"fter to say, Thy Sins are forgiven, I am as infal"libly fure they are fo, as if I heard a Voice my felf from Heaven." All Divines hitherto have taught us, that our Affurance of our Forgiveness depends upon our being confcious, that we have heartily and fincerely repented, and without immediate Revelation we can have none other Affurance. But here's a Gentleman, who is affur'd by the Priest's Affurance, not by his own. If the Priest be affur'd he has power to abfolve, then he is fure his Sins are forgiven. I'm afraid that won't follow: for either this Gentleman, when abfolv'd by a Prieft, is a true Penitent, or he is not; if he be, then his Affurance of Forgiveness comes not from his opinionative Power of the Priest, but from his own Senfe, that he is one qualify'd for Pardon by the Terms of the Gospel. But if he be not a true Penitent, then a thousand Priestly Abfolutions, be they ever fo abfolute and peremptory, will do him no Service; and let the Priest be ever fo fure of his own Power, he can never affure an impenitent Sinner of Pardon, who understands the Terms of Forgiveness in the Gospel: Upon a fincere Compliance with which Terms we are certainly forgiven by God, and may fecurely depend upon it, tho all the Priests in Chrif tendom should refufe us Abfolution, or even anathematize us. 6.34. 'Tis pleasant to obferve how he trifles, p. 47. He begins indeed with a feeming ferious Air, "Per"haps we shall better understand this Controversy, if we ftate it in a logical View." Then having recited fome words of the Bishop, he comes off instantly from his logical View, in this abje&t manner; " I " leave the Learned to quarrel about Mode and Figure :" And well he may; he has fome Modefty left to restrain him; if his Stock had been greater, he had not laid down his Ha-er to take up the Pen, which by no means is the Province of every Demetrius. He may repeat his Affertions about God's God's appointing a Set of Men, as his words are, pag. 48, 49. and of his impowering them to act in his ftead, and urge the Expediency of it as often and as dogmatically as he pleafes; unless he could plainly and clearly ftate his own Notion of the Priestly Powers, or had carefully obferv'd what the Bishop has faid about Authoritative Abfolution, his intermeddling in this Affair will fignify nothing, but to amufe himself, and divert the Publick. §. 35. His Recital of the common Texts that are produc'd in thefe Debates, fignify nothing from his Pen; because he can neither explain them, nor ap-. ply them to his purpose. I wish he took a little more heed to quote the words right, which he has not done, Mat. 18. 18. and to write intelligibly, which he has not done, pag. 50. and in several other Places. And as for Candour, if he knows the true meaning of the Word, he feems to have no regard for the thing; why elfe does he upon the leaft Occafion, and from no Occafion given him, divert from honeft and useful Observations to invidious Reflections? pag. 51. What need was there of his "modern Notions of Proteftantifm, Levities from the "Genius of a Mughoufe, or the Pen of a News-Wri ter, &c." unless it be natural to him to be dull, and to be rude? "O but the Text, Whofefoever Sins 66 ye remit, they are remitted, &c. John 20, 23, has "been deem'd fo plenary a Proof of fuch a Power, "that it's urg'd by Divines of all forts for that pur"pofe." Has this Gentleman feen, and read, and well confider'd what has been written by Divines of all Denominations upon these Points, that he's fo pofitive? Have all the Commentators been perus'd by him? He would have his Readers believe this, for he has the Vanity to use these words; Divines of all forts, and Commentators of all forts. Quis expedivit pfittaco fuum xaige? Quis Demetrium inftituit, Bibliothecam Vaticanam, & Theologos crepare ? §. 36. §. 36. He acknowledges, p. 52. which is a Favour, "That fome Powers conferr'd on the Apostles were in"tirely miraculous, and were not convey'd to their Succeffors; but the Power of remitting and retaining " is not fo esteem'd, he fays, by any of the Commen"tators, but is by them all mention'd as that ordinary " and stated Power, which was promis'd to the Church "till the end of the World." By any of the Commentators, and by all of them, methinks are Words too great for little Demetrius, and too falfe for a modest Man to use. However they are but Words, and vain ones too out of his Mouth. Commentators we know, and Criticks we know; but who are you, Sir? and what is the precife Notion of remitting and retaining you contend for? Dr. Brett, in his Doctrine of Remiffion explain'd and vindicated, pag. 51. tells us what he understands by Absolution, and the Description is penn'd pretty cautiously, tho (if I rightly understand him) he makes the Remiffion of Sins to be the Effect of the Priest's Declaration and Pronunciation of it; a Notion, I think, that can never be prov'd: for certainly Pardon of Sins is the pure and fole Effect of the Divine Mercy and Goodness, and the Apostles themselves could be no further concern'd in it, than to declare it, tho they could declare and pronounce it abfolutely to fuch, of whofe State they had receiv'd immediate Revelation; that is, they could with Certainty tell fuch, that God had pardon'd them: but none who are call'd their Succeffors can declare peremptorily and The Author of the Penitential Difcipline of the Primitive Church, Speaking of the Abfolution in the Primitive Church, fays, pag. 93. That Abfolution regarded the Sinner's Confcience, or relax'd the Cenfures of the Church: The firft Abfolution was by interceding with God for the Sinner's Forgiveness ; the second declar'd him releas'd from the Ecclefiaftical Cenfure. The firft kind of Abfolution, fays he, was always in Form of a Prayer throughout the earlieft Ages, and continu'd fo for a thousand years. effectually, effectually, I pardon you, I abfolve you, &c. because they have not the fame measure of the Spirit. Nor. will or can Remiffion follow, as an Effect from any Declaration made by any Perfon whatever, it being the certain, proper, and genuine Effect of the Divine Mercy and Goodness alone. Men may make known God's Grace and Favour to Penitents; but He alone can originally and authoritatively forgive: for 'tis his Laws and his Authority as a Governor that the Sinner violates, and therefore 'tis he alone that can remit the Punishment. All the Power that was certainly convey'd by our Saviour to the Apostles, by these words, Whofefoever Sins ye remit, &c. they undoubtedly exercis'd; but the most learned Interpreters of any Communion are very cautious in pronouncing, that they have attain'd the adequate and intire Sense of thofe Words. Yet all Interpreters of Note are agreed, that the Apostles, in fome Inftances of their Power and Authority, had no Succeffors; and most certainly they have none, who can now remit and retain Sins by the fame Divine Direction as they did. And till Divines can with Certainty, and by infallible Knowledg, diftinguish the Sincere from the Hypocrites, a peremptory and indicative Abfolution is an Act of the higheft Prefumption. And to think fuch Abfolution has any Efficacy for the Pardon of Sins, is, as Dr. Cannon truly fays, grofs Superftition. Mr. Sm-th thinks a little Gravity, and fome good Words, will do with his Readers; especially if he can but talk of Commentators, and cite fome infufficient Paffages from two or three of that Number. If he can read the Critici Sacri, and understand them well, he may fee Caufe to alter his Opinion; and for the prefent I will abide by the Sense of our Church in this matter, where he has exprefs'd her Sense of * * Account of tao Motions in Convocation, p. 12. F Abfo Abfolution in the plaineft Terms, viz. He (that is, God) hath given Power and Commandment to his Minifters to declare and pronounce to his People, being penitent, &c. And He, that is, God pardoneth, and not the Priest pardoneth and abfolveth all them that truly repent, and unfeignedly believe his Holy Gospel. Upon which it follows, Wherefore let us befeech him to grant us true Repentance, &c, that is, that God may pardon us. By which 'tis evident beyond all difpute, that in this Absolution the Minifter only declares the Terms upon which God will abfolve, viz. true Repentance, and an unfeign'd Belief of the Holy Gofpel. And that is indeed all that he has Power to do in the Cafe: unless he be a Judge in an Ecclefiaftical Court, then indeed he has by the Canons a Power, Solvere nexus five vincula Juris, i. e. to abfolve one from the Cenfures or Sentence of the Court. S. 37. Mr. S-th proceeds to cite an Excellent Paffage out of the Prefervative, pag. 93, 94. which if his Readers look into, they must blush for the Confidence of this weak Man, who has firft left the word [fuch] out of the laft Clause in the Paragraph, and fo made the words Run, "Therefore it can't be the true Intent of this Paffage, [John 20. 21, 22, 23.] to give any Power to Men"; whereas the Bishop's Words are any fuch Power to Men: Pointing by that word [fuck] to a Power to abfolve, fuppos'd to be lodg'd in Priests (which he had spoken of a few Lines before) without which God wou'd not pardon Sinners. I leave the Readers to judge whether fuch a notorious Perverfion was an effect of Mr. Sm---th's Care or his Candor. §. 38. I don't fee how he cou'd read and cite the next Paragraph out of the 94th Page of the Prefervative, without being rightly inform'd how far any one befides the Supreme Being, is concern'd in Abfolution, &c. But he goes on with Mistake upon Miftake, and with one Perverfion after another; that |