PENANCE
621
PENANCE
extends to all sins: "God makes no distinction; He
promised mercy to all and to His priests He granted
the authority to pardon unlhoul any exception" (op.
eit., I, iii, 10). Against the same heretics St. Pacian,
Bishop of Barcelona (d. 390), wrote to Sympronianus,
one of their leaders: "This (forgiving sins), you say,
only God can do. Quite true: but what He does
through His priests is the doing of His own power"
(Ep. I ad Sympron, 6 in P. L., XIII, 1057).
In the East during the same period we have the tes- timony of St. Cyril of Alexandria (d. 447) : "Men filled with the spirit of God (i. e. priests) forgive sins in two ways, either by admitting to baptism those who are worthy or by pardoning the penitent children of the Church" (In Joan., 1, 12 in P. G., LXXIV, 722). St. John Chrysostom (d. 407) after declaring that neither angels nor the archangels have received such power, and after showing that earthly rulers can bind only the bodies of men, declares that the priest's power of forgiving sins "penetrates to the soul and reaches up to heaven". Wherefore, he concludes, "it were mani- fest folly to condemn so great a power without which we can neither obtain heaven nor come to the fulfil- ment of the promises. . . . Not only when they (the priests) regenerate us (baptism), but also after our new birth, they can forgive us our sins" (De sacerd.. Ill, 5 sq.). St. Athanasius (d. 373): "As the man whom the priest baptizes is enlightened by the grace of the Holy Ghost, so does he who in penance confesses his sins, receive through the priest forgiveness in virtue of the grace of Christ" (Frag, contra Novat. in P. G., XXVI, 1315).
These extracts show that the Fathers recognized in penance a power and a utility quite distinct from that of baptism. Repeatedly they compare in figurative language the two means of obtaining pardon as two gates of the Church, two beacons of salvation; or, regarding baptism as spiritual birth, they describe penance as the remedy for the ills of the soul con- tracted after that birth. But a more important fact is that both in the West and in the East, the Fathers constantly appeal to the words of Christ and give them the same interpretation that was given eleven cen- turies later by the Council of Trent. In this respect they simply echoed the teachings of the earlier Fathers who had defended Catholic doctrine against the here- tics of the third and second centuries. Thus St. Cyprian (q. v.) in his "De lapsis" (a. d. 251) rebukes those who had fallen away in time of persecution, but he also exhorts them to penance: "Let each confess his sin while he is still in this world, while his con- fession can be received, while satisfaction and the for- giveness granted by the priests is acceptable to God" (c. xxix). (See L.ipsi.) The heretic Novatian, on the contrary, asserted that "it is unlawful to readmit apostates to the communion of the Church; their for- giveness must be left with God who alone can grant it" (Socrates, "Hist, eccl.", V, xxviii). Novatian and his party did not at first deny the power of the Church to absolve from sin; they affirmed that apostasy placed the sinner beyond the reach of that power — an error which was condemned by a synod at Rome in 251. (See Novatianism.)
The distinction between sins that could be forgiven and others that could not, originated in the latter half of the second century as the doctrine of the Montan- ists (q. v.), and especially of Tertullian (q. v.). While still a Catholic, Tertullian wrote (a. d. 200-6) his " De pnenitentia" in which he distinguishes two kinds of penance, one as a preparation for baptism, the other to obtain forgiveness of certain grievous sins committed after baptism, i. e., apostasy, murder, and adultery. For these, however, he allows only one forgiveness: "Foreseeing these poisons of the Evil One, God, although the gate of forgiveness has been shut and fastened up with the bar of baptism, has per- mitted it still to stand somewhat open. In the vesti-
bule He has stationed a second repentance for opening
to such as knock ; but now once for all, because now
for the second time; but never more, because the last
time it had been in vain. . . . However, if any do
incur the debt of a second repentance, his spirit is
not to be forthwith cut down and undermined by
despair. Let it be irksome to sin again, but let it not
be irksome to repent again; let it be irksome to im-
peril oneself again, but let no one be ashamed to
be set free again. Repeated sickness must have re-
peated medicine" (De pa-n., VII). Tertullian does
not deny that the Church can forgive sins; he warns
sinners against relapse, yet exhorts them to repent in
case they should fall. His attitude at the time was
not surprising, since in the early days the sins above
mentioned were severely dealt with; this was done
for disciplinary reasons, not because the Church
lacked power to forgive.
In the minds, however, of some people the idea was developing that not only the exercise of the power but the power itself was limited. Against this false notion Pope Callistus (218-22) published his "peremptory edict" in which he declares: "I forgive the sins both of adultery and of fornication to those who have done penance." Thereupon Tertullian, now become a Montanist, wrote his "De pudicitia" (a. D. 217-22). In this work he rejects without scruple what he had taught as a Catholic: "I blush not at an error which I have cast off because T am delighted at being rid of it . . . one is not ashamed of his own improve- ment." The "error" which he imputes to Callistus and the Catholics was that the Church could forgive all sins: this, therefore, was the orthodox doctrine which Tertullian the heretic denied. In place of it he sets up the distinction between lighter sins which the bishop could forgive and more grievous sins which God alone could forgive. Though in an earlier treatise, "Scorpiace", he had said (c. x) that "the Lord left here to Peter and through him to the Church the keys of heaven", he now denies that the power granted to Peter had been transmitted to the Church, i. e., to the numerus episcoporum or body of bishops. Yet he claims this power for the "spirituals" (pneutnaHci) , although these, for prudential reasons, do not make use of it. To the arguments of the "Psychici", as he termed the Catholics, he replies: "But the Church, you say, has the power to forgive sin. This I, even more than you, acknowledge and adjudge. I who in the new prophets have the Paraclete saying: 'The Church can forgive sin, but I will not do that (forgive) lest they (who are forgiven) fall into other sins'" (De pud., XXI, vii). Thus Tertullian, by the accusation which he makes against the pope and by the restric- tion which he places upon the exercise of the power of forgiving sin, bears witness to the existence of that power in the Church which he had abandoned.
Not content with assailing Callistus and his doc- trine, Tertullian refers to the "Shepherd" (Paslor), a work written a. d. 140-54, and takes its author Her- mas (q. v.) to task for favouring the pardon of adul- terers. In the days of Hermas there was evidently a school of rigorists who insisted that there was no par- don for sin committed after baptism (Simil. VIII, vi). Against this school the author of the " Pastor" takes a resolute stand. He teaches that by penance the sinner may hope for reconciliation with God and with the Church. "Go and tell all to repent and they shall live unto God. Because the Lord having had compassion, has sent me to give repentance to all men, although some are not worthy of it on account of their works" (Simil. VIII, ii). Hermas, however, seems to give but one opportunity for such reconciliation, for in Man- date IV, i, he seems to state categorically that "there is but one repentance for the servants of God", and further on in c. iii he says the Lord has had mercy on the work of his hands and hath set repentance for them; "and he has entrusted la me the power of this
