THE DOGMA OF AURICULAR CONFESSION A SACRILEGIOUS IMPOSTURE.
* * * * *
Both Roman Catholics and Protestants have fallen into very strange errors
in reference to the words of Christ: "Whose soever sins ye remit, they are
remitted unto them; _and_ whose soever _sins_ ye retain, they are
retained." (St. John xx. 23.)
The first have seen in this text the inalienable attributes of God of
forgiving and retaining sins transferred to sinful men; the second have
most unwisely granted their position, even while attempting to refute their
errors.
A little more attention to the translation of the 3rd and 6th verses of
chapter xiii. of Leviticus by the Septuagint would have prevented the
former from falling into their sacrilegious errors, and would have saved
the latter from wasting so much time in refuting errors which refute
themselves.
Every one knows that the Septuagint Bible was the Bible that was generally
read and used by Jesus Christ and the Hebrew people, in our Saviour's days.
Its language was evidently the one spoken by Christ and understood by his
hearers. When addressing his apostles and disciples on their duties towards
the spiritual lepers to whom they were to preach the ways of salvation,
Christ constantly followed the very expression of the Septuagint. It was
the foundation of his doctrine and the testimonial of his divine mission to
which he constantly appealed: the book which was the greatest treasure of
the nation.
From the beginning to the end of the Old and the New Testament, the bodily
leprosy, with which the Jewish priest had to deal, is presented as the
figure of the spiritual leprosy, sin, the penalty of which our Saviour had
taken upon himself, that we might be saved by his death. That spiritual
leprosy was the very thing for the cleansing of which he had come to this
world--for which he lived, suffered and died. Yes! the bodily leprosy with
which the priests of the Jews had to deal, was the figure of the sins which
Christ was to take away by shedding his blood, and with which his apostles
were to deal till the end of the world.
When speaking of the duties of the Hebrew priests towards the leper, our
modern translations say: (Lev. xiii. v. 6.) "They will pronounce him clean"
or (v. 3d.) "They will pronounce him unclean."
But this action of the priests was expressed in a very different way by the
Septuagint Bible, used by Christ and the people of his time. Instead of
saying, "The priest shall pronounce the leper clean," as we read in our
Bible, the Septuagint version says, "The priest shall clean (_katharei_,)
or shall unclean (_mianei_,) the leper.
No one had ever been so foolish, among the Jews, as to believe that because
their Bible said _clean_, (_katharei_) their priests had the miraculous and
supernatural power of taking away and curing the leprosy: and we nowhere
see that the Jewish priests ever had the audacity to try to persuade the
people that they had ever received any supernatural and divine power to
"cleanse" the leprosy, because their God through the Bible, had said of
them: "They will cleanse the leper." Both priest and people were
sufficiently intelligent and honest to understand and acknowledge that by
that expression, if was only meant that the priests had the legal right to
see if the leprosy was gone or not, they had only to look at certain marks
indicated by God Himself, through Moses, to know whether, or not, God had
cured the leper before he presented himself to his priest. The leper, cured
by the mercy and power of God alone, before presenting himself to the
priest, was only declared to be clean by that priest. Thus the priest was
said, by the Bible, to "clean" the leper, or the leprosy;--and, in the
opposite case, to "unclean." (Septuagint, Leviticus xiii. v. 3. 6.)
Now, let us put what God has said, through Moses, to the priests of the old
law, in reference to the bodily leprosy, face to face with what God has
said, through his Son Jesus, to his apostles and his whole church, in
reference to the spiritual leprosy from which Christ has delivered us on
the cross.
Septuagint Bible, Levit. xiii. | New Testament, John xx., 23.
|
"And the Priest shall look on the | "Whose soever sins ye remit, they
plague, in the skin of the flesh, | are remitted unto them; and whose
and when the hair in the plague is | soever sins ye retain, they are
turned white, and the plague in | retained."
sight be deeper than the skin of |
his flesh, it is a plague of |
leprosy: and the priest shall look |
on him and UNCLEAN HIM (_mianei_). |
|
"And the Priest shall look on him |
again the seventh day, and if the |
plague is somewhat dark and does |
not spread on the skin, the Priest |
shall CLEAN HIM (_katharei_): and |
he shall wash his clothes and BE |
CLEAN," (katharos.) |
The analogy of the diseases with which the Hebrew priests and the disciples
of Christ had to deal, is striking: so the analogy of the expressions
prescribing their respective duties is also striking.
When God said to the priests of the Old Law, "You shall clean the leper,"
and he shall be "cleaned," or, "you shall unclean the leper," and he shall
be "uncleaned," He only gave the legal power to see if there were any signs
or indications by which they could say that God had cured the leper before
he presented himself to the priest. So, when Christ said to his apostles
and his whole church, "Whose soever sins ye shall forgive, shall be
forgiven unto them," He only repeated what Moses had said in an analagous
case: He only gave them the authority to say when the spiritual lepers, the
sinners, had reconciled themselves to God, and received their pardon from
Him and Him alone, previous to their coming to the apostles.
It is true that the priests of the Old Law had regulations from God,
through Moses, which they had to follow, by which they could see and say
whether, or not, the leprosy was gone.
"If the plague spread not on the skin ... the priest shall clean him ...
but if the priest see that the scab spread on the skin, it is leprosy: he
shall "unclean" him. (Septuagint, Levit. xiii. 3. 6.)
So Christ had given to his apostles and his whole church equally,
infallible rules and marks to determine whether, or not, the spiritual
leprosy was gone, that they might clean the leper and tell him,
I clean thee, | I forgive thy sins,
or | or
I unclean thee. | I retain thy sins.
I would have, indeed, many passages of the Old and New Testaments to copy,
were it my intention to reproduce all the marks given by God Himself,
through his prophets, or by Christ and apostles, that His ambassadors might
know when they should say to the sinner that he was delivered from his
iniquities. I will give only a few.
First: "And he said unto them, go ye into all the world and preach the
gospel to every creature:
"He that believeth and is baptised, shall be saved: but he that believeth
not shall be damned." (Mark xvi. 15, 16.)
What a strange want of memory in the Saviour of the world! He has entirely
forgotten that "Auricular Confession," besides Faith and Baptism are
necessary to be saved! To those who believe and are baptised, the apostles
and the church are authorised by Christ to say: "You are saved! your sins
are forgiven! I clean you!"
Second: "And when ye come into an house, salute it.
"And if the house be worthy, let your peace come upon it: but if it be not
worthy, let your peace return to you.
"And whose soever shall not receive you, nor hear your words, when ye
depart out of that house or city, shake off the dust of your feet.
"Verily, verily I say unto you, it shall be more tolerable for the land of
Sodom and Gomorrha, in the day of Judgment, than for that city." (Math x.
12-15.)
Here again the Great Physician tells his disciples when the leprosy will be
gone, the sins forgiven, the soul purified. It is when the lepers, the
sinners, will have welcomed his messengers, heard and received their
message. Not a word about auricular confession: this great panacea of the
Pope's was evidently ignored by Christ.
Third: "If ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also
forgive you--But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your
Father forgive your trespasses." (Math vi. 14, 15.)
Was it possible to give a more striking and simple rule to the Apostles and
the Disciples that they might know when they could say to a sinner: "Thy
sins are forgiven!" or, "Thy sins are retained?" Here the double keys of
heaven are most solemnly and publicly given to every child of Adam! As sure
as there is a God in heaven and that Jesus died to save sinners, so it is
sure that if one forgives the trespasses of his neighbor for the dear
Saviour's sake, his own sins have been forgiven! To the end of the world,
then, let the disciples of Christ say to the sinner, "Thy sins are
forgiven," not because you have confessed your sins to me, but for Christ's
sake; the evidence of which is that you have forgiven those who had
offended you.
Fourth: "And behold, a certain one stood up and tempted him, saying:
Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?
"He said unto him: What is written in the law? how readest thou?
"And he, answering, said: Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy
heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy
mind, and thy neighbor as thyself.
"And He said unto him, thou hast answered right; this do and thou shalt
live." (Luke x. 25-28.)
What a fine opportunity for the Saviour to speak of "auricular confession"
as a means given by him to be saved! But here again, Christ forgets that
marvellous medicine of the Popes. Jesus, speaking absolutely, like the
Protestants, bids his messengers to proclaim pardon, forgiveness of sins,
not to those who confess their sins to a man, but to those who love God and
their neighbor. And so will his true disciples and messengers do to the end
of the world!
Fifth: "And when he (the prodigal son) came to himself, he said: ... I will
arise and go to my father and I will say unto him, Father, I have sinned
against Heaven and before thee: and I am not worthy to be called thy son:
make me as one of thy hired servants.
"And he arose and came to his father. But when he was yet a great way off,
his father saw him and had compassion and ran; and he fell on his neck and
kissed him.
"And the son said, Father, I have sinned against heaven and in thy sight,
and am not worthy to be called thy son.
"But the father said to his servants: Bring forth his best robe, and put it
on him: put a ring on his hand and shoes on his feet, and bring hither the
fat calf. For this my son was dead, and he is alive again, he was lost and
he is found." (Luke xv, 17-24.)
Apostles and disciples of Christ, wherever you will hear, on this land of
sin and misery, the cry of the Prodigal Son: "I will arise and go to my
Father" every time you see him, not at your feet, but at the feet of his
true Father, crying: "Father I have sinned against thee," unite your hymns
of joy to the joyful songs of the angels of God; repeat into the ears of
that redeemed sinner the sentence just fallen from the lips of the Lamb,
whose blood cleanses us from all our sins; say to him, "Thy sins are
forgiven."
Sixth: "Come unto me all ye who labour, and are heavy-laden, and I will
give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me, for I am meek and
lowly in heart, and ye shall find rest unto your souls; for my yoke is easy
and my burden is light." (Math. xi, 28-30.)
Though these words were pronounced more than 1800 years ago, they were
pronounced this very morning; they come at every hour of day and night from
the lips and the heart of Christ to every one of us sinners. It is just now
that Jesus says to every sinner, "Come to me and I will give ye rest."
Christ has never said and he will never say to any sinner: "Go to my
priests and they will give you rest!" But he has said, "Come to me and I
will give you rest."
Let the apostles and disciples of the Saviour, then, proclaim peace,
pardon, rest, not to the sinners who come to confess to them all their most
secretly sinful thoughts, desires, or actions, but to those who go to
Christ and Him alone, for peace, pardon and rest. For "Come to me," from
Jesus lips, has never meant, it will never mean, "Go and confess to the
priests."
Christ would never have said: "My yoke is easy and my burden light" if he
had instituted auricular confession. For the world has never seen a yoke so
heavy, humiliating and degrading as auricular confession.
Seventh: "As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must
the Son of man be lifted up; that who soever believeth in him should not
perish, but have eternal life." (John iii. 14.)
Did Almighty God require any auricular confession in the wilderness, from
the sinners, when He ordered Moses to lift up the serpent? No! Neither did
Christ speak of auricular confession as a condition of salvation to those
who look to Him when He dies on the Cross to pay their debts. A free pardon
was offered to the Israelites who looked to the uplifted serpent. A free
pardon is offered by Christ crucified to all those who look to Him with
faith, repentance and love. To such sinners the ministers of Christ, to the
end of the world, are authorised to say: "Your sins are forgiven--we
"clean" your leprosy."
Eighth: "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son,
that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.
"For God sent not His Son to condemn the world, but that the world, through
him, might be saved.
"He that believeth in him is not condemned: but he that believeth not, is
condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only
begotten Son of God.
"And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world and man
loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. For every
one that doeth evil, hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest
his deeds should be reproved.
"But he that doeth truth, cometh to the light, that his deeds may be
manifest, that they are wrought in God." (John iii, 16-21.)
In the religion of Rome, it is only through auricular confession that the
sinner can be reconciled to God; it is only after he has heard a most
detailed confession of all the thoughts, desires and actions of the guilty
one that he can tell him: "Thy sins are forgiven." But in the religion of
the Gospel, the reconciliation of the sinner with his God is absolutely and
entirely the work of Christ. That marvellous forgiveness is a free gift
offered not for any outward act of the sinner: nothing is required from him
but faith, repentance and love. These are marks by which the leprosy is
known to be cured and the sins forgiven. To all those who have these marks,
the ambassadors of Christ are authorized to say, "Your sins are forgiven,"
we "clean" you.
Ninth: "The publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his
eyes to heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying: God! be merciful to me a
sinner!
"I tell you, this man went down to his house, justified." (Luke xviii 13,
14.). Yes! justified! and without auricular confession!
Ministers and disciples of Christ, when you see the repenting sinner
smiting his breast and crying: "Oh, God! have mercy upon me a sinner!" shut
your ears to the deceptive words of Rome who tells you to force that
redeemed sinner to make to you a special confession of all his sins, to get
his pardon. But go to him and deliver the message of love, peace and mercy,
which you received from Christ: "Thy sins are forgiven! I "clean" thee!
Tenth: "And one of the malefactors which were hanged, railed on him,
saying: "If thou be Christ, save thyself and us.
"But the other, answering, rebuked him, saying: Doest not thou fear God,
seeing thou art in the same condemnation? and we indeed justly, but this
man hath done nothing amiss.
"And he said unto Jesus: Remember me, when thou art in thy Kingdom. And
Jesus said unto him: Verily, I say Unto thee: to-day, shalt thou be with me
in Paradise." (Luke xxii, 39-43.)
Yes, in the Paradise or Kingdom of Christ without auricular confession!
From Calvary, when his hands are nailed to the cross, and his blood is
poured out, Christ even then protests against the great imposture of
auricular confession. Jesus will be to the end of the world what he was
there on the cross: the sinner's friend; always ready to hear and pardon
those who invoke his name and trust in him.
Disciples of the gospel, wherever you hear the cry of the repenting sinner
to the crucified Saviour: "Remember me when thou comest to thy Kingdom," go
and give the assurance to that penitent and redeemed child of Adam that
"his sins are forgiven"--clean the leper.
Eleventh: "Let the wicked forsake his way and the unrighteous man his
thoughts: and let him return to the Lord; and he will have mercy upon him
and to our God, for He will abundantly pardon." (Isa. lv. 7. 8.)
"Wash you, and make you clean, put away the evils of your doings from
before mine eyes: cease to do evil, learn to do well; seek judgment,
relieve the oppressed; judge the fatherless, plead for the widow.
"Come now, and let us reason together, saith the Lord: though your sins be
as scarlet, they will be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson,
they shall be as wool." (Isa. i, 16-18.)
Here are the landmarks of the mercy of God, put by his own almighty hands!
Who will dare to remove them in order to put others in their place? Has
ever Christ touched those landmarks? Has he ever intimated that anything
but faith, repentance and love, with their blessed fruits, were required
from the sinners to secure his pardon? No--never.
Have the prophets of the Old Testament or the apostles of the New ever said
a word about "auricular confession" as a condition for pardon? No--never.
What does David say? "I confess my sins unto thee, and mine iniquity have I
not hid. I said, I will confess my transgression unto the Lord, and thou
forgavest the iniquity of my sin." (Psalm xxxii, 5.)
What does the Apostle John say? "If we say that we have fellowship with
Him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth.
"But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship
with one another, and the blood of Jesus Christ His son cleanseth us from
sin;
"If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not
in us.
"If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive our sins and to
CLEANSE us from all unrighteousness." (i. John i, 6-9.)
This is the language of the prophets and apostles. This is the language of
the Old and the New Testament. It is to God and Him alone that the sinner
is requested to confess his sins. It is from God and Him alone that he can
expect his pardon.
The apostle Paul writes fifteen epistles, in which he speaks of all the
duties imposed upon human conscience by the laws of God and the
prescriptions of the Gospel of Christ. A thousand times he speaks to
sinners and tells them how they may be reconciled to God. But does he say a
word about auricular confession? No, not one!
The apostles Peter, John, Jude address six letters to the different
churches--in which they state with the greatest detail what the different
classes of Christians have to do. But again, not a single word comes from
them about auricular confession.
St. James says, "confess your faults one to another." But this is so
evidently the repetition of what the Saviour had said about the way of
reconciliation between those who had offended one another, and it is so far
from the dogma of a secret confession to the priest, that the most zealous
supporters of auricular confession have not dared to mention that text in
favour of their modern invention.
But if we look in vain in the Old and New Testament for a word in favour of
auricular confession as a dogma, will it be possible to find that dogma in
the records of the first thousand years of Christianity? No! for the more
one studies the records of the Christian church during the first ten
centuries, the more he will be convinced that auricular confession is a
miserable imposture, of the darkest days of the world and the church.
We have the life of Paul, the hermit, of the third century, by one of the
early fathers of the church. But not a word is said in it of his confessing
his sins to any one, though a thousand things are said of him which are of
a far less interesting character.
So it is with the life of St. Mary, the Egyptian. The minute history of her
life, her public scandals, her conversion, long prayers and fastings in
solitude, the detailed history of her last days and of her death, all these
we have; but not a single word is said of her confessing to any one. It is
evident that she lived and died without ever having thought of going to
confess.
The deacon Pontius wrote also the life St. Cyprien, who lived in the third
century; but he does not say a word of his ever having gone to confession,
or having heard the confession of any one. More than that, we learn from
this reliable historian that Cyprien was excommunicated by the Pope of
Rome, called Stephen, and that he died without having ever asked from any
one absolution from that excommunication; a thing which has not seemingly
prevented him from going to Heaven, since the infallible Popes of Rome, who
succeeded Stephen, have assured us that he is a saint.
Gregory of Nyssa has given us the life of St. Gregory of Neo-Cæsarea, of
the 3rd century, and of St. Basil, of the 4th century. But neither speak of
their having gone to confess, or having heard the confession of any one. It
is thus evident that those two great and good men, with all the Christians
of their times, lived and died without ever knowing any thing about the
dogma of auricular confession.
We have the interesting life of St Ambrose, of the 4th century, by
Paulinus; and from that book it is as evident as two and two make four,
that St. Ambrose never went to confess.
The history of St Martin of Tours, of the 4th century by Severus Sulpicius
of the 5th century, is another monument left by antiquity to prove that
there was no dogma of auricular confession in those days; for St. Martin
has evidently lived and died without ever going to confess.
Pallas and Theodoret have left us the history of the life, sufferings and
death of St. Chrysostom, bishop of Constantinople, who died at the
beginning of the 5th century, and both are absolutely mute about that
dogma. No fact is more evident, by what they say, than that holy and
eloquent bishop lived and died also without ever thinking of going to
confess.
No man has ever more perfectly entered into the details of a Christian
life, when writing on that subject, than the learned and eloquent St
Jerome, of the 5th century. A great number of his admirable letters are
written to the priests of his day, or to some Christian ladies and virgins,
who had requested him to give them some good advices about the best way to
lead a Christian life. His letters, which form five volumes, are most
interesting monuments of the manners, habits, views, morality, practical
and dogmatical faith of the first centuries of the church; and they are a
most unanswerable evidence that auricular confession, as a dogma, had then
no existence, and is quite a modern invention. Would it be possible that
Jerome could have forgotten to give some advices or rules about auricular
confession, to the priests of his time who asked his counsel about the best
way to fulfil their ministerial duties, if it had been one of their duties
to hear the confessions of the people? But we challenge the most devoted
modern priest of Rome to find a single line in all the letters of St Jerome
in favour of auricular confession. In his admirable letter to the priest
Nepotianus, on the life of priests, vol. II, p. 203, when speaking of the
relations of priests with women, he says: "Solus cum sola, secreto et
absque arbitrio vel teste, non sedeas. Si familiarus est aliquid loquendum,
habet nutricem majorem domus, virginem, viduam, vel maritatam; non est tam
inhumana ut nullum præter te habeat cui se audeat credere."
"Never sit in secret, alone, in a retired place, with a female who is alone
with you. If she has any particular thing to tell you, let her take the
female attendant of the house, a young girl, a widow, or a married woman.
She can not be so ignorant of the rules of human life as to expect to have
you as the only one to whom she can trust those things."
It would be easy to cite a great number of other remarkable passages where
Jerome shows himself the most determined and implacable opponent of those
secret "tête-à-tête" between a priest and a female, which, under the
plausible pretext of mutual advice and spiritual consolation, are generally
nothing but bottomless pits of infamy and perdition for both. But this is
enough.
We have also the admirable life of St. Paulina, written by St. Jerome. And
though in it he gives us every imaginable detail of her life when young,
married and widow, though he tells us even how her bed was composed of the
simplest and rudest materials, he has not a word about her ever having gone
to confess. Jerome speaks of the acquaintances of St. Paulina and gives
their names; he enters into the minutest details of her long voyages, her
charities, her foundations of monasteries for men and women, her
temptations, human frailties, heroic virtues, her macerations and her holy
death: but he has not a word to say about the frequent or rare auricular
confessions of St. Paulina; not a word about her wisdom in the choice of a
prudent and holy (?) confessor.
He tells us that after her death, her body was carried to her grave on the
shoulders of bishops and priests, as a token of their profound respect for
the saint. But he never says that any of those priests sat there in a dark
corner with her, and forced her to reveal to their ears the secret history
of all the thoughts, desires, and human frailties of her long and eventful
life. Jerome is an unimpeachable witness that his saintly and noble friend
St. Paulina lived and died without having ever thought of going to confess.
Possidius has left us the interesting life of St. Augustine, of the fifth
century; and again it is in vain that we look for the place or the time
when that celebrated bishop of Hippo went to confess, or heard the secret
confessions of his people.
More than that, St. Augustine has written a most admirable book, called:
"Confessions," in which he gives us the history of his life. With that
marvellous book in hand, we follow him, step by step, wherever he goes; we
are the witnesses of what he does and thinks; we attend with him those
celebrated schools, where his faith and morality were so sadly wrecked; he
takes us with him into the garden where, wavering between heaven and hell,
bathed in tears, he goes under the fig-tree and cries, "Oh Lord! how long
will I remain in my iniquities!" Our soul thrills with emotions, with his
soul, when we hear, with him, the sweet and mysterious voice: "Tolle!
lege!" take and read. We run with him to the places where he had left his
gospel book; with a trembling hand, we open it, and we read: "Let us walk
honestly as in the day ... put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ..." (Rom. xiii,
13, 14.)
That incomparable book of Augustine makes us weep and shout with joy with
him; it initiates us into all, his most secret actions, to all his sorrows,
anxieties and joys, it reveals and unvails his whole life. It tells us
where he goes, with whom he sins, and with whom he praises God; it makes us
pray, sing and bless the Lord with him. Is it possible that Augustine could
have been to confess without telling us when, where and to whom he made
confession? Could he have received the absolution and pardon of his sins
from his confessor, without making us partakers of his joys, and requesting
us to bless that confessor with him.
But, it is in vain that you look in that book for a single word about
auricular confession. That book is an unimpeachable witness that neither
Augustine nor his saintly mother Monica, whom it mentions so often, lived
and died without ever having been to confess. That book may be called the
most crushing evidence to prove that, "the dogma of auricular confession"
is a modern imposture.
From the beginning to the end of that book, we see that Augustine believed
and said that God alone could forgive the sins of men, and that it was to
Him alone that men had to confess in order to be pardoned. If he writes his
confession, it is only that the world might know how God had been merciful
to him, and that they might help him to praise and bless the merciful
Heavenly Father. In the tenth book of his Confessions, chapter III,
Augustine protests against the idea that men could do anything to cure the
spiritual leper, or forgive the sins of their fellow-men; here is his
eloquent protest: "Quid mihi ergo est cum hominibus ut audiant confessiones
meas, quasi ipsi sanaturi sint languores meas? Curiosum genus ad
cognoscendam vitam alienam; desidiosum ad corrigendam."
"What have I to do with men that I might be obliged to confess my sins to
them, as if they were able to heal my infirmities? Oh Lord! that human race
is very fond of knowing the sins of their neighbors; but they are very
neglectful in correcting their own lies."
Before Augustine had built up that sublime and imperishable monument
against auricular confession, St. John Chrysostom had raised his eloquent
voice against it, in his homily on the 50th Psalm, where, speaking in the
name of the Church, he said: "We do not request you to go to confess your
sins to any of your fellow-men, but only to God!"
Nestorius, of the 4th century, the predecessor of John Chrysostom, had, by
a public defense, which the best Roman Catholic historians have had to
acknowledge, solemnly forbidden the practice of auricular confession. For,
just as there has always been thieves, drunkards and malefactors in the
world, so there has always been men and women who, under the pretext of
opening their minds to each other for mutual comfort and edification, were
giving themselves to every kind of iniquity and lust. The celebrated
Chrysostom was only giving the sanction of his authority to what his
predecessor had done when, thundering against the newly born monster, he
said to the Christians of his time, "We do not ask you to go and confess
your iniquities to a sinful man for pardon--but only to God." (Homily on
50th Psalm.)
Auricular confession originated with the early heretics, especially with
Marcion. Bellarmin speaks of it as something to be practiced. But let us
hear what the contemporary writers have to say on the question:
"Certain women were in the habit of going to the heretic Marcion to confess
their sins to him. But, as he was smitten with their beauty, and they loved
him also, they abandoned themselves to sin with him."
Listen now to what St. Basil, in his commentary on Ps. xxxvii, says of
confession:
"I have not to come before the world to make a confession with my lips. But
I close my eyes, and confess my sins in the secret of my heart. Before
thee, O God, I pour out my sighs, and thou alone art the witness. My groans
are within my soul. There is no need of many words to confess: sorrow and
regret are the best confession. Yes, the lamentations of the soul, which
thou art pleased to hear, are the best confession."
Chrysostom, in his homily: De pænitentia, vol. IV., col. 901, has the
following: "You need no witnesses of your confession. Secretly acknowledge
your sins, and let God alone hear you."
In his homily V., De incomprehensibili Dei naturâ, vol. I, he says:
"Therefore, I beseech you, always confess your sins to God! I in no way ask
you to confess them to me. To God alone should you expose the wounds of
your souls, and from him alone expect the cure. Go to him, then; and you
shall not be cast off, but healed. For, before you utter a single word, God
knows your prayer."
In his commentary on Heb. xii., hom. xxxi., vol. xii., p. 289, he further
says: "Let us not be content with calling ourselves sinners. But let us
examine and number our sins. And then, I do not tell you to go and confess
them, according to the caprice of some; but I will say to you, with the
prophet: "Confess your sins before God, acknowledge your iniquities at the
feet of your Judge; pray in your heart and your mind, if not with your
tongue, and you shall be pardoned."
In his homily on Ps. I., vol. V., p. 589, the same Chrysostom says:
"Confess you sins every day in prayer. Why should you hesitate to do so? I
do not tell you to go and confess to a man, sinner as you are, and who
might despise you if he knew your faults. But confess them to God, who can
forgive them to you."
In his admirable homily IV., De Lazaro, vol. I., p. 757, he explains: "Why,
tell me, should you be ashamed to confess your sins? Do we compel you to
reveal them to a man, who might, one day, throw them into your face? Are
you commanded to confess them to one of your equals, who could publish them
and ruin you? What we ask of you, is simply to show the sores of your soul
to your Lord and Master, who is also your friend, your guardian and
physician."
In a small work of Chrysostom's, intitled: "Catechesis ad illuminandos,"
vol. II., p. 210, we read these remarkable words: "What we should most
admire, is not that God forgives our sins, but that he does not disclose
them to any one, nor wishes us to do so. What he demands of us, is to
confess our transgressions to him alone to obtain pardon."
St. Augustine, in his beautiful homily on the 31st Ps., says: "I shall
confess my sins to God, and he will pardon all my iniquities. And such
confession is made not with the lips, but with the heart only. I had hardly
opened my mouth to confess my sins, when they were pardoned; for God had
already heard the voice of my heart."
In the edition of the Fathers by Migne, vol. 67, p. 614, 615, we read:
"About the year 390, the office of penitentiary was abolished in the
church, in consequence of a great scandal given by a woman who publicly
accused herself of having committed a crime against chastity with a
deacon."
The office of penitentiary was this: in every large city, a priest or
minister was specially appointed to preside over the church meetings where
the members who had committed public sins were obliged to confess them
publicly before the assembly, in order to be reinstated in the privileges
of their membership; and that minister had the charge of reading or
pronouncing the sentence of pardon granted by the church to the guilty
ones, before they could be admitted again to communion. This was perfectly
in accordance with what St. Paul had done with regard to the incestuous one
of Corinth, that scandalous sinner, who had cast obloquy on the Christian
name; but who, after confessing and weeping over his sins, before the
church, obtained his pardon--not from a priest in whose ears he had
whispered all the shocking details of his incestuous intercourse, but from
the whole church assembled. St. Paul gladly approves the Church of Corinth
in thus receiving again in their midst a wandering but repenting brother.
There is as much difference between such public confessions and auricular
confessions, as there is between heaven and hell, between God and his great
enemy, Satan.
Public confession, then, dates from the time of the apostles, and is still
practised in protestant churches of our day. But auricular confession was
unknown by the disciples of Christ; as it is rejected, to-day, with horror
by all the true followers of the Son of God.
Erasmus, one of the most learned Roman Catholics which opposed the
Reformation in the 16th century, so admirably begun by Luther and Calvin,
fearlessly and honestly makes the following declaration in his treaty: De
Pænitantia, Dis 5. "This institution of penance began rather of some
tradition of the Old or New Testament. But our divines, not advisedly
considering what the old doctors do say, are deceived: that which they say
of general and open confession, they wrest by and by to this secret and
privy kind of confession.
It is a public fact, which no learned Roman Catholic has ever denied, that
auricular confession became a dogma and obligatory practice of the church
only at the council of Lateran in the year 1215, under the Pope Innocent
III. Not a single trace of auricular confession, as a dogma, can be found
before that year.
Thus, it has taken more than twelve hundred years of efforts for Satan to
bring out that master-piece of his inventions to conquer the world and
destroy the souls of men.
Little by little, that imposture had crept into the world, just as the
shadows of a stormy night creep without any one being able to note the
moment when the first rays of light give way before the dark clouds. We
know very well when the sun was shining, we know when it was very dark all
over the world, but no one can tell positively when the first ray of light
faded away. So saith the Lord:
"The Kingdom of heaven is likened unto a man which sowed good seed in his
field.
"But while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat and
went his way.
"But when the blade was sprung up, and brought forth fruit, there appeared
the tares also.
"So the servants of the house-holder came and said unto him: Sir, dist not
thou sow good seed in the field? From whence then hath it tares?
"He said unto them: The enemy hath done this." (Mat. xiii, 24-28.)
Yes, the Good Master tells us that the enemy sowed those tares in his field
during the night--when men were sleeping.
But he does not tell us precisely the hour of the night when the enemy cast
the tares among the wheat.
If any one likes to know how fearfully dark was the night which covered the
"Kingdom," and how cruel, implacable and savage was the enemy who sowed the
tares, let him read the testimony of the most devoted and learned cardinal
whom Rome has ever had, Baronius, Annals, Anno 900:
"It is evident that one can scarcely believe what unworthy, base, execrable
and abominable things the holy Apostolical See, which is the pivot upon
which the whole Catholic Church revolves, was forced to endure, when
princes of the age, though Christians, arrogated to themselves the election
of the Roman Pontiffs. Alas, the shame! alas, the grief! What monsters,
horrible to behold, were then intruded on the Holy See! What evils ensued!
What tragedies they perpatrated! With what pollutions was this See, though
itself without spot, then stained! With what corruptions infected! _With
what filthiness defiled! And by these things blackened with perpetual
infamy!_ (Baronius, Annals, Anno 900.)
"Est plane, ut vix aliquis credat, immo, nec vix quidem sit crediturus,
nisi suis inspiciat ipse oculis, manibusque contractat, quam indigna,
quamque turpia, atque deformia, execranda, insuper et abominanda sit coacta
pati sacrosancta apostolica sedes, in cujus cardine universa Ecclesia
catholica vertitur, cum principes sæculi hujus, quantumlibet christiani,
hac tamen ex parte dicendi tyranni sævissimi, arrogaverunt sibi tirannice
electionem Romanorum pontificum. Quot tunc ab eis, proh pudor! proh dolor!
in eandem sedem, angelis reverandam, visu horrenda intrusa sunt monstra!
Quot ex eis oborta sunt mala, consummatæ tragediæ! Quibus tunc ipsam sine
maculâ et sine rugâ contigit aspergi sordibus, putoribus infici, quinati
spurcitiis, ex hisque perpetuâ infamiâ denigrari!"
* * * * *