repent on any consideration cannot be denied to have attrition. The following observations are presented on this subject for the maders consideration. 5. Octi attrition. (1.) Such a pomon, who, being attr/?e, as described above, comes to confess his sins, may still retain his /?e of sin; for nothing but love to God can take away his love of sin; and if there be love in it, it is contrition, not attrition. From these premises it will follow, that if the priest can absolve him that is attrite, he may pardon him that hath af- fections to sin still remaining. if it be said that absolution changes fear into love, attrition into contrition, a Saul into a David, a Judas into a John, a Simon Magus into a Simon Peter; then the greatest conversions and miracles may be wrought by an ordinary ministry. (2.) The priest certainly cannot pardon on any other terms than those upon which Ood pardons; for if he do, then he is not the minis�r of God, but the supreme lord, and must do it on his own terms, if he dons it not according to ?od's prescription. But C?od never pardons him that is only attrite; and this they confess when they require the man to go to the priest that he may be made contrite; which is all one as if he were sent to the priest to be made chaste, temperate, or humble in an instant. If it be said, "that although God does not pardon him that is attr/te unless it be together with the keys, that is, unless the priest absolves him--and as this is all that God requires, the priest does no more than God warrants; the attrition or imperfect repentance, and the keys of the church, are all that God requires." If this could be proved, it were something; but there is no support for it in Scrip- ture or antiquity, it being nowhere said that attriti?? and absolution are alone sufficient. Indeed, this is a dream of yesterday. (3.) If attrition be good of itself, and a su/licient disposition to receive pardon from the church, then it is sufficient to receive pardon from God without the church, in case of necessity. For unless, in case of necessity, it be sufficient to desire absolution, then the outward act does more than the inward, and the ceremony were more than the grace, and the priest could do more than God; for the priest could pardon him whom God would not pardon without the priest; and the will would not be accepted for the deed, when the deed were impossi* hie to be done; and a man should live or die, not by himself, but should be judged by the actions of others. All of which is absurd, and therefore proceeds from a false principle. (4.) Attrition renders contrition, or true repentance, tmn?ce.?ory. For if attrition in some cases, without the sacrament, were good, it is as good to all intents and purpose8 of pardon as contrition; for contrition, they affirm, is not sufficient without the keys; that is, unless it contain in it a resolution to confess and beg absolution. Now this resolution is worthless unless it be reduced to act when it can. It is to be ex- cused in no case but in that of necessity. So it is also in attrition. It is vain, therefore, to persuade the penitent to heighten his repentance and be contrite, for he may obtain panIon at a cheaper rate; and as for contrition, it is to him wholly unnecessary. (5.) It is strange that attrition, which of itself is insufficient, shall yet do the work of pardon with the priest's absolution; and yet that contrition, which is pronounced sufficient by the Council of Trent, 1
�
