the power of forgiveness of sins (which sole prerogative was attributed by them to His Father), because He had said "I and the Father are one."

Here again, I thought, was another splendid opportunity for Christ to have instituted "Auricular Confession" were He so minded, and if He wished to accustom His people to it why did He not then appoint Peter or John to hear that sick man's confession, and so prepare him the more worthily for the miracle, and them for the future Tribunal of Penance? But Christ merely said, openly and before all, with no recapitulation of sin, with no conditions, but lovingly and freely and fully, "Son, be of good cheer, thy sins are forgiven thee." Could anything be more direct? I must confess that I felt the floor of this old dogma, on which, hitherto, I had stood so firmly, giving way. No more scanning but quiet deep study did I devote to the reading of the Apostles in their preaching and writing. But they were all devoid of the least declaration expressed or implied which could furnish the Divine foundation of so world-wide and of so criticismfraught an institution as the "Tribunal of Penance. Certainly the text, "Unless ye do penance, ye shall all likewise perish," does not favour the idea by any stretch of imagination. If it does, how does it? I could not take that text as a proof of "auricular confession." For alms, deeds, Prayer, Sacrifice, sackcloth, ashes, etc., are hereby inculcated, but never auricular confession.

In the following text-"There is forgiveness with Thee that Thou mayest be feared," who, I asked myself, is this "Thee," and this "Thou." A mere man? NO. A gleaming seraph? NO. Who, then? God, the Father Almighty, who alone can exercise this power as of Divine Right, "Jesus Christ His Only Begotten Son."

There is an Old Testament text which helped me not a little in settling my conscience as to the non-Divinity of the tribunal of Penance. "Let Israel hope in the Lord, for with Him there is merciful redemption and He shall redeem Israel from all his iniquities," thus portraying the Lord our God as the only Sin-bearer, Sin-atoner, Sin-Forgiver, He, and not mere man.

At the Last Supper, we hear Him say as He took the Cup and gave thanks, and gave to them-"Drink ye all of it, for this is My Blood of the New Testament, which shall be shed for many for the remission of sins." So that on the highest authority in Heaven or on earth, "The forgiveness of sins" is not effected through "auricular" confession, but through the shedding of His Blood.

CHAPTER XXI.

THE TRIBUNAL (Continued).

NCE again I appealed to the Four Creeds for

O their verdict upon this last great stumbling

The

pre

block to my conscientious settlement. Apostles, in their creed, declare for the "forgiveness of sins," but add not one iota as to by whom this rogative is to be exercised. They evidently deemed such addition superfluous. It never entered into their simple, faithful, inspired minds that anyone would dare to arrogate this extraordinary power to himself, or to other than Almighty God. Furthest from their belief and teachings was the thought that any one of their successors would attribute such a privilege to himself, hence they never stated in their creed by whom this "Forgiveness" was to be effected, and least of all by their own Apostolic selves, one of whom had betrayed His Son, another had denied Him thrice, and all had abandoned Him throughout His Passion and Death, with the solitary exception of the Beloved Disciple. If this unique power were not to be exercised by themselves, who were co-workers with the Master and by His chosen and immediate successors, it was hardly to be expected that it would be exercised by others following later on in the centuries. I was compelled to admit that.

There is no record of such doctrine in the Acts of the Apostles. So vital a point of Christ's teachings

as "auricular" confession had it formed a part of the Divine commission would not, in fact, could not, have been excluded from their Creed, or they had been false.

Upon this question I found the "Nicene Creed" very clearly and pointedly expressing itself fess one baptism for the remission of sins."

"I con

No possible twist of the most subtly framed mind dare introduce here the dimmest possible suggestion that "auricular" confession is intended, included, or implied; that auricular confession is an ordinance instituted by Christ and absolutely necessary for the salvation of those who have fallen into serious sin after baptism, except in those certain extreme cases where the Roman theologians hold that a person can go direct to God to obtain pardon. Even then, they maintain such an one must have the sincere intention of going to "Auricular" confession as soon as possible should he escape or recover from the extremity.

ATHANASIAN CREED.

The Athanasian Creed rests upon the authenticity of the two previous creeds, and when I examined it, I failed to trace any reference whatsoever stating the necessity of practising "auricular confession." What it declares most emphatically necessary to salvation is to be gathered from these words "Furthermore, it is necessary to everlasting salvation that he also believe rightly the incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ. Now the right faith is that we believe and confess that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is both God and man."

According to this, then "Believing rightly" the Incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ, and not "Auricular Confession" is the condition necessary to obtain everlasting salvation.

Again, according to this Creed, "belief in and confession" of the Divinity of Our Lord Jesus Christ, "is the right faith." What manner of confession is required by this Creed, who runs may read, but I certainly found on investigation, it was not "auricular confession."

Passing on to the study of the historic Creed of Pope Pius IV., which was published about 1,500 years after the death of Christ, I saw that it was the first and the only one of the "four Creeds" hardy enough to decree "Auricular Confession," or the "Tribunal of Penance," to be "necessary for the salvation of mankind." It demands full, implicit and explicit belief from its adherents and converts in the truth of this following declaration, "I also profess that there_are truly and properly seven Sacraments of the New Law instituted by Jesus Christ our Lord and necessary for the salvation of mankind, viz., Baptism, Confirmation, Eucharist, Penance, Extreme Unction, Orders and Matrimony."

Therefore, by the declarations and requirements of this particular Creed, those who lived during the interval between the establishment of Christianity and the promulgation of this Creed, a period of about fifteen hundred years, could obtain salvation without auricular confession, but those who have lived since the period of that promulgation cannot obtain salvation unless by recourse to it, the "Sacrament of Penance."

However, as a matter of historic fact, the term or respite from auricular confession was not quite so long as 1,500 years, because in 1215 A.D., at the fourth Latern Council it was made compulsory to confess to a lawfully ordained priest. So that, what already I had hitherto but faint suspicions of was now developing into a very ugly and concrete fact, viz.,