerned a tendency in
the clergy, strongly developed in the Mediaeval and
Romish systems, of late years reviving among ourselves,
to think of themselves as the physicians of the souls of
men, instead of what they really are, the errand-boys cierpy not
and dispensers of the one Great Physician — having re- Lt onh"^
ceived from Him a panacea of life — sent into the world b"vs"of
by Him, as He was sent by the Father, to do His work pi^^'^lSn.

Q 2

228 CONFESSION.

in the ministry of reconciliation — not in acts of confession
to tliem, not in words of absolution from them ; but in
the preaching the Gospel of their Lord, dispensing His
sacraments, in exhorting, warning, teaching : licensed by
Him to minister the Gospel in His name, with the promise
that to those who receive it and its offers from their hands
it shall be as effectual to cure them, as if He Himself
had ministered it — as it was to those to whom He did
minister. They indeed are bound to use all their ener-
gies, all their talents, all their industry, in short, all that
God has given them, some in one way, some in another,
in getting men to accept the remedy committed to their
Have no dispensation ; but with that remedy they have no authority
to add to or or licence to tamper, or to alter or change it : they have no

olfpy* ITjg

panacea. Warrant to practise for themselves, or to vend nostrums of
their own, or to add to their Lord's panacea ingredients
of their own, in the notion of making it more agreeable
or beneficial. If they do so, they do it not only at their
own peril, but the peril of those on whom they try their
experiments, at the risk of neutralising the healing effects
of that which they have thus adulterated.
Certainty That God wiU Himsclf work in what He has prescribed

prescribed and promised we are certain — that He will work in these
inventions of our own we have no reason to think ; on the
contrary, those who study most accurately the growth of
the errors and the corruptions which have made Chris-
tianity almost a by-word among the nations, will be most
convinced, that these can be traced to the rashness of well-
intentioned men, who chose to be wise above that which is
written. There are persons who talk very glibly and fre-
quently of Christ's presence in His Church, and the
Spirit's work in the Church, but who forget that this two-
fold presence guarantees the effectual working of what
He has ordained for His Church, and forbids men to work
in their own devices, and in ways which He has not or-

uy God.

DANGER OF ADDING TO IT. 229

daiiied, as if what He has ordained would not do His
work without the aid of these human devices. It seems
to me to be a phase of disbelief. There are those, who
think that men cannot be saved without their exercising
functions and powers which belong to God alone. Like panger of
Korah and his company, they seem to think it a small devices.
thing that God hath made them to stand before the con-
gregation to minister to them, they seek Christ's priest-
hood also. Nor is there anything surprising in this ; it is
the natural working of the perverse, proud, will of man on
the knowledge and the system which He has given them.
For myself, I confess that I look upon these inventions
and additions with distrust and alarm : and when a man
has nothing more to say for a religious nostrum than that
it is not forbidden, and may be beneficial, I think it wiser
and safer to trust to God's wisdom in what He has pre-
scribed for us, than in our own wisdom and in what we
prescribe for ourselves.

Of course all this is heightened when the theory of this
supposed beneficial addition contradicts, or is inconsistent
with, some leading principle or fact or injunction or ordi-
nance or promise of God's revealed scheme : or when its sup-
posed benefits are counterbalanced tenfold by the evils
which are inherent in it, or which history bears witness to
it, having produced. And under both these aggravations
the Confessionalist system falls. If — to take one instance Auricular
out of many that could be alleged — it is necessary to the i,npiies'°"
obtaining pardon of sins committed against God, to confess Qod's'pro-'^
them privately to a priest, then the promise that ' If we "^'*®'^'
' confess our sins to God, He is faithful and just to forgive
* us our sins,' is held of ^-^o account. The believing the one
is an act of disbelief in the other, and I know of no reason
to think that it will not bring with it the penalties of dis-
belief. And the pages of history — the memories, nay,
even the experience of living men, ring with the evils,

230 CONFESSION.

spiritual, political, social, domestic, moral, of the Con-
fessional.
The impor- Por myself, I place so much importance on the prin-

tance of » / x j. x

this piin- ciple that the absence of any authority or warrant or

ciple makes

me defer precedent in Scripture for the practice of what is techni-

the question -t-i -i-, -, r^ c •

of tiie cally called Confession cannot be counterbalanced by any

Confession, possible benefits resulting from it, that I am unwilling to
mix up the two questions together : and therefore confining
myself iu my present publication to the former question, I
shall defer for the present entering on the latter point ; it
will form the subject which it is my intention to consider
in the second part of my work. At present I will only
add that this mode of treating the subject furnishes a
ready answer to those Confessionalists who urge that those
who have not tried their system cannot form a fair or trust-
worthy judgment against it. It is the old argument of the
Romish Proselytizers. It is about as reasonable to say that
none but opium-eaters can reasonably condemn or dis-
suade from opium-eating. But setting this aside, Ave
answer tha.t the Confessional is not on its trial with respect
to the benefits which may conceivably flow from it, or
from the spiritual enjoyments it may confer. We are
willing to join issue with its advocates on this point :
but at present the question is whether it is ordained
by God, recognised by the really Primitive Church, or
accepted by our own. This is to be decided by the tests
whereby we have tried it — if the answer is in the nega-
tive, then its benefits must be delusive, its enjoyments
dangerous.
Argument There is a plea of the Confessionalists, savouring

tion." ^^^' somewhat of an argumentum ad misericordiam, which finds
a ready acceptance with many, who do not accept their
system on grounds either of logic or expediency ; the plea
is, that their system should meet with toleration instead
of opposition.

TOLERATION NOT ADMISSIBLE. 231

A writer on the subject expresses a hope that the
sohition of the difficulty may be found in the practical
adoption of the requirement of mutual forbearance given in
the first book of Edward VT. (see page 109). The pro-
position is practically this : that whereas the difficulty
consists in one party maintaining that Confession is per-
missible, and another party maintaining that it is not
permissible, the latter should admit the permissive for-
mula which the Church has struck out. Yerily, they must
have a very low estimate of the energy and discernment
of those with whom they have to deal. There is no
greater proof of a man being himself wanting in tlie faculty
of discerning what is true and honourable and reasonable
and of good faith, than his proposing what is unfair and
unreasonable, in utter unconsciousness of its absurdity and
trickery.

The advantage of the plea (self-condemnino- thouo-h it Tiuspiopo-
be) consists in this, that it is in harmony with that theo- tiumgii in

t • • no -I ' " harmony

retical indifference to truth, which holds that anything may with tiie
be true, and with that practical opposition to truth which sign of
holds that no error is to be opposed. This chimes in well weaknss.
enough with the liberalism of the age ; but one would
hardly expect it to be put forth by a school who profess
themselves ready to go to the stake in defending what
they believe to be true, or opposing what they believe to
be false. It is clear they do not give their oj)ponents
credit for the same amount of discernment and firmness
for which they take credit to themselves. In reality, their
plea betrays their consciousness that their cause cannot
stand against the convictions and instincts of the nation.
They feel that their chance is to be able to stifle the instincts
and master these convictions, by gradually bringing
men's reason and men's feelings under the influence of a
sacerdotal power which should forbid men to think or feel
except as the priest should bid them : and for this all that

232

CONFESSION.

Import-
ance of the
results
of the Con-
fessional :

Theologi-
cally.

they want is what they call 'fair play.' It is the judgment
of Solomon over again — they are willing to cut the truth
as it were into two halves, provided one half may fall to
their share, it will be to them so much gain. But if we,
who know the truth to be wholly on our side, consent to
any such compromise, the loss will be on our side. It is
a proposition that those who occupy a vantage ground
shall descend from their stronghold, and give the invaders
a fair chance of conquering their country — a proposal
wearing a fair enough semblance of chivalry and valour,
admissible, perhaps, in mimic contest for a laurel crown,
but not likely to be accepted, or even listened to, by
reasonable men, engaged in the momentous interest at
stake between us and the Confessionalists.

I confess there is nothing which more excites my
astonishment, not to say apprehension, in this matter,
than the toleration which is conceded by some men to
the endeavours which are now being made to revive this
pre-Reformation practice : the indulgence, with which it
is pleaded that everyone should be allowed to do as he
likes herein : the complacency with which men see the
system gaining ground as long as it does not actually
touch themselves. In fact, I caimot conceive how such a
course of apathy, indifference, indulgence, toleration, and
even connivance, which the Confessionalists kindly recom-
mend to their opponents as the proper way of meeting
them, can be listened to by anyone who is aware of the
greatness of the danger, of the gravit}^ of the crisis. They
have scarcely realised the full nature and the full results
of the confessional in its theological, evangelical, ecclesi-
astical, religious, political, social, personal bearings.

Theologically, it puts before us as necessary to salva-
tion, or at least highly beneficial to our spiritual state,
that for which we find no warrant or sanction in Revela-
tion. It claims our acquiescence in and adoption of a

EVILS OF CONFESSION. 233

system of man's invention, plausible enough and eflPective
enough, perhaps, had there been no revelation of God's
nature, and counsels, and scheme of salvation, which over-
rides, or rather supersedes, whatever man may have
guessed or dreamt on these matters, whatever man may
have devised or arranged.

Evangelically, it is an alteration of the condition of Evangdi-
the Gospel message — of the channels whereby forgiveness is
conveyed from God under the Gospel scheme — of the means
whereby man is to lay hold of what God provides for him.
It is an infringement of the charter of our salvation as
children of grace, having the right, each of us, of free access
to God by virtue of the freedom whereby Christ has made
us free.

Ecclesiastically, it is a setting at naught of the teaching Ecciesiasti •
and practice of the early Church, the teaching and prac-
tice of our own. It is the setting up a sacerdotal order
to be not only ambassadors from God to man, but medi-
ators between man and God, as lords over God's heritage,
judges of their brethren — the attorneys, so to say, of their
spiritual interests, empowered to arrange with each man
the terms on which God's free mercy shall be his — dealing
out spiritual life or spiritual death according to the issues
of their weak judgments.

Religiously, it is opening in this our hitherto haj^py Religious-
country that same source of superstition which has flooded
so many Papal countries — notably France, Spain, and
Italy — with infidelity, even in minds not naturally indis-
posed to religion, by pressing Christianity on men's
homes and hearts in a form deeply repulsive and utterly
untrue. Christianity has no greater enemy than the
Confessional, perhaps none so great. Infidelity has no
greater friend, perhaps none so great, as the Confessional.
In its bearing, too, on individual religion its work of de- rersonaUy.
moralisation is complete. It dries up the springs of real

234 CONFESSION.

religion, fills up its wells with rubbish ; it paralyses the
energies of individual spirituality, and makes faith nothing
more than reason limping in a priest's footsteps, or
reluctantly dragged along by a heavy chain — nothing more
than reason bowing its neck to the ground and letting a
priest put his foot upon it, instead of walking in the
knowledge of God, with the uplifted face and the firm, free,
step of spiritualised, evangelised intelligence.

Nationally. Nationally, it turns that which should be the light of
a nation, its religion, into darkness ; and if so, how great
is that darkness? It destroys the very nerves of a
nation, sucks out its life-blood, places the liv^es, the con-
sciences, the interests of the people at the mercy of a Father
Confessor, who may by the means of the Confessional have
gained dominion over the soul and the conscience of a
weak or a wicked king or minister. It places the fortune,
the strength, the destinies of the nation in the hands of
the priest. To all this history bears witness in the records
of the crimes, and the follies, and the disasters which were
brought about by the Confessional, the echoes of which, long
passed though they be, still ring with a painful clearness,
and ever will, ring, in the ears of the civilised world as long-
as that world lasts — in vain it would seem for those men
who sit quietly by and smile, sometimes apj)rovingly,
sometimes disdainfully at its progress among us. And

Socially. when to these we add the social, the personal evils in the
family — in the heart — which have always waited, and ever
must wait upon it, it seems to me inconceivable, incredible,
unintelligible, that anyone should watch its revival with
satisfaction, or even indifference, on the ground that this
revival is but partial, and its success or triumph unlikely.

Simfhi^ °ft ^^^^^ ^^^ r^QQ^ to be reminded of that pretty water-plant

again to which was welcomed so warmly a few years a2"0 as a

take root. ^ ^ j a

charming addition to the flora of our streams. A few
years passed, and it was found that wherever it had taken

EVILS OF CONFESSION. 235

root it had clioked the waters, and made them a mass of
impenetrable herbage ; it cost much time and expense to
remove the eviL And what would be thought of, what
would now be said to, the man who re-planted it in a
flowing river or a glassj pool ?

INDEX.

ABS

Absolution, ancient forms of, 95 ;
what they indicate, 95 ; 'I absolve
thee,' -what does it convey ? 96 ; to
be distinguished from pardon, 97 ;
benefit of, 111 ; meaning of, 111 ;
not to be pronounced over uncon-
scious persons, 185 ; what it is
not, 132; what it is, 169; not
mere preaching or reading the
Bible, 170; private, not recog-
nised in the Scriptures or Apostulic
Church, 162 ; practical use of, 175;
in the Morning and Evening Ser-
vices, 176 ; in the Holy Communion
Office, 177; in the Visitation Office,
178; why the direct form 'I absolve
thee' is used, 178; why permitted
to the dying man, 179, 182 ; nature
and results of, 179, 180; how far
it may be said to be a declaration as
to who are pardoned, 179; illustra-
tions of, 181 ; not to be suggested to
every sick man, 182 ; may clear
away doubt of repentance, 183;
why limited to a death-bed, 188;
is it a restoration to a state of
grace? 208

Advice, following Confidence diifers
from Direction, 45

Analogies of lawyer and physician,
27 ; examined, 28 scq.

Ancient writers, contradictory lan-
guage of, 63 ; solution of, 68

Anxiety for salvation, not the point
at issue, 15

Apostles, why they may have been
conceived to forgive sins absolutely,
142

Applicants, how clergy may deal with
them, 202, 205

AuricuLir Confession, different modes
of administering it, 25 ; even vo-

CHR

luntary, no sanction for in primi-
mitive Church, 86 ; what is meant
by, 19 ; Confessionalists' teaching
thereon, 91 ; several notions wrongly
identified with, 20 ; not recognised
as a preparation for Holy Com-
munion, 188 ; plea that it is forced
upon the clergy, 199 seq. ; that
laity are responsible for it, 201 ; an
abuse of the clerical office, 204 ;
cannot be claimed by a layman,
205 ; benefits alleged as arising from
the practice, 222 ; this evidence in
its favour not to be trusted, 222
seq. ; this not the primary question,
226 ; real question whether ordained
by God, 226 ; objections to it on
this score, 227 ; why not to be tole-
rated or connived at, 230 seq.

Benefit of Absolution, meaning of. 111

Canons, passage alleged from, in
favour of Confession, 117

Carter, Mr., his admission as to Con-
fession in the early Church, 57

Catena — alleged by the Confessional-
ists, 209 ; examination of, 209 seq. ;
of practice is against the Confes-
sionalists, 217; on the other side of
authorities, 218; logical value of,
at the highest, 219

Christ's words in St. John, meaning
of, 138; questions involved there-
in, 141 ; to whom addressed, 141 ;
are they, if addressed to the
Apostles, necessarily carried on to
their successors, 142; bearing of
our Lord's promise, ' I am with you
always,' on this point, 143; not
addressed to the Apostles onlj', 144;

238

INDEX.

CHU

bearing of this point on the ques-
tion, 145 ; what were the powers
given ? evidently forgiveness of sins
against the Cliurch, 147 ; wliy they
cannot be limited to this, 147;
comparison of the Evangelists on
this point, 148; account given by
St. Luke and St. John of the com-
mission given, 149; both recog-
nised by our Church, 149 — taken
by no one in their literal meaning,
l/iS ; how interpreted by the prac-
tice of the early Church, 162 ; how
not interpreted, 162; what taken
to include, 164

Cliurch's mission, how it differs from
our Lord's, 167

Church's office before the canon of the
New Testament, 170; still exists
in Absolution, 173; relations be-
tween it and the written word, 1 72

Clerical office and authority not the
point in question, 14, 120, 139

Commission to remit sins, how exer-
cised in early Church, 160; Con-
fessionalist assertion thoreon, 151

Confession — importance of, 1 ; subject
forced upon us, 3 ; aspects and re-
sults. 1 ; nature, 282 ; revolution in
religion, 2 ; — aversion to, not un-
reasonable— not the ground for op-
posing it, 3 ; Eitualistic argument
from, 10 ; supersedes revelation, 3 ;
indistinct views about, 4 ; — two
phases of, 21 ; differences between,
21 ; how identified by the Confes-
sionalists, 22 ; links in the process,
23 ; ending in Auricular Confession,
24 ; — the two pleas for, 26 ; — con-
founded with the human yearning
after sympathy, 26 ; how it differs
from confidence, 44 ; how girls are
led to, 49 ; its connection with Ab-
solution, 60 ; — might be useful if
there had been no revelation, 51 ;
real objection against, tliat it is not
revealed, 52 ; no trace of it in Scrip-
ture, 54; unknown in early times,
except in connection with public
discipline, 56; totally different from
modern Confession, 57 ; witness of
the primitive Church as given in
the note to TertuUian, 58 seq. ; — as
permitted in Visitation Office, gene-
rally only confidence, 98; — cannot
under any circumstances be a prece-
dent for other cases, 100 ; — not ne-
cessary to the exercise of the priest's

FOR

office, 133 ; not to be suggested to
every sick man, 182; habitual and
occasional flaw in the assumed dif-
fernce between, 197, 198

Confidence only once suggested by the
Church, 46 ; transition from Confi-
dence to Confession, 47 ; — existed in
early Church, 82 ; changed into
private Confession, 85; — howit may
slip into Confession, 43 ; care to be
taken against this, 43 ; — da.nger in
it at present day, 44, 201 ; how it
differs from Confession, 44

Confidential communications not the
point at issue, 16

Corinthian penitent, case of, 151

Cyprian, passage from, 70

Differences of view briefly considered,
1 7 ; causes of, 1 9

Direction differs from advice given in
confidence, 45

Discipline of the Church — meaning of
the phrase in the Ordination Service,
126 ; not mentioned among the par-
ticulars of tiie clerical office, 126 ;
falls under faithful dispensation of
the Sacraments, 1 26 ; does not sup-
port the Confessionalist point, 126

Early Church practices, retained by
our Churcti, 82

Exhortation to the Holy Communion,
passage in, considered, 102 ;
wrongly claimed by the Confession-
iilists, 102 ; their language about,
1 03 ; — does not suggest recourse to
a minister as the usual or best
method, 103; case in which it is
suggested, 104; directions for it,
105; all go to exclude Auricular
Confession, 1C5 ; object of, not ab-
solution, but benefit of absolution,
10 ; how the contrary interpreta-
tion has been accepted, 106 ; — coun-
ter-balanced by general disuse, 107;
— need not lie read by a priest, 107 ;
alterations in the passage;, 1 09- 111;
— what issuggestedin, distinguished
from that which is permitted in the
Visitation Office, 195

Extravagancies not used to disprove
Confession, 16

Forgiveness of sins not recognised by
our Church in the Confessionalist
sense, 129 ; reason of this, 130

INDEX.

239

FOR

Forgiveness, threefold method of, 65,
70

FormiUa for private absolution ex-
punged from the Prayer-Eook, 110

Girls, how led to Confession, 49
God's mercy, doulit of, not to be
created or suggested, 184 ; condi-
tions of, not to be altered or ex-
ceeded, 185, 187

Homilies, passage of alleged in favour
of Auricular Confession, 118

Hnraau yearning after sympathy con-
founded "vvith Confession. See
under ' Confession.'

Leo I., changes introduced by, 64

Mini'^try of God's Word, meaning of,
113

Morbid spiritual state, not to bo en-
couraged, 42

Nectarius, discipline contemplated by,
84

Ordination formula, meaning and
force of, 119, 128; real issue in-
volved in tlie question, 120 ; — docs
not prove the t'onfessionalist point,
121 ; paragraplis in, 122 ; two
powers conveyed by, 122; positive
power exhausted by dispensation of
the Word and Sacraments. 123 ; re-
taining power Ijy the faithful dis-
pensation thereof, 124 ; — no otiier
exercise of the clerical office in this
respect recognised by our Church,
125 ; or mentioned in the ordination
exhortation, 1 25 ; no private exer-
cise of retaining for secret sins re-
cognised in the Rubrics or in the
Canons, 127; arbitrary exercise of
retaining powers not contemplated
in the exhortation to tlie Holy
Communion or in the Visitation
Office, 124

Psenitentiarius, appointment and office
of, 79 ; a step towards mediaeval
confession, 80; abolished, 81 ; no

PRI

■warrant for modern Confession,
81

Pardon to be distinguished from Ab
solution, 97 ; comes directly from
God, 184

Pastoral confidence, no sanction for
confession, 38 ; natural and allow-
able, 39 ; nature of, 40 ; for relief
or advice, 40; beneficial, 41; for
solution of doubts, 41 ; cure for
morbid state, 41 ; to be received
under certain limitations, 42

Penance not recognised by our Church,
135

P< nitence not recognised by our Chui'ch,
137

Penitential discipline, 65 ; prominence
given to, 67 ; difference between
this and modern confession in
theory, 71; and details, 72; decay
of, 82 ; public changed into private,
83 ; matter of canonical arrange-
ment, and therefore not of divine
obligation, 87

Power of forgiving sins, as claimed by
Confessionalists, practical test of,
155

Practical conclusions, 192

Prayer after Absolution in Visitation
Office. 93 , affects the force of tlie ab-
solution formula, 94 ; — nftcr pul)lic
reconciliation in early Churzh,
165

Priest, struck out of the Rubric in the
exhortation to the Holy Communion,
108

Primitive Church, witness of, 59 scq.

Private Confession, not commanded in
Scripture, 32; exM,minatii)n of pas-
sages alleged to the contrary, 32 ;
how it sprung from public disci-
pline, 74 ; unknown at first, 75 ;
changes introduced after pa-niten-
tiarius, 83 ; authorised by Leo I.,
84 ; still different from modern Con-
fession, 85 ; plea that it may be
adopted by any Church, 88 ; proves
it not to be of divine obligation, 89 ;
question whether it is recognised by
our Church cciusidered, 89 scq. ;
mistaken assumption of the Con-
fessionalists on this point, 90 ; argu-
ments advanced in support of, 90;
not practised or recognised by the
Apostles, 151

Private personal discipline in early
Church, 81 ; retained by our Cliurc'a,
82

240

Index.

PEM

Remission of sins — direct, 165 ; indi-
rect, 166; results of, 167

Retaining power, results of exercise
of, 168 ; power not to be exceeded,
169

Scripture, precedents alleged, 9 ; pas-
sages alleged, as giving power of
forgiving sins, 152

Sin, tlu'eefold phases of, against a
brother, against the Church, and
against tiod, 65 ; against the
Church, 65 ; condoned in public
discipline and reconciliation, 66 ;
against the Church, distinguished
from sins against God, 69 ; secret
disclosure of, 76 ; not made neces-
sarily to a priest, 78 ; object of, 78 ;
remission of by God and man, dif-
ference between, 97 ; prevalence of,
77 ; did not go beyond confidence,
77

Sins, mortal and venial, distinction
between, does not authorise Auricular
Confession, 207 •

Sophistries, and petty arguments of the
Confessionalists, 7 ; instances of, 7 ;

VIS

logical value of, 12, 157; practical

way of testing. 160
Spiritual life, Ritualistic argument

from, in favour of Confession

answered, 10
St. James, passage alleged from, 32 ;

examined, 32 and scq.
St. John's words, ' As my Father hath

sent me,' &c., Coufessionalist argu-
ment from, examined, 157
St. Matthew, ix. 8, Confessionalists'

a"gumeuts from, examined, 154
St. Paul, 2 Cor. v. 18, examination of

argument alleged from, 156
Summary of the arguments on both

sides, 189 scq.

Tertullian, note on, 58 ; evidence con-
tained in, as to primitive practice,
59 seq.

Visitation Office, Confessionalist argu-
ment therefrom, 91 ; the Confession
here permitted shown to be not that
of the Confessionalist, 92, 98

tosDoy : pniNTED ny

8P0TTIBW0ODR AND CO., NEW-STKEET SQUARE
AND PARLIAMENT faTRBBT

39 Paternoster Row, E.C.
London, November 1874.

GENERAL LIST OF WORKS

PUBLISHED BY

Messrs. Longmans, Green, and Co.

PAGE

Arts, Manufactures, &c. ... 25

Astronomy & Meteorology . . 17

Biographical Works 6

Chemistry & Physiology ... 23
Dictionaries & other Books of

Reference 14

Fine Arts & Illustrated Edi-
tions 24

History, Politics, Historical

Memoirs, &c i

Index 41 to 44

Knowledge for the Young ... 40

Mental & Political Philosophy 8

Miscellaneous & Critical Works 12
Natural History & Physical

Science iS

Poetry & the Drama 35

Religious & Moral Works . . 28
Rural Sports, Horse & Cattle

Management, &c 36

Travels, Voyages, &c 32

Works of Fiction 34

Works of Utility & General

Information ig

ooj*:c

HISTORY, POLITICS, HISTORICAL

MEMOIRS, &c.

yoitrnal of the Reigns of

King George IV. and King
William IV.

By the late Charles C. F.
Greville, Esq. Clerk of
the Conncil to those
Sovereigns. Edited by
Henry Reeve, Registrar
of the Privy Council.

3 z'ols. Sr'(7. frice 36^.

The Life of Napoleon III.
derived from State Records,
Unpublished Family Cor-
respondence, and Personal
Testimony.
By Blanchard yerrold.

Four ]'ols. 8r'^. unth Portraits frciii the
Orii^inah in possession of the Imperial
Family, and Facsimiles of Letters of
Napoleon I. N^apoleon III. Queen
Ilortense, &~'e. YoL. I. price iSj.

*^f* IW. //. 7vill be published in the
Autumn, and Vols. III. and IV. com-
pleting the work, in the Spring of 1875.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

R.ecollections and Sugges-
tions of Public Life, 1813-

By John Earl Russell.

1 vol. Zvo. \Nearly ready.

Introductory Lectures on
Modern History delivered
in Lent Term 1842 ; with
the Liaugural Lectttre de-
livered in December 1841.
By the late Rev. Thomas
Arnold, D.D.

8z>o. price "js. 6d.

Essays on the English
Government and Constitti-
tion f'om the Reign of
Henry VI L to the Present
Time.
By John Earl Rtcssell.

Fcp. %vo. 3 J. bd.

On Parliamentary Go-
vernment in England: its
Origin, Development, and
Practical Operation.
By Alpheus Todd.

2 vols. %vo. £\. I p.

The Constitutional His-
tory of England since the
Accession of George III.
1 760-1870.

By Sir Thomas Erskine
May, K.C.B.

Fourth Edition. 3 vols, crotun 2>vo. iSj-.

Democracy in Europe ;
a History.

By Sir Thomas Erski7ie
May, K.C.B.

2 vols. Svo. [Til preparation.

The History of England
from the Fall of VVolsey to
the Defeat of the Spanish
Armada.
By y. A. Fronde, M.A .

Cabinet Edition, \2v0ls. cr.Svo. £2,. 12s.
Library Edition, 12 vols. ?>vo. £8. iSs.

The English in Ireland
in the Eighteenth Century,
By 7. A. Froude, M.A.

3 vols. %vo. £2. %s.

Estimates of the English
Kings from William the
Conquei'or to Geoige III.
By J . L. Sanford.

Cro'un ?>vo. 12s. 6d.

The History of England
fro?n the Accession of
fames II.
By Lord Macaulay.

Student's Edition, 2 vols. cr. Svo. 12s.
People's Edition, 4 vols. cr. Zvo. i6j.
Cabinet Edition, 8 vols, post Zvo. ^Zs.
Library Edition, 5 vols. %vo. £df.

Critical and Historical

Essays contributed to the
Edinburgh Review.
By the Right Hon. Lord
Macaulay.

Cheap Edition, authorised and complete,
craiun 8vo. ;^s. 6d.

Student's Edition, crozvn 8zv. ds.
People's Edition, 2 vols, croivn %vo. %s.
Cabinet Edition, 4 vols. 24s.
Library Edition, 3 vols. Svo. 36^-.

Lord Macaulay s IVoiIzs.
Complete and uniform Li-
brary Edition.
Edited by his Sister, Lady

Trcvelyan.

8 vols. Srv. li'ith Portrait, £$. %s.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

Lectures on the History
of England from the Ear-
liest Times to the Death of
King Edward II.
By W. Longman, F.A.S.

Maps and Illustrations. 8zv. 15^.

The History of the Life
and Ti7Jtes of Edward III.
By W. Longman, F.A.S.

With 9 Maps, 8 Plates, and 16 Woodcuts.
2 vols. %vo. 28j-.

History of England
under the Duke of Bnckijig-
ha77i and Charles the First,
1624-1628.

By S. Raws on Gardiner,
late Student of Ch. Ch.

2 vols. %vo. {In the press.

History of Civilization in

England and France, Spain

a7id Scotland.

By Heniy Thomas Buckle.

3 vols, crown %vo. 2^.

A Stndenfs Manual of
the History of Lidia fro7n
the Earliest Pe7Hod to the
P7^ese7it.

By Col. Meadows Taylor,
M.R.A.S.

Second Thousand. Cr. %vo. Maps, Js. 6d.

The French Revolution

a7id First Empire; a7i

Histo7'ical Sketch.

By W. GCo7inor Mo7^7ns,

sometime Schola r of07'iel

College, Oxford.

With 2 Maps. Post Zvo. p. 6d.

The History of India
fro77i the Earliest Period
to the close of Lo7'd Dal-
hoiisies A d77iinist7'atio7i.
Byfoh7i Clark Marshma7i.

3 vols, crowji 8vo. 22s. 6d.

India? I Polity; a View of
the Syste77i of Ad77ii7iist7'a-
tion i7i Lidia.
By Lieut. -Colo7iel Geo7ge
Ches7iey.

Second Edition, revised, with Map. Zvo. 2ls.

Waterloo Lectures ; a
Study of the Ca77tpaigii of
1S15.

By Colonel Charles C.
Ches7tey, R.E.

Third Edition. ?>vo. -with Map, los. 6d.

Essays in Modern Mili-
taiy Biog7'aphy.
By Colo7iel Charles C.
Chesney, R.E.

Zvo. \2s. 6d.

The Imperial and Colo-
7iial Co7istitutio7is of the
B7Hta7i7iic E77ipi7'e, i7icltid-
ing India7i l7istitutio7is.
By Sir E. C^^easy, M.A.

With 6 Maps. %vo. \^s.

The Oxford Reformers —

fohn Colet, Eras77ius, a7td
Thomas Mo7^e ; bei7ig a
Histo7y of their Fellow-

W07^k.

By F7^ede7'ic Seebohm.

Second Edition. %vo. \\s.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

TJie History of Persia

and its present Political
Situation ; zvit/i Abstracts
of all Ti^eaties and Con-
ventions betzueen Persia and
England.

By Clements R. Markhani,
CB. F.R.S.

%vo. -iinth Map, 2\s.

The Mythology of the

Aryan Nations.

By Geo. W. Cox, ALA. late
ScJiolar of Trinity Col-
lege, Oxford.

2 vols. Zvo. 28^.

A History of Greece.
By tJie Rev. Geo. IV. Cox,
M.A. late Scholar of
Trinity College, Oxford.

Vols. I. and IT. Zvo. ]\Iaps, ^bs.

The History of Greece.
By C. Thirlwall, D.D.
late Bp. of St. David' s.

^vols.fcp.^vo. 2Sj-.

The Tale of the Great

Persian War, from the
Histories of Herodotus.
By Rev. G. W. Cox, M.A.

Fcp. %vo. TyS. 6d.

The History of the Pclo-
ponnesian War, by Thu-
cydides.

Translated byRichd. Craiv-
ley, Felloiv of Worcester
College, Oxford.

Greek History from The-

mistocles to Alexander, in
a Series of Lives from
PlntarcJi.

Revised and arranged by
A. H. C lough.

Fcp. ^vo. IVoodaits, 6j.

LListory of the Romans

7inder the Empire.

By the Very Rev. Charles

Merivale, D.CL. Dean

of Ely.

8 vols, post %vo. 48^'.

TJie Fall of the Roman

Republic ; a Short History

of the Last Century of the

Commonwealth.

By Dean Merivale, D.CL.

xzmo. Is. 6d.

The Sixth Oriental Mo-
narchy; or the Geography,
History, and Antiquities
of Part Ilia. Collected and
Lllustrated from Ancient
and ALodern sources.
By Geo. Randinson, JIL.A.

IVilli i\[aps and Illustrations. Sev. I 5j'.

The Seventh Great Ori-
ental Monarchy ; or, a
LListory of the Sassanians :
with Notices Geographical
and Antiquarian.
By Geo. Razvlinson, M.A.

<ivo. ivitli Maps and Illustrations.

\_In the press.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

Eiicyclopccdia of Chro-
nology, Historical and
Biographical ; comprising
the Dates of all the Great
Events of History, includ-
ing Treaties, Alliances,
Wars,^ Battles, &c. Inci-
dents in the Lives of Emi-
nent Jllen, Scientific and
Geographical Discoveries,
Mechanical Inventions, and
Social, Domestic, and Eco-
nomical Improvements.
By B. B. Woodwa7'd, B.A.
and TV. L. R. Gates.

The History of Rome.

By With elm Ihne.

Vols. I. and II. 8:

IV. in p7-cparation

OS. J'ols. III. and

History of European

Moi^als from Aiignstns to

Gharlemagne.

By W. E. H. Lecky, M.A.

2 vols. Si'c'. 2'is.

History of the Rise and
Influence of the Spirit of
Rationalism in Enrope.
By W. E. H. Lecky, M.A.

Cabinet Edition, 2 vols, crovjn Zvo. iGj.

History of the Early
Ghitrch from the First
Preaching of the Gospel to
the Council of Niccca, a.d.
325.
By Miss E. M. Seiuell.

Fcp. %vo. 4.i-. 6i/,

Introduction to the
Science of Religion : Fotir
Lectnres delivered at the
Royal Institution ; with
tzvo Essays on False Ana-
logies and the Philosophy
of Mythology.
By F. Max Midler, M.A.

Crozun Zvo. \Os. 6d.

The Stoics, Epicureans,

and Sceptics.

Translated from the Ger-
man of Dr. E. Zeller,
by Oszvald y. Rcichcl,
M.A.

Crown Zvo. 145".

Socrates and the Soc ratio
Schools.

Translated from the Ger-
man of Dr. E. Zeller,
by the Rev. O. J. Reichel,
M.A.

Croivn Svo. Ss. 6d.

The History of Philoso-
phy, from T hales to Comte.
By George Henry Lezves.

Fourth Edition, 2 vols. ^vo. 32^.

Sketch of the History of
the Chtirch of England to
the Revo I tit ion of i6S8.
By the Right Rev. T V.

Short, D.D. Bishop of

St. Asaph.

Eighth Edition. Croivn Zvo. 'js. 6d.

The Historical Geogi'a-
phy of Europe.
By E. A. Freeman, D.C.L.

%vo. Maps. [In the press.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

Essays on the History of

the Christian Relio-ion.
By John Earl RiLssell.

Fcp. %vo. 3^. dd.

History of the Reforma-
tion in EiLTope in the Time
of Calvin.

By the Rev. J. H. Merle
nA2ibignS, D.D.

Vols. I. to V. %vo. ;^3. I2J. Vols. VI. d-
VII. completion. [In the press.

The Sttidenfs Maimal
of Ancient History : con-
taiiiing the Political His-
tory, Geographical Posi-
tio7i, and Social State of
the Principal Nations of
Antiquity.
By W. Cooke Taylor, LL.D.

Cro7vn 2>vo. 'js. 6d.

The Sttidenfs Manual of
Modern History : contain-
ing the Rise and P^^ogress
of the Pj'incipal E^iropean
Nations, their Political
History, and the Changes
in their Social Condition.
By W. Cooke Taylor, LL.D.

Cro'vn %vo. "js. 6d.

The Era of the Pro-
testant Revolution.
By F. Seebohm, Author of
* The Oxford Reformers. '

JVith 4 3Iaps and 1 2 Diagrams. Fcp. %vo.
2s. 6d.

The Crnsades.
By the Rev. G. W. Cox,
M.A.

Fcp. %vo. ivith Map, 2s. 6d.

The Thirty Years War^
1618-1648.

By Samuel Razvson Gar-
diner.

Fcp. %vo. ivith Maps, 2s. (yd.

The Houses of Lancaster

and York ; with the Con-
quest and Loss of France.
By James Gairdner.

Fcp. %vo. Tvith Map, 2s. 6d.

Edward the Third.
By the Rev. W. Warburton,
M.A.

Fcp. Zvo. 2vith Maps, 2s. 6d.

BIOGRAPHICAL V/ORKS.

^ titobiography.

By John Stuart Mill

?>vo. p. 6d.

Life and Correspondence
of Richard Whately, D.D.
late Archbishop of Dublin.
By E. Jane Whately.

Hew Edition in i vol. C)-own 8vo.
[In the press.

Life and Letters of Gil-

beid Elliot, First Earl of
Minto, from 1 75 1 to 1 806,
wheji his Public Life in
Em'ope ivas closed by his
Appointment to the Vice-
Royalty of India.
Edited by the Countess of
Minto.

3 vols, post %vo. 31^. 6d.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

Memoir of Thomas First

Lord Denmaii, formeiHy
Lord Chief f us lice of
Enoiaiid.

By Sir Joseph Arnoidd,
B.A. K.B.

With (wo Portraits. 2 vols. '?)V0^ 32^-.

The Life of Lloyd First
Lord KenyoiL.
By Hon. G. T. Kejiyoit,
M.A.

With Portraits. %vo. 14J.

Recollections of Past
Life.

By Sir Henry Holland,
Bart. M.D. F.R.S.

Third Edition. Post%vo. los. 6d.

Lsaac Casatibon, 1559-
16 14.

By Mark Pattison, Rector
of Lincoln College, Oxford.

'ivo. [/n t/ie press.

Life of Alexander von
Hiunboldt.

Edited by ICarl Bridms,
and translated by fane
and Caroline Las sell.

With 3 Portraits. 2 vols. ?>vo. ■yos.

Biographical and Criti-
cal Essays, reprinted from
Reviews, with Additions
and Corrections.
By A. Hay ward, Q.C.

Second Series, 2 vols. ?>vo. 2^s.
Series, i vol. ?>vo. l^s.

Third

The Life of Lsambard
L<ingdoin Brnnel, Civil
Engineer.
By L. Brttnel, B.C.L.

With Portrait, Plates, and Woodcuts.

Sz/O. 21S.

Lord George Bent inch ;
a Political Biography.
By the Right Hon. B.
Disraeli, M.P.

Eighth Edition. Croi.vn 8z'c. 6j.

Memoir of George Ed-
zvard Lynch Cotton, D.D.
Bishop of Calcutta; with
Selections front his foiir-
nals and Correspondence.
Edited by Mrs. Cotton.

Second Edition. CroT.vn Zvo. "js. 6d.

The Life and Letters of
the Rev. Sydney Smith.
Edited by his Daughter,

Lady Holland, and

Mrs. Atistin.

Crown Zvo. 2s. 6d. sewed; y. 6d. cloth.

Essays in Ecclesiastical

Biography.

By the Right Hon. Sir J.
Stephen, LL.D.

Cabinet Edition. Croivn Svo. "js. 6d.

Leaders of Public Opi-
nion in L r eland ; Swift,
Flood, Grattan, G Connell.
By W. E. H. Lecky, M.A.

Croiun Zvo. ^s. 6d.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

Ltf^ of the Duke of
Wellington.

By the Rev. G. R. Gleig,
M.A.

Popular Edition, Croion Zz'O. 'vith Por-
trait, 5.r.

Felix Mendelssohn' s
Letters from Italy and
Switzerland, and Letters
from 1833 to 1847.
Translated by Lady Wal-
lace.

With Portrait. 2 vols, crown Zvo. ^s. each.

The Rise of Great Fami-
lies; other Essays and
Stories.

By Sir Bernard Bitrke,
C.B. LL.D.

Crozvn ^VO. I2r. 6;/.

Dictionary of General

Biography ; containing
Concise Memoirs and No-
tices of the most Eminent
Persons of all Countries,
from the Earliest Ages to
the Present Time.

Edited by W. L. R. Gates.

Memoirs of Sir ITen?y
Havelock, K.C.B.
Byfohn Clark Alarshman.

People's Edition. Crozvn ^vo. 3^. 6d.

Vicissitudes of Families.
By Sir Bernard Bnrke,
C.B.

New Edition. 2 vols, crown ?!V0. 2 1.'".

MENTAL and POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY.

The System of Positive
Polity, or Treatise upon So-
ciology, of Augnste Comte,
Author of the System of
Positive Philosophy.

Translated from the Paris
Edition of 1 851 -1854,
and furnished zvith Ana-
lytical Tables of Contents.

\In preparation.

In Four Volumes, %vo. to be piddished sepa-
rately, and each forming in some degree
an independent Treatise : —

Vol. I. TJie General Vieiu of Positive
Polity and its Philosophical Basis. Trans-
lated by 1. H. Bridges, Vi..^, formerly Fellow

Oriel College, Oxford.

Vol. II. The Social Statics, or the Ab-

stract Laivs of Human Order. Translated
l>y Frederic Harrison, INI.A. of Lincoln's
inn.

Vol. III. The Social Dynamics, or the
General Laws of Human Progress (the Phi-
losophy of History). Translated by E. S.
Beesly, RI.A. Professor of History in Uni-
versity College, London.

Vol. IV. The Ideal of the Future oj
Mankind. Ti-anslated by'K\Cr\'\xA Congreve,
M.D. formerly Fellow and Tutor of Wad-
ham College, Oxford.

Political Problems,
Reprinted chiefly from
the Fortnightly Rcviezv,
revised, and zvith New
Essays.

By Frederick Harrison,
of LJncoln s Inn.

I vol. %vo. \Iii the press.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS &. CO.

Essays Critical & Nar-
rative, partly original and
partly reprifited from Re-
views.
By IV. Forsyth, Q.C. M.P.

Essays, Political, Social,
and Religious.
By Riehd. Congreve, ALA.

Si '(7. 1 8 J.

Essays on Freethinking
and Plainspcaking.
By Leslie Stephen.

Crcnuji Sivo. los. 6d.

Essays, Critical and
Biographical, contributed
to the Edinbnrorh Revieiv.
By LLenry Rogers.

A',-70 Edith

2 Z'ols. crown Srw. lli

Essays on some Fheolo-
gical Controversies of the
Fime, contributed chiefly
to the Edinbnigh Review.
By the same Aiithor.

New Edition. Crown %7'o. 6.r.

Democracy in America.
By Alexis de FocqtLeville.
Translated by LLenry

Reeve, C. B. D.C.L.

Corresponding Member

of the Lnstit nte of

France.

New Edition. 2 vols, post %vo. [In tlu press.

On Representative Go-
vernment.
By Jolin Stnart Mill.

Fourth Edition, crcnvn Srv. zs.

On Liberty.

By John Stnart Mill.

Post Zz'o. Js. 6d. crown %vo. \s. ^d.

Principles of Political
Economy.
By John Stttart Mill.

2 vols. Zvo. 30.r. or I vol. crotvn %vo. t^s. '

Essays on someUnsettled
Quest iojis of Political Eco-
nomy.
By John Stuart Mill.

Second Edition. 8vo. 6s. 6d.

Utilitarianism.
By John Stuart Mill.

Fourth Edition. %vo. 5^-.

A System of Logic,
Ratiocinative and Lnduc-
tive. By John Stuart Mill.

Eighth Edition. 2 vols. Zvo. 25,r.

Examination of Sir
William LLamiltojis Phi-
losophy, and of the princi-
pal Philosophical Questions
discussed in his Wrifinos.
By John Stuart MilL '

I-'ottrth Edition, ^vo. 16^.

ThcSubjection oflVomen.
By John Stuart MilL

New Edition. Post Zvo. 5,r.

Dissertations and Dis-
cussions.
By John Stuart Mill.

Second Edition. 3 vols. %vo. 36J.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

Analysis of the Pheno-

mcna of the Human Mind.

By James Mill Neiv

Edition, with Notes,

1 Illustrative and Critical.

2 vols. Siv. 28^.

A Systematic View of
the Science of Jurisprn-
dence.
By Sheldon Amos, M.A.

?>vo. I Si-.

A Priiner of the English
Constitution and Govern-
ment.
By Sheldon Amos, M.A.

New Edition, revised. Post.%vo.

\_Iii the press.

Principles of Economical
Philosophy.

By H. D. Macleod, M.A.
Barrister-at-Lazv.

Second Edition, in 2 vols. Vol. I. ^vo. I'-^s.

The Institntes of Jus-
tinian; with English In-
troduction, Translation,
and Notes.
By T. C. Sandars, M.A.

Sixth Edition. S-'C. 1 8 J.

Lord Bacons Works,

Collected and Edited by R.
L.Ellis, M.A. y.Sped-
ding, M.A. and D. D.
Heath.

NriV and Cheaper Edition. 7 vols, 2>vo.
£1. ly. 6d.

Letters and Life of
Francis Bacon, including
all his Occasional JVorlcs.
Collected and edited, with

a Co7nmentary, by J .

Spedding.

7 vols. Srv. ;^4. 4^.

The Nicomachean Ethics

of A ristotle. Nezvly trans-
lated into English.
By R. Williams, B.A.

Sz'O. 12S.

The Politics of Aristotle;
Greek Text, with English
Notes.
By Richard Congreve, M.A .

A^ezu Edition, revised, ^vo. i8j.

The Ethics of Aristotle ;
with Essays and Notes.
By Sir A. Grant, Bart.
M.A. LL.D.

Third Edition, mused and partly re<vritten.
\_In the press.

Bacon s Essays, with
Annotations.
By R. Whately, D.D.

Neiu Edition. %vo. ioj-. bd.

Elements of Logic.
By R. Whately, D.D.

Neit) Edition. 8" v. los. 6d. er. %vo. \s. 6d.

Elements of Rhetoric.
By R. Whately, D.D.

Neiv Edition. Zvo. \os. 6d. cr. %vo. dfS. 6d.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

An Outline of the Neces-
sary Laws of Thought : a
Treatise on Pure and
Applied Logic.
By the Most Rev. W.
Thomson, D.D. Arch-
bishop of York.

Ninth Thousand. Cro7vii %vo. i^s. 6d.

An Introductio7i to Men-
tal P/iilosophy, on the Li-
ductive Method.
By J. D. Mo ret I, LL.D.

%vo. I2.r.

Elements of Psychology,
containing the Analysis of
the Lntellect2ial Poivers.
By y. D. Morcll, LL.D.

Post 8tv. 7,c ed.

The Secret of Hegel:
being the Hegelian System
in Origin, Principle, Form,
and Matter.
By y. H. Stirling, LL.D.

2 z'ols. Srv. zZs.

Sir Williani Hamilton ;
bei?ig the Philosophy of
Perception : an Analysis.
By y. H. Stirling, LL.D.

Sz'o. 5...

The Philosophy of Ne-
cessity; or, JVattiral Laiv
as applicable to Mental,
Moral, and Social Science.
By Charles Bray.

Second Edition, "^vo. ^s.

Ueberweg s System of
Logic, and Histoiy. of
Logical Doctrines.

Translated, with Notes and
Appendices, by T. M.
Lindsay, M. A. F.R.S.E.

The Senses and the
Intellect.

By A. Bain, LL.D. Prof
of L ogic, Un iv. A berdeen.

Mental and Moral
Science ; a CompendiiLVt of
Psychology and Ethics.

By A. Bain, LL.D.

Thij-d Edition. Crown %vo. \os. dd. Or
separately: Part I. Mental Science, 6j, dd.
Part II. ]\Ioral Science, ^s. bd.

Htimes Treatise on Hu-
man Nature.

Edited, with Notes, &c. by
T. H. Green, M.A. and
the Rev. T H. Grose,
M.A.

1 vols. %V0. 2%S.

Htimes Essays Moral,
Political, and Literary.
By the same Editors.

2 vols. 8?'^. 2Sj-.

*^* The aboz'efoni! a complete and uniform
Edition of Hume's Philosophical
Works.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

MISCELLANEOUS &

Miscellaneous and Post-

Immous Works of the late

Heiijy Thomas Biicklc.

Edited, with a Biographical

Notice, by Helen Taylor.

3 vols. ^vo. £2. 12S. 6d.

Short studies on Great
Stibjects.

By y. A. Fronde, M.A.
formerly Fellow of
Exeter College, Oxford.

2 vols, civzvn Zvo. 12s.

Lord Macanlays Mis-
cellaneo2Ls VVritinors.

Library Edition, 2 zw/j-. %vo. Portrait, 2\s.
People's Edition, i vol. cr. %vo. 4?. dd.

Lord Macanlay's Mis-
cellaneous Writings and
Speeches.

« SiiideiUs'' Edition. Crown ^vo. 6s.

Speeches of the Right
Hon. Lord Macatday, cor-
rected by Himself

rcoJ>L^s Edition. Crozun Svo. y. bd.

LordMacaiday sSpeeches
on Parliamentary Reform
in 1 83 1 and 1832.

16//10. is.

The Rev. Sydney Smith's
Essays contributed to the
Edinburgh Review.

Authorised Edition, complete in One Voln/ne,
Croivn %vo. 2s. 6d. sewed, or 3J. 6d. cloth.

CRITICAL \VORKS.

The Rev. Sydney Smith' s
Miscellaneous Works.

Crotun 2>vo. 6s.

The Wit and Wisdom of
the Rev. Sydney Smith.

Crown Svo. y. 6d.

The Miscellaneous
Works of Thomas Arnold,
D.D. Late Head Master of
Rugby School and Regius
Professor of JModern His-
tory in the Univ. of Ox-
ford, collected and repub-
lished.

2>ro. "js. 6d.

Manual of English Lite-
rature, Historical and
Critical.
By Thomas Arnold, M.A.

Neiu Edition. Croivn ?>vo. "js. 6d.

Realities of Irish Life.
By W. Steuart Trench.

Cr. Zvo. 2s. 6d. setced, or y. 6d. cloth. I

Lectures on the Science
of Language.
By F. Max Midler, M.A.
&c.

Seventh Edition. 2 vols, crown Svo. l6s. J

Chips from a German '

Workshop ; being Essays
on the Science of Religion,
and on Mythology, Tradi-
tions, and Ctistoms.
By F. Max Midler, M.A.
&c.

3 vols. %vo. £2.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO. 13

Faniilies of Speech.

Foiw Lectures delivered at
the Royal Institution.
By F. W. Farrar, M.A.
F.R.S.

New Edition. Croivn Si'c. 3^'. 6i/.

Chapters on Language.

By F. W. Farrar, ALA.
FR.S.

Nliu Edition. Croivn Sr'c. 5^.

Sontheys Doctor, com-
plete in One Volwne.
Edited by Rev. J. W.
Warter, B.D.

Square cro'iVn Sz'o. I2s. 6d.

A Budget of Paradoxes.
By Augustus De Morgan,
F.R.A.S.

Reprinted, ivitli Ant/ior's Additions, from
the Athenajum. ivo. 15^.

Recreations of a Country
Parson.
By A.K. H. B.

Two Series, ^s. 6d. caeJi.

Landscapes, ChurcJies,
and Moralities.
By A. K. H. B.

Croivn 81V. is. 6d.

Seaside Musings on Sun-
days and Weekdays.
By A. K. H. B.

Crown Zvo. jJ'. dd.

Changed Aspects of Un-
ehanged Triiths.
By A. K. H. B.

Croivn St'c. 3J". dd.

Counsel aiui Comfort
from a City Pulpit.
By A. K. H. B.

Croivn 8:'6>. 3^. bd.

Lessons of Middle Age,
By A. K. H. B.

Croivn Sc't?. 3^. 6d.

Leisure LLours in Town
By A. K. H. B.

Croivn 8:'6i. ^^s. Gd.

The Autunin LLolidays

of a Co2tntry Parson.
I By A. K. H. B.

Croivn 'iivo. 3.1'. bd.

Sunday Afternoons at
the Pai'isk Church of a
Scottish University City.
ByA.K.H.B.

Crown %vo. 3J. (>d.

Lite Commonplace Phi-
losopher in Town and
Country.
By A. K. H. B.

Cro'vn 2)V0. 2,^. dd.

Present-Day Thoughts.
By A. K. H. B.

Croivn %vo. 3^". bd.

u NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

Critical Essays of a
Country Parson.
By A. K. H. B.

Crown %vo. 3^. dd.

The G^^aver Tkotights of
a Country Parson.
By A. K. H. B.

7ivo Series, 2,s. 6d. each.

Principles of Education,
drawn from Nature and
Revelation, and applied to
Female Education in the
Upper Classes.
By the Author of 'Amy
Herbert!

2 vols. fcp. "^VO. \2S. 6d

From Jamiary to De-

ec m ber; a Book for Children.

Second Edition. %vo. 3J. 6d.

The Election of Repre-
sentatives, Parliamentaiy
and AFtnicipal ; a Treatise.
By Thos. Hare, Barrister.

Fourth Edition. Post Zvo. ^s.

Miscellaneous IVritings

of John Conington, M.A.

Edited by J. A. Symonds,

M.A. With a Memoir

by H. y. S. Smith, M.A.

2 vols. Z'c'O. 28j-.

DICTIONARIES and OTHER BOOKS of
REFERENCE.

A Dictionary of the

English Language.

By R. G. Latham, M.A.
M.D. F.R.S. Founded
on the Dictionary of Dr.
S. fohnson, as edited by
the Rev. H. J. Todd,
with ntLmerous Emenda-
tions and Additions.

4 vols. A^o. £-j.

Thesanrits of English
Words and Phrases, classi-
fied and ai'ranged so as to
facilitate the expression of
Ideas, and assist in Literary
Composition.
By P. M. Roget, M.D.

Crown ?>vo. lOs. 6d.

English Synonyines.
ByE.y. Whately. Edited
by Archbishop Whately.

Fifth Edition. Fcp. %vo. 3^.

A Practical Dictionary

of the French and English

Lafiguages.

By L(fo7i Contanseau, many
years Frejich Examiner
for Military and Civil
Appoijitments, &c.

Post ^vo. \os. bd.

Contanseau' s Pocket Dic-
tionary, French and Eng-
lish, abridged from the
Practical Dictionary, by
the Author.

Square iSmo. 3^. 6d.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO. 15

New Practical Diction-
ary of the Gej^man Lan-
guage ; German - English
and English-German.
By Rev. W. L. Blackley,

M.A. and Dr. C. M.

Friedldnder.

Post %vo. Is. 6d.

A Dictionary of Roman

and Greek Anliqicilies.
With 2,000 Wooden ts
from Ancient Originals,
illustrative of tJie Arts
and Life of tlie Greeks and
Romans.
By Anthony Rich, B.A.

Third Edition. Crozvn %vo. ']s. 6d.

The Mastery of Lan-
guages; or, the Art of
Speaking Foreign Tongues
Idiomatically.
By Tliomas Prendergast.

Second Edition. Zvo. 6j".

A Practical EnglisJi Dic-
tionary.

By John T. White, D.D.
0x071. and T C. Donkin,
ALA.

I vol. post ?)Vo. tDiiform luith Contaiiscan^s
Practical French Dictionary.

[In the press.

A Latin-English Dic-
tionary.
By Jolm T. W/iite, D.D.

Oxo7i. and J . E. Riddle,

M.A. Oxon.

Third Edition, revised. 2 vols. Afto. 42s.

White s College Latin-

E nglis Ii D ic tio na ry ;
abridged from the Parent
Work for the tise of Uni-
versity Students.

Medium %vo. \%s.

A Latin -English Dic-
tionary adapted for the iise
of Middle-Class ScJiools,
By John T White, D.D.
Oxon.

Square fcp. Zvo. y.

IVhite s Junior Student's
Complete Latin - English
and English-Latin Dic-
tionary.

Square \2mo. \2s.

o , ,7 r English-Latin, ^s. 6d.

Separately < ^ ^ ■' ^ ,

^ -^ \ Latin-English, 7j-. 6(/.

A Greek-English Lexi-
con.

By H. G. Liddell, D.D.
Dean of Clwistchurch,
and R. Scott, D.D.
Dean of Roc /tester.

Sixth Edition. Crozun ^0. ^6s.

A Lexicon, Greek and
English, abridged for
Scliools from Liddell and
Scotfs Greek - English
Lexicon.

Fourteenth Edition. Square 121110. "js. 6d.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

An English-Greek Lexi-
con, containing all the Gi^eek
Words used by Writers of
good authority.

By C. D, Yojige, B.A.

Neiv Edition, i^to. 2\s.

Mr. Yonge s New Lexicon,
English a7id Greek, abridged
front his larger Lexicon.

Square \2ino. 2>s. 6d.

M'CtiUocJis Dictionary,
Practical, Theoretical, and
Historical, of Commerce
and Commercial Naviga-
tion.
Edited by H. G. Reid.

Zvo. d^s.

The Post Office Gazetteer
of the United Kingdom : a
Complete Dictionary of all
Cities, Towns, Villages, and
of the Principal Gentle-
men s Seats, in Gi'-eat Bri-
tain and Ireland, refei^red
to the nearest Post Tozvn,
Railway & Telegraph Sta-
tion ; with Natural Featnres
and Objects of Note.
ByJ.A. Sharp.

In I vol. %zv. of abojit \,^oo pages.
\_[n the press.

A Geiierat Dictionary
of Geography, Descriptive,
Physical, Statistical, and
Historical ; forming a com-
plete Gazetteer of the World.
By A. Keith fohnston,
F.R.S.E.

Nciv Edition, thoi-oughly revised.

[In the press.

The Pnblic Schools A tlas
of Modern Geog?^aphy. In
3 1 Maps, exhibiting clearly
the more important Physi-
cal Features of the Conn-
tries delineated.
Edited, with Introduction,
by Rev. G. Butler, M.A.

Imperial quarto, 3^-. 6d. saved; ^s. cloth.

The Public Schools Ma-
fuial of Mode7ni Geography
Forming a Companion to
' The Pttblic Schools Atlas
of Alodern Geography!
By Rev. G Butler, M.A.

\_!n tlte press.

The Public Schools Atlas
of Ancient Geography.
Edited, with an Introduc-
tion on the Study of An-
cient Geogi'aphy, by the
Rev. G B7itler, M.A.

Imperial Quarto. [In the press.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS £i CO. 17

ASTRONOMY and METEOROLOGY.

The Universe and the
Coining Transits ; Rc-
searcJies into and New
Views respecting t/ie Con-
stitntion of the Heavens.
By R. A. Proctor, B.A.

With 22 Charts a}id 22 Diagrams, "ivo. \Gs.

The Tra]isits of Venus ;
A Popnlar Account of Past
and Coining Transits, from
tJie first observed by Hor-
rocks A.D. 1639 to tlie
Transit of a.d. 2 i i 2.
By R. A. Proctor, B.A.
Cantab.

With 20 Plates and nitmcrons JFoo/lcuts.
Croivii %vo. \^Nt'arly ready.

Essays on Astronomy.
A Series of Papers on
Planets and Meteors, the
Snn and Snn-surronnding
Space, Stars and Star
Clondlets.
By R. A. Proctor, B.A.

With 10 Plates and 2\ Woodcuts. S:w. I2s.

The Moon ; Jier Motions,
Aspect, Scenery, and Phy-
sical Condition.
By R. A. Proctor, B.A.

IVith Plates, Charts, Woodcuts, a/id Lunar
IViotogra/hs. Croiuji 2>vo. l^s.

The Sun ; Ruler, Light,
Fire, and Life of the Pla-
netary System.
By R. A. Proctor, B.A.

Second Edition. Plates and Woodcuts. Cr.
"ivo. 14J.

Saturn and its System,
By R. A. Proctor, B.A.

Sz'o. 'ivith 14 Plates, i^.

The Orbs Around Us; a

Series of Familiar Essays

on tlie Moon and Planets,

Meteors and Comets, the

Sun and Coloured Pairs of

Snns.

By R. A. Proctor, B.A.

Crozvn %vo. "js. 6d.

Other Worlds than Ours ;
T/ie Plurality of Worlds
Studied binder the LigJit
of Recent Scientific Re-
searches.
By R. A. Proctor, B.A.

T'hiril Edition, icith 14 Illustrations. Cr.
ivo. 10s. 6d.

Britikley's Astronomy.
Revised and partly re-ivrit-
tcn, with Additional Chap-
ters, and an Appendix of
Questions for Examination.
By John W. Stubbs, D.D.

Trill. Coll. Dublin and

F. Brunnozv, Ph.D.

Astronomer Royal of

Ireland.

U'ith 49 Diagrams. Cro"d>n Zvo. ds.

Outlines of Astronomy.
By Sir y. F. W. Herschel,
Bart. M.A.

Latest Edition, with Plates and Diagrams.
Square crown %vo. 1 2s.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

A New star Atlas, for
the Library, the School, and
the Observatory, in 1 2 Cir-
cular Maps {zuith 2 Ijidex
Plates).
By R. A. Proctor, B.A.

Crcrwn Zvo. ^s.

Celestial Objects for Com-
inou Telescopes.
By T. W. Webb, M.A.
F.R.A.S.

JVrcU Edition, zvith Map of the Moon and
IVoodaits. Crmon %vo. Js. 6d.

L argerStarA t las, for the
Library, in Tivelve Cir-
cular Maps, photolitlio-
graphcd by A. Brothers,
F.R.A.S. With 2 Lidex
Plates and a Letterpress
Introdiiction.
By R. A. Proctor, BA.

Second Edition. Small folio, 25J.

Magnetism and Devia-
tion of the Compass. For
the tcse of Students in Navi-
gation and Science Schools.
By y. Merrificld, LL.D.

iS/no. IS. 6d.

Doves Law of Storms,
considered in connexion with
the oi^dinary Movemeiits of
the Atmosphere.
Translated by R. H. Scott,
M.A.

^VO. \OS. 6d.

Air and Rain ; the Be-
ginnings of a Chemical
Climatology.
By R. A. Smith, F.R.S.

Zvo. 24J.

Nautical Sttrveying, an
Introduction to the Practi-
cal and Theoretical Study
of.
By J. K. Laughton, M.A.

Small 8rv. ds.

Sc he I ten's SpectrtmiA na-
lysis, in its Application to
Terrestrial Sicbstances and
the Physical Constitution of
the Heavenly Bodies.
Translated by J ane and
C. Lassell ; .edited, with
Notes, by W. Hnggins,
LL.D. F.R.S.

With 13 Plates and 22T, JVoodaits. ^vo. 28.r.

NATURAL HISTORY and PHYSICAL
SCIENCE.

The Correlation of Phy-
sical Forces.

By the Hon. Sir W. R.
G7'ove, F.R.S. &c.

Sixth Edition, -ivith other Contributions to
Science. Svo. l^s.

Professor Helmholtz
Popular Lectzcres on Scien-
tific Snbjccts.
Translated by E. Atkinson,
F.C.S.

With miny Illustrative Wood Engravings.
^vo, 12s. 6d.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

Gaiiofs Natural Philo-
sophy for General Readers
and Yonng Persons; a
Course of Physics divested
of Mathematical FonmtlcB
and expressed in the la?i-
gnage of daily life.
Translated by E.Atkinson,
F.C.S.

Cr. %vo. -with 404 Woodcuts, 'js. 6d.

Ganofs Elementary
Treatise on Physics, Ex-
perimental and Applied,
for the use of Colleges and
Schools.

Ti'anslated and edited by E.
Atkinson, F.C.S.

Ncio Edition, with a Coloured Plate and
726 ll'oodcuts. Post ?>vo. i^s.

Principles of Animal

Mechanics.

By the Rev. S. Hanghton,
F.R.S.

Second Edition. ?>vo. 2is.

J/Fein hold's Introdttction

to Experimental Physics,
Theoretical and Practical ;
including Directions for
Constructing Physical Ap-
paratus and for Making
Experiments.

Ti'anslated by B. Loewy,
F.R.A.S. With a Pre-
face by G. C. Foster,
F.R.S.

With numerous Woodcuts. %vo.

\Nearly ready.

Text-Books of Science,
Mechanical and Physical,
adapted for the 2ise of Arti-
sans and of Students in
Piiblic and other Schools.
{The first Ten edited by
T. M. Goodeve, M.A. Lec-
turer on Applied Science at
the Royal School of Mi^ies;
the remainder edited by
C. W. Merrifield, F.R.S.
an Examiner in the De-
partment of Public Educa-
tion^

Small %vo. Woodcuts.

Edited by T. M. Goodeve, M.A.

Anderson's Strength of Materials, 3^. 6d.
Bloxam's Metals, y. 6d.
Goodeve's Mechanics, 3^. 6d.

Mechanism , "^s. 6d.

Griffin's Algebra &" Trigonometry, y. 6d.

Notes on the same, with Solutions, t^s. 6d.
Jenkin's Electricity &= Magnetism, 3J. dd.
Maxwell's iVieory of Heat, y. 6d.
Merrifield's Technical Arithrnetic, 3^. 6d.

Key, 2,s. 6d.
Miller's Inotganic Chemistry, 3^. 6d.
Shelley's Workshop Appliances, 3^. pd.
Watson's Plane &= Solid Geometry, \s. 6d.

Edited by C. W. Merrifield, F.R.S.

Armstrong's Organic Chemistry, y. 6d.
Thorpe's Quantitative Analysis, d^s. 6d.
Thorpe and Muir's Qualitative Analysis,
y. 6d.

Address delivered before
the British Association
assembled at Belfast ; luith
Additions and a Preface.
By John Tyndall, F.R.S.
President.

^vo. price y.

Fragments of Science.
By John Tyndall, F.R.S.

Third Edition. Zvo. 14^.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

Heat a Mode of Motion.
By John Tyndall, F.R.S.

Fourth Edition. Cr. %vo. with Woodcuts,
los. 6d.

Sotmd; a Course of Eight
Ledw^es delivered at the
Royal Institution of Great
Britain.
By John Tyndall, F.R.S.

Fortrait and IVoodcuts. Cr. ?>vo. ^s.

Researches on Diamag-
netism and Magne-Crystal-
lic Action; including the
Question of Diamagnetic
PolaiHty.
By John Tyndall, F.R.S.

With 6 Flates and many Woodcuts. %vo. li^s.

Contributions to Mole-
cular Physics in the do-
main of Radiant Heat.
By John Tyndall, F.R.S.

With 2 Flatcs and i\ Woodcuts. Zvo. ids.

Lectures on Light, de-
livered in the United States
of America in 1872 and

1873.

By y. Tyndall, F.R.S.

Crown Sz'c. "js. dd.

Notes of a Course of
Seven Lectures on Electri-
cal Phetiomena and Theo-
ries, delivered at the Royal
Instit2Ltion.
By J. Tyndall, F.R.S.

Crown %vo. \s. seiued, or is. 6d. cloth.

Notes of a Course of Nine
Lectures on Light, delivered
at the Royal InstitiUion. J

By y. Tyndall, F.R.S. ^

Crown Zvo. \s. sewed, or \s. 6d. cloth.

A Treatise on Magne-
tism, General and Terres-
trial.

By Humphrey Lloyd,
D.D. D.C.L. Provost of
Trinity College, Dublin.

^vo. price lOs. 6d.

Elementary Treatise on
the Wave-Theory of Light.
By H. Lloyd, D.D. D.C.L.

TJiird Edition. %vo. \0s. 6d. ,

Professor Owen's Lec-
tures on the Ccmparative
Anatomy and Physiology
of Livertebrate Aitimals.

2nd Edition, with 235 Woodcuts. Zvo. lis.

The Comparative Ana-
tomy and Physiology of the
Vertebi^ate Animals.
By RicJiard Ozven, F.R.S.

With 1,472 Woodcuts, iz'ols. Zvo. £T,.i2,s.6d.

Light Science for Lei-
sure H OUT'S ; a^ Series of
Familiar Essays on Scien-
tific Subjects, Natin^al Phe-
nomena, &c.
By R. A. Proctor, B.A.

First and Second Series. . 2 vols, crozun %vo.
Is. 6d. each.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS &, CO.

Kirby and Spences In-
troduction to Entomology,
or Elements of the Natural
History of Insects.

Crown %z'o. ^s.

Strange Di-uelliugs : a De-
scription of the Habitations
of Animals, abridged from
' Homes zuithont Hands!
By Rev. J. G. Wood, M.A.

With Frontispiece and 6o ]Voodeitts. Cr 07011
Srv. Is. 6d.

Homes luithont Hands ;
a Description of the Habi-
tations of Animals, classed
according to their Principle
of ConstriLction.
By Rev. J. G. Wood, M.A.

With about 140 Vi^i^nettes on ll'ood. Sr^. 2is.

Out of Doors : a Selec-
tion of Original Articles
on Practical Natural His-
tory.
By Rev. J. G. Wood, M.A.

With 6 Illustrations from Original Designs
engraved on Wood. Crozun ^vo. Is. ()d.

The Polar IVorld : a
Popular Description of
Man and. Nature in the
Arctic and Antarctic Re-
gions of the Globe.
By Dr. G. Hartwig.

With Chroinoxylographs, Maps, and ]Vood-
ciits. Srv. loj. 6(/.

The Sea and its Livinv;
Wonders.
By Dr. G. Hartzuig.

Fourth Edition, enlarged, izv. zi'ith many
Illustrations, los. 6d.

The Tropical World ; a
Popular Scientific Account
of the Natural History of
the Equatorial Regions.
By Dr. G. Hartivig.

With about 200 Illuslratio)is. Zvo. \Qs. 6d.

The Subterranean World.
By Dr. G. Hartzuig.

With Ulaps and many IVoodeuts. ?>z'o. 2ls.

The Aerial World.
By Dr. George Hartzuig.

JVith 8 Chromoxylographs and about 60
other Illustrations engraved on Wood.
Zvo. price 7,\s.

Insects at Home; aPopn-

lar Account of British

Insects, thei^'' Stnictnre,

Habits, and Transforma-

tions.

By Rev. J. G. Wood, ALA.

With up-wards of "joo IVoodeuts. ?>zv. 2ls.

Insects Abroad ; being a
Popular Account of Eoreign
Insects, thcirStrncttire, Ha-
bits, and Transformations.
By Rev. f. G. Wood, M.A.

With npzikirds of 100 IVoodeuts. Zvo. 21s.

A Familiar History of
Birds.

By E. Stanley, D.D. late
Id. Bishop of Norwich.

Fep. 2,vo. with IVoodeuts, 3^. 6d.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

Rocks Classified and De-
scribed.
By B. Von Cotta.

English Editio7i, by P. H. Lawrence [with
English, German, and French Syno-
nymes), revised by the Author. Post

PrimcBval TVorldofSwit-

zerland.

By Professo7' Oswald Heer,
of the Univei'sity of
Ziiricli. Translated by
W. S, Dallas, FD.S.
and edited by fames
Hey wood, M.A. F.R.S.

2 vols. Svo. 'with numerous Illustrations.
\In the press.

The Origin of Civilisa-
tion, and the Primitive
Condition of Man; Men-
tal and Social Condition of
Savages.

By Sir J. Dibbock, Bart.
M.P. F.R.S.

Third Edition, zi'ith 2i, Woodcuts. Zvo. i6j.

A Manual of Anlhro-
pology, or Science of Man,
based on Modern Research.
By Charles Bray.

Cro7un ?>vo. ^s.

A Phrenologist amongst
the Todas, or the Study of
a Priinitive Tribe in South
India; History, Character,
Customs, Religion, Infa?iti-
cide. Polyandry, Language.
By W. E. Marshall Lient.-
Col. Bengal Staff Corps.

With 26 Illustrations. Zvo. 2\s.

The Ancient Stone Im-
plements, Weapons, and Or-
na7nents of Great Britain.
By fohn Evans, F.R.S,

With 2 Plates and 476 Woodcuts. Sfo. 2Ss.

The Elements of Botany
for Families and Schools.
Tenth Edition, revised by
Thomas Moore, F.L.S.

Fcp. 8cV. zvith 1 54 JJ^oodcuts 2s. 6d.

Bible Animals ; a De-
scription of every Living
Creature mentioned in the
Scriptures, from the Ape
to the Coral.
By Rev. J. G. Wood, M.A.

With about lOo Vignettes on JFood. Sz'o. 2ts.

The Rose Amatetirs
Guide.
By Thomas Rivers.

Tenth Edition. Fcp. %vo. OfS.

A Dictionary of Science,

L iteratu re, and A rt.

Fourth Edition, re-edited

by the late W. T. Brcinde

( the A^tthor )and Rev. G.

W. Cox, M.A.

3 vols, medium %vo. 63^.

London's Encyclopcedia

of Plants ; comprising the
Specific Character, Dcsc^dp-
tion, Ciilture, History, &c.
of all the Plants found in
G^'cat Britain.

U- ith ujnuards of 12, 000 Woodcuts. 8z/^. 42 j-.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

The Treasury of Botany,
or Popular Dictionary of
the Vegetable Kino;doin ;
wit/i zvliich is incorporated
a Glossary of Botanical
Terms.
Edited by J. Lzndley,

T.R.S. a?id T. Mooi-e,

RL.S.

With 274 Woodcuts and 20 Steel Plates.
Two Parts, fcp. Zvo. 12s.

Handbook of Hardy
Trees, Skrnds, and Her-
baceous Plants; containhig
Descriptions &c. of the
Best Species in Cultivation ;
zvith Cidtural Details,
Comparative Uai'diness,
suitability for particular
positions, &c. Based on
the French Work of De~
caisne and Naudin, and
Z71C hiding the 720 Original
Woodcut Illustrations.
By W. B. Hemsley.

Medium ^z'o. 2is.

A General System of

Descriptive a7id Analytical
Botany.

Translated from theFrench
of Le Maout and De-
caisne, by Mrs. Hooker.
Edited and arranp-ed
according to the English
Botanical System, by y .
D. Hooker, M.D. &c.
Director of the Royal
Botanic Gardens, Kew.

With $,'^ooWoodcjits. Imperial %z'o. $2s.6d.

Forest Trees and PFood-
la nd Scenery, as described

in Ancient
Poets.

and Modern

By William Menzies, De-
puty Sm^veyor of Wind-
sor Forest and Parks, &c.

In One Volitnie, imperial ^o. with Tiventy
Plates, Coloured in facsimile of the
original drawings, price f^^. K,s.

[Preparing for publication.

CHEMISTRY and PHYSIOLOGY.

Millers Elements of
Chemistry, Theoretical and
Practical.

Re-edited, with Additions,
by H. Macleod, F.C.S.

3 vols. ^z'o. £z-
Part I. Chemical Physics, 15J.
Part II. Inorganic Chemistry, 21s.
Part III. Organic Chemistry, 24j-.

A Manual of Chemical
Physiology, including its
Points of Contact with
Pathology.

By 7. L.
M.D.

W. Thudichum,

Zvo. with Woodcuts, "js. 6d.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

A Dictionary of Che-
mistry and the Allied
Branches of otJier Sciences.
By Henry Watts, F.C.S.
assisted by eminent
Scientific and Practica.l
Chemists.

6 vols, medium Zvo. £%. \\s. bd.

Second Stipplement com-
pleting the Record of Dis-
covery to the end of 1872.

[In the press.

A Course of Practical

Chemistry, for the use of
Medical Students.
By W. Odling, F.R.S.

Crcnon %vo. Woodcuts, 'js. 6d.

Select Methods in Chemi-
cal Analysis, chiefiy Inor-
ganic.
By Wm. Crookcs, F.R.S.

WitJi 22 Woodcuts. Crown Szy'. \2s. 6d.

Todd an..d Bowman' s

. Physiological A natomy, and
Physiology of Man.

Vol. II. 7vith mimerous riustraiions, 25X.

Vol. I. Neiu Edition by Dr. Lionel S.
Beale, F.R.S. in C02irse of publication,
with njimerous Illustrations. Parts I. and
II. in Sz'o. price Js. 6d. each.

Outlines of Physiology,

Human and Compai^ative.

By 7. Marshall, F.R.C.S.

Surgeon to the Univcr-

sity College Hospital.

2 vols. cr. 87W. with 122 Woodcuts, 2)2s.

The FINE ARTS and ILLUSTRATED
EDITIONS.

Albert Durer, his Life

and Works; including An-
tobiographical Papers and
Complete Catalogues.
By William B. Scott.

With 6 Etchings by the Aiithor and other
Illustrations, ^vo. lbs.

In Fairyland ; Pictures
from the Elf- World By
Richard Doyle. With a
Poem by W. Allingham.

With 1 6 coloured Plates, containing 36 De-
signs. Second Edition, folio, I ^s.

A Dictionary of Artists
of the English School:
Painters, Sculptors, Archi-
tects, Engravers, a7id Orna-
mentists ; ivith Notices of
their Lives and Works.
By Samuel Redgrave.

Svo. i6s.

The New Testament, il-
lustrated zuith Wood En-
gravings after the Early
Masters, chief y of the
Italian School.

Crozvn-\to. d^s.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS &l CO.

The Life of Man Sym-
bolised by the JMonths 'of
the Year.
Text selected by R. Pigot.

25 Illustrations on Wood from Designs by
John Leighton, F.S.A. Quarto, 42s.

Lyra Gennauica ; the
Christian Year and the
Christian Life.
Translated by Miss C.
Wi7ikivorth.

With about 325 Woodcut Illustrations by y.
Leighton, F.S.A. and other Artists.
2 vols. i^o. price 42J.

Lord Macaulays Lays
of Ancient Rome. With
90 Illnstrations on Wood
from Drawings by G.
Scharf

Fcp. 4to. 2is.

Miniature Edition, with
Scharf s 90 Illustrations
redjiced in Lithography.

Imp. i6mo. 10s. 6d.

Sacred and Legeiidary
Art.
By Airs, fameson.

6 vols, sqnare cro7iijt 2>vo. price £^. ip. 6d.
as folhni's : —

Legends of the Saints

and Martyrs.

Xeiv Fdition, ivith 19 Etchings and 1 87
Woodcuts. 2 vols. 3IJ-. 6(/.

Legends of the Monastic
Orders.

A'eii) Edition, with 1 1 Etchings and 88
Woodcuts. I vol. 21 s.

Legends of the Madonna.

N'eiu Edition, with 27 Etchings and 165
Woodcuts. I vol. 2\s.

The History ofOnrLord,
with that of his Types and
Precursors.

Completed by Lady East-
lake.

Revised Edition, zuith 13 Etchings and 281
Woodcuts. 2 vols. 42 J-.

The USEFUL ARTS, MANUFACTURES, &c,

^ Manual of ArcJiitec-

ture : being a Concise His-
tory and Explanation of the
Principal Styles of Euro-
pean A rchitectnre, A ncicnt,
MedicBval, and Renaissance;
with a Glossary.
By Thomas Mitchell, Au-
thor of ' The Stepping
Stone to Architect urei

With 150 IVoodcuts. Croavn 87V. \Os. 6d.

History of the Gothic

Revival ; an Attempt to
shezv Iiow far the taste for
Mediceval A rchitectni^e zvas
retained in England dtwing
the last tzvo cejtttcries, and
has been re-developed in the
present.

By Charles L. East lake,
Architect.

With 48 Illnstrations. Imp. Sev. 31/. 6d.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

Industrial Chemistry ; a

Manual for Man^tfactii-

rers and for Colleges or

Technical Schools. Being a

Translation of P^'ofessors

StoJwiann and Englers

German Edition of Pay ens

'■Precis de Chimie Indus-

trielle' by Dr. J. D. Barry.

Edited, and szLpplemented

zvith Chapters on the

Chemistry of the Metals,

by B. H. Paul, Ph.D.

%vo. with Plates and Woodads.

[In the press.

Gwilfs EncyclofcBciia of
Architcctitre, with above
1, 600 Woodcuts.
Fifth Edition, with Altera
tions and Additions, by
Wyatt Papzvorth.

The Three Cathedrals
dedicated to St. Paid in
Lon4on/, their History
from the Foundation of
the First Btnlding in the
Sixth Century to the Pro-
posals for the Adornment
of the Present Cathedi^al.
By W. Longman, F.S.A.

With numerous Illustrations. Square cro7un
Svo. 21 s.

Hints oil Household
Taste in Furniture, Up-
holstery, and other Details.
By Charles L. East lake,
Architect.

New Edition, with about 90 Illustrations,
'Square crown Sz'o. 14s.

Geometric Turning; com-
prising a Description of
Plant's New Geometric
Chuck, zuith Directions for
its use, and a Series of
Pattei^ns cttt by it, zvith
Explanations.
By H. S. Samry.

With 571 Woodcuts. Squa)-e cr. ?>vo. 21s.

Lathes and Turning,

Simple, Mechanical, and

Ornameiital.

By W. Henry Northcott.

With 240 Illustrations. %vo. iSj-.

Handbook of Practical

Telegraphy.

By R. S. Culley, Memb.
Inst. C.E. Enginee7^-in-
Chief of Telegraphs to
the Post-Office.

Sixth Edition, Plates &^ Woodcuts. ?>vo. 1 6s.

Principles of Mechanism,
for the use of Students in
the Universities, and for
Engineei^ing Students.
By R. Willis, M.A. F.R.S.
Professor in the Univer-
sity of Cambridge.

Second Edition, with 374 Woodcuts. 2iZ'0. iSj".

Perspective ; or, the Art
of Drawing zvhat 07ie Sees :
for the Use of those Sketch-
ing from Nature.
By Lieut. W. H. Collins,
R.E. F.R.A.S.

With 37 Woodcuts. Crown Zvo. 5.C.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

Ejicyclopcedia of Civil
Engineering, Historical,
Theoretical, and Practical.
By E. Ci'esy, C.E.

With above 1,000 Woodcuts, ^vo. if2s.

A Treatise on tlie Steam
Engine, in its various ap-
plications to Mines., Mills,
Steam Navigation, Rail-
ways and Agriculture.
By y . Boitrne, C.E.

With Portrait, 37 Plates, ami 546 Wood-
cuts. 4to. 42s.

Catechisiii of the Steam
Engine, in its various Ap-
plications.
By yohn Bourne, C.E.

New Edition, with 89 Woodcuts. Fcp. 8r v. 6.c

Handbook of the Steam
Engine.

By y. Bottrne, C.E. fonii-
inga Key to theAiithors
Catechism of the Steam
Engine.

With 67 Woodcuts. Fcp. Zvo. ^s.

Recent Improvements in
the Steam Engine.
By y . Bourne, C.E.

With 124 Woodcuts. Fcp. Zvo. 6s.

Lowndes s Engineer's

Handbook ; explaining the
Principles which should
guide the Yoimg Engineer
in the Co7istruction of Ma-
chine 7y.

Post '&1'0. Ss.

Ures Dictionary of Arts,
Manufactures, and Mines.
Sixth Edition, re-written
and g7^eatly eidarged by
R. Hunt, F.R.S. assisted
by munerojis Contributors.

With 2,000 Woodcuts. 3 vols, medium %vo.
^4. I4J-. bd.

Handbook to the Minera-
logy of Cor7izuall a7id
Devo7i ; zuith l7ist7'uctio7is
for their Disc7n77ti7iatio7t,
and copious Tables of Lo-
cality.
By y. H. Colli7is, E.G.S.

With 10 Plates, %vo. 6s.

Gnns and Steel ; Miscel-
laneous Papers 071 Mecha7ti-
cal Siibjects.

By Sir y. Whitworth,
C.E. F.R.S.

With Illustrations. Royal %vo. "js. 6d.

Practical Treatise on

Metallurgy,

Adapted from the last Ger-
man Editio7i of P7'ofessor
KerVs Metallu7gy by W.
C7'ookes, E.R.S. &c. a7id
E. Rdh7dg, Ph.D.

3 vols. %vo. -with 625 Woodcuts. £4. igs.

Treatise on Mills and
Millwork.
By Sir W. Fairbairn, Bt.

With 1% Plates and T,22 Woodcuts. 2 vols.
Svo. 3 2 J.

NEW WORKS PU3LISHED BY LONGMANS & GO.

Useful Information for

Engineers.

By Sir W. Fairbairn, Bt.

With many Plates and Woodcuts. 3 I'ols.
croivn Zvo. 3IJ. (yd.

The Application of Cast

and Wro2io-/u Iron to

Binlding Ptirposcs.

By Sir IV. Fairbairn, Bt.

With 6 Plates and \\% Woodcuts. %vo. xds.

The Strains in Trusses
Computed by means of Dia-
grams ; oiitJi 20 Examples.
By F. A. Ranken, C.E.

With 35 Diagrams. Square cr. 1)V0. ds. 6d.

Practical Handbook of
Dyeing and Calico- Print-
ing.
By W. Crookes, F.R.S. &c.

With numerous Illustrations and Specimens
of Dyed Textile Fabrics. ?)V0. 42s.

Mitchells Manual ' of

Practical Assaying.

Fourth Edition, revised,
with the Recent Disco-
veries incorporated, by
TV. Crookes, F.R.S.

%vo. Woodcuts, 3 1 J. dd.

Occasional Papers on

Subjects connected with
Civil Engineering, Gun-
nery, and Naval Archi-
tecture.
By Michael Scott, Memb.

Inst. C.E. (jf of Inst.

N.A.

2 vols. %vo. zi'ith Plates, 42J,

Londons Encyclopccdia
of Gardening .- comprising
the Theory and Practice of
Horticulture, Floriculture,
Arboriculture, and Land-
scape Gardening,

Willi 1,000 Woodcuts. %vo. 2\s.

Loudon s Encyclopcedia

of Agriculture : comprising
the Laying-out, Improve-
ment, and Management of
Landed Property, and the
C^iltivation and Economy
of the Productions of Agri-
culture.

With 1,100 Woodcuts. Zvo. 2is.

RELIGIOUS and MORAL \VORKS.

^71 Exposition of the 39
Articles, Histoilcal and
Doctrinal.

By E. H. Browne, D.D.
Bishop of Winchester.

Nc'lv Edition. %z'o. \()s.

An Introduction to the
Theology of the Church of
England, in an Exposition
of the 39 Ai^ticles. By Rev.
T. P. Boultbee, LL.D.

Fcp. ^vo. 6^.

NEW V/ORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

Historical Lectures on
the L ife of Our Lord JesiLs
Christ.
By C. y. Ellicott, D.D.

Fifth Edition. %vo. \2s.

Sermons; including Two
Sermons on the Intei^prc-
tation of Prophecy, and an
Essay on the Right Inter-
pretation and Understand-
ing of the Scripttires.
By the late Rev. Thomas
Arnold, D.D.

3 vols. Zvo. price 2\s.

Christian Life, its

CoiLrse, its Hindrances,
and its Helps; Sermons
preached mostly in the
Chapel of Rngby School.
By the late Rev. Thomas
Arnold, D.D.

^vo. "js. bd.

Ch ris tia n L ife, its

Hopes, its Fears, and its
Close ; Sermons preached
mostly in the Chapel of
Rugby School.
By the late Rev. Tliomas
Arnold, D.D.

Z'jo. "js. 6d.

So^mons Chiefly on the

I^iterpretation of Scrip-
tui^e.

By the late Rev. Thonuxs
Arnold, D.D.

Zvo. price "js. 6d.

Sermons preached in the

Chapel of Rugby School ;
zvith an Address before
Confimnation.
By the late Rev. Thomas
Arnold, D.D.

Fcp. Zi'o. price ^s. ()d.

Three Essays on Reli-
gion : jVature ; the Utility
of Religion; Theism.
By John Stuart Mill.

%vo. price \os. 6d.

Synonyms of the Old Tes-
tament, their Bearing on
Christian Faith and
Practice.
By Rev. R. B. Girdlestone.

Reasons of Faith; or,
the Order of the Christian
Argument Developed and
Explained.
By Rev. G. S. Drew, M.A,

Second Edition. Fcp. Zvo. 6j,

The Eclipse of Faith ;
or a Visit to a Religious
Sceptic.
By Phnrv Rog-ers.

Latest Edition. Fcp. %z-o. ^s.

Defence of the Eclipse of
Faith.
By Heniy Rogers.

Latest Edition. Fcp. Zvo. y. 6d.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

Sermons for the Times
preached in St. PaiWs
Cathedral and clsciuhcrc.
By Rev. T. Griffith, M.A.

Crcnun %vo. 6j'.

The Life and Epistles of
St. Paid.
By Rev. W. J. Conybeare,

M.A. and Very Rev. J.

S. How son, D.D.

Library Edition, zvith all the Orighial
Illustrations, Maps, Landscapes on Steel,
Woodcuts, &^c. 2 vols. 4to. 48^.

Intermediate Edition, 7vitA a Selection
of Maps, Plates, and IVoodcuts. 2 vols,
square croivn %vo. 2IJ.

Student's Edition, j-eznsed and condensed,
with 46 Illustrations and Maps. I vol.
croxvn Zvo. (js.

A Critical a?id Gram-
matical Commentary on St.
PauVs Epistles.
By C. 7. Ellicott, D.D.

2)V0. Galatians, 8j-. 6d. Ephesians, 8j. 6d.
Pastoral Epistles, loj-. 6d. Philippi-
ans, Colossians, & Philemon, loj-. 6d.
Thessalonians, ^s. 6d.

The Voyage 'and Ship-
wreck of St. Paid ; with
Dissertations on the Ships
and Navigation of the
Ancients.
By Jatnes Smith, F.R.S.

Crozun ^vo. Charts, \os. 6d.

Evidence of the Truth
of the Chidstian Religion
derived from the Literal
Fidfihnent of Prophecy.
By Alexander Keith, D.D.

\Oth Edition, %oith nuinerotis Plates.
Square %vo. \2s. bd. or in post %vo.
with 5 Plates, 6s.

Historical and Critical

Commentary on the Old

Testament; zuith a New

Translation.

By M. M. Kalisch, Ph.D.

Vol. I. Genesis, Zvo. \%s. or adapted for the
General Reader, 1 2s. Vol. II. Exodus,
\^s. or adapted for the General Reader,
\2.s. Vol. III. Leviticus, Part I. \<,s.
or adapted for the General Reader, Zs.
Vol. IV. Leviticus, Part II. \^s. or
adapted for the General Reader, 2>s.

The History and Litera-
ture of the Israelites, ac-
cording to the Old Testa-
ment and the Apocrypha.
By C. De Rothschild and
A. De Rothschild.

Second Edition. 2 vols, crown %vo. 1 2s. (yd.
Abridged Edition, in I vol. fcp. 8vo. y. 6d.

Ewald' s History of
Israel.

Translated from the Gei^-
man by J . E. Carpenter,
M.A. zvith Preface by
R. Martineau, M.A.

5 vols. %vo. 63 J'.

Commei^tary on Epistle
to the Romans.
By Rev. W. A. O Conor.

Cro'vn %vo. 3^. bd.

A Cominentary on the
Gospel of St. John.
By Rev. W. A. O Conor.

Crown 8vo. los. 6d.

The Epistle to the He-

bi^eivs ; with Analytical
Litrodiiction and N'otes.
By Rev. W. A. GCo7ior.

Croivn 8z'o. 4.r. 6d.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

Thoughts for the Age.
By Elizabeth M. Sewell.

Nau Edition. Fcp. %vo. y. 6d.

Passing Thoughts on
Religion.
By Elizabeth M. Sewell.

Fcp. %To. 3J'. (id.

Self-examination before

Confirmation.

By Elizabeth M. Sewell.

12 mo. IS. 6d.

Preparation for the Holy
Co7n77tunion ; the Devotio7is
chiefly f7^077t the zvo7^ks of
yere77ty TayloT-.
By Elizabeth M. Seivell.

2,27110. y.

Readings for a Month
Prepa7^ato7y to Co7ifi7^77ia-
tion, fro77i W7nte7's of the
Early a7id English Church.
By Elizabeth M. Sewell.

Fcp. Zvo. 4J-.

Readijigs for Every Day
i7i Le7it, co77ipiled f 7^0771 the
Writings of Bishop
yere77iy Taylor.
By Elizabeth M. Sewell.

Fcp. %vo. 5J-.

Bishop Jereiny Taylor s
E7iti7^e Works ; zvith Life
by Bishop Heber.
Revised a7id co7''rected by
the Rev. C P. Ede7i.

lo vols. ^5. 5 J.

Hymns of Praise and

Prayer.

Collected a7id edited by Rev.
y. Ma7^ti7ieatc, LL.D.

Cnnvn 2>z'o. 4^. 6d.

Thoughts for the Holy
Week, for Yoimg Persons.
By Elizabeth M. Sewell.

Nczo Edition. Fcp. 8t'<7. 2s.

Spirit nni Songs for, the
Su7idays a7id Holidays
thronghoiU the Year.
Byy. S. B. jWo7isell, LL.D.

Fourth Edition. Fcp. 8tv. 4^-. dd.

Lyra Gernmnica; Hyinns

tra7islatedf7'oi7i the Ge7^ma7i
by Miss C. Wi7ikzvo7'th.

2 scries, fcp. Siw. 3^-. dd. each.

Endeavonrs after the
Christia7i Life; Discoit7^ses.
By Rev. y. Marti7teau,
LL.D.

Fifth Edition. Crozvn Svo. ys. 6d.

An Lntroduction to the

Study of the Neto Testa-
77ie7it, Critical, Exegetical,
a7id Theoloo;ical.
By Rev. S. Davidson, D.D.

2 vols. Zl'O. 30J.

Supernatural Religion ;
a7i l7iqiciry i7ito the Reality
of Divi7ie Revelatio7i.

New Edition. 2 vols. %vo. 2\s.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

The Life of Christ.
For the nsc of J ^oiiiig Per-
sons^ selected from the Gos-
pels and Chronologically
arra7iged ; zvith Supple-
mentary Notices from
parallel Passages.

• By the Rev. R. B. Gar-
diner, M.A.

Crozvn %vo. 2s.

Lectures on the Penta-
teuch & the Moa'bite Stone ;
with Appendices.
By y. IV. Colenso, D.D.
Bishop of IV at al.

The Pentateuch and Book
of foslnca Critically Ex-
amined.

By 7. W. Colenso, D.D.
Bishop of N'atal.

Crcnvn %vo. bs.

The New Bible Coni-
7nentary, by Bishops and
other Clergy of the An-
glican ChiLrch, C7'itically
. examined by the Rt. Rev.
7. W. Colenso, D.D.
Bishop of Natal.

SfC. 25.r.

TRAVELS, VOYAGES, &c.

The Valleys of Tirol ;
their Traditions and C71S-
toms, and How to Visit
them.

By Miss R. H. Busk,
AiLtJwr of ' The Folk-
Lore of Rome' cfc.

IVitJi Frontispiece and
Sty'. I2J-. (id.

I\Iaps. Crcnvn

Eight Years in Ceylon.
By Sir Samuel W. Baker,
M.A. F.R.G.S.

Nciv Edition, 7i'ith Illustrations oi^raved
on Wood by G. Pearson. Cro^vn Zfo.
Price Is. 6d.

The Rifle and the Hound

in Ceylon.

By Sir Samuel TV. Baker,
M.A. F.R.G.S.

iVrw Edition, luitk Illustrations enr^rared
on Wood by G. Pearson. Crown Zvo.
Price "Js. dd.

Meeting the Sun ; a
fourney all round the
World through Egypt,
China, fapan, and Cali-
fornia.

By William Simpsoji,
F.R.G.S.

With Ileliotypes and Woodcuts. %vo. 24J.

The Rural Life of Eng-
land.
By William Howitt.

Woodcuts, Zvo. I2J-. bd.

The Dolomite Motm-
tains. Fxcursions through
Tyrol, Carinthia, Carniola,
and Friuli.

By y. Gilbert and G. C.
Churchill, F.R.G.S..

ir/t/i Illustrations. Sq. cr. %vo. 2\s.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

The Alpine Club Map
of the Chain of Mont
Blanc, f^om an actual Stn--
vey in 1863- 1864.
By A. Adams- Reilty,
F.R.G.S. M.A.C

III Chroniolithography, on extra stout draru-
iiig paper \Os. or monnted on canvas
ill a folding ease, 1 2s. 6d.

The Alpine Club Map
of the Valpelline, the Val
Tonrnanche, and the South-
ern Valleys of the Chain of
Mojite Rosa, from acttial
Survey.

By A, Adains-Reilly ,
F.R.G.S. M.A.C.

Price bs. on extra Stout Draioing Paper, or
']s. 6d. mounted in a Folding Case.

Hours of Exercise in the

Alps.

By fohn Tyndall, F.R.S.

Third Edition, 7vit/i 7 Woodcuts by E.
Whyniper. Croxvn Svo. I2J-. 6d.

Gitide to the Pyrenees, for
the nse of Mountaineers.
By Charles Packe.

Second Edition, zuith Maps ^'c. and Ap-
pendix. Croiun ?>vo. "js. 6d.

How to See Norway.
By J. R. Campbell

With Map and 5 ]Voodcnts, fep. Zvo. ^s.

Untrodden Peaks and

Unfrequented Valleys ; a
Midsummer Ramble anions:
the Dolomites.
By Amelia B. Edzuards.

With numerous Illustrations. %vo. 21s.

The Alpine Club Map

of Siuitzerland, zuith parts
of the Neighbouring Coun-
tries, on the scale of four
miles to an Inch.
Edited by R. C Nichols,
F.S.A. F.R.G.S.

In Four Sheets, vt Portfolio, 42^. or
mounted in a Case, \2s. 6d. Each
Sheet may be had separately, price 1 2s.
or monnted in a Case, 15J.

The Alpine Guide.
By John Ball, M.R.I. A.
late President of the
Alpine Club.

Post S"'(?. 7ijifh Maps and other Illustrations.

Eastern Alps.

Price \os. 6d.

Cen tral A Ips, including
ail the Oberland District.

Price Is. 6d.

Western Alps, including
Mont Blanc, Monte Rosa,
Zermatt, &c.

Price 6s. 6d.

Introduction on Alpine
Travelling in general, and
on the Geology of the Alps.

Price \s. Either of the Three Volumes or Paris
of the '■Alpine Guide'' may be had with
this Introduction prefixed, \s. extra.

Visits to Remarkable

Places, and Scenes illus-
trative of striking Passages
in English History and
Poet7y.
By William Hozuitt.

2 fols. ?>io. Woodcuts, 25^.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

V/ORKS of FICTION.

Whispers from Fairy-
land.
By the Rt. Hon. E. H.

Knatchbull - Hngcssen,
M.P. Aiitkorof' Stories
for my Childreii', ' Moon-
shine,' ' Queer Folici &e.

IVith 9 Illustrations from Original De-
signs engraved on Wood by G. Pear-
son. Cro-tvn %vo. price ds.

Elena, an Italian Tale.
By L. N. Coniyn.

2 vols, post Zvo. \ifS.

La dy Wi II o ttgh by ' s

Diary during the Reign of
Charles the First, the Pro-
tectorate, and the Restora-
tion.

Crozvn ?>vo. 'Js. 6d.

Centttlle, a Tale of Fait.
By Denys Shyne Lazulor,
A uthor of ' Pilgjdmages in
the Pyrenees and Landcsi

Croiun %vo. los. ()d.

The Folk-Lore of Rome,

collected by Word of Mouth

from the People.

By R. H. Busk, Author of

' The Valleys of Tirol'

&c.

Crown "ivo. \2s. 6d.

Cyllene ; or. The Fall of

Paganism.

By Henry Sneyd, 31. A.

2 vols, pos %vo. 14J.

Tales of the Tetttonic
Lands.

By Rev. G. W. Cox, M.A.
and E. H. Jones.

Crown ?>vo. los. 6d.

Beckers Galhts; or Ro-

7nan Scenes of the Time of
Augustus.

Post %vo. Is. 6d.

Beckers Charicles : Il-
lustrative of Private Life
of the Ancient Greeks.

Post %vo. ^s. 6d.

Tales of Ancient Greece.
By the Rev. G. W. Cox,
M.A.

Cro7utt Zvo. 6s. 6d.

The Modern Novelisfs
Library.

Atlierstone Priory, 2s. boards ; 2s. 6d. cloth.

The Burgomaster'' s Family, 2s. boards;
2s. 6d. cloth.

Melville's Digby Grand, 2s. and 2s. 6d.

Gladiators, 2s. and 2s.6d.

Good for Nothing,2s. f-j^2s. 6d.

■ Holmby House, 2s. and 2s. 6d.

Interpret^-, 2s. and 2s. bd.

Kate Coventry, 2s. and 2s. 6d.

Queeii's Alarics, 2s. aiid 2s. 6d.

General Bounce, 2s. and 2s. 6d.

Trollope's Warden, is. bd. and 2s.

J>archester Toivers, 2s. and

2s. bd.

Bramley-Moore's Six Sisters of the Val-
leys, 2s. boards ; 2s. bd cloth.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS &. CO.

Novels and Tales.

By the Right Hon. Benja-
min Disraeli, M.P.

Cabinet Editions, complete in Ten Volumes,

crozun %vo. 6s. each, asfollo7vs : —
Lothair, ds. \ Venctia, ds.

Coningsby, 6s. Alroy,Ixion, a^c. 6s.

Sybil, 6s. Yonng Duke, &=c. 6s.

Tancred, 6s. \ Vivian Grey, 6s.

Henrietta Temple, 6s.

Contarini Fleming, &^c. 6s.

Cabinet Edition, in crown
'^vo. of Stories and Tales
by Miss Sewell : —

Amy Hej-bert, 2s. 6d.
Gertrude, 2s. 6d.
EarFs Daughter,

2s. 6d.
Experience of Life,

2s. 6d.
Cleve Hall, 2s. 6d

Ursula, y. 6d.

Ivors, 2s. 6d.
Katharine Ashton,

2s. 6d.
Margaret Percival,

Zs. 6d.
Laneton Parsonage,
6d.

POETRY and THE DRAMA.

Ballads and Lyrics of
Old France; with other
Poems.
By A. Lang.

Square fcp. 8r'^. 5^-.

Moore s La I la RookJi,
Tenniers Edition, ivith 68
Wood Engravings.

Fcp. 4/(7. 21 s.

Moore s Irish Melodies,
Mac Use's Edition, zvith 1 6 1
Steel Plates.

Super-royal St'o. ^is. 6d.

Miniature Edition of

Moore s Irish Melodies,
with Macliscs i6i Illus-
trations reduced in Litho-
graphy.

Imp. l6mo. lO.r. 6d.

Milton's Lycidas and
Epitaphiuni Damonis.
Edited, with Lfotes and

Introduction, by C. S.

Jerram, M.A.

Qrozun %vo. 3.r. 6d.

Lays of Ancient Rome ;
zuith Ivry and the Ar-
mada.
By the Right Hon. Lo7^d

Macanlay.

\6mo. 3J-. 6d.

Lord Macanlay s Lays
of Ancient Rome. With
90 Illustrations on Wood
from Draiuings by G.
Scharf.

Fcp. 4to. 2 IS.

Miniatttre Edition of
Lord Macaulay s Lays
of Ancient Rome, zuith
Scharf s 90 Illustrations
reduced in Lithography.

Imp. \6mo. lOJ. 6d.

Southeys Poetical IVorks

zvith the Author' s last Cor-
rections and Additions.

Aledium Zvo. with Portrait, 14J.

Boivdlers Family Shak-
speare, cheaper Gemdne
Edition.

Complete in I vol. medium Svo. large type,
with 36 IVoodcut Illustrations, 1 41. or
in 6 vols. fcp. Zvo.' price 21 s.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

Horatii Opera, Library
Edition, with English
Notes, Marginal References
and various Readings.
Edited by Rev.y . E . Yonge,

%V0. 21 s.

The ^neid of Virgil
Translated into English
Verse.
By y. Conington, M.A.

Crown %vo. (js.

Poems by yean Inge low.

2 z'ols. Fcp. Zvo. lo.r.

First Series, containing '■Divided' ' The
Star's Monument,'' ^c. \bth Thousand.
Fcp. %vo. 5j.

Second Series, '■A Story of Doom' 'Gla-
dys and her Island,' Cs-v. '^th Thousand.
Fcp. Zvo. 5.C

Poems by yean Ingeloiv.
First Series, zvith nearly
lOO Woodcut I llicstrations.

Fcp. \to. 21 s.

RURAL SPORTS, HORSE and CATTLE
MANAGEMENT, &c.

the

Down the Road ; or,
Reminiscences of a Gentle-
man Coachman.
By C. T. S. Birch Rey-
nardson.

With Twelve Chroviolithographic Illustra-
tions from Original Paintings by H.
Aiken. Medium 2>z'o. \_Nearly ready.

Blaine s Encyclofcedia of
Rural Sports; Complete
Accoimts, Historical, Prac-
tical, and Descriptive, of
Hunting, Shooting, Fish-
ing, Racing, &c.

With above 6oo Woodcuts {20 from Designs
3/ John Leech). ?,vo. 21s.

A Book on Angling:
a Treatise on the Art of
Angling in every branch,
inchiding fill Illusti^ated
Lists of Salmon Flies.
By Francis Francis.

Post Svo. Portrait and Plates, 1 5^'.

Wilcockss Sea -Fisher-
man : comprising the Chief
Methods of Hook and Li^ie
Fishing, a gla7ice at Nets,
and remarks on Boats and
Boating.

NlIO Edition, unth So Woodcuts.
Post Svo. 1 2s. 6d.

The Ox, his Diseases and

their Treatment ; with an
Essay on Parturition in the
Cow.

By y. R. Dobson, Memb.
R.C.V.S.

Ci-own Zvo. 7vith Illustrations, "js. 6d.

A Treatise on Horse-
Shoeing a7id Lameness.
By y. Gamgee, Vet. Surg.

%vo. with 55 Woodcuts, \os. 6d.

Youatt on the Horse.

Revised and enlarged by W.
Watson, M.R.CV.S.

Svo. Woodcuts, I2s, 6d.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS 8c CO. 57

Yoiiatfs IVork on the

Dog, revised and enlarged.

%vo. JVoodcuts, 6s.

Horses and Stables.
By Colonel F. Fitzwygrani,
X V. the KingsH^cssars.

With 2^ Plates of Illustrations. Svo. ios.6d.

The Dog in Health and

Disease.

By Stonehenge.

With 73 Wood Engravings. Square craivn
Zvo. 7s. 6d.

The Greyhound.
By Stonehe7ige.

Revised Edition, with 24 Portraits of Grey-
hounds. Square croion 8vo. los. 6d.

Stables and Stable Fit-
tings.
By W. Miles, Esq.

Imp. %vo. ivith 13 Plates, \^s.

The Horse s Foot, and
how to keep it Sound.
By W. Miles, Esq.

Ninth Edition. Imp. %vo. Woodcuts, \2s. bd.

A Plain Treatise on
Horse-shoeing.
By W. Miles, Esq.

Sixth Edition. Post 8vo. Woodcuts, 2s. 6d.

Remarks on Horses
Teeth, addressed to Pur-
chasers.
By W. Miles, Esq.

Post 'iivo. \s. 6d.

The Fly-Fisher's Ento-
mology.

By Alfred Ronalds.
With coloured Represe7ita-
tions of the Natural aiid
Artificial Insect.

With 20 coloured Plates. %vo. I4r.

The Dead Shot, or Sports-
mans Complete Giiide ; a
Treatise on the Use of the
Gun, D og-br caking, P igeo7i-
shooting, &c.

By Marksman.

Fcp. Zvo. ivith Plates, ^s.

'38

NEW WORKS PuausHED BY LONGMANS & GO.

WORKS of UTILITY and GENERAL
INFORMATION.

Maunder s Treasiiry of
Knowledge and Library of
Reference ; comp^Hsing an
English Dictionary and
Grammar, Universal Ga-
zetteer, Classical Diction-
ary, Chronology, Law Dic-
tionary, Synopsis of the
Peerage, Useful Tables,&c.

Fcp. %vo. 6j.

Mmuiders Biographical
Treasury.

Latest Edition, recon-
strjicted and partly re-
written, with abotit i,ooo
additional Memoirs, by
W. L. R. Gates.

Fcp. Zvo. 6s,

Maunder s Scientific and

Literary Treasury; a
Popular Encyclopccdia of
Science, Literature, and
Art.

New Edition, in pa7't re-
written,with above i,ooo
nezu articles, by J . Y.
yohnson.

Fcp. 8zv. (is.

Maunder s Treasury of
Geography, Physical, His-
torical, Descriptive, and
Political.

Edited by W. Hitghes,
E.R.G.S.

IViih 7 Maps and 1 6 Flaies. Fcp. ^vo. 6s.

Maunder s LListorical

Treasury ; General Iniro-
dtt-ctory Outlines of Uni-
versal Histoiy, and a
Series of Separate His-
tories.

Revised by the Rev. G. W.
Cox, M.A.

Fcp. 8vo. 6s.

Maunders Treasury of
N at2iral Histoiy; or Popu-
lar Dictionary of Zoology.

Revised and corrected Edition. Fcp. 'ivo.
with 900 Woodcuts, 6s.

The Treasury of Bible

Knozv ledge ; behig a Dic-
tionary of the Books, Per-
sons, Places, Events, and
other Matters of which 1
mention is 7nade in Holy
Scriptiire.
By Rev. J. Ayre, M.A.

With Maps, 1 5 Plates, and nuinerons Wood-
cuts. Fcp, %vo. 6s.

Collieries a7id Colliers:

a Handbook of the Law
and Leadiiig Cases relat-
ing thereto.
By y. C. Fowler.

Third Edition. Fcp. %vo. ^s. 6d.

The Theory and Prac-
tice of Banking.
By H. D. Macleod, M.A,

Second Edition. 2 vols. 8vo. ^os.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

Modern Cookery for Pri-
vate Families, reduced to a
System of Easy Practice in
a Series of cai^efully-tested
Receipts.

By Eliza Acton.

IVit/i^Flaic's&'i^o Woodcuts. Fcp. %vo. (ys.

A Practical Treatise on

Bi^eiving ; zvith Formnlce
for Public Brewers, and
Instructions for Private
Families.
By W. Black.

Fifth Edition. Zvo. los. 6d.

Three Hundred Original
Chess Problems and Studies.
By fas. Pierce, M.A. and
W. T. Pierce.

IViih many Diagrams. Sq.fcp. %vo. 'js. 6r/.
Supplement, 2s. 6d.

Chess Openings.
By F. W. Longman, Bal-
liol College, Oxford.

Second Edition, revised. Fcp. "ivo. 2s. 6d.

The Theory of the Mo-
dem Sclent if c Game of
W/iist.

By W. Pole, F.R.S.

Fifth Edition. Fcp. Sw. 2s. 6d.

The Cabinet Lawyer ; a
Popular Digest oftheLaius
of England, Civil Crimi-
nal, and Constitutional.

T'Menty-fourth Edition, corrected and ex-
tended. Fcp. ^vo. 9J-.

Blacks tone Economised ;
being a Compeiidium of the
Laws of England to the
Present Time.
By D. M. Aird, Barrister.

Revised Edition. Post %ve. p. dd.

Pewtner s Comprehensive
Specifier ; a Guide to the
Practical Specification of
evcry^ kind of Building-
Artificers Work.
Edited by W. Young.

Crozvn Svo. (js.

Hints to Mothers on
the Management of their
Health dtiring the Period
of Pregnancy and in the
Lying-in Room.
By Thomas Bull, M.D.

Fcp. '6zv. 5j-.

The Maternal Manasie-
ment of Children in Health
and Disease,
By Thomas Bull, M.D.

Fcp. %vo. 5^-.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

KNO^VLEDaE for the

The Stepping- Stoiie to Know-
ledge; or iipiuards of 7 00 Questions
and Anstvers on Miscellaneous
Subjects^ adapted to the capacity of
Infant minds.

Second Series of the Stepping-

Stone to Knotvledge : Containing
upivards of 800 Questions and
Answers on Miscellaneous Subjects
not contained i?i the First Series.
lS/;io. Is.

The Stepping-Stone to Geo-
graphy : Containing several Hun-
dred Questions and Answers on
Geographical Subjects,
i8mo. Is.

The Stepping-Stone to Eng-
lish History; Questions and An-
swers on the History of England.
\%mo. I J.

The Stepping-Stone to Bible

Knotvledge; Questions and An-
swers on the Old and Nau Testa-
Dients.
iSmo. Is.

The Stepping-Stone to Bio-
graphy; Questions and Answers
on the Lives of Eminent Men and
Women.
iSwo. Is.

The Stepping-Stone to Irish

History : Containing several Hun-
dred Questions and Ansraers on
the History of Ireland.
\%mo. \s.

The Stepping-Stone to French
History: Containing srveral Hun-
dred Questions and An severs on
the History of France.
iSmo. is.

YOUNG.

The Stepping-Stone to Roman

History: Containing several Hu?i-
dred Questions and Anstcers on
the History of Rome.
i%mo. IS.

The Stepping-Stoneto Grecian
History: Containing several Hun-
dred Questions and Answers on
the History of Greece.
iS/iio. Is.

The Stepping-Stone to Eng-
lish Grammar : Contai?ii?ig seve-
ral Hundred Questions and An-
swers on English Grammar.
iS/uo. Is.

The Stepping-Stone to French
Pronunciation and Conversation:
Containing several Hundred
Questions and Anszuers.
l2»no. Is.

The Stepping-Stone to Astro-
nomy: Containing several Hun-
dred familiar Questions and
Ansivers on the Earth and the
Solar and Stellar Systems.
iSmo. is.

The Stepping-Stone to Mnsic:
Containing several Hundi-ed
Questions on the Science; also a
short History of Music.
i%mo. Is.

The Stepping-Stone to Natu-
ral History : Vertebrate or Back-
boned Animals. Fart I. Mam-
malia; Part II. Birds, Reptiles,
Fishes.

iZmo. Is. each Part.

The Stepping-Stone to Archi-
tecture; Questions and Answers
explaining the Principles and
Progress of Architecture from the
Earliest Times.

With 100 Woodcuts. l8mo. is.

INDEX.

Ac toil s Modern Cookery 39

Aird's Blackstone Economised 39

Alpine Club Map of Switzerland 33

Alpine Guide (The) 33

Amos' s Jurisprudence 10

Primer of the Constitution 10

Andersoii's Strength of Materials 20

Anftstrong' s OrgamcChermslry 20

Arnold's (Dr.) Christian Life 29

Lectures on Modern History 2

Miscellaneous Works 12

School Sermons 29

Sermons 29

(T. ) Manual of English Literature 1 2

^r;/t)«/ii'j Life of Lord Denman 7

Atherstone Priory 39

Autumn Holidays of a Country Parson ... 13

Ay re's Treasury of Bible Knowledge 38

Bacon's 'Essa.ys, hj Whalely 10

Life and Letters, by Spcddiiig ... 10

Works 10

Bain's Mental and Moral Science 11

on the Senses and Intellect 11

Baker's Two Works on Ceylon 32

Ball's Guide to the Central Alps 38

Guide to the Western Alps 38

Guide to the Eastern Alps 38

Becker's Charicles and Gallus 34

^/(7<r/J'j Treatise on Brewing 39

Blackley's German- English Dictionary 15

Blaine's Rural Sports 36

Bloxam's Metals 20

Boultbce on 39 Articles 28

Bourne s Catechism of the Steam Engine . 27

Handbook of Steam Engine 27

Treatise on the Steam -Engine ... 27

Improvements in the same 27

Boii'dler's Family Shakspeare 35

Bramley-Moorc s Six Sisters of the Valley . 39
Brande's Dictionary of Science, Literature,

and Art 22

Bray's Manual of Anthropology 22

Philosophy of Necessity 11

Brinklcy s Astronomy 17

Browne s Exposition of the 39 Articles 28

Brunei s Ude oi Brunei 7

Buckle's History of Civilisation 3

Posthumous Remains 12

Bull's Hints to Mothers 39

Maternal Management of Children . 39

Burgomaster's Family (The) 39

Burke's Rise of Great Families 8

Vicissitudes of Families 8

Busk's Folk-lore of Rome 34.

Valleys of Tirol 32

Cabinet Lawyer 39

Campbell's Norway 33

Cates's Biographical Dictionary 8

and I Fycif/tiwrrf' J Encyclopaedia ... 5

Changed Aspects of Unchanged Truths ... 13

Chesney s Indian Polity 3

Modern Military Biography 3

Waterloo Campaign 3

C lough's Lives from Plutarch 4

Colenso on Moabite Stone (&c 32

's Pentateuch and Book of Joshua. 32

Speaker's Bible Commentary ... 32

Collins s Mineralogy of Cornwall 27

Perspective 26

Commonplace Philosopher in Town and

Country, by A. K. H. B 13

Comfe's Positive Polity 8

Comyn's Elena 34

Congreve s Essays 9

Politics of Aristotle 10

Conington s Translation of Virgil's .i^ineid 36

Miscellaneous Writings 14

Contanseau's Two French Dictionaries ... 14
Conybeare and Howson's Life and Epistles

of St. Paul 29

Cotton's Memoir and Correspondence 7

Counsel and Comfort from a City Pulpit... 13

Cox's (G. W.) Aryan Mythology 4

Crusades 6

History of Greece 4

Tale of the Great Persian

War 4

Tales of Ancient Greece ... 34

and Jones' s Teutonic Tales 34

Crazi'ley s Thucydides 4

Cr^aj)/ on British Constitution 3

Cresy s Encyclopaedia of Civil Engineering 27

Critical Essays of a Country Parson 14

C/-fci«'i' Chemical Analysis 24

Dyeing and Calico-printing 28

Culley's Handbook of Telegraphy 26

C"«^af/t' J Student's History of Ireland 3

D' Aubignfs Reformation in the Time of

Calvin 6

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

Roget's Thesaurus of English Words and

Phrases 14

Ronald's Fly-Fisher's Entomology 37

Rothschild' s Israelites 30

/{"^jj-t;// on the Christian Religion 6

English Constitution 2

's Recollections and Suggestions ... 2

Sandars' s '^^x's,^^vi\2iVi s Institutes 10

5a»/brif'j English Kings 2

Savory's Geometric Turning 26

Schcllen' s Spectrum Analysis 18

.Sco/^'j Albert Durer 24

Papers on Civil Engineering 28

Seaside Musing, by A. K. H. B 13

Seebohm s Oxford Reformers of 1498 3

Protestant Revolution 6

Sewcll's History of the Early Church 5

Passing Thoughts on Religion 31

Preparation for Communion 31

Principles of Education 14

Readings for Confirmation 31

Readings for Lent 31

Examination for Confirmation ... 31

Stories and Tales 35

Thoughts for the Age 31

Thoughts for the Holy Week 31

Sharp's Post-office Gazetteer 16

Shelley's Workshop Appliances 20

5/?o;-/'j Church History 5

Simpson's Meeting the Sun 32

Smith's Paul's Voyage and Shipwreck 30

(Sydney) Essays 12

Life and Letters 7

Miscellaneous Works ... 12

Wit and Wisdom 12

(Dr. R. A.) Air and Rain 18

Sneyd's Cyllene 34

Southey's Doctor 13

Poetical Works 35

Stanley's History of British Birds 21

Stephen's Ecclesiastical Biography 7

Freethinking and Plainspeaking 9

Stepping Stones (the Series) 40

5//r//>;^'j Secret of Hegel 11

Sir William Hamilton 11

Stonehenge on the Dog 37

on the Greyhound 37

Sunday Afternoons at the Parish Church of

a University City, by A. K. H. B 13

Supernatural Religion 31

Taylor s History of India 3

Manual of Ancient History 6

Manual of Modern History 6

[Jereyny] Works, edited hy Eden. 31

T<»<t-Books of Science 19

2 hirlvjall's History of Greece 4

Thomson's Laws of Thought i r

Z^iJ/^iif'j Quantitative Analysis 20

and Muir's Qualitative Analysis ... 20

7'/z?/(f^c/z«;«'j- Chemical Physiology 23

Todd (A.) on Parliamentary Government... 2
and Bowtnan's Anatomy and

Physiology of Man 24

Trench's Reahties of Irish Life 12

Trollope's Barchester Towers 39

Warden 39

Tyndall's Axnmczn Lectures on Light ... 20

Belfast Address ig

Diamagnetism 20

Fragments of Science 19

Hours of Exercise in the Alps... 33

Lectures on Electricity 20

Lectures on Light 20

Lectures on Sound 20

Heat a Mode of Motion 20

Molecular Physics 20

t/fi5^;-W(7^'j System of Logic n

Ure's Dictionary of Arts, Manufactures,

and Mines 27

IVarburton's Edward the Third 6

Watso}i's Geometry 20

IF'a/A'j Dictionary of Chemistry 24

Webb's Objects for Common Telescopes ... 18

Weinhola's Experimental Physics 19

Wellington s Life, by Gleig 8

Whately s Enghsh Synonymes 14

Life and Correspondence 6

Logic 10

Rhetoric 10

White and Donkin's English Dictionary... 15

and Riddle's Latin Dictionaries ... 15

IF/z/7tiicri'/i on Guns and Steel 27

Wilcocks s Sea-Fisherman 36

I F////(77;m' J Aristotle's Ethics 10

Willis's Principles of Mechanism 26

Willonghby's {L,2.Ay) Diary 34

Wood's Bible Animals 22

Homes without Hands 21

Insects at Home 21

Insects Abroad 21

Out of Doors 21

Strange Dwellings 21

F(7;/^c' J English-Greek Lexicons 16

Horace 36

F(3Ka/^ on the Dog 37

on the Horse 36

Zc//^/j Socrates 5

Stoics, Epicureans, and Sceptics... 5

Sj>ottis-woode &' Co., Printers, Nezv-street Square, Loudon.

Internet Archive Audio

Featured

Top

Images

Featured

Top

Software

Featured

Top

Books

Featured

Top

Video

Featured

Top

Mobile Apps

Browser Extensions

Archive-It Subscription

Save Page Now

Full text of "An examination into the doctrine and practice of confession"

See other formats