Lr\ U tfe

rfo v*sCb

^

1

AN

EXAMINATION

THE THEORIES OF

ABSOLUTION AND CONFESSION

LATELY PROPOUNDED

UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD.

REV. ROBERT FRENCH LAURENCE, M.A.,
Ml
VICAE OP CHALGROVE, OXFORDSHIRE, AND LATE
STUDENT OP CHRIST CHURCH.

OXFORD : J. VINCENT ;
P. AND J. RIVINGTON, LONDON,
1847.

"... The controversy between parties in the Church ought to be confined
to this one point, whetlper certain'private opinions are, or are not consistent
with our formularies, not only in the letter but in the spirit, the controver
sialists assuming as their data that our Church was reformed on the right
principle, and that the expression of that principle, as contained in the
PrayeivBook, including the Articles and not excluding the Canons, is in
essentials Scriptural and primitive.''Dr. Hook's Lecture on the Three Reformations.

AN EXAMINATION, &c.
The entire absolution of the Penitent, through the Remis
sion of Post-Baptismal Sin, is so important to all who would
enter into eternal life, that it cannot be necessary for him,
who would come forward to defend the doctrine of the
Church, upon that subject, from assault, or to rescue it firom
mis-statement, to offer any apology for the attempt, even
though, in the course he might feel called upon to take, he
should find himself opposed to men of eminent talent and
station, and be compelled to speak unfavourably of their
writings; because the salvation of men is of more im
portance than the mere adulation of such persons, and the
voice of the Church is far to be preferred to that of any,
even the most learned, author. I do not, therefore, offer
any apology for taking in hand the Theories of Absolution
and Confession that have lately been propounded in Oxford,
though the argument has been conducted, upon the one
side, by Dr. Pusey, and, upon the other, by L)r. Jeune; for
I grieve to say that both appear to me to have opposed
themselves to the Church ; the former by exceeding, and
the latter by falling short of, her teaching.
It can hardly be necessary to state at length the argu
ments that have been advanced by the combatants in this
part of the great controversy of the day: it will be sufficient
to point out the writings to which I allude, to quote from
them the passages that bear upon my position, and to shew,
by comparing them with the authorized standards of our
Church, that I am right in speaking of their authors, as
B 2

I have ; and, perhaps, it may not be out of the way to de
clare my opinion, before I go into the questions we have
to consider, that much difficulty would be removed from the
settlement of the points which commonly form the subject of
dispute, if those who appear to have determined to remain
in the Church of England, would bow to the decision of the
Church they thus adopt, and would not set about the inva
lidation of her authority, by the introduction of interpreta
tions, whether of doctrine or discipline, other than have
been formally recognized by her. I would not say that no
man is to differ from the Church of England, though I re
gret that any do; but I cannot believe that a man can pro
perly remain in communion with a Church with which he
differs — much less enrich himself with the emoluments of
her offices.
The Sermous* which I shall now bring under the notice
of my readers, were preached before the University of Ox
ford, on the days mentioned in their respective titles : the
former in answer to the Sermon preached by Dr. Pusey on
his return to the pulpit at Christ Church, and afterwards
published by him in an enlarged form, and the latter partly
in continuation of the Sermon of the first of February," and
partly in rejoinder to Dr. Jeune.
' The Throne of Grace: Not the Confessional. A Sermon preached
before the University of Oxford, on Sunday, October 18, 1846. By Francis
Jeune, D.C.L., Master of Pembroke College, and Canon of Gloucester.
Oxford : published by J. Vincent. London : Hatchard aud Son, Piccadilly.
1846. Entire Absolution of the Penitent. Sermon II. Judge Thyself,
THAT thou be not Judoed OF THE LoRD. A Sermou preached before the
University, in the Cathedral Church of Christ, in Oxford, on the first Sun
day in Advent, 1846. By the Rev. E. B. Pusey, D.D., Regius Professor of
Hebrew, Canon of Christ Church, and late Fellow of Oriel College. Oxford:
John Henry Parker. London : F. and J. Rivington. 1846.
•> Entire Absolution of the Penitent. A Sermon mostly preached be
fore the University, in the Cathedral Church of Christ, in Oxford, on tho
fourth Sunday after Epiphany. By the Rer. E. B. Pusey, D.D., Regius
Professor of Hebrew, Canon of Christ Church, and late Fellow of Oriel Col
lege. Oxford, John Henry Parker ; F. and J. Rivggton, London. 1846.

s
Dr. Pusey had, in his former Sermon, declared, that
auricular confession, with the view to the entire absolution
of the penitent, was not only allowed by the Church of
England, but the proper method to pursue in order to se
cure the attainment of that much desired end ; and, further,
that deep need had arisen in the case of our youth, which
he recommended to be habituated to confession, first to
their parents, and then to priests. To the general ground
of this Dr. Jeune answers that we are justified by faith
only — that we have the promise of remission of sins with
out the intervention of any beside our Lord and Saviour
Jesus Christ, and that in so far as our Prayer-Book had
been quoted it had been misunderstood ; for, where it speaks
of absolution by the priest in the indicative form, it speaks
of the unbinding of Church censures, and nothing more;
whereupon Dr. Pusey rejoins, that something more than
the censures of the Church must be supposed to be remitted,
and in proof thereof repeats some portion of his former ar
guments, though in different words, and goes on to impress
upon his hearers the great advantage of confession to all
persons, declaring, at the saipe time, that it is only not
compulsory upon any : this, however, he does not think has
anything to do with the expediency of the practice, which
he, accordingly, most fully recognises. Up to a certain ex
tent, it appears to me that we may, and should, agree with
both authors : — to the full extent with neither. I do not
think the absolution spoken of in the Prayer-Book, in the
office for the Visitation of the Sick, or in the Exhortation to
-presence at Communion, can be looked upon as the mere
unbinding of Church censures ; neither do I think that the
absolution spoken of therein is necessary to all or generally
expedient, though I attach to it a meaning different from
that suggested by Dr. Jeune.
The most convenient way of raising the question fairly to
all parties will be, probably, to select some passages from

the Sermons to which I have alluded ; and, as Dr. Jeune
speaks very fully upon the nature of the Absolution men
tioned in the Prayer-Book ; I shall, in the first place, quote
his Sermon ; then contrast with it Dr. Pusey's an&wer ; and
finally go into the observations which the reading of these
works has suggested to my mind, and which I have taken
upon me to offer to the public. I am very well aware that
the task I have undertaken might have been better per
formed by some one else ; but no one has as yet come for
ward ; and, therefore, I shall not perhaps be wholly without
excuse for attempting it.
Dr. Jeune, then, says : — " There are three forms of ab
solution in our Liturgy. The first, a declaration of pardon ;
— The second, an intercessory prayer ; the third, consisting
partly of such a prayer, partly of a remission of sins in the
indicative mood. ' I absolve thee.' Of the two former we
need not speak particularly.
" For more than twelve centuries this last mode of ab
solving was unknown in the Western, as it is now in the
Eastern Church. It was only after the Lateran decree of
the year 1215 had rendered auricular confession obligatory
upon all the members of the Western Church, that it was
used. Opposed at the first, it obtained general favour
when a belief of the necessity and efficacy, of what was
called the sacrament of penance, became more firmly rooted
in the minds of the people. In the course of sixty years it
superseded all other modes of remission ; and now it is re
presented as the formal, or, in more usual language, as the
essential, part of the sacrament ; so that sin is remitted by
' Ego absolve te,' as bread is transubstantiated by ' Hoc
est enim corpus meum.' It is somewhat surprising that a
form so recent, and apparently so repugnant to the princi
ples of our Church should have been retained.
" But observe, that it is not to be used unless the peni
tent humbly and heartily desire it ; and unless he have

made a special confession of his sins. To such a confessioiTr
he is to be moved only, * if he feel his conscience troubled
with some weighty matter.' If our Church regarded abso
lution and confession as the provision made by Grod, for the
pardon of sin, and the ' very remedy' for moral evil ; or even,
if she thought them conducive to those great ends ; surely,
she could not, without a total dereliction of her duty, re
frain from enforcing them, or, at least, from urging them
most earnestly, on all her children, and on every possible
occasion. " Why, then, has she retained the Romish form ! She
has not done so without reason ; because she has the power
to loose or to bind, to remit or retain sin, as fully as Church
ever had. But that power, as she herself rightly teaches,
is when any have offended their brother's mind with some
notable crime, and banished themselves from the fellowship
and body of Christ, to eject them, if need be ; or to recon
cile and restore them to it. And the minister represents,
either individual Christians whom a dying brother would
fain appease, for the wrong which he may have inflicted on
them ; or the Church itself, whose censures he has virtually,
or formally, incurred. The former, or precatory, part of
the absolution may, however, well be thought to relate to
sins against God. The authentic account which we have
of the sense of our Church in this matter, illustrates the
prayer which follows the ministerial act. It is, on the one
hand, that ' God would continue the sick member in the
imity of the Church,' and, on the other hand, it runs thus,
' that thou wouldst not impute unto him his former sins,
forasmuch as he putteth his trust only in thy mercy.' The
revisers of our Liturgy probably thought that,having guarded
the Church against misconstruction, by their rejection of all
besides that was suspicious, by the whole tenor of her
Liturgy, and by the express teaching of her Homilies, they
could safely keep a form, the rejection of which would, at

that time, have been construed into a surrender of the rights
and duties of a Church. It is no valid objection that in
practice none among us are shut out from communion, ex
cept on individual responsibility ; and that, therefore, there
can be no question here of restoration to it, or freeing from
censures. Our Reformers hoped and believed that public
discipline would be established among us ; and, therefore,
provided for the case, so common in the early Church, of a
man falling mortally sick when under penance, whom it
was, therefore, necessary to absolve by a summary process.
Our Canons are full of stringent legislation. If they had
any hold of the consciences of the people, as they, doubtlessi,
were intended to have, the need of clinical absolution would
occur every day. Surely, the Church did not acquire new
powers in the thirteenth century ; and she can effect no
more by the new, than she can by the older forms of re
mission of sins ; or, indeed, without any form at all, or by
mere imposition of hands, as in early times.
" If^ however, you conceive that the words ' I absolve
thee,' refer also to the pardon of sins as committed against
God, because you hold that, according to Jerome's illustra
tion, as the priest, under the law, was said to cleanse or to
pollute the leper, because he judged that God had cleansed
him, or afflicted him with disease ; or, as the scribes might
have been said to open the kingdom of heaven, if they had
not taken away the key of knowledge ; so, the minister of
Christ may be said to remit sins as against God, because,
by the use of that key, he is qualified to judge of a man's
spiritual state, and, by his judgment, to give comfort and
assurance to the contrite but doubting heart ; you have in
favour of your view, many ancient divines, and many of
our own theologians ; and you attribute to the priest no
thing but what is involved in his office, as a minister of re
conciliation. But, then, you hold that he remits only what
has been already remitted ; though, as relates to sins

against His Church, it may be said that the act of God
follows the act of His servants, when they do not err.
Permit me, however, to state, that it does not appear to
me, that the power to remit sins, given by the Lord to His
apostles, and committed to us when we were ordained, is a
mere power of declaring forgiveness ; — it is certainly abso
lute in its terms ; — and, being such, relates, I would say,
solely, to ecclesiastical discipline. Our great Hooker ap
pears in this, as in most cases, to arrive at a sound conclu
sion. ' Concerning the divine mysteries' he says, ' as the
power of the Church did bind and restrain from access to
them, — so upon our apparent repentance it only looseth the
chains wherewith we were tied. The further we wade, the
better doth it still appear, that the priest doth never in ab
solution, no not so much as by way of service and ministry,
take away the uncleanness or remove the punishment of
sin.' " Such considerations as we have urged, no plea of expe
diency can countervail. But, even on this ground, we do
no fear to meet our opponents. We hold, that experience
shews, independently of Scripture and reason, that sacer
dotal absolution, and auricular confession are not of God."°
In answer to this Dr. Pusey says : —
" Norj again, can It be said, that, in her meaning, the
solemn words 'by His Authority committed unto me, I
absolve thee from all thy sins in the name of the Father
and of the Son and of the Holt Ghost,' relate to the re
moval of censures of the Church only. On the contrary,
the portion of the older form,* which rather relates to those
censures, is omitted, and that part only is retained which
directly relates to the remission of sins. Again, the sins
which we are bid to urge men to confess, are sins by which
c Jeune'a Sermon, pp. 64 — 71.
d "Et sacramentis ecclesiae te restituo.' See Sarum Manual in Mr.
Palmer's Antiq. of Eng. Rit. ii. 226."

10
the penitent's conscience is troubled, sins known to himself
and to God only, and these are no objects of the censure of
the Church. They are sins, which the Priest knows not of,
whereas a Priest could hardly be ignorant, whether one,
committed to his charge, had fallen under the public cen
sures of the Church or no. Nor, again, has the Church any
where given to the Priest the power of removing her cen
sures, in cases of ordinary sickness.
" But, In truth, the doctrine of the Church herein is very
clear and explicit. She distinctly says in her Homily,
•Absolution hath the promise of forgiveness of sins.' At
our Ordination as Priests, she repeated to each of us our
Lord's words, ' Whose sins thou dost forgive, they are for
given.' Upon the special confession of the sick, she bids
us absolve him ; and the words of Absolution contain a re
hearsal of the authority through which we do it. ' By His
Authority committed unto me, I absolve thee from all thy
sins' in the Name of the All-Holy Trinity, in Whose Name
we received our commission. She speaks of ' the benefit of
Absolution,' as distinct from ' ghostly advice and counsel,'
both being needed for the penitent ; she retains in her Or
dinations, and Absolution of the sick, the ancient words.
What had this been but hypocrisy and double dealing, had
she not meant it in the same sense as of old ? What un
reality and mockery were it of the penitent's hopes, what
ashes for bread, nay rather a scorpion, what waste of pre
cious moments on which eternity may hang, to move the
sick to confess his sins, then, in solemn words, which sinful
men may well tremble to use, to ' absolve him,' if truly
penitent, ' from all his sins,' if this solemn act is not of
value to his soul, or relates only to Church censures, under
which these secret sins do not fall. There is no middle
way. Either the Church speaks truly wherein she says
' our Lord Jesus Christ hath left power with His Church
to absolve all sinners who truly repent and believe In Him,'

n
or those her most solemn acts of Ordination and Absolution
would be, (as those without her have alleged,) year by year
and day by day, accumulated blasphemy. Of her own
meaning there can be no doubt, that deferring as she does
throughout to ' the Primitive Church which,' she says, ' is
especially to be followed as most uncorrupt and pure,' she,
using its language, doth so in its meaning also, and asserts
her power of absolution in the same sense as he whom she
calls «the holy father,' 'the holy Martyr of God, St. Cy
prian,' who from our Lord's own words, thus infers, ' The
power then of remitting sins was given to the Apostles and
to the Churches which they, sent by Christ, established,
and to the Bishops who succeeded to them by vicarious
ordination ;' or in briefer words and yet earlier times, by
St. Cyprian's master, ' Confession shall quench to them the
fires of hell.'
" We may then (whether priests or penitents or both in
one) have full comfort that the Church of England has
denied or abridged nothing of that ' ministry of reconcili
ation' which God has committed to His Church. Not to
constrain Confession, is not to deny it ; to leave it to the
penitent's choice, is not to refuse it, if chosen ; we are not
set free one way, to be limited in the other ; freed from
the necessity of confession, to be denied, if we crave it, the
comforts of special absolution — a freedom more like that
denounced by the prophet, ' Behold, I proclaim a liberty
for you, saith the Lord, to the sword, to the pestilence, to
the famine,' than to that 'liberty wherewith Christ has
made us free.' The Church leaves us free, yet fails not to
remind us of the responsibilities which that very freedom
entails upon us. A reverent, tender, mind may well pause,
ere he attempt to abridge, either way, that freedom, or call in
question that use of the keys, which as it hath never been
laid aside, but rather advocated at all times by Bishops,
and Divines of note, and recognised by our Canons,

12
so now has it been and is resorted to by thousands in these
later years, not exhorted thereto by man, but impelled and
constrained by God's voice within the conscience, to seek
therein, as they have found, pardon, and grace, and peac6.
Rather we may well implore persons, in the Name of ' the
God of peace,' herein to follow the charitable counsel of our
first English Liturgy, ' requiring such as shall be satisfied
with a general confession not to be offended with them that
do use, to their further satisfying, the auricular and secret
confession to the priest, nor those also which think needful
or convenient, for the quietness of their own consciences
particularly to open their sins to the priest, to be offended
with them that are satisfied with their humble confession
to God, and the general confession to the Church, but in all
things to follow and keep the rule of charity, and every one
to be satisfied with his own conscience, not judging other
men's minds or consciences, whereas he hath no warrant of
God's word to the same.' Would that in these days of
trouble and sorrow, we could more and more lay to heart
this loving counsel, 'judging nothing before the time,'
'judging not Another's servant,' but each labouring, with
what wisdom God gives to each, to save some, with him
self, out of a perishing world !"^
No two passages can be more diametrically opposite than
those which I have now presented to my readers : which
of the two is nearest the truth Is the question we have to
solve ; and to the solution of it I will now address myself.
We have first to consider the dictum of Dr. Jeune, and
then that of Dr. Pusey.
Dr. Jeune says that the Absolution pronounced is the
loosing of men from the censures of the Church, and the
restoring and reconciling them to It. How does this agree
with the Rubrics and wording of the Visitation Service I 
" Pusey's Second Sermon, pp. 11  16.

13
how with the wording of the exhortation calling upon the
members of the Church to present themselves at the Lord's
Table ? Let ua, in the first place, examine the Kubrlcs and
wording of the Visitation Service ; let us see how far they
agree with Dr. Jeune. The Rubric which introduces con
fession to our notice stands thus —
" Here shall the sick person be moved to make a special
confession of his sins, if he feel his conscience troubled with
any weighty matter. After which confession, the Priest
shall absolve him (If he humbly and heartily desire it) after
this sort."^
He is to be moved, not generally indeed, but under
special circumstances, to make a special confession of his
sins ; he is to be moved to make that confession, if his
conscience be troubled with any weighty matter. We do not
hear one word about the censures of the Church, but of
sins, sins that press upon the sick man's conscience ; and
it Is for relief from the weight produced by them that our
ministers are to ask him to confess. In order that they may
be enabled properly to offer him God's pardon. If it had
been the censures of the Church that we had to consider
when the Rubric talked of sins, and no more, why were not
those censures mentioned? Nor is it possible to suppose
that such an idea would be entertained with anything like
consistency, for the censures of the Church are known, and
need no confession.
This has been urged by Dr. Pusey with great success ;
for though there be cases In which persons are said to be
excommunicated ipso facto, lawyers hold that that ex
pression is not to be taken In its fullest extent. Wheatly,
in speaking of the cases in which ministers are required to
refuse burial, argues, with regard to excommunicates, that
such persons must be convicted first, and, that, until they
f Visitation Service.

14
be excommunicated, they are not to be regarded as ex
communicated ; and says, that the difference between what
canonists call consfitutio sententice latce and consfitutio sen-
tentice ferendw consists in this, that the sententia lata arises
immediately out of the conviction without any further sen
tence than the declaration that the person convicted is
excommunicate, and has been liable to excommunication
from such a time, whereas the sententia ferenda implies
that solemn sentence of excommunication must be pro
nounced in a distinct form.s
Now, if this argument be worth anything at all, it
amounts to this, that persons, however liable to the censures
of the Church, do not incur the penalties denounced against
them, until they have been formally convicted; and if,
until then, they do not incur these penalties, they do not,
until then, require absolution in the sense in which Dr.
Jeune uses that word. But the formal conviction of every
man must at least be supposed to be known to his minister ;
and, therefore, offences against the Church cannot be what
he is required to confess. If, however, we would take up
the contrary supposition, and say that a man, by the very
commission of crime, falls at once under the censure of
the Church, without any necessity at all for a legal con
viction, we must at least ask, whether, or not, the wording
of the Rubric will bear the construction contended for
by Dr. Jeune. The sick man is to confess, not in every
case, but only when his conscience is weighed down by
some weighty matter. Which is worst, the indignation
of God, or the censure of man ? and which Is most likely to
prey upon a man's spirits 2 Surely It cannot be necessary
to say, — the former. The indignation of Him who has
power to destroy both body and soul in hell is the weighty
matter, and it is to prepare men to seek their pardon with
' See Wheatly on Common Prayer, pp. 460  461,

15
God, that our ministers are to call upon them to confess.
At all events, it is not easy to conceive why the Rubric
should speak of sins, conscience, and weighty matter, when
it would have been easier to have said, ' to confess, if he
had broken through the laws of the Church, that he might
be forgiven.'
Again, the words of the Absolution, pronounced by the
priest, forbid us to imagine that it ia to the mere censures
of the Church that the words, used in the Service for the
Visitation of the Sick, are addressed. "I absolve thee from
all thy sins " cannot, consistently with the rules of logic,
be interpreted to mean "I absolve thee only from some."
But, perhaps the exhortation to persons calling upon them
to present themselves at the Lord's Table, may be more
favourable to this hypothesis; and, therefore, I will turn
to it.
After speaking of the danger we incur by presuming to
receive the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Our Lord
unworthily, the Exhortation proceeds to enforce the neces
sity of examination.
" The way and means thereto is : First to examine your
lives and conversations by the rule of God's command
ments ; and whereinsoever ye shall perceive yourselves to
have offended, either by will, word, or deed, there to
bewail your own sinfulness, and to confess yourselves to
Almighty God, with full purpose of amendment of life.
And if ye shall perceive your offences to be such as are not
only against God, but also against your neighbours ; then
ye shall reconcile yourselves unto them ; being ready to
make restitution and satisfaction, according to the utter
most of your powers, for all injuries and wrongs done by
you to any other; and being likewise ready to forgive
others that have offended you, as ye would have forgive
ness of your offences at God's hand : for otherwise the re
ceiving of the Holy Communion doth nothing else but

16
increase your damnation. Therefore if any of you be a
blasphemer of God, an hinderer or slanderer of his Word,
an adulterer, or be in malice, or envy, or in any other grievous
crime, repent you of your sins, or else come not to that
holy Table ; lest, after the taking of that Holy Sacrament,
the devil enter into you, as he entered into Judas, and fill
you full of all iniquities, and bring you to destruction both
of body and soul.'"'
Now it must be plain to every one that we are called
upon to confess to God, if we have offended "either
by will, word, or deed ;" and, if our offences should be such
as are not only against God (so that in the first part the
direct offences against God were alone alluded to) but
against our neighbours, we must seek to be reconciled to
them ; " for, otherwise, the receiving of the Holy Com
munion doth nothing else but increase our damnation,"
The word " damnation," I am aware, is interpreted, upon
good authority, to mean the condemnation of the wicked
in this world, as St. Paul says, " for this cause many are
weak and sickly among you and many sleep," immediately
after he had said " he that eateth and drinketh unworthily,
eatetli and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning
the Lord's body." ' But, even with that limitation of the
word, it is impossible not to see that the offences which
communicants are to examine, are those which are directly
or indirectly against God ; which are done either in dis
honour of Him, or to the prejudice of our neighbours ; and
that the mere infringements of the discipline of the Church,
however serious those infringements may be, are not even
alluded to.
The concluding words of this exhortation, which in
troduce the directions for confession to the priest, and treat
of absolution, put the matter out of all doubt.
l" Exhortation in Communion Service. 1 1 Cor. xi. 29...J30.

17
" And because it is requisite, that no man should come
to the Holy Communion, but with a full trust In God's
mercy, and with a quiet conscience ; therefore if there be
any of you, who by this means cannot quiet his own
conscience herein, but requireth further comfort or counsel,
let him come to me, or to some other discreet and learned
Minister of God's Word, and open his grief; that by the
ministry of God's holy Word he may receive the benefit of
absolution, together with ghostly counsel and advice, to
the quieting of his conscience, and avoiding of all scruple
and doubtfulness.'"'
What is it that we are told here, but that those, who
cannot quiet their own consciences, should come and open
their griefs to their own, or to some other discreet and
learned Minister of God's Word ? And as to what are
they to quiet them, but as to those sins which before had
been alluded to — the sins against God 1 The words allude
to something which had gone before. — " If there je any of
you who by this means, cannot quiet his own conscience
herein" — no other sins had been mentioned but the sins
against God. Surely then they must be the sins alluded
to, and none other.
But, if this be not enough, what shall we say of the
words " God:s mercy f It is, that we may come to the
Holy Communion with a frill trust in God's Mercy, that
we are directed, in case of need, to come to our Ministers ;
we have no 'right to read the " Church's Mercy" for that.
Nor would it be reasonable to talk of " opening our griefs"
to our Ministers, " that, by the ministry of God's holy
word" we might "receive the benefit of absolution to
gether with ghostly counsel and advice, to the quieting of
our conscience and avoiding of all scruple and doubtful
ness, if it were only, to be absolved from the censures of
k Exhortation in Communion Service. 0

18
the Church, that we were invited. The ministry of God^s
holy word must, surely, mean something more than the
ministration of the forgiveness of the Church : the Church
could remove her censures without that. It is something
connected with sin, in the proper sense of that term, that
requires the ministration alluded to ; it is no mere offence
against the laws of the Church that requires the application
of such machinery.
Dr. Jeune appears to have been led into the adoption of
the theory I have just been commenting on, by the indi
cative form of the Absolution in the Service for the Visitation
of the Sick, and by the comparative lateness of the intro-
Tductlon of that form into the services of the Church, He
says, "it is certainly absolute in its terms," and thence
concludes it must relate " solely to ecclesiastical discipline,"
But not only is it the case that ecclesiastical discipline was
more stringent in earlier times than afterwards, and so, if
this form were necessary for the removal of those censures,
it would have been found earlier, but it is not by any
means necessary that absolute terms should convey un
limited intentions, or requisite for the defence of the
Church from the imputation of claiming unauthorized
powers, to resort to the peculiar interpretation contended
for; for, although the Church changed her language in
the thirteenth century, she may not have changed her
doctrine, although the form then introduced appears to
convey somewhat more than those that had been previously
in use. At all events we have a strong instance of the use
of absolute terms with a limited intention in the service of
the Church at the present day, and it may, not improbably,
serve to help us out of the difficulty presented by the words
in the Office for the Visitation of the Sick,
Every one who has read the Services for the Public Bap
tism of Infants, for the admission of children into the
Church who have previously been baptized at home, and

19
for the Baptism of Persons of Riper Years, knows that the
word " regenerate" occurs very often, and that in all of
them an almost perfect identity of expression prevails
with respect to the regeneration implied. In the Ser
vice for the Public Baptism of Infants the words are,
" This child is regenerate ;" in that for admission to the
Church of children previously baptized, the words are,
" This child is by baptism regenerate ;" and In that for adult
baptism, the words are, " These persons are regenerate;" but
there is by no means an identity of signification, though
these expressions vary but little In form. In the services
for the baptism and admission of Infants the words are un
limited and the regeneration implied absolute, not con
ditional as contended by Mr. Close and those that have
been termed Hypothetical-Regeneratists ; but in the case
of adults, though the terms are equally strong, the con
clusion cannot be the same consistently with the wording
of the Service and Rubrics. The expression in that Service
is founded on the supposition that the persons baptized
have answered sincerely to the questions put to them in
the Service, and in the Examination previously held ; and
it is obvious that the most discreet minister may be de-;
ceived, and so the words " these persons are regenerate,"!
become inapplicable as expositors of their real state ; unless
the successors of the Apostles in the present day can lay
claim to the power of discerning spirits ; which I am not
inclined to concede. The Rubrics of the Service, to which
I am now alluding, run as follows : — " When any such
persons, as are of riper years, are to be baptized, timely
notice shall be given to the Bishop, or whom he shall ap
point for that purpose, a week before at the least, by the
parents, or some other discreet persons ; that so due care
may be taken for their examination, whether they be suffi
ciently jnstructed^ In the principles of the Christian Re
ligion ; and that they may IBe exhorted to prepare them-
c2

20
selves with prayers and fasting for the receiving of this
Holy Sacrament. And, iffhey shall be found fit, then the
Godfathers and Godmothers (the people being assembled
upon the Sunday or Holy-day appointed) shall be ready to
present them at the font," &c. Adults are not then ad
missible to baptism unless they have been previously pre
pared, and after due examination, are supposed to_be_fitj_
the service is applicable to them only in such supposition ;
it is upon the presumption of that fitness that the Priest
says they are regenerate. And this view is fully borne
out by the wording of the Service itself, for in the Exhorta.-
tion we find the priest speaking in a somewhat reserved
manner. "Doubt ye not, therefore, but earnestly believe,
that he (that Is the Lord our God) will favourably receive
these present persons truly repenting and coming unto him
by faith; that he will grant them remission of their sins,
and bestow upon them the Holy Ghost ; that he will give
them the blessing of eternal life, and make them partakers
of his everlasting kingdom." Here the blessings spoken of
are indeed definite ; but they are not unconditionally pro
mised : they are dependant upon the^^itljjand repentance
of the candidates for baptism, and, as it appears to me, can
only be expected if their faith and repentance be sincere.
So again when the priest comes to baptize them, if the
candidates for baptism do not sincerely renounce the devil
and all his works, do not stedfastly believe the articles of
the Christian faith, do not sincerely desire to be baptized,
nor purpose obediently to keep God's holy will and com
mandments, for questions to that effect are put to them
immediately before the administration of that sacrament, I
do not think, although the words " these persons are
regenerate " are used after Its administration, and they be
absolute in form, that an unlimited intention can be attri
buted to them, so as to allow us to infer from them that
such persons are in all cases recipients of the blessings im-

21
plied in the expression used. I believe that, although in
the baptism of infants the words " this child is regenerate"
convey the assurance that the blessing is, at the time of
baptism, actually conferred upon every child that is brought
to the font, the words "these persons are regenerate"
in the Service for Adult Baptism, are not equivalent in
meaning, because they are limited by the circumstances
under which the service is performed, and by the language
with which they are connected. And this conditional use
of absolute terms leads me to think, that the words " I
absolve thee from all thy sins," In the Service for the Visi
tation of the Sick, may, not Improbably, be used under some
such limitation. I shall endeavour hereafter to prove that
they are not used in an unlimited sense ; but the business'
I have taken upon me now, is only to shew, that, though
they be absolute in form, they will not necessarily justify
Dr. Jeune's inference ; and this, I believe, I have performed
by the citation of a parallel passage from another portion
of the services of the Church, which may not be considered
an inappropriate exponent of her occasional practice.
Dr. Jeune, too, appears to me to depend rather too
much upon the word "continue" In the prayer, which
immediately follows the Absolution in the Service for the
Visitation of the Sick. The word "continue" does not
necessarily pre-suppose restoration, nor, when connected
with " former sins," as it Is In that prayer, are we obliged
to suppose, that those sins must refer to offences against
Church discipline, the censures for which have now been
removed ; for we may very properly pray that men may
be continued in the Unity of the Church, who have not
been exposed to the censure of the Church, and the sins
alluded to in the words " former sins" may be of a much
more important nature than the offences mentioned. In
deed it is impossible to read the whole of the prayer, from
which the words under consideration are taken, without

22
seeing that it is not to any mere removal of Church cen
sures that it alludes, and that it cannot, without consider
able violence, be made to bear any such meaning. The
prayer runs as follows : — " 0 most merciful God, who,
according to the multitude of thy mercies, dost so put
away the sins of those who truly repent, that thou remem-
berest them no more ; open thine eye of mercy upon this
thy servant, who most earnestly desireth pardon and for
giveness. Renew In him, most loving Father, whatsoever
hath been decayed by the fraud and malice of the devil,
or by his own carnal will and frailness; preserve and
continue this sick member in the unity of the Church;
consider his contrition, accept his tears, assuage his pain,
as shall seem to thee most expedient for him. And for
asmuch as he putteth his full trust only in thy mercy,
impute not unto him his former sins, but strengthen him
with thy blessed Spirit ; and, when thou art pleased to take
him hence, take him unto thy favour, through the merits
of thy most dearly beloved Son Jesus Christ our Lord."'
This prayer is not compatible with the idea that the
Absolution, which had just preceded was addressed merely
to the loosing of the censures of the Church ; for It speaks
of the renewal of those who had driven God's Holy Spirit
away by their sins, of God's mercy being showered down
upon them on account of their repentance, and of their
being brought through his assisting grace finally to heaven.
Now I am not about to say, that every one, who remains
in the Church, will, on that account, be necessarily saved
hereafter ; for the Church holds that, until we are saved,
we may be lost ; but restoration to the favour of God upon
repentance after the commission of sin Is the privilege of
those that are baptized, and remain in the Church, and the
restoration to churchmanship of those who have fallen
under censure, Is in itself a guarantee of the return of those
' Visitation Service.

23
assisting powers which Are alluded to in the prayer; so
that, if the Priest have absolved the penitent from Church
censures, he has restored to him the assistances in question,
and it would hardly appear reasonable that he should pray
for them. But, if we suppose the Absolution that has
preceded to be connected with the apprehension produced
by sin, and limit the intention of the absolute terms in
which it is expressed, as has already been hinted at, the
Absolution and Prayer become apposite to the case of the
penitent, and are productive of the fullest comfort to him.
If, however, it be argued that the restoration to the
Church is not complete without the impetration of God's
blessing upon the act of [the Priest, then I ask why are
our thoughts carried away from the present scene, and
made to rest In heaven, or upon ourselves as unworthy of
God's favour, to the total exclusion of all mention of the
Church, to which, according to that hypothesis, the peni
tent was about to be restored ? I do not then think that
we can symbolize with Dr. Jeune, and say that Church
censures are all that we have to think of, when we direct
our attention to the Absolution in the Visitation of the
Sick. It may be for me presently to state my own views
as to the meaning of that absolution; but my design
requires that I should examine other writings than that
which has now been surveyed ; and my readers will pardon
my bringing them first under notice.
I come now to Dr. Pusey ; and I propose to examine
chiefly the passage I have already quoted, though I shall
not restrict myself to observations upon it, but shall exercise
my right of illustrating my argument from any passages
either of the Sermon from which it is quoted, or from the
previous one on the same subject. The passage, however,
that has already been given, presents us with a fair view of
the opinions of the learned author ; and, therefore, little in
the way of addition may be necessary. Of the first two

2*
paragraphs quoted I need not now speak particukrfy : it
was necessary to produce them, to place the whole question
before my readers ; but they are chiefly on the point of
which I have now completed the examination, so that I
should be only going over old ground again were I to press
their discussion." Dr. Pusey, in those paragraphs, connects
the absolution with our sins against God, and not with our
offences against the Church, and that is exactly what I have
endeavoured to do : it is to the last paragraph of the pasf
sage, quoted from his Sermon, that I must beg the atten
tion of my readers ; and, in it, to that portion of it that
runs as follows : —
"Not ta constrain confession, is not to deny it ; to leave
it to the penitent's choice is not to reftise it, if chosen ; w©
are not set free in one way to be limited in the other; freed
from the necessity of confession, to be denied, if we crave
it, the comforts of special absolution — a freedon> more like
that denounced by the prophet, 'Behold, I proclaim a
liberty for you, saith the Lord, to the sword, to the pesti
lence, to the famine,' than to that liberty wherewith Christ
' has made us free.' The Church leaves us free, yet fails
not to remind us of the responsibilities which that very free
dom entails upon us. A reverent, tender mind may well
pause, ere he attempt to abridge, either way, that freedom
or call in question that use of the keys, which as it hath
never been laid aside, but rather advocated at all times
by Bishops and Divines of note, and recognised by our
Canons, so now has It been and is resorted to by thousands
in these later years, not exhorted thereto by man, but im
pelled and constrained by God's voice within the conscience,
to seek therein, as they have found, pardon, and grace, and
peace." '^
"1 Some may perhaps argue that Dr. Pusey, in the paragraphs alluded to,
contends that sin is immedLitely remitted by absolution j^ but they do not
appear to me necessarily to imply as much, aud therefore I do not wish to
encourage that impression.
n Pusey's Second Sermon, pp. 14—16.

25
It can hardly be supposed, that one who has just been
endeavouring to prove, that the Church does in some in
stances recommend confession to a priest, and that of sins
that are between God and the sinner's conscience, can, for a
moment, desire to curtail the use of that privilege, or inter
fere with the peace of those who would use it. It would
be such a manifest contradiction, as at once to betray
the inconsistency of which he would be guilty. I, there
fore, must not be supposed, after what I have already said, .
to desire to restrain those, whose consciences need the as
sistance alluded to, from seeking through it " pardon and
grace and peace." But I must take exception to this pas
sage, and not least of all to that part, from which those
soul-stirring words are derived. For, though it be true
that the Church does not deny to her members the use of
confession with the view to absolution, but, on the contrary,
in her own season enjoins it, yet Is there not evidence to
shew, that such as have sought It, as they have done, of
whom Dr. Pusey speaks, have sought it rightly. The
Church is either right or wrong in wishing her people, at any
time, to come to her ministers for such a purpose. If she
be right, then we must suppose her rule to be right also :
if wrong, otherwise. But the Church, in no case recom
mends people to come, unless they be burdened to such an
extent, not with sin, for that is not the matter to be con
sidered, but with the sense of sin, as to be unable to get re
lief without ; and it may be questioned whether these per
sons have a right to look upon the peace they have derived
from the practice alluded to, as otherwise than delusive,
when it has been resorted to contrary to this rule. Con
fess to God is the language of the Church — confess to God,
and examine yourselves, that you may confess sincerely ;
and eome to the priest only, if, when humbled before God,
your souls faint within you from too little consideration of
His mercy. It is from God that your pardon is to be de-

26
rived; your minister is only to help you on your way;
and happy are they who have faith enough not to require
the assistance. It is the last resort, to snatch men from
despair ; It is not intended to be put instead of, or before,
the Immediate application to the Almighty,
" Not to constrain is not to deny ;" but not to deny is not
to recommend. The whole, however, of Dr. Pusey's Ser
mon is commendatory of the resort to the practice of spe
cial confession in every instance. From that one dictum,
fallacious though it be, the whole argument of the learned
author proceeds. When in his former Sermon on this sub
ject, or rather in the preface to it, he recommended children
to be brought to confession, he depended upon this negative
principle ; when, in the Sermon before us he recommends
sinners to look to the necessities of their case, in that the
danger is great that they will not carry out that eKSiK7]ai<{
he considers necessary, as though, to use Dr. Jeune's ex
pression, God would remit ten thousand talents, and yet
exact the remaining farthing. It is this principle which he
appears to wish to set to work. Come and confess, for
you cannot do without it, that is the inference he would
have us draw to our ruin ; as if we had no mediator but
the priest, so called, on earth ; as if we had no priest, no
mediator in heaven. Liberty ! why it is an abuse of liberty;
it is rebellion itself thus even to hint at the fancied inacces
sibility of God, but through man.
Perhaps I may appear not to be treating Dr. Pusey
fairly. In putting this construction on his language; and
certainly I do not recollect that he, anywhere, says, in so
many words, that confession to a Priest is necessary to all,
or that the absolution of the Priest Is indispensable. But I
do not think, if we are to take the whole bearing of the
Sermons before us into consideration, that we can easily
avoid the conclusion to which I have come. What can be
more general than the following ; and what more contrary
to the teaching of the Church of England?

27
"In my last Sermon, I dwelt upon that authoritative act,
whereby God, through the ministry of man, conveys His
own sentence of pardon to the soul of the penitent, sets him
free from the guilt of his past sins, opens to the blessed in
flux of His grace the channels which sin had stopped, and
often pours at once large grace and love into the soul."" Can
any one say that this is not a recommendation of priestly
absolution, as a means of grace, beyond others, necessary for
salvation S For it was upon the Entire Absolution of the
Penitent that Dr. Pusey was preaching, and of the Absolu
tion used in our Church that he had descanted in the Sermon
alluded to, and now on taking it up again he says " This is
the authoritative act whereby God does so and so" or rather
implies as much by the use of the language quoted.^ Again
" special confession" is said " to gather into one before the
soul all its greater sins" and therefore to be productive of
special grace and mercy,"" But have not all need of this ;
and must not all therefore be called upon to use it ? and, if
all be called upon to use it, why should there be any doubt
at all about the practice ? Let all fly to the use of confes
sion : — the Church does not constrain ; — it needs but the
demand for its use to establish It ! I read however the
Rubrics and Exhortations of our Church in vain, If we are to
argue in favour of any such inference. According to her
rule, we are to confess to God, without the minister, and
seek his aid only, when we want it, to remove our doubts :
we are not to go to the Priest, as though but for him, we
could not obtain mercy,
I have already quoted the leading paragraphs on this sub
ject from the Exhortation to presence at the Holy Commu
nion, where confession is mentioned, and where private con-
° Pusey's Second Sermon, p. 3.
P Dr. Pusey used similar language in his first Sermon on Absolution,
" And now brethren I would proceed to speak of that great authoritative act,
whereby God in the Church still forgives the an of the penitent." P. 4.
1 Pusey's Second Sermon, p. 3.

2g
fession alone can possibly be intended ; and if my readers
will turn back to them"^ they will find my assertion to be
fully borne out ; but the same doctrine, as Is implied in
them. Is so much more fully set out, and the fallacy upon
which the misapprehension turns so fully pointed out, in the
Homilies of our Church, that I shall not apologize to my
readers for quoting them.
I am aware that some persons think that the Homilies
may not be quoted for the establishment of doctrine, as the
35th Article speaks of them as containing only a godly and
wholesome doctrine and necessary for the times in which
the Articles were written ; and I believe the ecclesiastical
court has sanctioned this opinion ; but this argument will
not hold in cases in which they follow the formal exhorta
tions of the Church, and, as that is the case in this instance,
they cannot be well objected to ; and Dr. Pusey quotes
them himself: his example therefore will be my protec
tion. The Homilies do not endeavour to get rid of confession by
asserting that we must not go to the priest ; but they re
mind us, that, although we may go to those, who bear that
title on earth, as occasion may point out, we have no true
Priest, but in heaven : We are to apply to God for the
mercy, of which we stand In need. When oppressed with
fear we may go to our ministers to be relieved of It ; but
the sin which occasions it Is to be remitted by another. Our
Priest, in the strictest sense, is the Lobd Jesus Chkist,
and to Him must we turn in confession ! This is the lan
guage of our Homilies, " Holy Ambrose, in his second ser
mon upon the 119th Psalm, doth say full well, go show thy
self unto the Priest. Who is the true Priest, but he which" is
the Priest for ever after the order of Melchlsedec ? Where
by this Holy Father doth understand that both the priest
hood and the law being changed, we ought to acknowledge
r Pages 15, 16, and 17.

29
none other priest for deliverance from our sins, but our
Saviour Jesus Christ, who being Sovereign Bishop doth with
the sacrifice of His Body and Blood, offered once for ever
upon the altar of the cross, most effectually cleanse the spi
ritual leprosies, and wash away the sins of all those that
with true confession of the same do flee unto Him."
And then after shewing why auricular confession, as ad
vocated by Rome and aimed at by Dr. Pusey, is inadmissi
ble, the same Homily goes on to say,
"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 learned man, and shew 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,"' Alluding to the expression I have just quoted. Dr. Pusey
says — " One thing only she excludes, when she excludes
any thing, compulsory confession ; ' that any man should
be bound to the numbering of his sins ;' ' as if,' adds
Hooker, 'remission of sins otherwise were impossible;'"'
by which he endeavours to make us believe, that to confess
to Priests Is the way most approved by the Church, when
the words, which I have quoted, speak In a very different
tone upon the subject, the constant nmning to the priests
being discouraged, the resort to them being reserved only
for the relief of particular cases. So again he goes on to
speak of the Exhortation in recommendation of presence at
Communion, as if the priests were the persons to resort to
in every case, whereas that recommendation is confined to
particular cases only. His words run as follows : —
s Homilies. Second Part of Sermon of Repentance.
t Pusey's Second Sermon, p. 8.

30
"But, short of this, in that Exhortation, she strives,
with an austere, anxious love, to rouse the conscience, not
only as to overt, but as to secret, mental, sins, ' if any of
you be in malice, envy, or any other grievous crime ;' and
then, after words, which may well shake the soul through
and through, 'lest after taking of that Holy Sacrament,
the devil enter into you, as he entered into Judas, and fill
you full of all iniquities, and bring you to destruction both
of body and soul,' she straightway insists on the necessity
of ' a quiet conscience,' and invites such as cannot otherwise
quiet theirs, to open their griefs, that by the ministry of
God's Holy Word, they may receive the benefit of abso
lution."" True it is, indeed, that in this passage Dr. Pusey makes
use of the qualification ' if otherwise they cannot quiet their
consciences,' when he speaks of the Church directing men
to go to confession; but I would ask, why he omits
the very earnest exhortation to confession to God, which
we find immediately joined with the mention of crime, and
which is insisted on as the proper means of procuring the
forgiveness of God, or an essential part of it ? Why are
we to have only so much of the truth as serves his purpose,
and no more 2 Why are we not to have the whole truth 1
No honest man would withhold any one part, but here Dr.
Pusey scruples not to withhold the most Important,
It may be alleged, indeed, that our author goes on to
speak of forgiveness as coming originally from God, though
it be derived to man through the ministry of priests ; his
words being as follows : —
" 'By the ministry,' she says, ' of God's Word,' ' for,' (as
I said more at large before,) 'all forgiveness of sin, by
whomsoever, or howsoever It comes to us, is from Him,'
'God Alone forglveth sin.' The Word of God is the au-
" Pusey's Second Sermon, p. 8.

31
thority by virtue of which the Priest acts ; ' men,' S.
Ambrose says, ' supply their ministry' only ; or as he says
again, 'Sins are remitted through the word of God, of
which the Levite is the interpreter and a sort of executor ;
they are remitted also through the office of the Priest, and
the sacred ministry,'"'
This, however, is no justification whatever. Even in
this it is through the priest that pardon is derived, though
the Exhortation speaks of the pardon being given in answer
to confession independently of the priest, and brings the
minister in only to administer " the salve of God's word"
occasionally. Any one, who should read Dr, Pusey's
sermon alone, would say that he made it out to be neces
sary, that all should come to the Priest to confess ; he
would not, for a moment believe that confession to the
priest was recommended, but in few instances ; for, al
though the learned author does not say so totidem verbis, no
other conclusion can be arrived at consistently with his
argument. Dr. Pusey appears to be proceeding by the
principle of indoctrination advocated by Mr, Oakeley,
which aimed at Romanizing the Church without advancing
the doctrines of Rome in their technical form : already we
have much that has been said by him on the subject of
confession : little more need be added to bring out the full
doctrine of Rome, We have before us a recommendation
from him to bring our children to confession, and an argu
ment upon its general expediency : we have only to wait,
until he preach again, to be taught that it is indispensable
to salvation. At all events the expressions of the Church
which would have forbidden that inference, had they been
quoted by Dr, Pusey, have all been avoided, so as to allow
us little or no opportunity of coming to a more favourable
conclusion. Although in the course of the observations that have
¦* Pusey's Second Sermon, pp. 8 — 9.

32
been offered, enough has been quoted from the formularies
of the Church to shew that her priests are not commended
to all as the channels of mercy, when they stand in need of
forgiveness ; and from thence it may be inferred that the
resort to them is not In her view necessary to salvation, I
have not as yet touched upon the expediency of the prac
tice so fully as might be wished, or so fully as the peculiar
argument of Dr. Pusey might seem to require. I have
indeed said that not to deny Is not to recommend, and
shewn that the Church most commends applications to
God, but I have not carried the argument into that portion
of her Services in which she adopts the indicative form of
absolution, after confession to the priest, where if any
where the expediency of the practice may be expected to
be insisted on. This part of the argument I will endea
vour to supply now. When I say that I shall refer to the
Service which adopts the indicative form of absolution after
confession. It will at once be seen, that there are some
cases in which the Church thinks it expedient to use both ;
but the question for us to consider is whether those cases
are few or many and how far the recommendation goes-
I will turn then to the Visitation of the Sick, and enquire
into the teaching of the Church in that portion of her
Services, prefacing my enquiry with extracts from Dr.
Pusey's Sermons, as a means of raising the points that
must be discussed.
Dr. Pusey lays much stress upon the service which I
propose now to consider : from it he draws his fancied
authority for confession, and upon it he bases the very
unwonted powers that he would give to the "Priests of
God." Other portions of the Services and Rubrics of the
Church are brought forward by him in support of his argu
ment ; but here Is It that he imagines that he finds the
chief warrant of that which he has put forth. " In visiting
the sick," he says, "our Church directs those who will

33
obey her * to move the sick person to make a special con
fession of his sins, if he feel his conscience troubled with
any weighty matter,' not to wait for him, but ourselves to
'move him thereto;' and then, 'if he humbly and heartily
desire it, thus to absolve him.' And ' His authority' so to
do, was, ye know conveyed to us, in the very words, in
wliich it was given by our Lord to the Apostles ; so that
whatever authority they conveyed to the Apostles, they
do, thus far, convey to us also : * which although,' says S,
Pacian, 'for our sins it be presumptuous to claim, yet God,
who hath granted unto bishops the name of even His Only
Beloved, will not deny it unto them.'""
Dr. Pusey's observations on the Absolution of the sick
cannot be separated from the context, but they go on to
enforce the solemnity of absolution, aud as such cannot be
properly omitted. In the following page then he continues
thus. " And all this doctrine of our Church as to Absolu
tion is the more solemn as not being a profession only in
the sight of men, but embodied in acts in the name of
Almighty God Himself; in His daily worship ; at the
Holy Communion, or in earnest preparation for its last
conflict, for that moment which sums up all the past, and
shall decide eternity. The sacred stillness at the Holy
Communion, when, after the deep confession which our
Church gives us, one voice alone is heard, and we the rest,
in silence receive it ; the Intense earnest longing, with
which the penitent awaits those words of awful comfort,
which the Church commissions her priests to pronounce,
or the thrill of awe which any of us must ourselves have
felt, when we sinners had to take on our lips her words
' by His authority I absolve thee' and that in the name of
the All-Holy Trinity, may well make us think more deeply,
how very solemn the doctrine is, which is so embodied.''^
" Pusey's first Sermon on Absolution, pp. 11, 12.
' Pusey's first Sermon on Absolution, p. 13.
c

34
The language of the Sermon last preached by the Regius
Professor is in tone much like that now submitted to my
readers. In reply to the objections that had been offered
to his theory, he uses the following expressions. "The
Church (I am compelled to repeat) allows us both ways,"
(i. e. public and private confession and absolution.) " In
particular cases, she recommends special confession, and
absolution in form more authoritative. For in the Visita
tion of the Sick, she directs her Priests to ' move the sick
person to make a special confession of his sins, if he feel
his conscience troubled with any weighty matter;' and,
as Bishop Sparrow adds, ' It should be considered, whether
every deadly sin be not a weighty matter', she would, at
least secure, that they who have during health neglected
her warnings at the Holy Communion, and shrunk from
the shame, should not pass, clogged with grievous sins,
into the presence of their Judge. We, His Priests, are
not to wait for the sick man's wish ; we are (if we would
obey her, and It has been done of old also) ourselves to
' move' the sick man, and suggest to him, that if his con
science be troubled with any weighty matter, he ought to
confess it. Absolution is to be given only on such signs of
lowly contrition as betoken ' true repentance,' — if he
humbly and heartily desire it (for the Church could never
command the Priest to absolve indiscriminately,) but we
are directed, In all cases, to appeal to the sick man's con
science ; if he, having need, despise or put it from him, he
has to give account of his deed at the judgment seat of
Christ." And then taking up this, as a point from whence
to start, he goes on to ask : — " and can it be thought that
the Church denies that In health which she recommends
in sickness ?" '^ and other similar questions, which tend only
to the conclusion, that the practice of private confession
and absolution ar* held by the Church to be generally
expedient. ' Pusey's Second Sermon, pp. 3  4.

My readers must, by this time, be fully impressed with
the use that Doctor Pusey has made of the word " move"
in the Order for the Visitation of the Sick, and of what
importance it is to him, in the argument he has set up.
From it, as from a centre all radiates, and with it must the
whole fall, if it be not, as I believe It not to be, incapable of
assault. I will not say that the learned author has quoted
the words of the Rubric in the Visitation Service incorrectly :
I have no reason to charge him with that ; but the inter
pretation that is put upon the words quoted is not such as
they will bear. To build up an argument, such as that
which is displayed in the passages I have brought under
notice, we want materials of a widely different nature from
those that we find in the Rubric in question. To " move"
a man " to make a special confession of his sins, if he feel
his conscience troubled with any weighty matter," and to
" absolve him," after confession made, " if he humbly and
heartily desire it," Is not to, move a man to confess and to
be absolved if he have committed any deadly sin. The two
propositions embrace two very different subjects. That
which represents the order of the Church alludes not to
sin, but to that overpowering sense of sin which often
prevents men from stretching forward to salvation, and
which the Church would therefore have removed, and
which may be removed without the immediate remission of
the sin from which it arises ; while that which represents
the argument of Doctor Pusey is conversant with the sin
itself, and is nothing without its immediate remission. In
the proposition that represents the order of the Church,,
the word " move" is confined to the confession, and refers
to that only under a condition ; the sick man is to be moved
only to confess if he feel his conscience troubled with any
weighty matter ; but in that which represents the ar
gument of Dr. Pusey, the word " move" is carried, through
the confession, to absolution and made to apply to all cases.

36
In the one case it is the conscience ; in the other it is the
soul, that is to be relieved. And hence the difference in
the manner of the treatment of the question by the Church
and Dr. Piisey : the former leaves it to the sick man to
say whether he will be absolved or not ; the latter will
hardly allow him to escape damnation, if he seek it not.
Probably some one will say that I am, in this- point,
misrepresenting Dr, Pusey, as he talks of the appeal to the
conscience throughout the passages which have been
quoted; but it Is not for the mere relief of the conscience
or for the withdrawal of apprehensions from the mind, that
he insists upon the resort to confession and absolution, as
is abundantly evident from the latter part of the quo
tations that have been cited. When he says indeed that
absolution is to be given at the request of the penitent, he
may be said to have confined himself within the limits of
the Church's doctrine, but when he adds : " If he having
need, despise or put it from him, he has to give account of
his deed at the judgmsnt-seat of Christ," he brings a new
element into bearing, which altogether changes the sense
of the Instruction given : he makes that, which Is held by
the Church to be expedient In some cases. Indispensable to
all, for in the strictest sense of the term all have need of
absolution, though all may not be in a situation to receive
it ; he makes that, v/hich was intended as a h^Ip to faith
a condition of salvation, thereby exceeding the teaching of
the Church. I have said, from the general tenour of the
Sermon, whence this passage is taken, that the learned
author already Insists on the expediency of the general
resort to auricular confession as a preparative for abso
lution, and that doubtless he will not allow another op
portunity to pass without insisting on Its necessity. In that
all sin and all have need that their sins should be remitted ;
and here we have the first fruits of that doctrine, in that
the absolution of the priest is urged upon our attention.

37
under pain of damnation. The reserve that pervades the
admission of our Church that in some cases confession and
absolution may be useful. Is altogether removed by Dr.
Pusey in his desire to carry his doctrine to the fullest
possible extent.
I believe that I have said enough to shew that the
learned author has made more use of the words of the
Church, than they were intended to allow, and that, in so far
as his teaching depends upon' his construction of the Ru
bric that has now been observed upon, it is untenable ; but
it may be as well to go into an examination of the wording
of the Service, in order to discover whether there be any
thing In it to affect the position I have taken up. I pro
pose then to examine the Absolution and the Prayer which
immediately follows in the " Order for the Visitation of
the Sick;" and I shall do so with the more confidence,
as, up to a certain, point, I shall have Dr. Pusey with me.
I shall have no occasion to repeat the argument put for
ward against Dr. Jeune : Dr. Pusey does not refer the
Absolution ofthat Service to the removal of Church censures,
but connects it immediately with that of sin : I am, there
fore, not only freed from the necessity of shewing that It
has nothing to do with Church censures, or at least Is not
confined to them, but have also a convenient point from
whence to start upon the investigation that I have under
taken. The form of absolution, as has been observed by Dr.
Jeune, " is certainly absolute in Its terms ;" but the ques
tion is one of intention, how far It is to be taken to extend;
and, in solving the problem before us, we must look to the
wording of other parts of the Service, and not bestow all our
attention upon the Absolution. A prayer Is ordered by the
Church to be addressed to the Almighty immediately after
the pronunciation of the form of Absolution : " And then,"
says the Rubric, "the Priest shall say the collect following."

S8
The collect alluded to is that which was given in full, when
Dr. Jeune's theory was under notice."' It prays God, who
puts away the sins of those who truly repent, so as to re
member them no more, to open His eye of mercy upon His
servant who most earnestly desireth pardon and forgive
ness — to accept of his contrition, and on account of his
trust in His mercy not to impute his former sins to him ;
and, as such, is a prayer for the remission of sins that are
past, and with respect to which the priest has just been
addressing words of comfort to the patient ; but, inasmuch
as It is a prayer to God to do that of which it speaks, and
that which is only sought Is yet future, the remission of sin
could not have been conveyed by the pronunciation of ab
solution, as supposed by Dr. Pusey.
I am very well aware that men, highly esteemed in the
Church, have contended, that this is only a prayer for the
ratification of the Absolution that has just been pronounced,
and that, therefore, it must be received as part and parcel
of the form, through which the Power of the Keys is exer
cised. But I cannot view it in that light, and, even If I
could, it would not make much difference in the matter.
Upon that supposition the words " I absolve thee" do not
convey the remission of sin, as Dr. Pusey alleges, — without
the prayer following they would be wholly inoperative. I
contend, however, that there is no authority for the suppo
sition, and that, therefore, by it, the difficulty presented
by the prayer, cannot be surmounted.
The reader will recollect that the Prayer is directed to
be used after the Absolution, and surely, if it were Intended
to be confirmatory of that act as though remission of sin
were conveyed by It, provided the Author of our pardon were
thus acknowledged, some allusion to the act that had just
been completed would have been made ; but nothing of the
sort is to be found from beginning to end ; what has been
¦i Page 22.

29
done is entirely unnoticed. And not only is this the case,
but it is contrary to reason to expect that any such prayers
should in that place be offered up, for a pious man would
pray first and act afterwards : he would not act, and then
plead, as it were, for an Indemnification. And it is precisely
upon the principle that I contend for that the Church pro
ceeds in the only case which can be brought forward as a
precedent. In the service for the Baptism of Infants,
where remission of sins is absolutely given at the moment
that the baptism is performed, we find the precatory part
of the solemnity, so far as the act of the priest Is concerned,
all completed before the child is as much as taken Into his
arms : he does not presume to .exercise the power of the
keys until his prayers have been offered up to God for a
blessing upon the act he Is contemplating.'' I can only say,
b The following analysis of " the Ministration of Publick Baptism of In
fanta," may not "be entirely useless to the reader: —
In the Preface to the Service the minister calls upon the congregation to
pray God " that forasmuch as all men are conceived and born in siu ; and
our Saviour Christ saith, none can enter into the kingdom of God, except
he be regenerate and born anew of Water aud of the Holy Ghost," He
would, " of liis bounteous mercy grant" to the child presented, " that thing
which by nature he cannot have ; that he may be baptized with water and
the Holy Ghost, and received into Christ's holy Church and be made a lively
member of the same." In the first prayer, he prays to God thus: "We
beseech thee, for thine infinite mercies, that thou wilt mercifully look upon
this Child ; wash him and sanctify him with the Holy Ghost ; that he being
delivered from thy wrath, may be received into the ark of Christ's Church ;
and being stedfast in faith, joyful through hope, and rooted in charity, may
so pass the waves of this troublesome world, that finally he may come to
the land of everlasting life, there to reign with thee world without end,
through Jesus Christ our Lord." In the second prayer he addresses Ihe
Almighty in these words : " We call upon thee for this Infant, that he,
coming to thy holy Baptism, may receive remission of his sins T)y spiritual
regeneration ,-" then, after allusion to the promises of God, he goes on in his
prayer, " that this Infant may enjoy the everlasting benediction of iky heavenly
washing, and may come to the eternal kingdom which thou hast promised by
Christ our Lord." Then the gospel and the exhortation founded on it are
read ; and then comes another prayer, in which he says, " Give thy Holy
Spirit to this Infant, that he may be born again, and be made an heir of
everlasting salvation.'" After this the minister addresses the Godfathers ak

40
that, if the Absolution in the Service for the Visitation of
the Sick is to be taken to convey remission of sins, the
variation in the practice of the Church appears to me inex
plicable. I prefer, however, to say that the Absolution in
that Service conveys no such remission, and that, therefore,
we have not to defend the Church from Inconsistency. The
terms of the prayer shew us, that, up to the time that it is
offered up, no remission of sin has taken place, unless it is
to be taken as part and parcel of the solemnity of remis
sion ; but the precedent, which I have brought forward,
does not allow us to entertain that idea, and we have,
therefore, no alternative left, but to limit the intention of
the word " absolve."
I have come now, by the processes that have been de
tailed, in the argument which is before the reader, to the
conclusion that the Absolution in the Order for the Visita-
Godmothers, and examines them, and then come five short prayers prepa
ratory to the administration of the sacrament. In these the minister prays,
"that the old Adam," in the child presented, "maybe so buried that the
new man may be raised up in him ;" " that all carnal affections may die in
him, and that all things belonging to the spirit may live and grow in him i"
"that he may have power and strength to have victory, and to triumph
against the devil, the world, and the flesh ;" " that whosoever" might be
there " dedicated" to God " through his office and ministry,'" might " also be
endued with heavenly virtues and everlastingly rewarded ;" and then, after
reciting the commission that was given to the Apostles by our Lord, he
sums up his prayers thus : " Regard, we beseech thee, the supplicationa of
thy congregation ; sanctify this water to the mystical washing away of sin ;
and grant that this child, now to be baptixed therein, may receive tlie ful
ness of thy grace, and ever remain in the number of thy faithful and elect
children ; through Jesus Christ our Lord." Then is it, and not before, that
he takes the child in his arms, receives his name from the Godfathers and
Godmothers, baptizes him, and admits liim into the Church. After that he
declares him to be regenerate, and calls upon the congregation to thank God
for it, and to pray " that he may lead the rest of his life according to this
beginning." The Lord's Prayer then follows, and the prayer of thanks and
impetration of future blessing, which is no sooner ended than he betakes
himself to the concluding exhortation. After the baptism we find nothing
in the shape of a prayer for blessing upon the act which he has then per
formed : all that is completed before he ventures upon the discharge of this
solemn duty.

41
tion of the Sick, is not to be taken for a mere removal of
Church censures, or for that remission of sin that Is implied
in the full exercise of the Power of the Keys committed to
the Apostles by Our Lord Jesus Christ, and derived to us
through the Apostolic Succession ; and it remains for me
only to state how far, in my opinion, the Absolution goes,
or rather what is to be taken to be the intention of the
Church in allowing the form, which appears in that Service,
to become part of it.
It appears to me, then, that the words that have formed
the subject of controversy, are only declarative of the for
giveness of sin, and In no way concerned with its remission ;
and that they are allowed to take the absolute form, in
order only that he, whose " conscience is troubled with any
weighty matter," may not be driven to despair of life, since
a propitiation for his sins has been provided in " the merits
and death of our Lord Jesus Christ," And this conclusion
appears to me to be the only one we can come to consis
tently with the arguments that have been detailed, and
with the language of the Church. It would not, surely, be
merely left to the penitent to say whether he would be ab
solved at all, if it were intended, that the Absolution should
be considered to be of a sacramental nature ; neither would
prayer, for the remission of sin be offered up after its use :
nor would the Confession, which leads to the use of Absolu
tion, be confined to persons who might be borne down by
the consciousness of sin, but all would be invited to confess
and to be absolved, that all, through that service, might
come to the hope of Salvation. We should riot be told to
confess if our conscience were troubled with any weighty
matter, but that we were all sinful, and too many, if not all,
guilty of deadly sin, and that that was too weighty a
matter for us to bear : we should be told that we might
possibly have need, nay probably, and that, as Dr. Pusey
says " if we having need despise or put absolution from us,

42
we should have to give an account of our deed at the
Judgment Seat of Christ. There is, no doubt, an earnest
desire to assist the afflicted, but, in the particular service
out of which the controversy arises, the language is not
half earnest enough to support the hypothesis of sacramen
tal absolution, nor is the service itself one hundredth part
full enough for the confession it would require. I believe,
then, that I am justified In inferring that the Absolution in
" the Order for the Visitation of the Sick," though it «s,
for obvious reasons, strongly declarative, is not to be taken
to convey the forgiveness of God.
I have now performed the task I assigned to myself,
when I took up the subject which has been laid before the
reader ; and I can only add that, in pursuing my object, I
have endeavoured humbly and obediently to walk in the
paths of the Church. Probably I should have secured to
myself more of that applause which Is dear to all who
take part in matters of this nature, if I had chosen per
sonally to attack either of the eminent men whose writings
liave been examined ; probably I shall please none in that
I have not shrunk from criticizing the opinions of both ; but,
if the Church is to be defended, or attempts are to be made
to put her doctrine in its true light, we must look to her
formularies and not to the wishes of parties : they are not
always protective of truth. It may appear expedient to
this person to overstate the doctrines of the Church, and to
that to understate them ; but we have nothing to do with
what Is expedient to them : our duty is to ourselves, and
to the Church, and as long as we remain In her Communion
we must uphold her doctrine and practice. If I had not
considered both parties wrong, I should not have commented
on the publications of their champions, but .such was my
opinion, and, therefore I could not avoid the course I have
taken.

43
It appears to me that the Church has endeavoured to
avoid extreme views of this subject, desiring, upon the one
hand, not to give place to the notion, that the mercy of
priests may be substituted for the mercy of God, and
upon the other, not to encourage the idea, that priests
have nothing to do, in the Visitation of the Sick, with
the office of reconciliation committed to them by Our
Lord. I do not believe, that the mere unbinding of Church
censures is more In accordance with the intention of the
Church than unlimited Absolution ; but others must say
how far I am right in this supposition.

the end.

VINCENT, PRINTKR, OXFOUl).

YALE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY

3 9002 02428 8954