Supper of the Lord. For although absolution hath the promise of forgiveness of sin: yet by the express word of the New Testament it hath not this promise annexed and tied to the visible sign, which is imposition of hands. For this visible sign . . . is not expressly commanded in the New Testament to be used in Absolution, as the visible signs in Baptism and the Lord's Supper are: and therefore Absolution is no such sacrament as Baptism and the Communion are."

We note that the Homily allows Absolution, if administered with laying on of hands, to be a Sacrament in that general sense in which the Fathers use the word, and which would make the number of sacraments "not seven but seventeen," i.e. without any limit. After the witness we have brought from various writers on this point, it is impossible to believe that the writer of the Homily meant to imply that "those five commonly called sacraments" could properly claim the name.

But, if additional proof of this be needed, we may turn to the Homily for Whit-Sunday (Part II.). It is charged against the Bishops of Rome, "Neither do they order the Sacraments, or else the ecclesiastical keys, in such sort as (Christ) did first institute or ordain them.' Here" the sacraments are distinguished from "the keys": which, the Homily adds, were ordained "to excommunicate notorious sinners, and to absolve them which are truly penitent." Absolution is here not classed as a sacrament: and when these

matters are subsequently described in detail, Holy Communion and Baptism are expressly called sacraments, whereas "the keys" are not. See note on the Seven Sacraments, p. 92.

The mention of "laying on hands" is noteworthy. It proves that the men who drew up the Homilies were familiar with primitive practice, and sought to return to it. If Absolution was a sacrament in any sense whatever, the outward sign was the imposition of hands, a well known primitive ceremony, and not, as the Schoolmen taught, the acts of the penitent.1 In sound learning and historic instinct, as well as in loyalty to ancient use, our Reformers held the field.2

1 In the Lutheran Church of Norway, at the present day, the Absolution before Holy Communion is not given generally as with us, but individually at an earlier service, the priest laying his hand on the head of each communicant.

2 "Absolution hath the promise of forgiveness of sins." We cannot be charged with special pleading, if we say that this is true of Absolution in the sense in which it is true of Preaching, and every other such application of God's promises. The men who published these words held that the virtue of all absolution lay in the " ministry of God's Holy Word": and that whether applied publicly and generally in the pulpit, or privately and individually in the house, it was an application of the Comfortable Words" of Christ and His Apostles as a sovereign salve for wounded consciences. With these men the benefit of a ministerial Absolution, as distinct from the divine, was the effectual assurance that "He pardoneth and absolveth all them that truly repent and unfeignedly

66

Auricular Confession is thus dealt with in the Homily on Repentance. It states that besides confession to God, there is another kind which is necessary, of which St. James speaks (c. v). The purpose of such confession to man is (1) for brotherly reconciliation," and (2) for mutual prayer. The Homily goes on to say:

66

66

And whereas the adversaries go about to wrest this place, for to maintain their auricular confession withal, they are greatly deceived themselves, and do shamefully deceive others; for if this text ought to be understood of auricular confession, then the priests are as much bound to confess themselves unto the lay people, as the lay people are bound to confess themselves to them. And if to pray is to absolve,1 then the laity by this place hath as great authority to absolve the priests as the priests have to absolve the laity. This did Johannes Scotus, otherwise called Duns, well perceive, who upon this place writeth on this manner: Neither doth it seem unto me that James did give this commandment, or that he did set it forth as being received of Christ. . . . 2 And where that they do allege this saying of our Saviour Jesus Christ unto the leper, to prove auricular confession to stand on God's word, Go thy way and show thyself unto the priest (Matt. viii.); do they not see that the leper was cleansed from his leprosy, afore he was by Christ sent unto the priest, for to show himself unto him? By the

believe." Every kind of Absolution, in this sense, “hath the promise of forgiveness of sins."

1 "If to pray is to absolve," St. James is thus interpreted along the lines of primitive practice. As a comment on James v., I do not remember to have met with it elsewhere.

2 Duns Scotus, Sent. iv. Dist. 17, Qu. 1 (ix. 304 f.).

ENGLISH CHURCH FORMULARIES

same reason we must be cleansed from our spiritual leprosy I mean, our sins must be forgiven us-afore that we come to confession. What need we then to tell forth our sins into the ear of the priest, sith that they be already taken away? . . . It is most evident and plain that this auricular confession hath not the warrant of God's word, else it had not been lawful for Nectarius, Bishop of Constantinople, upon a just occasion to have put it down. For when anything ordained of God is by the lewdness of men abused, the abuse ought to be taken away, and the thing itself suffered to remain. Moreover, these are St. Augustine's words: What have I to do with men, that they should hear my confession, as though they were able to heal my diseases? A curious sort of men to know another man's life, and slothful to correct and amend their own. .1 And how can they tell when they hear me by myself, whether I tell the truth or not; sith no mortal man knoweth what is in man, but the spirit of man which is in him?' Augustine would not have written thus, if auricular confession had been used in his time. Being therefore not led with the conscience thereof, let us . . . with a true contrite heart, use that kind of confession that God doth command in His word; and then, doubtless, as He is faithful and righteous, He will forgive us our sins, and make us clean from all wicked

ness.

"I do not say, but that, if any do find themselves troubled in conscience, they may repair to their learned curate or pastor, or to some other godly or learned man, and show the trouble and doubt of their conscience to them, that they may receive at their hand the comfortable salve of God's word: but it is against the true Christian liberty, that any man should be bound to the numbering of his sins, as it hath been used heretofore in the time of blindness and ignorance."

1

66

Curiosum genus ad inquirendam vitam alienam, desidiosum ad corrigendam suam.”

QUESTIONS ON THE SACRAMENTS

Our appeal to the writings of the Reformers called forth an answer which was clear and distinct. We have now appealed to their action at this crisis of national history, and the same answer has been given. All is consistent.

ADDITIONAL NOTE. I

The MSS. containing the answers to "Questions on the Sacraments" (1540)

These answers are found in two groups of papers, one in the British Museum, Cleopatra MSS., the other in the Lambeth Library, sometimes called the Stillingfleet MSS. They are to be found in more or less complete form in Burnet, Hist. of Ref., I. ii. 314 f.; III. iii. 225 f; Strype, Hist. Abp. Cranmer, I. 417 f., 424 f., 428 ff.; Cranmer (P.S.), ii. 115. They are printed as follows: (1) Cranmer's answers signed by himself, with the following characteristic caution, "This is mine opinion and sentence at this present, which I do not temerariously define, and do remit the judgment thereof wholly unto your majesty." These are taken from Cleopatra MSS. E. 5, f. 53, and Lambeth MS. 1108, f. 69. Also printed in (2). (2) A collation of answers under each question given by Burnet from the Lambeth MS. 1108, and containing the opinions of fifteen divines, with reference to the "agreements or "disagree