In the eleventh century Lanfranc sets forth the same theory, but distinguishes between public sins and hidden faults; the first he reserves "to priest, by whom the Church binds and looses:, and authorizes the avowal of the second to all members of the ecclesiastical hierarchy, and in their absence to an upright man (vir mundus), and in the absence of an upright man, to God alone.
The other text on which is based the second form of confession to laymen, is taken from a work widely read in the Middle Ages, the De vera et falsa poenitentia, until the sixteenth century unanimously attributed to Augustine of Hippo and quoted as such.
Briefly, to obtain pardon, the sinner performs his duty to the best of his ability, i.e. he is contrite and confesses with the desire of addressing himself to a priest; he hopes that the mercy of God will supply what in this point is lacking.
Thus understood confession to laymen is imposed as obligatory later only counselled or simply permitted, by the greater number of theologians from Gratian and Peter Lombard to the sixteenth century and the Reformation.
Duns Scotus, on the other hand,[12] not only does not make this confession obligatory, but discovers therein certain dangers; after him John of Freiburg, Durandus of Saint-Pourçain, and Astesanus declare this practice merely licit.
Practice corresponds to theory; in the medieval chansons de gestes and in annals and chronicles, examples of such confessions occur.
[13] Thus, Jean de Joinville relates,[14] that the army of the Christians having been put to flight by the Saracens, each one confessed to any priest he could find, and at need to his neighbour; he himself thus received the confession of Guy d'Ybelin, and gave him a kind of absolution saying: "Je vous asol de tel pooir que Diex m'a donnei" (I absolve you with such power as God may have given me).
Sixteenth-century authors, while not condemning the practice, declared it dangerous, e.g. Martin Aspilcueta (Navarrus),[18] who with Dominicus Soto says that it had fallen into desuetude.
Although this can lead to some variation between nations, there remains a general unity based upon the doctrinal positions of the 1662 Book of Common Prayer.
[citation needed] In relation to the reconciliation of a penitent, most churches state (either in their Canons, or in their liturgical rubrics, or both) that confession must be made to a priest.
As an example, the Anglican Church of Canada states, in the preface to its liturgical rite for "The Reconciliation of a Penitent", the following: "The absolution in these services may be pronounced only by a bishop or a priest.
[31] The Book of Worship of The United Methodist Church contains the rite for private confession and absolution in A Service of Healing II, in which the minister pronounces the words "In the name of Jesus Christ, you are forgiven!
[34] In Methodism, the minister is bound by the Seal of the Confessional, with The Book of Discipline stating "All clergy of The United Methodist Church are charged to maintain all confidences inviolate, including confessional confidences"; any confessor who divulges information revealed in confession is subject to being defrocked in accordance with canon law.