Annotation CCXVIII

”Receive the Holy Spirit: whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them; and whose you shall retain, they are retained.” — John 20:22–23

Whether auricular confession was instituted by Christ.

To Thomas Cajetan, explaining this sentence in the commentaries, Ambrosius [Catharinus], in the fifth book of the Annotations, imputes two errors, writing these [things] against him: “Cajetan CONFESSES that in John, chapter 20, confession was instituted by the Lord — yet not auricular [confession]; but that this [was] left to the arbitration of the Church, whether it should be made into the ear [privately], or publicly. Which is most absurd. For that is not left to the arbitration of the Church which reason and Scripture teach [must] be observed in a certain [determined] manner. For the Church could not decree that everyone should publicly disclose [his] hidden sins, on account of the innumerable scandals which would arise thence. Therefore, confession being instituted by the Lord, of its own accord [there] comes also the institution of the manner of confessing — namely, that public [sins be confessed] publicly, [and] hidden [sins] secretly; and it is peevish to wish all [things] to be [explicitly] set out in the Scriptures. For if the Lord instituted confession, it is credible that he also taught the manner of confessing — and no other than that which has always been observed, and which reason itself persuades: namely, that public [sins] should be confessed publicly, and hidden [sins] secretly. This too did not please [me]: that, although he confesses that confession was instituted by the Lord, yet he does not confess that it is enjoined [as a precept].

But I, from the very institution, interpret [it] also [as] enjoined — lest we say that so great a remedy was instituted in vain. And since everyone is bound to seek his own salvation, and this is the manner instituted by the Lord, and (as Jerome says) the second plank after shipwreck — namely, that through confession the sinner is absolved by the priest — how can it be said not to be enjoined? Will it, then, be lawful to despise the goodness and grace of God, and one’s own salvation, without crime? Far be it from the minds of the faithful, that these absurdities be believed.” These [things] Ambrosius [Catharinus says]; to whose opinion is to be added the canon of the Council of Trent against both errors. It is had in session 14, canon 6, in these words: “IF anyone shall deny that sacramental confession was either instituted, or is necessary to salvation, by divine right; or shall say that the manner of confessing secretly to the priest alone — which the catholic Church has always observed from the beginning, and [still] observes — is alien from the institution and mandate of Christ, and is a human invention: let him be anathema.”