Bellarmine · De Controversiis · On the Sacrament of Penance · Book III: On Confession
Chapter 15: The Third Argument of Calvin, from Chrysostom, Is Solved; and the Fourth, from the Impossibility of Enumeration
Our translation, from the Latin of the Opera Omnia (Paris: Vivès, 1870–74), vol. III, De Sacramento Poenitentiae, Book III, the fourth general controversy on the sacraments. The Latin source text is public domain; this English rendering is released with the site. Scripture quotations follow Bellarmine's Vulgate citations, rendered in Douay-Rheims wording where he quotes exactly. Click “Show the Latin” for the original (raw OCR of the scan; scanning errors remain — the scan itself is the authority).
Calvin goes on in the same chapter, section 8, and adduces Chrysostom: “This abrogation,” he says, “Chrysostom, himself also prelate of the Church of Constantinople, evidently witnesses in so many places that it is a wonder these men dare to mutter against it. Tell your sins, he says, homily 2 on Psalm 50, that you may blot them out. If you are ashamed to tell anyone what you have sinned, tell them daily in your soul; I do not say that you should confess to your fellow servant, who may upbraid you; tell them to God, who cures them.” Calvin adds in the same place other similar places of the same Chrysostom, from the sermon On Penance and Confession, likewise from homily 5 On the Incomprehensible Nature of God, likewise from homily 4 on Lazarus. Philip adds, in the Augsburg Confession, article on confession, another place similar to the preceding, from homily 31 on chapter 12 of the epistle to the Hebrews. I answer that Chrysostom, who acknowledged himself the successor of Nectarius, wished diligently, as was fitting, to defend the judgement of his predecessor, yet so as to bring no harm in any matter to truth and faith. As therefore Nectarius abrogated not private but public confession, so also Chrysostom everywhere carps at public confession, but nowhere reprehends private. This is clear from all the places which either have been objected by the adversaries or could have been objected. For in homily 2 on Psalm 50, when he says, “I do not say that you should confess to your fellow servant, who may upbraid you,” he openly indicates that he speaks of public confession, from which upbraiding was accustomed to follow. For, as Origen relates, homily 2 on Psalm 37, when confession was made publicly there were not wanting those who upbraided: “If a man of this kind,” he says, “mindful of his fault, confesses what he has committed, and with human confusion makes little of those who upbraid him confessing and mark him, or mock him,” and so on. But from private confession no upbraiding can follow, both because that confession is made without witnesses, and because priests are held by the strictest bond to cover with the deepest silence what they have heard in private confession. What therefore Chrysostom says in the homily cited on Psalm 50, “If you are ashamed to tell anyone that you have sinned,” ought to be understood in this manner: if you are ashamed to tell anyone who could upbraid you, that is, publicly, as he himself straightway explains when he says, “I do not say that you should confess to your fellow servant, who may upbraid you.” The same Chrysostom, in the homily On Penance and Confession, which is the second place adduced by Calvin, says thus: “But now it is not even necessary to confess with witnesses present,” and so on; where we see that confession disapproved which is made before witnesses, and which Nectarius had abrogated; since those words, “But now it is not even necessary,” note that at some time it was necessary to confess before witnesses, but that that necessity had then been taken away. Likewise homily 5 On the Incomprehensible Nature of God: “I do not lead you,” he says, “into the theatre of your fellow servants, nor compel you to disclose your sins to men.” Here also it is to be discerned how openly Chrysostom alludes to that ancient constitution of the bishops, who, as Sozomen witnesses in the Tripartite, book 9, chapter 35, wished that sins should be laid open as in a theatre; which constitution Nectarius, as we have often said, abrogated. Likewise in homily 4 on Lazarus: “Take care,” he says, “not to tell a man, lest he upbraid you.” And below: “I do not compel you to come forth into the midst of the theatre, and to employ many witnesses; tell your sin to me alone privately,” and so on. The same, homily 31 on the epistle to the Hebrews: “I do not say,” he says, “that you should betray yourself in public, nor that you should accuse yourself before others.” The same, homily 8 On Penance: “Do not reveal,” he says, “the ulcer, do not bring the accusation into the common theatre, do not set up witnesses of your offences.” The same, homily on the publican, on chapter 18 of Luke: “I admonish you to confess continually; for I do not lead you to the theatre of your fellow servants,” and so on. From these places it is evidently gathered that Chrysostom speaks of public confession when he dissuades the people from confession to be made to men.
But, you will say, to the confession which is made to men Chrysostom opposes the confession which is made to God alone in the soul, or within the conscience of the one confessing, in thought, not with the tongue; therefore he excludes all confession which is made to men, whether public or private; for a private confession made before a priest cannot be said to have been made in the soul, or within the conscience, or in thought, not with the tongue. His words are these, homily 2 on Psalm 50: “If you are ashamed to tell anyone that you have sinned, tell them daily in your soul.” Homily On Penance and Confession: “But now it is not even necessary to confess with witnesses present; let the inquiry of offences be made in thought; let this judgement be without witness; let God alone see you confessing.” Homily 31 on the epistle to the Hebrews: “Confess your sins before God; before the true judge pronounce your offences with prayer, not with the tongue, but with the memory of your conscience.” Homily 8 On Penance: “Do not set up witnesses of your offences; within, in your conscience, with no one standing by except him who sees all things, God, reform what you have done amiss.” I answer that Chrysostom in these places opposes to public confession the confession which is made to God alone in the conscience, without the sound of words, because he does not speak of confession as it is ordered to priestly absolution, which is properly an essential part of the sacrament of Penance, but of confession as it is ordered to confusion and shame, which can be called a part of satisfaction. For that public confession which Nectarius took away had not been instituted that through it the priest might know the sins of the penitent, and thence rightly judge whether the penitent was to be bound or absolved, or what Penance was to be imposed; but only that the penitent, having received that public confusion, might pay a part of the punishment which was due to his sins. Further, Chrysostom rightly hints that it is not necessary for obtaining an end of that kind to confess to men publicly, or even privately; but that it is enough to confess to God with grief and tears, and so to make satisfaction, prayers, alms, fasts and other pious and laborious works being added. But that for another end, namely that the priest may know the diseases of the penitent to which he ought to apply the medicine of Penance, confession is necessary, we showed above from book 2 On the Priesthood of the same Chrysostom, and also from the testimonies of Basil, Nyssen and the other Greek Fathers, from whom it is in no way credible that Chrysostom dissented. Add that if Chrysostom in the places cited above spoke of confession in respect of any end whatever, he would fight not only with us and with the whole Church, but also with our adversaries. For the adversaries think the confession of at least some grave offences before the minister most useful, or even necessary; but Chrysostom not only says that confession before men is not necessary, but even openly condemns and rejects it; for he speaks thus, homily 4 on Lazarus, “Take care not to tell a man, lest he upbraid you,” and homily 8 On Penance, “Do not reveal the ulcer, do not set up witnesses of your offences.” Wherefore Chrysostom rejects public confession only, as it was a certain part of satisfaction; from which it follows that even private confession is not necessary for that same end, although it is necessary for another end, which he himself does not deny in this place, and elsewhere confirms clearly enough.
Chapter XVI. The fourth argument of Calvin
After that objection from Chrysostom, Calvin discourses much in the same chapter, from section 9 to 16, about the various forms of confessions, and says not a few things also, after his manner, not so much by arguing as by calumniating, against the decree of the Lateran Council. But in section 16 he returns to arguments, and objects those words of Psalm 18, “Who can understand sins?” and those of Psalm 37, “My iniquities are gone over my head”; from which places he concludes thus: “Who would now think of a reckoning of his sins, when he sees David unable to enter on the number of his?” Then in sections 17 and 18 he exaggerates the matter with many words, which would be written down here in vain; the sum is that the enumeration of sins is impossible, and therefore was neither commanded by God nor could rightly be commanded by the Church. But this objection, which Philip also uses in the Augsburg Confession, and the other sectaries everywhere, is not only slight in itself, but is also most openly solved from the words of the same Calvin set down in the same place. For Calvin teaches, section 18, that in the confession which is made to God it is not enough to confess in general and to say, “I am a sinner,” but that one ought, so far as in us lies, to confess single sins accurately. Which same all Catholics teach of the confession which is made to a priest. For neither do they bid all sins altogether be enumerated, but those only which after a diligent examination occur to the memory; and they call a diligent examination that which men are ordinarily accustomed to apply in graver matters. Lastly, they bid this only, that we enumerate all sins, so far as in us lies (which phrase Calvin uses in explaining the confession which is made to God), while we open our conscience before a priest. Whatever therefore Calvin objects against the enumeration of sins in the confession which is made to a man, the same can be objected against the enumeration of sins in the confession which is made to God. For if that enumeration is impossible, this too is impossible; if that is a cruel butchery, this too is a cruel butchery; if that makes hypocrites, this too makes hypocrites; and on the contrary, if this is free from these inconveniences (as Calvin is compelled to say) because it is to be made only so far as in us lies, that too is free from these inconveniences, because it is to be made only so far as in us lies; and as in the confession which is made to God alone, after the enumeration of those things which we remember, we add, “Who can understand sins? from my secret ones cleanse me, O Lord,” and, “I have sinned above the number of the sand of the sea,” and yet expect the indulgence of all sins, so also in the confession which is made to a man, or rather through a man to God, after the enumeration of those things which we remember, we add, “Who can understand sins?” and so on, and nonetheless expect the entire indulgence of all sins.
Show the Latin (Vives edition, OCR)
CAPUT XV.
Solviiur argumcntum III. Joannis Calvini.
Pcrgil Calvinus in cndiMn capile sectionc 8. cl
adducil Clirysostomum: Ilanc. mquil, abrogatio-
ncm tot locis evidcntcr Clirysosldmus tcslaiur ,
constaniinopolilanae etipse Ecclcsiae prucsul.ul
mirum sit.istos auderc conlra mulirc. Pcccala
tua, inquilhom. 2. in psal. .lO. dicilo ut dclcas
illa. Si confundcris alicui diccrc. quac peccasli,
dicilo quolidie ea in anima tua: non dico, lU
confUearis conscrvo tuo, qui exprobret : dicito
Deo. qui curat ea.
Addit ibidem Calvinus alia loca sirailia ciusdeni
Chrysostomi. ex scrm.dc Poenilentia el conlessio-
ne. ilem cx homil. 5. de incomprchensibili nalura
Dci. ilem ex hom. 4. de Lazaro. Adtlil Philippus
in confess. augusl. arlic. de confcssione alium lo-
cum similem superioribus, cx hom. 31. in cap.I2.
episL ad Hebracos.
Respondeo: Chrysostomum, qui Ncctarii suc-
cessorem se agnosccbat, diligenter , ut par erat ,
judicium praedecessoris sui dcfcndcre voluisse ,
sic tamen, ut veritali el lidci nulla in rc dclri-
mentuni adferrcl. Quemadmodum igilur Nectarius
non confcssionem privalam, sed publicam abroga-
vil: sic eliam Chrysoslomus passim confessionem
publicam carpil, privatam autem nusquam repre-
hendit.
Id pcrspicuum csl ex omnibus locis. quae vcl
nbjccla sunt ab adversariis, vel objici potuisscnt.
Nam hom. 2. in psalm. 50. cum ail: ISon dico, ut
confilearis conservo tuo, qui exprobrct: apcrto
indicalse loqui de confessionc publica.cx qua cx-
probralio scqui solebat. Nam ul refcrl Origcnes
Iiom. 2. in psal. 37. cum publica ileret confcssio,
non dcerant qui exprobrarcnt, Si liujusmodi, \n-
quil, liomomcmor dclicti sui, confilcalur quac
commisit et Immana confusionc parvi pendat
cos, qui exprobrant cuni confitcntem ct nolant ,
vei irridcnt etc.c\ privala autein confcssionc nulla
S(!(iui potest exprobratio.lum quod sine lcslibus ea
conlessio f]al,lum quod arclissimo vinculo lcncan-
lur sacerdoles allissimo silcntio tcgcre . (juae in
privala confessione audicrunt. Quod igilur Chry-
sostonms ail hom. cilala in psalra. 50. Si conl\in-
deris (dicui dicerc, quia peccasli. inlelligi dcbcl
ad hiinc modum: Si conhindcris alicui diccrc ,
qiii cxprobnirc possil. idcsl, puhlicc, ul ipse con-
linuo explical, cum ail: Non dico ul confitearis
conservo tuo, qui rxprobrct.
Idcm Clirysostomus homil. dc Poenilcnlia et
(;onf(;ssi()nc, (|ui csl sccundus locus a Calvino ad-
duclus: sic ail: ISunc autemncque ncccssarium .
70 i
i)i; i'oi;Mii:Mi\
jiniesenlibHs lcslilnis coulilcri clc. iihi viilemus ,
conrossioMom illam improbari , qiKio lil coram lo-
>libus, i|uainiiiie NiHiarms ahro-javeral : sKjuidcra
verba illa: .Vinic autcin ncquc nccessariam. iio-
l:iiil, jiliqnando fuisse neeessarium eoram leslibus
i-onlilori. sed eam uecessilaUMU luuc fuisse sub-
lalam.
Ilem hom. 5. dc incom|»reliensibili nalura Doi :
Von lc, iuciuil. in thcatrum conscrvnrum luorum
(Inco, nua hominibus /uTCd/a tua dctajcrc cor/o.
Ilic cliam ccrnere esl, quam ancrle Olirysoslomus
;illu«i.il ad illam vctorcm opiscoporum couslilulio-
iiem, qui losle Sozomono in Triparl. lib. *.>. cap.
Vj. volucraul. ul «luasi in lliealro peceala pande-
ronlur; quam conslilulionem Neclarius , ul sacpe
diximus. abropavil.
llem in liom. -4. de Lazaro: Cave, inquil,/io»i//ii
dixeris. ne tibi cxprobrct. El infra: i\'oji cogo te
in mcdium prodire thcatrum.ac muUos adhihere
testiK^: mihi soli dic peccatum privatim clc. Idem
lioin. :U. in epislol. ad Hcbraeos: ISon («Vn.inquit,
dico ut te prodas in publicum; neque ul /e apud
aliosaccuscs. Ideni bomil. 8. de Poeuilonlia: ^on
rcvelcs. inquil. ulcus, non in commune theatrum
occumtioncm producas , non deliclorum lesles
slatuas. Idem liom. dc publicano nd cap. 18. Lu-
cac: Admonco tc ul ossidue confileare: neque
enim te ad thcalrum duco conscrvorum tuorum
clc. Ex his locis evidcnlcr colligilur , Chrysoslo-
mum dc publica confossiono loqui. cum a confes-
siotie hominibus facicnda populum dehorlalur.
.\l. inquies: Confessioni , quae fil hominibus ,
Clirysoslomus opponil confcssionem, quae lil soli
Deo in anima. sive inlra conscienliara confilenlis,
cogilalione. non lingua : igilur excludit omucm
confessioncra quae ill hominibus, sive publicam ,
sivc privatam:non cnim confessio privala facla co-
ram sacerdole. dici polcst facta csse in anima, si-
ve intra conscienliam, sivc cogilalione.non lingua.
Vorba ejus haec sunl hora. 2. in psalra. 50. Si
ronfunderis dicere alicui quia peccasti, dicito ea
quulidie in anima tua. Homil. de Poeniienlia el
confessione: ISunc autem neque necessarium est
praescntibus testibus confiteri: cogilatione fiat
dcliclorum exquisitio: absque tesle sit hocjudi-
cium: solus te Deus confilentem videat. Hom. 31.
in episl. ad Hebraeos: Anle Deum confitere pec-
cata tua: apud verum judicem cum oratione de-
licta tua pronuncia.non lingiia.sed conscieniiae
tuae memoria. Homil. 8. de Poenil. Non delicto-
nim tesles slatuas: intus in conscientia , astantc
nemine. praeter eum. qui cuncla videt , Deum ,
reforma quod deliquisti.
Respondeo: Chrysostomum in liis locis oppone-
re confessioni publicae, confessionom.quae fit soli
Deo in conscienlia, sine sono verborum: quia non
loquilur de confessione, ul ordinatur ad absolulio-
nem saccrdolalera, quae proprie pars esl sacra-
menti Poenileniiae essentialis, sed de confessione
ul ordinatur ad confusionem el erubescenliam,
quae pars dici potesl salisfaclionis. Illa enira con-
fessio publica, quam suslulit Nectarius, non erat
insliluta, ut per eam sacerdos cognosceret,pecoata
poenilenlis, el inde recte judicaret, esset ne poe-
nitons ligamlus. vel absolvondus, iuit qiine Poeiii-
lcntia iiiipoiionda esscl:sed soliim iil pocnilons [)u-
l)lic:i illa {•oufiisione accepta, |)arlciu poi'ii;io,,(iuao
poccalis ojus dobebalur, lueret. Porro Clirysoslo-
inus rccli' inniiol, non osse necossiirium iid cjus-
modi linom obliiiondum, publice. vel otiam priva-
lim confileri hominibus: sed satis esse,cum doloro
ol laclirymis confiteri Ueo, et sic salisfacero, ad-
junclis prccibus, eloomosynis. jciuniis, aliiscpio
piis. laboriosisipin oporibus. Ouod auloiu ad aliura
iiiieiu, nimirum.ul sacerdos novcrit morbos poeni-
loiilis. quibus modicinam Pocnilcnliae iippliciire
debii; necessariii sil confcssio. oslcndimus supra
ox lib. 2. de sacerdolio, (;jusdem Chrysoslomi, nec
non ex loslimoniis Basilii , Nysseni , el aliorum
Pnlrura graecorum, a quibus nullo modo credibiie
est Chrysoslomum disscnsisse.
Addc quod si Chrysostomus in locis supra cita-
lis, de confessione respcctu cujuscumque finis lo-
querclur, non solura nobiscura, et cum tota Ecde-
sia, sed etiam cum adversariis nostris pugnnret.
Advcrsarii onira confcssionem saltem aliquorura
graviura delictorura corara ministro ulilissiranra,
vel cliara necessariam esse censent-.Chrysoslonius
autem, confessioncm coram horainibus non solura
dicit non cssc necessariara, scd etiam aperte dara-
nat ac rejicil-,sic enira loquitur liom. 4. de Lnzaro;
Cavc Jiomini dixeris, ne tibi exprobret, cl hom.
8. de Poenitentia; lyon reveles ulcus, non delicto-
rum testes slatuas. Quare Chrysostomus solum
confessionera publicam rejicit, ul erat pars quae-
dara salisfnclionis: ex quo sequitur confessionem
eliam privnlam, non esse necessariam ad illura c-
undem finem,licet ad alium finem necessariam es-
se, neque ipse hoc loco neget, et alibi salis aperte
confirmct.
CAPUT XVI.
Argumcnlim /V. Calvini.
Posl ohjectionem illam ex Chrysoslomo.Cnlvinus
niulla disserit in eodem capile, a sectione 9. us-
que ad 16.de variis confessionum formis,non pau-
ca eliam raore suo, non tam argumenlando, quara
calumninndo, dicit in decrelura concilii laleranen-
sis. Seclione aulem 16. redil ad argumenla, alque
ohjicit vorba illa psnl. 18. Delicta quis intelligit?
el illa psal. ^l.Iniquitates meae supergressae sunt
capul mcum, ex quibus locis ita concludit; Quis
suorum peccatorum nunc supputationem cogilet,
ubi Davidem videt suorum 7iumerum inire non
posse? Deinde seclione 17. el 18. reni exaggerat
raultis verbis, quae fruslra hoc loco adscriberen-
tur: sumraa esl, enumerationem peccalorum essc
impossibilem, el idcirco neque a Deo fuisse impe-
ratam, neque ab Ecclesia imperari jure poluisse.
Sed objeclio isla, qua etiam ulitur Philippus in
confessione auguslana el caeteri seclarii passim,
non raodo per se tenuis est, sed eliam ex verbis
ejusdem Calvini eodem in loco positis,aperlissime
solvitur. Docet enim Cslvinus^seclione 18. in con-
i.ir.i:i; tkihius
707
f(>ssionfi qu;ie Doo iil, non salis essc, gcnerolini
conDleri ac dicere, Peccator sum: sed oporlere
quanlum in nobis est,singula pcccala accurate con-
llteri. Quod idem catholici omnes docent de con-
fessionc quae fit sacerdoli. Neque enim jubent o-
mnia omnino peccnla enumerari, sed ea solum,
.]uae posl diligenlcm excussionem memoriae oc-
currunl; diligenlem autem cxcussionem vocant,
quam in rebus gravioribus ordinaric homines ad-
hibere solcnt. Deniquc id solum jubent,ut peccata
omnia, quantum in nobis est (qua phrasi Calvinus
utitur in explicanda conlessione quae Deo fil) enu-
meremus, dum coram sacerdote conscientiam no-
stram aperimus.
Quaecumque igilur Calvinus objicit contra enu-
merationem peccatoruu) in confessione quae fit
liomini, eadem objici possunt contra enumeralio-
nem peccalorum in confessione quae fit Deo. Nam
si illa enumeratio est impossibilis, et haec est im-
possibilis: si illa est crudelis carnificina, et haec
cst crudelis carnificina: si illa facit hypocritas, et
haec facit hypocrilas: et contra, si haeo ab his in-
conmiodis libera est (ul Cnlvinus dicere cogitur)
quia non est facienda, nisi quantum in nobis est:
et ilia ab his incommodis Iiiiera est, quia non est
lacienda nisi quantum in nobis est: et quemadmo-
dum in confessione quae Deo soli iit, posl enume-
ralionem eorum, quae recordnmur, addimus: Deli-
cia quis inlclligil? ab occuUis meis miinda mc
Domine, et, Peccavi super numerum arenae ma-
?-is:et tamen omnium peccatorum indulgentiam ex-
pectamus: sic eliarn in confcssione, quae lilhomi-
ni, vel polius per hominem Deo; posl enumeralio-
ncm eorum quae recordamur, addimus: Delicla
quis intelligil etc. et nihilominus integram pecca-
lorum omnium indulgenliam expeclamns.
CAPUT xvn.
Diluilnr argumentum V. Calvini