« PredošláPokračovať »
penance. First, That for the most patres verba dirigebant ad genpart the holy fathers addressed tiles vel catechumenos, quos non themselves to the gentiles, or ca- de pænitentia sed de baptismo techumens, whom it was expedi- prius doceri oportebat. 2°. Alent to instruct in the first place tera ratio fuit aurea primorum concerning baptism and not pe- temporum felicitas, ita ut qui nance. Secondly, Another reason
suum semel dewas the golden felicity of the pri- derant, in innocentia per baptismitive times, so that those who had mum accepta pene omnes peronce given their names to Christ, severarent.3o. Huic alia ratio proxalmost all persevered in the inno- ima fuit, quod forte vererentur cence received by baptism. Third- patres ne remedii opportunitas ly, Another followed close upon incentivum peccati fieret: quod this, namely, that perhaps the holy quidem Tertullianus energicè exfathers feared lest the convenie ponit in libro de pænitentiâ. ence of the remedy should become an incentive to sin ; which, indeed, Tertullian forcibly insists upon
in his book on penance.
A Treatise on Penance, p. 28, Tractatus de Pænitentia, p. 28. by L. Æ. Delahogue.
Auct. L. Æ. Deluhogue.
Whether the absolution, which is
given in the sacrament of penance, truly and properly remits sins, or only declares them to be remitted.
An absolutio in sacramento
pænitentia data, tere et proprid peccata remittat, vel solummodo remissa declaret.
Respecting this controversy Circa præsentem controversiam there are three opinions.
triplex est sententia. The first is that of the hete- Prima heterodoxorum, &c. rodox, &c.
Secunda est magistri sentenThe second is that of the mas- tiarum (Petri Lombardi Pariter of opinions (Peter Lombard, siensis episcopi qui floruit sæcubishop of Paris, who flourished in lo 12), scilicet ). 4, dist. 18, the 12th century), in his book 4, principii instar supponens in dist. 18, who, supposing that pænitentibus requiri contritionem perfect contrition is required in perfectam, ut a sacerdote valide the penitents as a first principle in absolvantur, hinc deducit quod order that they may be validly sacerdotes peccata dimittunt vel absolved by the priests, thence retinent, dum dimissa a Deo vel concludes that the priests remit retenta fuisse, judicant. Idem or retain sins, when they adjudge sensere S. Bonaventura, Gabriel, them to have been remitted or Major, Alensis, aliique nec parci retained by God. St. Bonaven- nec intimi nominis theologi. ture, Gabriel, Major, Alensis, Inde duplex emergit dubium. and other theologians not a few, 1o. an Petri Lombardi sententia, nor of little note, have been of ab ea quam tenent heterodoxi sit the same opinion.
diversa. Et 29. an satis ab ista Hence arises a double
ques- differat ut anathemati Tridentino tion. 1st. Whether the opinion subtrahi possit. of Peter Lombard differs from Quod ad primum dubium specthat which is held by the heter- tat, immeriid prorsus novatores odox ? 2ndly. Whether it so dif. hâc scholasticorum opinione glofers that it can be exempted from riantur, quasi eadem cum sua the anathema of the council of foret. Namque isti cum Petro Trent?
Lombardo docent pænitentiam With respect to the first doubt, verum esse novæ legis sacramenthe innovators vainly boast of this tum, cujus minister non solum opinion of the scholastics, as if agat partes meri divinæ clemenit were the same as theirs. For tiæ præconis, sed etiam judicis, these teach with Peter Lombard qui audita confessione juridice that penance
is a true sacrament declaret peccata esse dimissa. 2o. of the new law, whose minister Agnoscunt contritionem quandoes not only officiate as the tumcumque perfectam, non deberald of the divine mercy, but
lere peccata nisi in ordine ad also of a judge, who having heard claves ecclesiæ traditas ; et 3o. the confession, juridically declares absolutionem producere secunthat sins are remitted. Secondly, dam gratiam, seu augmentum they acknowledge that contrition, gratia sanctificantis
.. although perfect, does not blot Fatendum tamen hanc opinioout sins except with reference to nem,
licet a novatorum errore the keys delivered to the church. insigniter discrepet, hand satis And 3rdly, that absolution pro- cum concilio Tridentino conduces a second grace, or an in
gruere, qua parte contendit absocrease of sanctifying grace.
lutionem non remittere culpam,
sed remissam declarare. Hinc It must be confessed, however, nunc plerique theologi eam ut that this opinion, although it ma- temerarium imo et erroneam rejiterially differs from the error of ciunt, cum Vasquezio de poenithe innovators, does not enough tentiâ quæ. 84, dubio 2o. Cum agree with the council of Trent, Suaresio, disput. 19, sect. 2. where it contends that absolution Cum Estio in 4, dist. 18, 3. Et does not remit the fault, but hanc partem amplexa est sacra declares that it is remitted. facultas Parisiensis, cum Hence most theologians at the 1638. censura notavit opus sub present day reject it as rash and nomine Claudii Seguenot. erroneous, with Vasquez in his Treatise on Penauce, qu. 84, doubt 2; with Suaresius, disput. 19, sect. 2; with Estius, in 4 dist.
18,53; and the boly faculty at Paris took this side in the year 1638, when it censured a work published in the name of Claudius Seguenot.
The Book of the Roman Catholic Church, by C. Butler, Esq. 1825.
P. 47. Controversy on Miracles.
Dr. Milner rejects in the wholesale, the miracles related in the Golden Legend of Jacobus de Voragine; those related in the “Speculum,” of Vincentius Belluacensis ; and those related in the saints' lives of the patrician Metaphiastes : no Roman Catholic gives credit to those which rest on Surius, or Monbritius. Dr. Lingard calls Osbert, the biographer of St. Dunstan, and the writer of his life, "an injudicious biographer, whose avile credulity collected and embellished every fable.” Dr. Lingard, also, while he asserts that there are many miracles in the Anglosaxon times, which it would require no small ingenuity to disprove, and incredulity to discredit, admits that there are also many, which must shrink from the frown of criticism ; some which may have been the effect of accident or imagination; some that are more calculated to excite the smile than the wonder of the hearers; and some, which, on whatever ground they were originally admitted, depend at the present day, on the distant testimony of writers, not remarkable for sagacity or discrimination.
INDULGENCES. The hours of the most blessed Horæ beatissimæ Virginis MaVirgin Mary according to the riæ ad legitimum Sarisburiensis prescribed ritual of the church of ecclesiæ ritum, cum quivdecim Salisbury, with fifteen of the orationibus beatæ Brigittæ, ac blessed Bridget's prayers, and multis aliis orationibus pulchermany other most beautiful prayers rimis et indulgentiis.-Parisiis, and indulgences.* -Printed at 1533. Paris, 1533.)
Hail, O most holy Mary, mo- Ave, sanctissima Maria, mater ther of God, queen of heaven, Dei, regina cæli, porta paradisi gate of paradise, mistress of the domina mundi, &c. world, &c.
Fol. 51.–Our holy father Sixtus, the 4th pope, hath granted to all them that devoutly say this prayer before the image of our lady, the sum of eleven thousand years of pardon.
If the authenticity of this work or of the extracts is called in question, I shall be happy to forward it for iuspection to any deputation.
Folio 60.—*These be the fifteen 00s, which the Holy Virgin Saint Brigitt was wont to say daily before the holy rod in St. Paul's church at Rome : whoso says this a whole year, he shall deliver fifteen souls out of purgatory of his next kindred, and convert other fifteen sin, ners to good life, and other fifteen righteous men of his kind shall persevere in good life. And what ye desire of God ye shall have it, if it be the salvation of your
soul. O Doinine Jesu Christe, &c. O Lord Jesus Christ, &c.
Folio 62.—To all them that before this imaget of pity devoutly say five Pater Nosters, and tive Aves and a Credo, piteously beholding these arms of Christ's passion, are granted thirty-two thousand seven hundred and fifty-five years of pardon, and Sixtus the 4th, Pope of Rome, hath made the fourth and fifth prayers, and hath doubled his foresaid pardon.
Folio 73.-These three prayers be written in the chapel of the holy cross in Rome, otherwise called Sacellum Sanctæ crucis Septeni Romanorum. Who that devoutly say them shall obtain ninety thousand years of pardon for deadly sins, granted of our holy father John 12, pope of Rome.
Folio 75.-Who that devoutly beholdeth these arms of our Lord Jesus Christ shall obtain six thousand years of pardon of our holy father Saint Peter, first pope of Rome, and of 30 other popes of Rome successors after him, and our holy father Pope John 22 hath granted unto all them very contrite and truly confessed that say these devout prayers following in the commemoration of the bitter passion of our Lord Jesus Christ, three thousand years of pardon for deadly sins, and other three thousand for venial sins, and say first a Pater Noster and Ave Maria.
Luther's character is impugned by Romanists upon four counts 1. Intemperance of language: the only palliation of which is the character of the times in which he lived, and the virulent abuse of his enemies. 2. His assent to the marriage of the Landgrave of Hesse to a second wife, his first wife being alive. This cannot be defended. Luther's consent was given, however, with the greatest reluctance ; and the best mode of parrying this attack, is to remind Romanists that Pope Clement 7th also offered Henry 8th a dispensation to
* Each of the fifteen prayers begins with the letter 0, O Lord, or O Jesus, &c. The prayers are unexceptionable. The indulgences are given in English, and are printed in red ink, tho prayors are in Latin.
+ An image of Christ.
In his essay
marry two wives. (See Burnet's Reformation, book 2.) 3. The breach of his vow, and his marriage with a nun. Luther wrote a treatise upon this subject, in which he contends that vows made to God ought to be observed; but that the monkish vows of celibacy, silence and mortification, constitute a false gospel, that such vows can only be made to the devil, and consequently that they are not binding. 4. His frequent conferences with the devil. Of these the greater part are fictions, and are extracted from an apocryphal work entitled “ Table Talk," which he never wrote. on private masses, he represents the devil as suggesting to him the arguments by which the wickedness of singing private masses is admirably exposed. But he does not pretend that Satan was personally visible; he only concludes that it was the devil who suggested these arguments to his mind, because they almost induced bim to despair of salvation. He says, “ But perhaps some will wonder that the devil should speak the truth;” and he adds that “ he did it for the same reason that he spoke the truth to Judas, when he reminded him that he had betrayed his Master,” viz. that he might despair and hang himself. At all events if it could be proved that Luther was 100 superstitions upon this head, was not this infirmity the natural result of his monkish devotions? Are not the lives of the saints filled with the most extraordinary narratives of the same kindi and, consequently, if Luther believed that the devil presented himself to him in a thousand shapes, may not this justly be ascribed to the disadvantages of his monastic education ? I have appended a few specimens of saintly rencontres with the devil, extracted from the “ Acta Sanctorum.” I need hardly observe that they should be reserved for defence, and that it would be a violation of good taste to introduce them wbeu not imperatively required.
From the Acts of the Saints, May, Acta Sanctorum Maii, tom. 6. tom. 6. Printed at Antwerp, 1688. Antverpiæ, 1688.
On the 26th of May.
Die Vigesima Sexta Maii.
From the Life of St. Philip Ne
rius, Founder of the Congre-
Anno Domini circiter millePhilip, who had many followers, simo quingentesimo quinquagejourneyed to the place where are simo quinto, cum iter Pbilippo the baths of Diocletian, he saw esset, quem multi sequebantur, standing upon a wall, which eum in locum, ubi extant thermæ, had fallen down from age, the quas Diocletianas appellamus; devil in the form of a man, and vidit, in quodam pariete vetustate when he observed him more collapso, dæmonem hominis speclosely, he beheld him at one cie ; quem cum attentius inspi