316 PBN&N CB.---CON rBSStOLV. [Boor it now stands, it was not considered as a law of the church, or neces- sary to salvation, till modern times. Secondly, It cannot be proved by any tsstimony of the father8 that private confession to a priest was looked on as any thing more than advisable and useful in several cases. Thirdly, The fathers taught quite the contrary of the popish doctrine. "What havre I to do with men," says Augustine, "that they should hes? my confession, as though they could heal my disease ? Chrysostom says: "It is not necessary that thou shouldeat confess in the presence of witnesses; let the iniquity of thy offences be made in thy thoughIs; let this judgment be made without a witness; let Sod only see thee co?fessing. Therefore I entreat and beseech you that you would con- tinually make your confession to God; for I do not b?ng thee to the theatre of thy fellow-servants, neither do I constrain thee to discover thy sins to men. Unclasp thy conscience before Cod, and show thy wounds to him, and from Mm ask a medicine." This testimony is so far from favouring t? Romish doctrine, that it direcdy contradicts it. The Council of Trent decrees, "That whosoever shall affirm that con- fession of all our sins to a priest is not necessary to our obtaining for- giveness of them, shall be accursed." St. Augustine and Chrysostom affirm that this confession is not necessary, but that forgiveness may be had withem it. Either the Roman anathemas are of no force, or these fathers are involved as deeply as we Protestants are. 6. The doctrine of auricular confession perplexes the consciences of the conscientious and pious. For since they hind every man to cSonfess all his mortal sins, even the most seeret? a?ter the most diligent search; and seeing also it is rarest di?icult to know what sins are mortal and what are not, and when a person hath made a sufficiently diligent search; what a multitude of endless scruples and perplexities is every man led into by this doe- trine! This is so true, tlmt according to the cases, conclusions, and inquiries that casuists have made in this matter, it seems impossible to make a fight confession. But let us descend to some particulars. There are no certain distinctions between mortal and venial sins; there being no catalogues of the one and the other, except that they usually reckon but seven deadly sins; and even there aremany ways of changing their mortality into venialdry. The consequence is, that they a?e either led to slight most sins, or be trouble with almost per. petual disputes concerning every thing. There is also no definite rule concerning the examin,on of con- ecience. It is difficult to know when this examination is done suffi- ciently; and yet if it be not sufficient, then the sins which are forgotten by carelessness, and not properly called to mind, are not pardoned. There are some confessions impert?eet, but valid; some invalid for their imperfection; some perfect, and yet invalid. Hence arise scruples beyond the power of remedy; because there is no cemin principle from which to derive peace. There are also several rasemad ca?eg which an ordinary priest can- not pardon. Some are reserved to the bishop, some to the archbishop, and some to the pope. Yet any priest can absolve from any of theoe, provided the person be at the point of death. The msighty cmsa? ?nd v? reserved are such as the following;' rig., heresy, simony, assault 1
�
