Page:Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent Buckley.djvu/127

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.
ON THE SACRAMENT OF PENANCE.
95

lest any should perish on this very account, it has always been very piously observed in the said Churcb of God, that there be no reservation at the point of death, and therefore, that all priests may [then] absolve all penitents whatsoever from all manner soever of sins and censure: and whereas, save only at that point [of death], priests have no influence in reserved cases, let them endeavour to persuade penitents to this alone, to repair to superior and lawful judges for the benefit of absolution.

CHAPTER VIII.

On the Necessity and Fruit of Satisfaction.

Lastly, as concerns satisfaction, which as it has, above all the parts of penance, been at all times recommended to the Christian people by our Fathers, so is it the one especially which in our age is, under the highest pretext of piety, impugned by those, who have a form of godliness, but have denied the power thereof;[1] the holy synod declares, that it absolutely false, and alien from the word of God, that the guilt is never remitted by the Lord, without the whole punishment also being pardoned. For clear and distinct examples are found in the sacred writings, by which, besides by divine tradition, this error is refuted in the plainest manner possible. And, in good truth, the nature of divine justice seems to demand, that in one manner,[2] they, who through ignorance have sinned before baptism, be received into grace; and in another, those who, after having been freed from the servitude of sin and of the devil, and having received the gift of the Holy Ghost, have not feared, knowingly to defile the temple of God[3] and to grieve the Holy Spirit.[4] And it becomes the divine clemency, that sins be not in such wise remitted unto us without any satisfaction, as that, occasion being obtained, thinking sins less grievous,

  1. 2 Tim. iii. 5.
  2. The phrase "aliter ab eo" followed by "aliter vero," seems extraordinary Latinity even for the middle ages. I cannot help thinking that the reading should be "aliter a Deo." A similar mistake has occurred twice in the Benedictine and other editions of St. Gregory's Homilies on the Gospels, but I have not my translation at hand, and cannot point out the precise passages.
  3. 1 Cor. iii. 17.
  4. Ephes. iv, 80.