I LIBRARY OF CONGRESS J t i I UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. K STARTLING FACTS;' OR, Deeds of Darkness Disclosed RELATIVE TO AURICULAE CONFESSION, • AND ITS RELATIONS TO SACERDOTAL CELIBACY, CONVENTS, MONASTERIES, MORALITY, AND CIVIL AND RELIGIOUS LIBERTY. BY / EEV. J. G. WHITE, Author of the "Protestant Missionary," and other Anti-roman Publications. ^^And have no fellowship with the tinfruitful works of darkness^ but rathey reprove them J'"' — Paul. CINCINNATI: " *' ' PUBLISHED BY THE AUTHOR. 1875. Q^'cOPYRlGHrm Entered, according to an Act of Congress, in the year 1875, BY J. G. WHITE, In the Office of tiie Librarian of Congress, at Wasliington, D. C. PREFACE. The present volume is offered to the public as the first of a series of works in which the author proposes to expose Homanism and defend Protestantism. This work devotes special attention to Auricular Confession, its corrupting and intolerant influences. The confessional is regarded as the main pillar of Popery, the instrument of a despotic clerical power, and the arch-key of the whole superstructure of the Papacy, without which it would crumble to the dust. This book is intended to be an embodiment of facts and documentary evidence of the pernicious influences of the confessional. It is a beacon-light to warn Protest- ants against the seductive influence of the confessional in connection with professed sacerdotal celibacy and convent life. It is also intended to show that Auricular Confession degrades and enslaves its votaries, and that through it the Roman clergy are endeavoring to subvert and destroy the principles of civil and religious liberty throughout the world ; and that their energies are especially concen- trated against the Government of the United States, 4 PREFACE, with a determination to destroy it, and on its ruins establish a Papal despotism. This book was written in the midst of numerous and pressing professional engagements; and if it does not possess variety, it should not be attributed to the monot- ony of surrounding circumstances. It has been written while traveling thousands of miles, and at intervals be- tween lectures, at hotels, between sermons, at protracted meetings, when often surrounded by the domestic circle, and occasionally at home, when resting from the fatigues of a journey, and at all hours of day and night. The nu- merous references to authorities has required the contin- ued presence of a small select traveling library of Roman books. We submit the work to the careful consideration of a generous American people, conscious that, while its style may be subject to criticism, it contains important facts which challenge investigation. Frequent abortive efforts have been made by Ro- manists to assassinate the author, and he has the positive evidence that they intend to take his life. He therefore puts these facts in form to speak for themselves ; and, if he falls by the hand of an assassin, he will fall in defense of outraged and insulted virtue, and ii\\\ fearlesslt/ at his post, battling for virtue, for liberty, for truth, for the right, for the salvation of man, and for the honor of God. THE AUTHOR. Jacksonville, III., Feb. 1, 1875. CONTENTS. PAGE. CHAPTEE I. Introdfctort, . . . \ 7 CHAPTEE II. Auricular Confession Defined, . . . . .12 CHAPTEE III. Auricular Confession Further Defined, ... 26 CHAPTEE lY. The Seal of Sacramental Confession, .... 33 ^ ^CHAPTEE Y. The Confessional, , .52 CHAPTEE YI. Sins, Mortal and Yenial, . . . . . .63 CHAPTEE YII. Power op the Keys, . . . . . . .76 CHAPTEE YIII. The Clergy and Concubines, 90 5 6 CONTENTS. PAGE. CHAPTEE IX. Clerical Seduction, how Concealed, .... 99 CHAPTEE X. Corruption of the Confessional, ..... 109 CHAPTEE XI. Corruption of the Confessional, Continued, , . 115 CHAPTEE XII. Corruption of the Confessional, Continued, . . 134 CHAPTEE XIII. The Confessional a Thief-trap, .... 143 CHAPTEE XIY. The Confessional enslaves Men, 149 CHAPTEE XY. Protestant Slaves to the Confessional, , , . 15G CHAPTEE XYI. Prison-pens for American Daughters, . . . . 170 CHAPTEE XYH. Papal Conspiracy aided through the Confessional, . 174 CHAPTEE XYIII. Eomish Intolerance enforced through the Confessional, 209 AURICULAR CONFESSION EXPOSED. CHAPTER I. I NTRODUCTORY. rpHE intolerant, despotic power of the Church of -^ Rome over the souls and bodies of men is main- tained by the direct influence of the confessional. The crime and licentiousness of cities and nations has been, and is now, in proportion to the unrestrained influence of the confessional. Civil and religious liberty struggle in vain for existence where its obligations are universally recognized. It therefore becomes the duty of all true patriots to investigate the principles of an institution, the influence of which is evil, and only evil, continually. To comprehend the moral degradation and abject servitude which result from the Romish Confessional, it is necessary, first, to understand its principles, its obli- gations, its practices, and its legitimate results. Such is the nature of the subject, and such are the facts con- nected with its investigation, that a regard for decency precludes the possibility of full disclosures. 8 AURICULAR CONFESSION EXPOSED. To form a correct estimate of the horrible corruption of the confessional, reference must be had to the secret theology and ritual of the Homan clergy, much of which should not be translated, nor published for promiscuous readers. In this work we can only coast along the shore of a boundless ocean of filth. We dare not disturb the scum of its smallest adjacent cesspool. Its exhalations are infected with moral pestilence; and protracted con- tact with its poisoned waters often results in eternal death. The necessity for Auricular Confession is predicated on the false and blasphemous assumption of the Homan clergy, who arrogate to themselves the titles of vice- gerents and vicars of Jesus Christ, possessed of judicial power as God to forgive or retain sin, and to save or damn the souls of men at pleasure. And so absolute is this' power that if a priest, in confession, refuse to par- don a penitent, Jesus Christ himself can not do it. Notwithstanding this blasphemous assumption of power, priests are compelled to admit that they do not possess all the attributes of God ; they are not omnis- cient nor omnipresent; and they are chiefly dependent on the extorted confessions of transgressors for their know^ledge of sins committed. Under these circum- stances they are as liable to be mistaken, deceived, and imposed upon, as other men. When confession is made, the priest does not know whether it is true or false, par- tial or thorough, feigned or sincere. And the penitent, if sincere, does not know whether he has confessed all, INTRODVCTORY. 9 or forgotten a part of his sins. And if the penitent is sincere, and is sure that he has confessed all mortal sins, and the priest has pronounced absolution in the usual form, the penitent does not know that the priest had the requisite intention, without which his pretended absolu- tion is a blasphemous ecclesiastical farce. In order to expedite this difficult work of Romish pardon and salvation, the clergy have instituted Auricu- lar Confession, which will receive attention in the follow- ing pages. This book is intended to meet the wants of the general reader, which fact will preclude the possibil- ity of extended quotations from the corrupt, secret, Latin theology of the Roman clergy. The most chaste ex- tracts are only admissible in consideration of correcting or preventing the evil influence. Ministers and men of age are referred to the original, which are before us, and can not be successfully denied nor defended. Auricular Confession, in the hands of the Roman clergy, is the masterpiece of the devil's workmanship, the arch-key of the whole superstructure of clerical power. {^Strike down the confessional, and professed sacerdotal celibacy Avill be discarded, convent life will lose many of its attractions, " foundling institutions " will be less pat- ronized, and " Magdalene institutions " and houses of the " Good Shepherd," Avill be less in demand for clerical pros- titutes. ^ Abolish the confessional, and the clerical power of Rome will vanish with it, and millions who are now crushed by Popish despotism, will enjoy civil and re- lioious libertv. No class of men understand these facts^ 10 AURICULAR CONFESSION EXPOSED. better than the Roman clergy; and hence their furt/ when these secret abominations are exposed. We have had much experience on this subject. Re- peated mob violence, and efforts at assassination, have been employed in vain to suppress the facts. The truth must and shall be proclaimed. The abominations of the confessional shall be exposed till its corrupting influences are understood, and until it shall be declared a nuisance, and suppressed by legal enactments. If there is a law in the land for the suppression of brothels, it might, Avith equal propriety, be enforced also against this prolific source of licentiousness. Let Protestant parents understand the rehition which priests sustain to nuns in the confessional, and they will cease to patronize convents. Let husbands understand the libidinous questions which bachelor priests are au- thorized to propound to their waives in confession, and their just indignation will demand redress. Let the people understand that the Roman clergy are the trucu- lent minions of an ecclesiastical despot, and that through the confessional they are prostituting virtue, corrupting society, and endeavoring to subvert the institutions of the nation, and enlightened public sentiment will consign the confessional to merited infamy. We are impelled to the publication of this work by the fact that Protestants generally have no just concep- tion of the " mystery of iniquity " now practiced in our midst by the " mother of harlots." Also, from the fact -that eomnaon decency wdll forever preclude the possibility INTRODUCTORY. 11 of disclosing the worst to a select company of men, much less in a work for general readers. The well-being of society demands that sufficient light be shed on this most detestable system of darkness to guard the unsuspecting against its seductive influences. This work is intended to arrest attention, and disclose such facts as may be prudently presented to the general reader, with the hope that men of mature years, and especially ministers of the Gospel, may be induced to examine more thoroughly this prolific source of licen- tiousness, which is subverting the virtue of youth, and jeopardizing the souls of millions. We predicate our statements on books and documents before us which chal- lenge investigation, and we defiantly hurl the facts in the face of the Roman clergy. Such a system of un- blushing licentiousness shall not escape merited rebuke and public exposure. Trusting for success to the justness of our cause, and to that power which guided the sling of David, we hurl this pebble of truth at the brazen pate of the " man of sin," and pray God to smite him to the dust. 12 AURICULAR CONFESSION EXPOSED. CHAPTER II. AURICULAR CONFESSION DEFINED. A URICULAH Confession is a modern invention, a -^ device of wicked men, and a prolific source of crime and licentiousness. It is not authorized in the Word of God, nor sanctioned by common sense. It was not known to Moses nor the prophets, and it was not taught by Jesus Christ, nor by his apostles. It origi- nated in ignorance and superstition, and can only be per- petuated by this influence. Auricular Confession is literally confession in the ear of a priest in order to ob- tain judicial absolution from all mortal sins committed after baptism. Roman theology teaches that baptism pardons original sin, and that the Roman clergy, by the " power of the keys," grant judicial pardon as God, for all mortal sins committed by their faithful after baptism, and is thus defined: "Confession, then, is defined a •sacramental accusation of one's self, made to obtain pardon by virtue of the keys." (Catechism of Trent, p. 191.) Previous to the Lateran Council, A. D. 1215, the confession of sin was an optional thing in the Church of Rome. In the midnight darkness of the world it had increasing popularity for two centuries. The flagrant AUEICULAB CONFESSION DEFINED, 13 licentiousness of bishops and popes of this period de- manded secrecy, or otherwise the entire suspension of confession in any form. Confession to God, and public confession in presence of the Church, had been long practiced ; but the debauchery of the clergy and popes, and consequent corruption of the people, brought pub- lic confession into disrepute and furnished strong induce- ments to conceal vice. Confession had been recommended; but it had no sovereign sanctions to enforce it, no canon or bull to compel it throughout the Roman Church previous to A. D. 1215, and the new dogma was not confirmed till the Council of Trent in its fourteenth session, A. D. 1557, the canons of which clearly defined the doctrine, as follows : " Canon 1. Whoever shall affirm that penance, as used in the Catholic Church, is not truly and properly a sacrament, instituted by Christ our Lord, 'for the benefit of the faithful, to reconcile them to God, as often as they shall fall into sin after baptism, LET HIM BE ACCUESEB." " Canon 3. Whoever shall affirm that the words of the Lord our Saviour, 'Eeceive ye the Holy Ghost; whose sins you shall forgive they are forgiven them, and whose sins j^ou shall re- tain the}^ are retained ;' are not to be understood of the power of forgiving and retaining sins in the sacrament of penance, as the Catholic Church has always from the very first under- stood them ; but shall restrict them to the authority of preach- ing the Gospel, in opposition to the institution of this sacra- ment, LET HIM BE ACCUESEH." *'■ Canon 6. Whoever shall deny that sacramental confession was instituted by Divine command, or that it is necessary to salva- tion ; or shall affirm that the practice of secretly confessing to the priest alone, as it has been ever observed from the beginning by the Catholic Church, and is still observed, is foreign to the 14 ATJEICULAE CONFESSION EXPOSED, institution and command of Christ, and is a human invention, LET HIM BE ACCUESED." " Canon 7. Whoever shall affirm that, in order to obtain for- giveness of sins in the sacrament of penance, it is not by Di- vine command necessary to confess all and every mortal sin which occurs to the memory after due and diligent premedita- tion, including secret offenses, etc., LET HIM BE ACCHESED." "Canon 8. Whoever shall affirm that the confession of every sin, according to the custom of the Church, is impossible and merely a human tradition, which the pious should reject; or that all Christians^ of both sexes, are not hound to observe the same once a year, according to the constitution of the great Council of Lateran, and therefore that the faithful in Christ are to be persuaded not to confess in Lent, LET HIM BE ACCUESED." "Canon 9. Whoever shall affirm that the priest's sacramen- tal absolution is not a judicial act, but only a ministry, to pro- nounce and declare thai the sins of the party confessing are forgiven, so that he believes himself to be absolved, even though the priest should not absolve seriously, but in jest; or shall affirm that the confession of the penitent is not necessary in order to obtain absolution from the priest, LET HIM BE ACCUESED." These are only a portion of the canons which define Auricular Confession. In conformity to the above de- crees, Pope Pius V. approved the Catechism of Trent as the infallible exponent of canon law, and it is now so regarded. The Bible itself is required to conform to its teaching. On page 190 we have the following, as trans- lated into English by Hev. J. Donovan, Professor, etc., Royal College, Maynooth : " Contrition, it is true, blots out sin ; but who is ignorant, that to effect this, it must be so intense, so ardent, so vehement, as to bear a proportion to the magnitude of the crimes which it effaces? This is a degree of contrition which few reach, and hence, through perfect contrition alone very few indeed could, hope to obtain the pardon of their sins. It therefore became AURICULAR CONFESSION DEFINED. 15 necessary that the Almiglity, in his mercy, should afford a less precarious and JesS difficult means of reconciliation and of sal- vation ; and this he has done, in his admirable wisdom, by giving to his Church the keys of the kingdom of heaven. Ac- cording to the doctrine of the Catholic Church, a doctrine firmly to be believed and professed by all her children, if the sinner have recourse to the tribunal of penance with a sincere sorrow for his sins, and a firm resolution of avoiding them in future, although he bring not with him that contrition which may be sufiicient of itself, to obtain pardon of sin, his sins are forgiven by the minister of religion, through the power of the keys. Justly, then, do the holy fathers proclaim that by the keys of the Church the gate of heaven is thrown open; a truth which the decree of the Council of Florence, declaring that the effect of penance is absolution from sin, renders it imperative on all unhesitatingly to believe." Again, on page 192 : "Invested, then, as they are, evidently appointed judges of the matter on which they are to pronounce; and as, according to the wise admonition of the Council of Trent, we can not form an accurate judgment on anj^ matter, or award to crime a just proportion of punishment, without having previously examined and made ourselves acquainted with the cause; hence, arises a necessity, on the part of the penitent, of making known to the priest, through the medium of confession, each and every sin. This doctrine, a doctrine defined by the holy Synod of Trent, the uniform doctrine of the Catholic Church, the pastor will teach. . . . When, with uncovered head and bended knees, with eyes fixed on the earth, and hands raised in sup])lication to heaven, and with other indications of Christian humility not essential to the sacrament, we confess our sins; our minds are thus dceplj" impressed with the clear conviction of the heavenly virtue of the sacraments, and also of the necessity of humbly imploring and earnestly importuning the mercy of Grod. To obtain admittance into any place, the concur- rence of him to whom the keys have been committed is neces- sar}''; and therefore, as the metaphor implies, to gain admission into heaven, its gates must be opened to us by the power of the keys, confided by Almighty God to the care of his Church. 16 AURICULAR CONFESSION EXPOSED. "This power should otherwise be nugatory: if heaven can be entered without the power of the keys, in vain shall they to whose fidelity they have been intrusted, assume the prerogative of jprohibiting indiscriminate entrance within its portals." Again, on page 193 : "According to the Council of Lateran, which begins ' Omnis utriusque sexus,' no person is bound by the law of confession until he has arrived at the use of reason, a time determinable by no fixed number of years. It may, however, be laid down as a general principle, that children are bound to go to confes- sion as soon as they are able to discern good from evil, and are capable of malice; for when arrived at an age to attend to the work of salvation, every one is bound to have recourse to the tribunal of penance, without which the sinner can not hope for salvation. In the same canon the Church has defined the period, within which we are bound to discharge the duty of confession : it commands all the faithful to confess their sins at least once a year. If, however, we consult for our eternal inter- ests, we will certain!}^ not neglect to have recourse to confession as often, at least, as we are in danger of death, or undertake to perform any act incompatible with the state of sin, such as to administer or receive the sacraments." Again, on page 194 : " All mortal sins must be revealed to the minister of religion ; venial sins, which do not separate us from the grace of God. and into which we fi-equently fall, although, as the experience of the pious proves, proper and profitable to be confessed, may be omitted without sin, and expiated b}' a variety of other means. Mortal sins, as we have already said, although buried in the darkest secrecy, and also sins of desire onh^ such as are forbidden by the Ninth and Tenth Commandments, are all and each of them to be made a matter of confession. Such secret sins often inflict deeper wounds on the soul than those which are committed openly and publicly. . . . Some circum- stances are such as, of themselves, to constitute mortal guilt; on no account or occasion whatever, therefore, are such circum- stances to be omitted. Has any one imbrued his hands in the blood of his fellow-man? He must state whether his victim AURICULAR CONFESSION DEFINED. 17 was a layman or an ecclesiastic. Has he had criminal inter- course with any one? He must state whether the female was married or unmarried, a relative, or a person consecrated to God by vow." THE PRIEST FORGIVES ALL SORTS OF SINS. Again, on page 196 : " But in case of imminent danger of death, when recourse can not be had to the proper priest, that none may perish, the Council of Trent teaches, that, according to the ancient prac- tice of the Church of God, it is then lawful for any priest not only to remit all sorts of sins, whatever faculties they might otherwise require, but also to absolve from excommunication." These extracts from canons and the Catechism of the Council of Trent may be examined with care, as we shall presently have use for them. It may also be observed that while the priest may be in flagrant violation of the Seventh Commandment of the decalogue — Sixth of the Douay Bible — he professes to have power to absolve his accomplice in crime from all other sins, and in case of danger of death from that sin also. This last fact will receive attention in subsequent pages. All the approved theology of the Homan Church, and all public and private instruction, is required to conform strictly to the teaching of the Council of Trent. This fact will be more apparent by reference to the catechisms and manuals in the hands of the laity and the secret theology for the instruction of the clergy. We here introduce extracts from the common cate- chisms and other books in general use throughout the United States, with the approbation of the bishops. 2 18 AURICULAR CONFESSION EXPOSED. POOK MAN'S CATECHISM. On page 140, we find the following : "the third precept of the church expounded. " Q. What is the third precept of the Church ? " A. To confess our sins to our pastor at least once a year. " §. Why was this commanded? *■'• A. Because libertines would not otherwise have done it once in many years. "Instruction. — This precept is contained in a canon of the fourth Council of Lateran, under Innocent the Third, held in the year of our Lord 1215, which was confirmed by the Council of Trent, Sess. xiv., c. v., and can. 8, whereby all the faithful, of both sexes, are strictly enjoined to confess their sins to their proper pastor once in a year at least ; and to receive the sacra- ment of the holy Eucharist at Easter, as soon as they come to years of discretion sufficient for each sacrament. This precept, then, begins to bind us as soon as we begin to have the full use of reason, so as to commit mortal sin, and to be capable of the sacrament, which, in some, is sooner, in some later.* The Church does not particularly prescribe the time of the year when we ought to confess ; j'et, as we are obliged to communicate at Easter, which can not be rightly done in a state of sin, it is evi- dent that all those who, at that time, are in mortal sin are ob- liged then to confess. " Though the precept of the Church obliges us to confess but once a year to restrain libertines, yet many circumstances may occur, in which, by the divine precept, we are obliged to confess oftener. 1. In all dangers of life, as when dangerously sick, or condemned to die, or when soldiers are to go to battle, or mer- chants to go a hazardous voyage, and are conscious of any mortal sin to themselves; in such dangers (life so uncertain), they are bound to confession ; because, in all perils of life, we are bound to prepare ourselves for death. Ought any one that knows himself to be in a bad state, considering the uncertainty of life, run the risk of a delay? 2. Before we receive the other sacra- ments, if guilty of mortal sin, we are bound, first, to confess; because such sin is opposite to divine grace, and must, of AURICULAR CONFESSION DEFINED. 19 necessity, hinder the blessed effect of the sacraments we receive, baptism excepted; for baptism being the first sacrament, by it we must be made Christians before we can receive any of the Christian sacraments; therefore, sacramental confession is not required before baptism, but only contrition in adult persons. Neither does every sort of confession satisfy our obligation ; but we are to make a true and entire confession, which can not be done without a previous and careful examen of our life and conscience." Bishop Butler's Catechism, which is approved and in use on both continents, contains the following, on page 41 : • " Q- What means the commandment of confessing our sins at least once a year? " A. It means that we are threatened with very severe pen- alties by the Church if we do not go to confession within the year. " Q. Does a bad confession satisfy the obligation of confess- ing our sins once a year? "JL. So far from it that it renders us more guilty by the additional crime of sacrilege. " Q. Is it sufficient to go but once a year to confession? '•^ A. No; frequent confession is necessary for all those who fall into mortal sin, or who desire to advance in virtue. " Q. At. what age are children obliged to go to confession? " A. As soon as they are capable of committing sin ; that is, when they come to the use of reason, which is generally sup- posed to be about the age of seven years." Thus the obligation binds all, beginning with children seven years of age. And to this agrees the Catechism of Trent, and numerous other catechisms published by bishops on both continents. A general catechism for the use of Romanists in the United States, and "approved by the Most Rev. John 20 AURICULAR CONFESSION EXPOSED. Hughes, D. D., Archbishop of New York," contains, on page 41, the following : " Q. What is confession ? "^. Confession is to accuse ourselves of all our sins to a priest, in order to obtain absolution. " Q. How must we declare our sins? "^. We must declare the number of our sins, and their different kinds. " Q. Must we declare all our sins? "A. We must declare all our mortal sins; for, if we were to conceal willfully any mortal sin, we should not obtain the forgiveness of anj^, and we should besides commit a sacrilege. " Q. What must we do to obtain an exact knowledge of all our sins? "A. We must carefully examine our consciences upon the commandments of God and of the Church, and see in what we have sinned upon each of these commandments. " Q. In what sentiments should we present ourselves before the priest, when we are going to confession? "J.. We should kneel, and begin our confession as criminals who implore the mercy of God, viewing Jesus Christ in the person of the priest." Again, page 43 : " Q. How ought we to accuse ourselves of our sins ? "J[. We ought to accuse ourselves of our sins with much sincerity and humility, and begin by those we have most diffi- culty in declaring. " Q. What should we do when the confessor puts us questions? "J.. We should answer the questions of the confessor clearly and with simplicity " Q. What should we do when we have finished declaring our faults? "J.. After telling our sins, we should finish the Confiteor, 1 confess to Almighty God, etc. ; then listen with attention to the advice which the confessor may think proper to give. " Q. What ought we to do whilst the priest is giving absolution ? AURICULAR CONFESSION DEFINED. 21 "J.. Whilst the priest is giving the absolution, we ought humbly to bow down our heads and renew our act of contrition with all the fervor we are capable of. " Q. What is absolution? "J.. Absolution is the forgiveness of our sins, which the priest imparts in virtufle of the power he has received from Christ. " Q. Can all priests exercise this power? " A. Only such priests as are approved of by the bishop can give absolution." Bishop David's Catechism has had a wide circulation in Kentucky and adjacent States nearly forty years, and the late edition contains the following — pages 103-105 : <* LESSON XIX. " OF CONFESSION. " Q. "What is confession ? " JL. Confession is the declaring of all our sins to a priest duly authorized, in order to receive absolution. " Q. Is confession necessary to obtain the forgiveness of our sins? " A. Yes ; confession is necessary to obtain the forgiveness of all mortal sins committed after baptism. " Q. When did our Savior command it? "J.. Our Savior enjoined the confession of sins, when he gave to his apostles the power of forgiving and of retaining them. " Q. How do you show this? "^. Because they could not know what sins to forgive, and what sins to retain, if they were not declared to them. " Q. Has confession been the constant practice of the Church in all ages? "J.. Yes; the faithful of all ages have had recourse to con- fession, to obtain the forgiveness of their sins. " Q. Can nothing excuse from that obligation? '•J.. Nothing, but impossibility, can excuse from confessing mortal sins. " Q. What must be the qualities of our confession ? 22 AURICULAR CONFESSION EXPOSED. ^^ A. Confession, to be good, must have these three qualities: it must be humble, sincere, and entire. " Q. How is it humble? "^. We must declare our sins with sorrow and repentance, seeking no excuse. " Q. How is it sincere? "J.. We must declare our sins as we know them, without making them greater or lesser th^n they are. " Q. How is it entire? "J.. We must declare at least all our mortal sins which we remember, after a due examination. " Q. Is it enough to tell the different kinds of sins we have committed ? " A. No ; we must also tell the number as nearly as we can, and the chief circumstances that may increase our guilt. " Q. What if one would have no sorrow for his sins, or would conceal a mortal sin in confession? "J.. He would, in both cases, commit a great crime, by telling a lie to the Holy Ghost, and make his confession invalid and worth nothing. " §. What must be done by those who, either from negligent examination, or by concealing their sins, or for want of con- trition, have made an invalid confession? "J.. They must, — '' 1. Make over again that confession, and all those which have followed it. "2. Accuse themselves of all the sacrilegious receptions of communion and other sacraments. "3. Do penance for them. " Q. Are there not occasions in which a general confession is necessary ? "A. A general confession is necessary for those who never yet approached the sacrament of penance with the necessary disposition, or have a reasonable doubt whether they ever did. " Q. What must one do who feels ashamed to declare some sin in confession? "J.. He must, — "1. Earnestly beg of God the grace of surmounting that false shame. A UEICULAB CONFESSION DEFINED. 23 *' 2. Look upon the pain of confessing his sin as the first penance to be done for it. "3. Make use of considerations that may help him to over- come it. " Q. What are these considerations? *'^. 1. That the priest is tlie father and friend of his soul. "2. That tiie priest is bound, under pain of damnation, to absolute secrecy and silence with regard to the sins he hears in confession. " 3. That the sins one would thus conceal from one man will be revealed by Jesus Christ, at the last day, to the whole world." Again, from St. Liguori : "He who has offended God by mortal sin has no other remedy for his damnation but the confession of his sin. But, if I am sorry for it from my heart ? If I do penance for it during my whole life? If I go into the desert^ And live on wild herbs, and sleep on the ground? You may do as much as you please; but if you do not confess every mortal sin which you remember, you can not obtain pardon. I have said, a sin which you re- member ; for, should jom have inculpably forgotten a sin, it has been pardoned indirectly, if you had a general sorrow for all your offenses against God. It is sufficient for you to confess it whenever you remember it. But if you have concealed it voluntarily, you must then confess not only the sin which has been concealed, but also the others which have been confessed; for the confession was null and sacrilegious. "Accursed shame! How many poor souls does this shame send to hell ! St. Teresa used to say to preachers, ' Preach, dearly beloved priests, preach against bad confessions; for it is on account of bad confessions that the greater part of Christians are damned.' " (St. Liguori on the Commandments and Sacra- ments, p. 219.) Again : " A penitent at confession should imagine himself to be a criminal condemned to death, bound by as many chains as he has sins to confess, and presenting himself before a confessor, who holds the place of God, and who alone can loose his bonds and 24 AURICULAR CONFESSION EXPOSED, deliver him from hell. Hence, he must speak to the confessor with great humility," (p. 227.) Again : *'Let all who choose to advance in the way of God obey their confessor, who holds the place of God ; he who acts thus is certain that he shall not have to render to God an account of the actions which he performed through obedience." (p. 196.) " OP THE MANNER OP CONFESSING OUR SINS. " Q. What must we do, when kneeling at the feet of the priest ? "^. We must behold in the person of the priest that of Jesus Christ himself, in whose name he sits there. " Q. How must we consider ourselves? "J.. Each penitent must consider himself a criminal, who appears before his judge. " Q. How must we begin our confession? *' A. We must, — " 1. Make the sign of the cross. . " 2. Ask the priest's blessing, saying, Bless me, father ! for I have sinned. " 3. Say the Confiteor, or, I confess to Almighty God^ etc., as far as, Through my fault, etc. " Q. What are we to do next? "A. AYe must tell,— " 1. The time of our last confession. " 2. Whether we received absolution. *' 3 AVhether we have performed the penance enjoined upon us. "4. Whether we did not forget any thing in our last confession. " Q. What is the best form of confession ? " A. It is to say, I accuse myself of such and such a sin, so many times. '' Q. By what sin is it proper to begin our confession ? " A. It is proper to begin our confession by the sin which .gives us most uneasiness." (Bishop David's Catechism, p. 107.) This obligation of confession is enforced throughout the Homan Church. It is taught in all works on theology, I AURICULAR CONFESSION DEFINED. 25 and in all catechetical instruction. In the Roman system of theology, Auricular Confession is an indispensable condition of reconciliation and salvation. A neglect of the confessional deprives the neglector of the right to the ordinances and immunities of the Church, and forever excludes him from heaven. The ingenuity of the Church has been taxed to impress these sentiments, and compel the faithful observance of the confessional. The more effectually to accomplish this work, penitents are contin- ually threatened with endless perdition if they die in the neglect of it. The following from Dr. Butler's Small Catechism, page 27, expresses the approved doctrine of the Church : " Q. Are any other condemned to hell beside the devils or bad angels? "J.. Yes; all who die enemies to God; that is, all who die in the state of mortal sin. " Q. Can any one come out of hell? " A. No ; out of hell there is no redemption" The only exception is, where they say the Virgin Mary sometimes interposes, and rescues souls doomed to endless perdition. Priests, for money, pretend to deliver souls from purgatory — a place which does not exist ; but it is reserved for Mary only to deliver from hell. (Glories of Mary, p. 123, etc.) 26 AURICULAR CONFESSION EXPOSED. CHAPTER in. CONFESSION FURTHER DEFINED. rpHE above extracts disclose many startling facts ■^ worthy of careful consideration, some of which we here enumerate : 1. The penitent, when kneeling at the feet of the priest " must behold in the person of the priest that of Jesus Christ himself, in whose name he sits there." This certainly requires powerful organs of vision or a more powerful imagination to see in the person of any priest, whether drunk or sober, 'Uhat of Jesus Christ himself r What strange perceptions must Romanists have when they can at one time behold Jesus Christ in the person of a bloated, licentious priest, and at another time in a drop of wine, or in the small dust of a wafer. 2. "Each penitent must consider himself a criminal who appears before his judger How degrading this ab- ject servitude ; how lost to self-respect must be the vic- tims of superstition who can voluntarily surrender soul and body to the dictation and domination of arrogant, self-constituted despots. 3. What a blasphemous assumption for mortal man, inflated with a self-righteous pomposity, and with his shirt-collar the back side before, in a long gown or petti- CONFESSION FUBTHER -DEFINED. 27 coat, or with his coat-tail a foot longer th-an other men's, strutting in sanctimonious hypocrisy, proclaiming him- self God, with power over three worlds — heaven, earth, and hell — and ahility to save or damn the souls of men at pleasure; pretending to open and shut heaven and hell at discretion, to grant judicial pardon as God, when (unless he is better than required by his theology, and better than many of his order) he is living in debauch- ery, indulging his appetites, passions, and propensities. Shame on such blasphemous, heaven-daring, hell-deserv- ing insolence, which, in hypocritical mask, and in virtue's guise, attempts to " Steal the livery of the court of heaven, To serve the devil in ; And transact villainies that common sinners durst not meddle with." "Oh judgment! thou hast fled to brutish beasts, And men have lost their reason." 4. The priest, in the confessional as God, pretends to forgive the sins of others, when at the same time he is liable at any moment to be eternally damned if he should disclose secrets from the confessional. * Thus " the man of sin is revealed ; the son of perdition who as God sit- teth in the Temple of God." (2 Thess. ii.) 5. The penitent must " earnestly beg of God the grace of surmounting that false shame" etc. Thus it seems that in the work of seduction the " Mother of Harlots " is not limited within the ordinary limits of sensual brutality, but guided by licentious theology, her voluptuous sacerdotal seducers are authorized to instruct 28 A URICULAB CONFESSION EXPOSED, their confiding penitents to ^^be^ of God the grace of sur- mounting that false shame." What more fiendish plot could h«ave been devised to prostitute virtue and debase society ? Modesty, the guardian angel of virtue, must be sacri- ficed to gratify the avarice and lust of clerical pretend- ers, and the intended victims are required to ^^ beg God'* to assist in the soul-destroying work. insulted justice ! how long wilt thou stay thy avenging arm, and permit the "Whore of Babylon'* to revel unrestrained, "drunk with the blood of saints," and virtue by her trampled to the dust ? Is there not some hidden curse, some bolt of heaven, red with un- common wrath, to blast a system which holds fiendish carnival amidst the ruins of fallen virtue, and laughs to scorn the dying agonies of lost souls ? 6. To give respectability to this seductive system of clerical debauchery, we are assured by the corrupters that " the faithful in all ages have had recourse to con- fession to obtain the forgiveness of their sins." By this declaration they evidently intend to teach that Auricular Confession has been practiced in all ages. This is an unmitigated falsehood, only worthy the Jesuit system of iniquity which it is intended to propagate. 7. One of the reasons assigned for Auricular Confes- sion is the ignorance of the clergy, " because they could not know what sins to forgive and what sins to retain, if they were not declared unto them." This is an honest confession, and it is not all nor the worst of it ; they are CONFESSION FURTHER DEFINED. 29 not only ignorant of sins committed, but they have no power to forgive sins, whether known or otherwise. It is simply a blasphemous assumption, not authorized by the word of God, nor consistent with reason. The Bible throughout teaches that God only can forgive sin. God is omniscient; he knows all the thoughts, motives, de- sires, purposes, words, and actions of men. Not so the Roman clergy ; they do not so much as know the decep- tion of their own hearts ; and they have no more power to forgive sins judicially/ than had Judas Iscariot, or Simon the sorcerer. Many of them violate both the laws of God and man, and pretend each to grant the other absolution. This looks very much like Satan cast- ing out devils. Can it be possible that the Roman clergy are such consummate simpletons as to be de- ceived by their own clerical jugglery ? Has their rea- son become stultified, or have they been given over to reprobate minds, to "believe a lie that they may be damned !" It is doubtless true that many of the Roman clergy possess far less intelligence than is generally awarded to them. But after spreading the broadest man- tle of charity to its utmost tension, it is impossible to re- strain the conviction that many of them are deliberately practicing an unprecedented fraud upon a confiding peo- ple. They certainly do know that their pretended judi- cial absolution is a blasphemous, hypocritical, ecclesiastical farce, and that they are willfully deceiving their un- fortunate victims, and decoying them down to endless perdition. They most assuredly do know that they are 30 AURICULAR CONFESSION EXPOSED. instrumentally destroying the souls of their fellow- beings by crying, Peace, peace, when there is no peace for the wicked. No language can portray the conse- quences of this fatal deception. The mere gratification of ambition, avarice, or lust here Avill be a miserable equivalent to the clergy when justice is awarded by the Judge of all the earth, who will do right; when popes, bishops, and priests, in com- mon with other sinners, will stand justified, regenerated, and saved by grace, through faith, in the merits of Jesus Christ alone, or be forever condemned for reject- ing the only Savior of the world. Lordly titles and clerical robes are not the requisite qualification for heaven. They will be consumed by the brightness of His coming. And unless clothed in the righteousness of Jesus Christ, penitent and priest, cardinal and pope, will appear destitute and naked before God, the judge of the universe, to receive merited condemnation, and ever after be exposed to that storm of wrath which is now heaping up against the day of wrath. 8. This pretended clerical power is again predicated on the assumption that Jesus Christ, in his nature and person as man^ judicially pardoned sins ; that he delegated to Peter, as man, power to forgive sins ; and that through Peter the Roman clergy, individually, pos- sess this power through an unbroken apostolical suc- cession. This theory is false in every member. The Bible nowhere teaches that in forgiving sins Jesus Christ acted onli/ " as man.'' CONFESSION FURTHER DEFINED. 31 There is no evidence in the Bible that Jesus Christ conferred on Peter, or any other apostle, judicial power to forgive sins. The apostles never had apostolic successors, and the Bible does not show that Peter or anj other apostle ever exercised that power, or conferred it on a successor. History does not show an unbroken hol^ succession from Peter or any other apostle to the clergy of Borne at the present time. If there is any natural or clerical affinity with any apostle and the clergy of Rome, it most legiti- mately connects with Judas Iscariot, Avhose ^ penurious spirit they clearly manifest. There is no evidence from the Bible or history that Peter or any of the apostles went about hearing auricular confession, and forgiving sins, or that they appointed any person to do it for them. The reverse of this is true, and history and the Bible prove conclusively that the boasted "holy apostolic" succession of the Roman clergy is a myth of their own production, and fabricated for sordid purposes. History shows a long succession of popes and bishops who were clerical tyrants, and many of them drunken debauchees, by whose notorious profligacy their pretended chain of holt/ succession is hopelessly and ruinously broken. 9. This whole system rests on an unsustained as- sumption, and that assumption is enforced by the third frecept of the Church, and the reason assigned for the third precept is, "Because lihertines would not have done it [confessed] once in many years." This is a tacit ad- mission that the Church of Rome contains within it as 32 AURICULAR CONFESSION EXPOSED. communicants such a large number of libertines that it became necessary to enact a law in perpetuity to regu- late their licentiousness. How different this system from the teaching of the Bible, which declares that " without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers !" The Church of Jesus Christ is not the appropriate place for libertines, and if the Church of Rome were a true and pure Church of Christ, there would be no ne- cessity for either the 'Hhird precept'' of the Church, or the confessional to regulate or restrain libertines. 1 THE SEAL OF CONFESSION. 33 CHAPTER lY. THE SEAL OF CONFESSION. TN all ages of the world, wicked men "have loved -*- darkness rather than light, because then' deeds were evil ;" and never was this fact more forcibly illustrated than in the Romish confessional. To conceal the abom- inations of Auricular Confession, the highest theology of the Roman Church authorizes equivocation, mental res- ervation, falsehood, and perjury. For the benefit of Protestants who may not have access to the secret abominations of the confessional, we will compel Roman theologians to define the subject. The works from which we quote are now before us, and are circulated in the United States, with the approbation of popes and bishops. Beginning with the smaller catechisms, and ending with the higher theological works, the obligation of secrecy is enforced, under the most solemn sanctions and the most aw^ful penalties : "The priest is bound, under pain of damnation, tO' absolute secrecy and silence, with regard to the sins he hears in con- fession." (Bishop David's Catechism, p.- 105.) "Know that the confessor is bound to suffer himself to be burnt alive sooner than disclose a single venial sin confessed by a penitent. The confessor can not speak of what he has 3 34 AURICULAR CONFESSION EXPOSED. heard in confession, even to the penitent himself; that is, without the permission of the penitent." (St. Liguori on the Commandments and Sacraments, p. 225.) Again : "A penitent at confession should imagine himself to be a criminal condemned to death, bound by as many chains as he has sins to confess, and presenting himself before a confessor, who holds the place of God, and who alone can loose his bonds and deliver him from hell." (p. 227.) "By the law of God and his Church, whatever is declared in confession can never be discovered directly or indirectly to any one, upon any account whatsoever, but remains an eternal secret betwixt God and the penitent soul ; of which the confessor can not, even to save his own life, make any use at all, to the penitent's discredit, disadvantage, or any other grievance what- soever. Vide Decretum InnoceMii XI, die 18 JVovemb. Anno 1682." (Challoncr's Catholic Christian Instructed, p. 126.) " The priest, as the vicegerent of Jesus Christ, bound to eternal secrecy by every law, human and divine." (Catechism •of Trent, p. 190.) "Secrecy should be strictly observed, as well by penitent as priest; and hence, because in such circumstances secrecy must ibe insecure, no one can, on any account, confess by messenger or letter." (Catechism of Trent, p. 195.) Here let us pause and sum up these facts. Bishop David teaches that the priest is bound to secrecy^ under '^ imin of damnation^ St. Liguori says that the priest should be " burnt alive " sooner than re- veal. Dr. Challoner declares that the priest " should not reveal, to save his life!' The Catechism of Trent declares that the " 'priest is bound to secrecy by every laiv, human and divine^' and that the ''penitent is equally bound!' Both priest and penitent are therefore bound to observe •^'.eternal secrecy',' relative to transactions in the confes- THE SEAL OF CONFESSION. 35 sional, at the peril of life, and threatened with " eternal damnation " if they reveal. Nothing less than deeds of darkness most horrible could demand such a penalty for disclosing their secrets. This obligation of secrecy is not peculiar to the Roman Church in Italy and Spain, or in the dark ages of super- stition. It is now binding on Eomanists in America and throughout the world. These pledges of eternal secrecy are not sufficient to destroy the inherent modesty enstamped by the Creator on the female constitution. The Roman clergy therefore often experience much difficulty in degrading and subju-y gating the noble heart of woman to the corrupting and licentious influences of the confessional. They are com- pelled to denounce virtuous modesty as ''foolish hashful- ness " and "false delicacy ^^ and assault the citadel of the virtuous woman's heart by scoff and scorn, by threat ^nd promise, to consummate their fiendish purpose. In confirmation of these facts, we again refer to the Catechism of Trent, page 197: "But as all are anxious that their sins should be buried in eternal secrecy, the faithful are to be admonished that there is no reason whatever to apprehend that what is made known in confession will ever be revealed by any priest, or that by it the penitent can, at any time, be brought into danger or difficulty of any sort. All laws, human and divine, guard the inviolability of the seal of confession, and against its sacri- legious infraction the Church denounces her heaviest chastise- ments. Let the priests, saj^s the Great Council of Lateran, take especial care neither by word nor sign, nor by any other means w^hatever, to betray in the least degree the sacred trust confided to them by the sinner." 36 AVBICULAR CONFESSION EXPOSED, Again, on page 198 : "Still more pernicious is the conduct of those who, yielding to a foolish bashfalness, can not induce themselves to confess their sins. Such persons are to be encouraged by exhortation, and to be reminded that there is no reason whatever why they should yield to such false delicacy; that to no one can it appear surprising if persons fall into sin, the common malady of the human race, and natural appendage of human infirmity." Again, on page 199 : "But as it sometimes happens that females, who may have forgotten some sin in a former confession, can not bring them- selves to return to the confessor, dreading to expose themselves to the suspicion of having been guilt}- of something grievous, or of looking for the praise of extraordinary piety, the pastor will frequently remind the faithful, both publicly and privately, that no one is gifted with so tenacious a memory as to be able to recollect all his thoughts, words, and actions; that the faith- ful, therefore, should they call to mind any thing grievous which they had previously forgotten, should not be deterred from returning to the priest. These and many other matters demand, and should receive, the particular attention of the confessor in the tribunal of penance." When we consider the nature of the questions pro- pounded by the priests to females — maids, matrons, and small girls — it should not be a matter of surprise that the priests are compelled to tax their ingenuity in devis- ing means by which to compel their attendance at con- fession'. It is rather a matter of surprise that insulted virtue has so long refrained from consigning them to merited infamy^ No other dass of men would be tolerated in decent society who would' propound to females such vile ques- tions as are asked by priests in the confessional. And yet Protestant parents, who profess to love their daugh- THE SEAL OF CONFESSION, 37 ters as they love their own lives, will place them in convents, where their morals are liable to be corrupted through the unhallowed influence of the confessional. Surely, they do not know the corrupting influence to which they are exposed. But it may be said that it is a matter of discretion whether Romanists do or do not at- tend confession — whether they do or do not answer the obscene questions propounded by the priests. Such declarations are evidence of the most profound ignorance of the rules of the Roman Church. It is not discretionary with any Romanist. All are required to make confession to the priests, and are excluded from the communion of the Church if ihej do not. All are required tp confess their sins of thought, of word, or action — not in general terms, but in detail — and answer an}'' questions, obscene or otherwise, which the priest may choose to ask. In attestation of these facts, we appeal to Roman books before us. But before we proceed with the horrible disclosures, let further evidence be exhibited relative to the obliga- tions of secrecy, by which this system of ecclesiastical seduction has been so long and so successfully secluded from inspection, and its projectors shielded from merited infamy. Let no one infer that our language is too strong, or that w^e are making assertions without clear documentary evidence at hand to sustain them. We have the most horrible and startling facts before us ; but their indeli- cacy precludes their insertion in this work. We can 38 A URTCULAR CONFESSION EXPOSED. only approximate the facts and permit the reader to infer the rest. The startling facts disclosed in these books and re- ferred to in the following pages, have excited profound interest in the minds of many intelligent Protestants, and the questions are frequently asked, '^ Is it possible that such books are now secretly circulated in our midst, as a guide of the Roman clergy in the confessional and other pretended devotions T — To which we reply. It is not only possible, but it is absolutely certain that they are now used on both continents with the approbation of Pope Gregory XYI., and Pope Pius IX. Peter Dens's " Theology " has been in use among the Roman clergy more than one hundred years. It has been twice unani- mously approved by the Roman Catholic prelates of Ireland, during the present century, as the most com- plete system of theology that could be published. It has been used as a text-book in the Royal College of Maynooth, Ireland. It is secretly sold by the pope's accredited publishers and booksellers in New York. The Mechlinise edition, from which the extracts are taken, bears date 1864, and is published by '' De Propaganda Fide' (Society for Propagation of the Faith). On the title-page it bears the following inscription : " Theologia ad usum Seminariorum, et Sacrce Theologice Alumnorum^' (Theology in use in the Theological Seminary, and Sacred Theology for Students.) Kenrick's "Theology" was first published in Philadelphia, in the years 1841, 1842, and 1843, and "Entered according to Act of Congress, THE SEAL OF CONFESSION. 39 by Francis Patrick Kenrick, in the Clerk's Office of the District Court in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania." It was published in three volumes, and the extracts are from the first edition. A later edition from Mechliniae, published in two volumes, by the "Society for the Propagation of the Faith," bears date 1861, and to our personal knowledge it is catalogued in Latin, and is for sale in the large Catholic bookstores generally through- out the United States. These and other kindred corrupting Homan Theolo- gies, together with Auricular Confession, ought to be suppressed by legal enactments. They are the prolific source of gross licentiousness. These are but speci- mens of the entire system of theology, and the infernal questions which they suggest may be propounded by bachelor priests, at discretion, to females of all ages, from "seven years" upward; and the obligation of the confession binds them under penalty of "eternal damna- tion" to "eternal secrecy." The indelicacy of the sub- jects discussed precludes the possibility of disclosing the facts promiscuously through the press or to a mixed audience. And yet something must be done to arrest this flood-tide of licentiousness. For the benefit of those who may not have access to the original we furnish the Latin extracts on the secrecy of the confessional, accompanied with an English translation in parallel columns. In Bishop Kenrick's Theology, vol. 3, page 172, section 87, perjury is sanctioned to conceal the abom- 40 AURICULAR CONFESSION EXPOSED. inations of the confessional, as may be seen in the fol- lowing quotation : ."DE SIGILLO CONFESSIONIS. "THE SEAL OF CONFESSION. " Interrogatus confessarius ''When a confessor is asked utrum quis apud eum confes- whether any one has confessed sus fuerit, poterit plerumque to him, he may generally reply respondere, prout res se habet. as the case is. If he has come Quod si clam accesserit, ipsam confessionem celatam volens, putant plures, et quidem recte, judice S. Alphonso, frangi sig- illuni si accessus ejus a confes- sario declaretur, nam gravi- secretly, wishing the confes- sion itself to be concealed, many think, and rightly, in- deed, according to the opinion of S. Alphonsus (Ligiiori), that his seal is broken if his ai^pli- oris, peccati suspicionem fiicile cation to him be mentioned by injicit. (L. vi. n. 638.) De iis the confessor, for he may easily autem qua? confitendo declar- cause him to incur suspicion of antur, nihil prorsus dicendum a more than commonly griev- est; ca enim ignorare cause- ous sin. Of the things which tur; quum nonnisi Dei vices are declared in confession, gerenti innotescant. 'Homo nothing further ia to be said; non adducitur in testimonium, for he is supposed not to know nisi ut homo. Et ideo sine them when they arc known lajsione conscientise potest ju- only to the vicegerent of God. rare se nescire, quod scit tan- 'A man is brought as a wjt- tumutn^us.' (S. Thom. Suppl. ness only as a man. And, iii. p. qu. xi. art i. ad 3.) Igi- therefore, without injury to tur simpliciter denegare debet conscience, he can swear that se ea nosse ; quod si aliunde he docs not know those things, novcrit, cavendum ne quid cer- which he knows only as God.' tius ex confessione proferatur." Therefore, he ought simply to deny that he knows these things ; if he has learned them from another source, care must be taken lest any thing should be reported more accurately from the confession." Here let it be observed that the Roman priest in the confessional is God, and outside of the confessional, or TBE SEAL OF CONFESSION. 41 in the court-room as a witness, he is man. What he, as God, knows in the confessional, he as man does not know as a witness, ''and, ivithout injury to conscience, can swear that he does not Jcnow those things which he knows only as Godr Such is the moral theology of the most distinguished archbishop of America, whose works are indorsed by Pope Pius IX and Pope Gregory XVI, and are for the guide of the Roman clergy on both contitients. Here is unblushing jperjury sanctioned by the highest authority of the Church of Rome, and which all the clergy are required to teach. The same unmitigated perjury is taught more clearly in the Moral Theology of Peter Dens. Here again is PEEJUEY SANCTIONED. " DE SIGILLO CONFESSIONIS. " Quid est sigilluni confes- sionis sacramentalis? "jR. Est obligatio sen debit- um celandi ea, quae ex sacra- mentali confessione cognoscun- tur. (Dens. torn, vi, p. 227.) "An potest dari casus, in quo licet frangere sigillum sa- cramentale? "i2. Non potest dari; quara- vis ab eo penderet vita aut salus hominis, aut etiam inter- itus Eeipublicse; neque sum- mus Pontifex in eo dispensare potest; ut proinde hoc sigilli arcanum magis liget, quam ob- ligatio juramenti, voti, secreti "ON THE SEAL OF CONFESSION. "What is the seal of sacra- mental confession? "J.. It is the obligation or duty of concealing tlipse things which are learned from sacra- mental confession. (Dens, vol. 6, p. 227.) " Can a case be given in which it is lawful to break the sacramental seal? "A. It can not ; although the life or safety of a man depended thereon, or even the destruc- tion of the commonwealth ; nor can the Supreme Pontiff give dispensation in this ; so that on that account this secret of the seal is more binding 42 AURICULAB CONFESSION EXPOSED. naturalis, fctc, idque ex volun- tate Dei positiva. " Quid igitur respondere de- bet eonfessarius interrogatus super veritate, quam per solam confessionem sacramentalem novit? " B. Debet respondere se nes- cire earn, et si opus est, idem juramento confirmare. "0Z>/. IS^ullo casu licet men- tiri ; atqui eonfessarius ille mentirctur quia scit veritatem, ergo, etc. "i?. Neg. min., quia talis eonfessarius interrogatur ut homo, et respondet ut homo; jam autem iion scit ut homo ill am veritatem, quam vis sciat ut Deus, ait S. Th. q. II, art. 1 ad 3, et iste sensus sponte in est responsioni ; nam quando extra confessionem interroga- tur, vel respondet, consideratur ut homo.r "Quid si directe a confessa- rio qusftratur, utrum illud sciat per confessionem 'sacramenta- lem ? "^. Hoc casu nihil oportet respondere ; ita Steyasrt cum Sj^lvio; sed interrogatio reji- cienda est tanquam impia vel etiam posset absolute, non re- lative ad petitionem dicere ; than the obligation of an oath, a vow, a natural secret, etc., and that by the positive will of God. "What answer, then, ought a confessor give when ques- tioned cencerning the truth which he knows from sacra- mental confession only? "JL. He ought to answer that he does not know it, and, if it be necessary, to confirm the same with an oath. ^^Ohj. It is in no case lawful to tell a lie; but tnat confessor would be guiltj'' of a lie, be- cause he knows the truth, therefore, etc. "J.. I deny the minor; be- cause such a confessor is ques- tioned as a man, and answers as a man; but now he does not know that truth as a man, though' he knows it as God, sa3'8 St. Thomas (q. II., art. 1, 3), and that is the free and natural meaning of the answer ; for when he is asked, or when he answers outside confession, he is considered as a man. " What if a confessor were di- rectly asked whether he knows it through sacramental confes- sion? "A. In this case he ought to give no answer (so Ste3^art and Sylvius), but reject the ques- tion as impious : or he could even say absolutely, not rela- tively to the question, I know THE SEAL OF CONFESSIOK 43 ego nihil scio; quia vox ego nothing, because the word I restringit ad scientiam huma- restricts to his human knowl- nam." (Dens, torn, vi, p. 228.) edge." (Dens, v. 6, p. 228.) Thus, in their highest theology, "perjury" is taught in the plainest possible terms. The obligation of secrecy is ''more binding than an oath, a vow, a natural secret, etc., and that hy the positive will of God!' So binding is this obligation of secrecy in the confessional that " a case can not he given in which it is lawful to break the seal (that is, reveal the secrets), although the life or safety of a man depended thereon, or even the destruction of the Commonwealth^ What horrible corruption must there be practiced in confession to require such fearful obligations of secrecy. Reader, examine well this fiendish obligation, and understand if a Roman priest should learn in the con- fessional that you were to be assassinated in one hour, he dare not disclose the fact under less penalty than ''endless damnationP He may be your nearest neighbor; he may profess to be your personal friend ; and you may have saved his life, or done him a thousand favors, but all are naught when contrasted with the more binding obligation of secrecy in the confessional. If a Roman priest should, through the confessional, learn that the Congress Hall was to be bloAvn to atoms by gunpowder, and that the President of the United States (including the Cabinet, Congress, and visitors), were to be dashed to atoms in a moment, he dare not reveal the fact. His obligation of " eternal secrecy " binds him to silence. 44 AURICULAR CONFESSION EXPOSED. if "the destruction of the Commonwealth depended thereon." This fact, so emphatically set forth in moral theology, is confirmed in Roman ecclesiastical histoiy. Priest Garnet was the confessor of the conspirators engaged in the gunpowder plot to blow up the British Parliament, with intention to destroy the royal family, that Romanists might grasp the regal power and sub- jugate England to Rome. He knew all the fficts ; he was in the confidence of the treasonable conspirators, aiding and abetting, until their fiendish plot was de- tected, and he lost his life for his perfidy. When ar- rested and convicted by a jury of his countrymen, and sentenced to be hung, drawn, and quartered, accord- ing to British law for treason, he still retained the secrets of the confessional to the last hour of life. When all hope had fled, and a certain and terrible death awaited him in a few moments, he, on the scaffold, ex- claimed : " As I hope for salvation, I never was ac- quainted with this treasonable conspiracy except through the confessional, which I was obliged not to reveal." This fact is found on page 580 of the " History of the Christian Church," by Rev. Joseph Reeve, with the approbation of the Right Rev. Bishop Fitzpatrick, and for sale in the large Roman bookstores generally. St. Liguori also, and other saints of Rome, sanc- tioned peijur}^ to conceal the corrupt communications of the confessional. In the Roman Calendar for 1845, page 167, we learn that, preparatory to his canonization, the Moral Theology THE SEAL OF CONFESSION. 45 of St. Liguori had been more than tAventy times rigorously discussed by the Sacred Congregation of Rights, which decreed that, in all Ms worJcs, whether printed or in- edited, not one word had leen found worthy of censure ; which decree was afterward confirmed by Pope Pius YII. This Liguori Avas Cardinal Wiseman's favorite saint, and the following are specimens of his doctrines on the seal of confession, Avhen the priest or peni- tent is interrogated relative to the secrets of the con- fessional : ^'EespondI. Sigillum hoc est "Answer 1. That this seal obligatio juris divini strictis- is an obligation of divine rght, sima in omni causa, etiam quo most strict in eveiy case, even integri regni salus periclita- Avhere the safety of a whole retur ad tacendum etiam post nation would be at stake, to mortem poenitentis dicta in observe silence even after the confessione (id est in ordinead death of the penitent as to all absolutionem sacramentalem), things spoken in confession omnia, quorum revelatio sacra- (that is, in order to obtain sacra- mentum rederit onerosum vel mental absolution), the revela- odiosum." (Liguori, torn 6, p. tion of which would render 276, n. 634.) the sacrament itself grievous or odious." (Liguori, vol. 6, p. 276,^0.634.) "Quseritur an confessarius "It is asked Avhether the interrogatus de peccato poeni- confessor, interrogated con- ten tis possit dicere se illud cerning the sin of his peni- nescire, etiam cum juramento. tent, can sa^^ that he does not AflSrmandum cum communi, know it, even with an oath, quam tenent D. Thomas." It is answered in the affirma- (Suppl., q. 11., art. 1., ad 3.) tive, in accordance with the common opinion which St. Thomas and others hold." (Su]3l., q. 11. art. 1 and 3.) 46 AURICULAR CONFESSION EXPOSED. The reason assigned by St. Thomas is in strict con- formity to the Jesuit casuistry of Roman theologians gen- erally, and is as follows : "Homo non adducitur in testimonium, nisi lit homo, ideo. . . . potest JQrare se nes- cire quod scit tantum iit Deus, (et hoc, etiamsi confessarius ro- gatus fuerit ad respondendum non ut homo, sed praecipne ut minister Dei, prout recte siunt Saurez et praefati auctores loc. cit.); quia confessarius nuUo modo scit 2)eccatum scicntia qua possit uti ad re- spondendum, unde juste as- serit se nescire id quod sine injustitia nequit manifestare. Vide dicta 1. 3. n. 125, v. Ilinc. Quid, si insuper rogetur ad respondendum sine sequivo- catione? Adhuc juramento cum potest respondere, se nescire, ut probabilus dicunt Lugo, n. 79, Croix, 1, c. cum Stoz. et Holzm. num. 722, cum Michel, contra alios. Ratio, quia tunc confessarius revera respondet secundum juramentum factum quod semper factum intelligi- tur modo quo fieri poterat, nempe manifestandi veritatem sine asquivocatione, sed sine sequivocatione ilia, qusd licite "A man is not adduced in testimony unless as a man; therefore, he can swear that he does not know what he knows only as God (and this holds good, although a confessor may have been asked to give his answer, not as man, but es- pecially as minister of God, as Suarez and the before quoted authors rightly say) ; because a confessor, in no manner, knows a sin with a knowledge which he can use for the pur- pose of answering; wherefore he justly asserts that he does not know that, which, without injustice, he can not manifest. Hence, what if he should be asked to answer without equivo- cation ? Even in that case he can answer with an oath, that he does not know it; as, most probably, Lugo, Croix, Stoz. et Holzm, with Michel, teach against others. The reason is, because then the confessor verily an- swers according to the oath made, which is always under- stood to be made in the man- ner in which it was possible to be made, to-wit, of manifesting the truth without equivoca- tion ; that is, without that equivocation which lawfully THE SEAL OF CONFESSION. 47 omitti poterat: quoad sequivo- cationein vero necessariiim, quae non poterat omitti absque pec- cato, nee alter habet jus ut sine sequivoeatione ei respon- deatur, uec ideo confessariiis tenetur sine sequivocatione re- spondere." (Liguori, torn. 6, n. 646.) can be omitted. But as to the necessary equivocation, which could not be omitted without sin, the other has not a right that an answer should be given to him without equivocation ; neither, moreover, is the con- fessor bound to answer with- out equivocation." (Liguori, vol. 6, n. 646.) We have before us ten volumes (the fall set) of St. Liguori's Moral Theology, from which the Roman clergy are instructed as to vile and indelicate questions in the confessional, and the manner of concealing the facts by equivocation, falsehood, and perjury ; but, for the present, the above may suffice. Again, perjury is sanctioned by De la Hogue, whose works are much esteemed, and have been in use in the Royal College of Maynooth, where Irish priests are drilled in the ritual of Auricular Confession in its filthiest details. He says: "Si sacerdos a magistrata "If a priest is questioned interrogetur de iis quorum by a magistrate as to matters notitiam ex sola confessione which ho has learned from habuit, respondere debet se confession alone, he ought to nescire, immo hoc ipsum jurare reply that he is ignorant of absque uilo mendacii periculo. them; na}", he ought to swear Ratio est juxta Estium, quia to it, which he may do without nee mentitur, nee in equivoco any danger of falsehood. It is ludit, qui ad raentem, interro- added, on the authority of Es- gantis respondet, at nihil nisi tins, that in doing so he neither verum profert; atqui ita se lies nor equivocates, since he habet Sacerdos in prefato casu, frames a true reply to the in- namque ab illo non quaerit tention. of the person interro- 48 AURICULAR CONFESSION EXPOSED. Judex quid scit via confession is gating him; because the mag- quafenus Dei vices agit, sed q\\\d istrate does not ask him what noverit, quatenus homo, proin- he knows from confession 'm deque extra confessionem." (De his character as God,' but what la Hogue, tom. 1, p. 292.) he knows 'in his character as man,' without confession." (De la Hogue, vol. 1, p. 292.) Adopting such theology as this, what confidence can be placed in the word or oath of a Roman priest or bishop? Under such teaching, whose character, prop- erty, or life may not be sworn away from him if the in- terests of papacy demand it. The following incident may illustrate the estimate in which the laity hold the obligation of secrecy in the confessional, as reported in the Northivestern Christian Advocate, of 1855: "A Eoman Catholic priest was recently before a magistrate in Chicago, charged with beating and otherwise abusing a a woman, a member of his Church, for refusing to take her children from the free-school at his bidding. The defense set up was, that the transactions of the confessional were to be kept secret; that the woman knew this, and if she should vi- olate this solemn obligation she was unworthy of belief. Wit- nesses, members of the Catholic Church, were examined, who testified that, according to the canons of the Church, whatever insult a priest* might offer a woman at the confessional, she was bound to keep it secret from her husband." After a thorough exammation of Roman theology^ we are persuaded that the Roman clergy should not be trusted under oath in any matter involving the real or imaginary interests of the Church of Rome. They claim power to absolve each other from the obligations of an oath. THE SEAL OF CONFESSION. 49 This doctrine is also imparted to the laity, as may be seen by reference to St. Liguori on the Commandments and Sacraments, pages 83 and 85 : "But if, in a matter of small moment, a person swore witli the intention of performing bis promise, but afterward did not adhere to it, it is probable, as several theologians s&y, that he would not be guilty of a mortal sin ; because God is called on to attest tbe present intention, and not tbe future execution of the promise." "How is tbe obligation of an oath taken away? It may be taken away by annulment, by dispensation, commutation, and relaxation. First, it may be annulled b}^ any one who has dominative power, sucb as a fatber, a husband, a guardian, prelate, or abbess ; and, to annul an oath, a just cause is not necessary. Secondly, by dispensation or commutation; and such dispensation or commutation may be given by the j^ope or bishop, but, to grant a dispensation or commutation, a just cause is required. Tbirdlj^ by relaxation. This may be given by the bisbop, and by all who have episcopal functions." These extracts are from a common manual in the hands of the laity. It is printed in plain English, to be read by all at discretion. The influence of such teach- ing, by a professedly infallible Church, on the minds of its subjects, may be easily inferred. The most binding oaths may be violated Avith impu- nity, and with the approbation of ecclesiastical superiors. Under the influence of these principles, it is not strange that Protestants have no rights which a Roman- ist is under obligation to respect, except in Protestant countries, or where papists are in the minority. Oaths are but toys in the hand of the Roman clergy. The preceding binding obligations of secrecy are not 4^ 50 AURICULAR CONFESSION EXPOSED. sufficient to restrain them except at pleasure, and their theology provides for disclosures Avhere '^ a just cause ex- istsT The evidence is before us, but space will not permit its insertion. The solemn and repeated declara- tion of secrecy on the part of the clergy accomplishes, at least, three things : 1. It tends to diminish the re- straints of modesty ; 2. It lessens the probabilities that criminal intercourse ^Yill be exposed ; 3. It furnishes in- centives to yield to the seductive influences of the con- fessional, Ayith the assurance that the facts will not come to light, they being known only to the guilty parties, who ;ire supposed to be mutually interested to conceal their shame. The confiding penitent finds it difficult to believe that one so holy as the father confessor, and act- ing as God in the confessional, could so far forget his obligation of secrecy as to betray confidence, or be guilty of such perfidy, as to incur the penalty of mortal sin. And such would seem to be the fair and logical inference if things were as they seem to be, and if there were not facts, history, and theology, to the contrarj^ Little do the confiding common people know of the secret theology and Jesuit casuistry of the Roman clergy ; little do they suspect that their humble and sincere confessions often furnish themes of ribaldry and jest in the carnivals and bacchanalian orgies of at least some of their lordly con- fessors. Dens, Liguori, and St. Thomas, each provide that, under certain contingencies, the obligation of secrecy does not bind the clergy except at discretion, and the interest of the Church must determine the matter. THE SEAL OF CONFESSION. 51 The mysieiy of iniquity does not end here. These men-Gods, who, in the court-room are men, and in the confessional, Gods, may, according to their own approved theology, not only keep concubines, but, under other cir- cumstances, flagrantly violate the law of chastity, and, at the same time, absolve their licentious accomplices. This fact will receive attention in a subsequent chapter. 52 AXmiCULAR CONFESSION EXPOSED. CHAPTER Y. THE CONFESSIONAL. Ti^ACH church or chapel is usually provided with a -*-^ confessional, or place for hearing confessions, which is frequently called a confession-box. The plainest form is a chair or seat, in a retired place, where the penitent may kneel beside the priest and whisper in his ear through a temporary screen. This style is not in gen- eral use in this country. With slight variations of form and structure, they are frequently about seven feet high, four feet wide, and eight feet long, divided into two equal apartments by a thin plank partition, extend- ing across the inclosure. In this partition is usually an aperture with lattice-work, or wicket-gate, and sometimes both, about four feet from the floor, through which to whisper the most obscene communications that ever pol- luted the lips of mortals. Each apartment is provided with a small door, which is usually closed with shutter or curtain. This is a description of the plain chapel style of a confession-box, and intended to furnish a gen- eral idea of the leadinsr features of all. A more aristo- cratic style of confession-box may be found in many of the larger churches, the exterior of which is about as large as the above described box, with the addition of THE CONFESSIONAL. 53 another partition, forming three small boxes. The cen- ter box is for the priest, and the boxes at the right and the left for the penitents; but only one penitent should enter at a time. And to prevent the possibility of one penitent hearing the confession of another, there is a shutter or sliding board in each partition, in addition to the lattice-work or wicket, so that when a penitent en- ters the box on the right, the wicket on the left is closed, and the reverse, as the case may require. The middle box for the priest is so small that he, by reclining to the right or to the left, can hear the confession of a penitent in either apartment of the box. The penitent is required to kneel, with the face as near to the priest's ear at the wdcket as possible, and communicate to the priest in a whisper. The necessity for putting the ''mmdh" as near the priest's ear as possible is urged from the considera- tion that "some penitents commit a fault by holding themselves far away from the priest, or too far to the part of the grate nearest the door of the confessional. This obliges the priest to hurt his back by stooping forward. This should not be." (Star of Bethlehem, p. 202.) It is said to be a mortal sin for a third person to at- tempt to hear the secret communications of the confes- sional. Another style of confession-box is, when it is built solid in the brick wall of the building, and not a ray of light can enter it except through the shutters or curtains of the doors. Confession may be made at any time or 54 AURICULAR CONFESSION EXPOSED. place where priest and penitent can communicate pri- vately under the obligation of eternal secrecy. Under these circumstances, when the subjects discussed and the nature of the communications there made are understood, it will not be difficult to infer the rest. Let it suffice for the present to say, that if such communications were made by females to unmarried men under any other cir- cumstances, they would be excluded from decent society. The evidence of this will appear in the next chapter. EXAMINATION OF CONSCIENCE. The manuals of the Roman Church, for the 2:uide of the laity in confession, contain suggestive catechetical instructions, by which they are required to refresh their memory on old subjects which may be subsequently dis- cussed in the confessional, and upon which they may be cross-examined by the priest in the confessional, as a lawyer would exa,mine a w^itness in court. And the validity of the confession is made to depend upon the fidelity in examining conscience, and the unreserved dis- closures subsequently made to a bachelor priest in the dark, secluded sentry-box, commonly known as the confes- sional. As a specimen we select a few questions for the examination of conscience on the Stzth Commandment in the Douay Bible, which is properly the Seventh Com- mandment, " Thou shalt not commit adultery." (It is called the Sixth Commandment in the '^Garden of the Soul," and in other poj)ish books, on account oT their omission of the second, which forbids the worship of THE CONFESSIONAL. 55 images or idols. They make up the number — ten — by dividing the tenth into two.) These questions are trans- scribed verhatim et literatim, with the omission of portions of two, which are calcuhated to suggest modes of pollu- tion and crime that otherwise a pure-minded person would never think of. The questions are printed in plain English, in a popular book of devotion, issued under the direct approbation of the most celebrated Romish archbishop of America, and to be found in the hands of intelligent Romanists generally; and it is but right that Protestants, and especially those who send their daughters to Roman seminaries or convents, should know the kind of questions that will be proposed by the priests, in the secret confessional, to their wives and daughters, in case they should be induced to embrace the religion of Rome. . I must be excused for omitting the most indecent portions of the two vilest questions of the filthy list. No decent man dare pollute with them pages to be read by the people generally. The work in which they are found is but one of a class of books which may be pro- cured at the Roman book-stores generally. The Avork is stereotyped, catalogued, and sold throughout the United States. The copy before us bears date 1871, and is pub- lished in " New York by D. & J. Sadlier & Co., 31 Bar- clay street." It is the " enlarged " American edition, with the approbation of Dr. Hughes, in the words following : " ' The Garden of the Soul' having been dult examined, we hereby approve op its publication. " f JOHN, Archbishop op New York," 56 AURICULAR CONFESSION EXPOSED. which is the usual official signature of that distin- guished prelate. The following are the questions, as found on pages 213 and 214 : "YI. Have you been guilty of fornication, or adultery, or incest, or any sin against nature, either with a person of the same sex, or with any other creature? How often ? Or have you designed, or attempted any such sin, or sought to induce others to it? How often ? "Have you been guilty of self pollution? or of immodest touches of yourself? How often? "Have you touched others, or permitted yourself to be touched by others, immodestly? or given or taken wanton kisses or embraces, or any such liberties? How often? "Have you looked at immodest objects with pleasure or danger? read immodest books or songs to yourselves or others? kept indecent pictures? willingly given ear to, and taken plea- sure in hearing, loose discourse, etc.? or sought to see or hear any thing that was immodest? How often? "Have you exposed j^ourself to wanton company? or played at any indecent play? or frequented masquerades, balls, come dies, etc.? with danger to your chastity? How often? "Have you been guilty of immodest discourses, wanton stories, jests, or songs, or words of double meaning? How often? and before how many? and were the persons to whom you spoke or sung married or single? For all this you are obliged to confess, by reason of the evil thoughts these things are apt to create in the hearers. Have you abused the marriage bed by or by any pollutions? or been guilty of any irregularity in order? How often ? "Have you, Avithout a just cause, refused the marriage debt? and what sin followed from it? How often? "Have you debauched any person that was innocent before? Have you forced any person, or deluded any one by deceitful promises? etc.^ or designed or desired to do so? How often? You are obliged to make satisfaction for the injury you have done. THE CONFESSIONAL. 57 "Have you taught any one evil that he knew not of before? or carried any one to lewd houses? etc. How often?'' On page 216 : " IX. Have you willingly taken pleasure in unchaste thoughts or imaginations? or entertained unchaste desires? Were the objects of your desires maids or married persons, or kinsfolks, or persons consecrated to God? Etow often? "Have you taken pleasure in the irregular motions of the flesh? or not endeavored to resist them? How often? "Have you entertained, with pleasure, the thoughts of say- ing or doing anything which it would be a sin to say or do? How often ? - "Have you had the desire or design of committing any sin? of what sin? How often?" Vile as these questions are, they are but as the shadow to the substance, compared with the questions in the confessional, and to the instructions in the secret Latin theology of the Roman clergy, now before us. These questions, when contrasted with the original, are white as the paper on which we write in contrast with the ink. We dare not specify the facts ; and the most vivid imagination can not do justice to the subject. Let any linguist take the Moral Theology of Dens, Kenrick, Liguori, St. Thomas, and other approved theological works, which are before us, and which are now the guide of the clergy in the confessional and in other duties, and they Avill exclaim : " The half has never been told ;" nor can it be, without violating every principle of decency and instinct of virtue. It is doubtless true that the promiscuous circulation of these vile theological books would corrupt any brothel on the continent. If any man of mature years doubts these facts, let him examine the 58 AURICULAR CONFESSION EXPOSED. original, under the general captions : " De usu Conjugii/* "De Luxuria," ^^De Peccatis Carnalibus Conjngum inter se/' " De Absolutione Complicis," "De justis causis per- mittendi Motus Sensualitatis," and kindred subjects which are discussed in the most minute and disgusting details, and his doubts will vanish. We have repeatedly compelled priests, in presence of large congregations of 7nen alone, to admit the books and Aicts, and the justness of our published extracts and translations. Some of the best linguists on this continent have heard our secret lecture to men, and have compared the " extracts " with the original; they have declared the original books genuine, the extracts fair, the translations literal, and our strictures just. The communications with females in the confessional are not in a dead language, nor in doubtful and obscure sui2:2:estions ; but often in the most obscene vernacular tongue. Modesty is no protection. All sins must he confessed, and all questions propounded by the confessor must be promptly answered, otherwise the confession is a nullity, and absolution refused ; thus leaving the pen- itent in mortal sin, and every moment exposed to die and be damned forever. The confiding penitent is a helpless victim in the hands of an artful seducer, whose will is law, whose ab- solution is pardon, and whose displeasure may incur eternal perdition. No mother's eye can guard the timid, confiding daughter in the confessional. Her innocent, inexperienced, and confiding soul trembling before the THE CONFESSIONAL, 59 august presence of one Avliom she is taught to believe is God in the confessional, and infallible in his instruction, how dare she resent an insult, or spurn his lecherous en- croachments? 0, that mothers could comprehend the danger of thus exposing the virture of their innocent daughters ! Then, the virtuous wife, in the absence of her hus- band, father, or brother, cloistered in a dark corner, under obligations of ''eternal secrecy '^^ and exposed to ''endless damnation^ if she reveals, is compelled to an- swer questions which would seem sufficient to crimson the face of a devil, and "turn the cheek of darkness pale." insulted virtue, hast thou no protector! These disclosures challenge investigation^ and if not true they are grossly slanderous, and we ought to be indicted for publishing them. Let the Uoman clergy accept the issue if they dare, and we will compel them, on the witness-stand, to translate worse things from their own theology, under oath. If priests are not corrupters of society and the de- spoilers of virtue, it is because they are better than their system of theology requires them to be. To Protestant minds these startling facts may cause surprise, and some one may exclaim. Can it be possible that such things noio exist? We emphatically answer. Yes; it is not only possible, but is absolutely certain^ that this corrupt system exists in our midst, with the knowledge and approbation of the Pope and his clergy; and that papal laws and edicts stand unrepealed for the 60 AUEICULAE CONFESSION EXPOSED. extermination of heretics who deny that the confessional is by divine appointment; and the Council of Trent plainly says, Let them be " accursed." To become a consistent Homanist, the first step is to surrender unconditionally the right of forming or ex- pressing an opinion relative to faith and doctrine, and blindly submit to the dictation and domination of eccle- siastical superiors. Reason and common-sense must be stultified, facts and evidence ignored, before judgment and conscience will ever become the passive dupes of authority. This accounts in part for the acceptance of many absurdities taught by the Eoman Church, and practiced by people who are otherwise intelligent. The fear of heresy, and its penalties, puts a quietus on many otherwise troubled minds and consciences. Heresy is thus defined : " Q. Wliat vice is opposite to faith? " A. Heresy. " Q. What is heresy? "^. It is an obstinate error in matters of faith. " Instruc. — He is a heretic who obstinately maintains any thing contrar}^ to the known faith and doctrine of the holy Catholic Church." (Poor Man's Catechism, p. 10.) "A heretic is one who has an opinion; for such is tho etymology of the word. What is understood by having an opinion is, following one's fancy and particular sentiment. A Catholic, without maintaining any particular sentiment, fol- lows unhesitatingly the doctrine of the Church." (Garden of the Soul, p. 392.) Also, " XJrsuline Manual," page 504. This blind submission is not discretionary on the part THE CONFESSIONAL. 61 of the victim. It is, in Roman countries, imperious and unconditional. Property, character, and life often depend upon it; and, above all, the salvation of the soul, or its utter ruin. Under these circumstances, faith is the crea- ture of aidhoriiy^ and implicit ohedience the perfection of piety. In this country, the charge of heresy, or insubordi- nation to the Homan clerg}^, subjects the person to ex- communication from the Church, proscription, and perse- cution by the priest and his congregation. And this cruel persecution is enforced through the confessional, often to the great injury of business, person, and property. Connected with this, the influence of education, often from infancy, and association, must be taken into the account. Thus hedged in by canon laws, decrees of councils, education, and association under the vif^ilant 7 7 O eye of an ecclesiastical dictator Avho is authorized to search out all secrets in the confessional, how abject the servitude, how helpless the victim ! Doubtless, many of the laity are to be pitied more than blamed; but who can sufficiently execrate their destroyers, who are presumed to be men of too much intelligence to be duped by their own devices? In the darker ages, they might have claimed some apology, but not now; and, especially in this Protestant country, they are inexcusable. If any other class of men or ministers were known to have such communications with females as that prac- ticed by the Roman clergy, they would be spurned as 62 AURICULAR CONFESSION EXPOSED. corrupters of society, and shunned as debauchers of the virtuous and innocent. Hoav is it, and why is it, that such unblushing abominations have so long escaped mer- ited rebuke ? It must be from a want of information on this subject. The facts are so astounding that men of intelligence, and often ministers of the Gospel, with the secret theol- ogy of the Roman clergy in their hands, authenticated by the most positive evidence, have exclaimed : " Is it possible! I never had the most remote conception that such things are now practiced in our midst." And the facts can not be successfully denied. SINS, MORTAL AND VENIAL. 63 CHAPTER YI. SINS, MORTAL AND VENIAL. T)OMAN theologians classify sins under two general -*- divisions, usually denominated mortal and venial, by which they mean Im^ge and small sins. Mortal (large) sins must be confessed; venial (small) sins may or may not be confessed. The former can only be forgiven by the clergy; the latter may be forgiven by holy water, the eucharist, penance, and various other appliances, not excepting purgatorial fire. Original sin, which precedes both, is washed away by baptism from both infants and adults; consequently, does not legitimately come within the sphere of Auricular Confession. In approved moral theology and catechisms, sins are defined as follows: "What is mortal sin? " It is that which of itself entails spiritual death upon the soul. "What is venial sin? " That which does not entail spiritual death upon the soul." (Dens, vol. 1, E'o. 153.) This distinguished theologian devotes not less than twenty-one chapters to this important definition, marking the nice distinctions and intricacies between mortal and 64 AURICULAR CONFESSION EXPOSED. venial sins, and leaves the subject about as clear as when he found it. The 156 Ih number commences with the following words : "Although mortal sin is far removed from venial sin, it is extremely difficult to discover, and very dangerous to define which is mortal and which venial; so that these are matters which ought to be considered, not by a human, but a divine, mind." This divine mind, in his conception, evidently belongs to Roman theologians, which is shown by the fact that, immediately after this avowal of the difficulty and dan- ger of the enterprise, he wrote twenty chapters relative to a definition of the difference. If it be thus difficult for a learned Doctor^of Divinity to distinguish between mortal and venial sins, what must be the condition of the common people, who have not access to these profound theological dissertations? How shall they know what sins are mortal and what sins are not, Avhat sins to con- fess and what not confess? This distinction without a difference has been a source of much perplexity to hair- splitting Roman theologians, and has caused them to darken counsel by a multitude of words. " Q. What is mortal sin? "^. Mortal sin is that which kills the soul, and deserves hell, " Q. HoW does mortal sin kill the soul? "A. Mortal sin kills the soul by destroying the life of the soul, which is the grace of God. " Q' What is venial sin? "^. Yenial sin is that which does not kill the soul, yet dis- pleases God." (General Catechism, p. 18.) SllfS, MORIAL AND VENIAL. 65 " Q' What if one willfully conceal a mortal sin in confession? "j1. He who conceals a mortal sin in confession commits a great sin b}^ telling a lie to the Holy Ghost, and makes his confession worthless. " Q. What must w^e do that we may not be guilty of leaving out sins in confession ? "J.. That we may not be guilty of leaving out sins in con- fession, we must carefully examine our consciences upon the Ten Commandments, the seven deadly sins, etc." (p. 41.) •' Q. How many are the chief mortal sins, commonly called caj)ital and deadly sins? " A. Seven : Pride, Covetousness, Lust, Anger, Gluttony, Envy, Sloth. " Q. Where shall they go who die in mortal sin? "j4. To hell, for all eternity. " Q. Where do thej^ go who die in venial sin? "^. To purgatory." (Butler's Catechism, p. 27.) These are specimens of mortal sins which may be enlarged indefinitely. It is a mortal sin to read the Bible, to attend a Protestant Church, or to read books published by Protestants, or to form opinions contrary to the known faith and doctrine of the Roman Church. It is a mortal sin to join the Odd Fellows or Masons, or any forbidden society. It is a mortal sin not to con/ess Sindpa?/ the priest. Falsehood, perjury, theft, arson, and murder, mat/ or mat/ not be charged as mortal sins. Circumstances must determine these matters. It is as true now in that sys- tem as it was in the days of the Inquisition, that the end sanctifies the means. The greater good to the Church of Rome must decide these vexed questions. This distinction between mortal and venial sins fur- nishes a Avide field for Romanist casuistry, and leaves- 5 66 AURICULAR CONFESSION EXPOSED. the confiding penitent in doubt as to his present condi- tion and his final destiny. Mortal sins only must be confessed. The Council of Trent says, Chapter V, 16 : "For venial offenses, by wliicli we are not excluded from the grace of God, and into whicli we so frequently full, may be concealed without fault, and expiated in many other ways." Mortal sins, even of thought, make men children of wrath, and enemies of God, and must be exposed in minute detail, Avith all the attendant circumstances which may aggravate or palliate the offense. And for this the Council of Trent assigns the following reason : "It is plain that the priests can not sustain the office of judge, if the cause be unknown to them; or inflict equitable punishments, if sins are only confessed in general, and not minutel}' and individually described. For this reason it fol- lows that penitents are bound to rehearse in confession all mortal sins, of which, after diligent examination of themselves, the}' are conscious, even though they be of the most secret kind, and only committed against the two last precepts of the Deca- logue, etc. . . . Moreover, it follows, that even those circumstances which alter the species of sin are to be explained in confession, since otherwise the penitents can not fully con- fess tlieir sins, nor the judge know them." (Ch. v.) "Though the priest's absolution is the dispensation of a benefit which belongs to another, yet it is not to be considered as merely a ministrj-, whether to publish the Gospel or to de- clare the remission of sins, but as of the nature of a judicial act^ in which sentence is pronounced by him as a judge." (Ch. 6, of the Minister.) The priest who hears confession is represented as sit- ting in the tribunal of penance as Christ himself, as a judge forgiving sins and^ inflicting punishment. This is the orthodox faith of the Church, and when denied, is SINS, MORTAL AND VENIAL. 67 the result of ignorance; oi' a matter of expediency to conceal the facts. The Catechism of Trent says : "The absolution of the priest, which is expressed in words, seals, therefore, the remission of sins which it accomplishes in the soul." (P. 180.) "Unlike the authority given to the priests of the Old Law, to declare the leper cleansed from his leprosy, the power with which the priests of the New Law are invested is not simply to declare that sins are forgiven, but, as the ministers of God, really to absolve from sin; a power which God himself, the au- thor and source oi* grace and justification, exercises through their ministry." (P. 182.) "There is no sin, however enormous, or however frequently repeated, which penance does not remit." (P. 183.) "The voice of the priest, who is legitimately constituted a minister for the remission of sins, is to he heard as that of Christ himself^ who said to the lame man ' Son, be of good cheer, thy sins are forgiven thee.' " (P. 189.) This may all seem clear to those who mat/ not investi- gate, and who dare not doubt; but what, are the facts, and Avhere is the evidence to sustain them ? In this sys- tem things are assumed which most need proof to sus- tain them. Where is the evidence that priests, either good or bad, can infallibly discriminate between mortal and venial sins, and, as God, grant judicial pardon, or retain sin? And what presumptuous mortal dare assert that to violate the moral Liw and offend an infinite God is only a venial sin? Who shall decide this momentous question, involving the destiny of immortal souls ? Where is the authority from the Bible for this absurd division of sins into mortal and venial — the former de- serving endlesS punishment, and the latter temporal 68 AURICULAR CONFESSION EXrOSED. punishment; the former only forgiven by a Roman priest, the latter by other devices, including holy water, the eucharist, penance, and purgatorial fire ? We are in- formed that there are just "seven chief mortal sins ;" "Pride," " covetousness," "lust," "anger," "gluttony," " envy," " sloth." Now, this is true, or it is not true. If true, the evidence of its truthfulness will be found in the Bible. So important a matter will not be left to in- ference or conjecture. It is a personal matter with every intelligent being on earth. One mistake here, ac- cording to this doctrine, may destroy the soul forever. But it is a singular fact that inspired men, engaged in writing the Scriptures during a period of more than fifteen hundred years, and discussing sin in all its forms and phases, never made this modern discovery relative to the great distinction between mortal and venial sins. They never marked the line of distinction w^here venial sin becomes mortal, or the finite becomes infinite. This important omission has been a great source of annoyance to Roman theologians, and will probably so continue till their system of theology changes for the better, or till it is numbered with the things of the past. How the Ro- man clergy ascertained that there w^ere seven mortal sins, we are not informed; we have this assertion, and nothing more. But at every step we encounter diffi- culty. Pride, for example, is a deadly sin. Is every degree of pride deadly or mortal sin ? If so, all who are not perfect in humility are constantly living in mortal sin. If this be true, how many of the cflergy would be SINS, MORTAL AND VENIAL. 69 free from mortal sin for one hour ? Would the Pope of Rome escape ? But if every degree of pride is not mor- tal sin, in what degree must it exist before it becomes deadly ? When does it pass that undefined, intangible line Avhich separates the venial from the mortal sins ? Echo answers, where ? Here we are left in the dark. All is indefinite. Again, we are informed that covetousness is a deadly sin. Is every degree of it so ? If not, what degree is ? The same questions may be asked relative to the whole seven mortal sins, and no definite answer given. The division of sin into mortal and venial is absurd. After all, if the list of mortal sins be admitted, w^e are not sure that it is complete. Lying and dealing are usually re- garded as sins. Is every lie a mortal sin ? If so, what would become of the clergy ? And if not, how many lies constitute a mortal sin ? The Bible says : " Thou shalt not steal." But some persons do steal, which is a positive violation of the law of God. Is every theft a mortal sin ? Or is the violation of a commandment of the Decalogue only a small sin which may be washed away by a few drops of holy-water, or a few alms-deeds, or a little penance ? Here St. Liguori answers this ques- tion conditionally. He says of the thief: "If he has taken a valuable material at any one time, he has sinned mortallj^ at that time. But if he has stolen a small amount at different times, then he has not sinned mortally, unless it amount to a valuable quantity; provided that from the beginning he had not the intention of reaching a valuable amount; but since that amount has now become considerable 70 AURICULAR CONFESSION EXPOSED. (gravis)^ although he has not sinned mortally, jQi he is bound — sub-gravi — under mortal sin, to restitution, at least of that last quantity which constituted the amount considerable.'' According to this distinguished theologian and saint, a man may steal small quantities without being guilty of niortal sin ; and when goods or money stolen amount to a considerable sum (the language is indefinite), he is bound to restore the last quantify stolen. Of course he may keep the rest, and only be guilty of a venial sin, which is a small matter, and may, or may not, be men- tioned in the confessional. Again he says : "But probably those who have eaten fruit in the vineyards of others, provided they be not rare, or of great price, may be excused, at least from mortiil sin, if they do not cany it away in large quantities. For in things of this kind, which are too little expounded, a greater quantity is required to constitute a valuable amount. And in this way men-servants and maid- servants may be easily excused, who take from their master's tables, provided they be not in lai-ge quantities, or extraordi- nary. Neither ought those to be regarded as guilty of mortal sin who cut wood, or take their flocks to feed in the fields of the community', though it be prohibited, because such j)rohibi- tions are supposed to be j^enal." Stealing is, therefore, admissible, provided it is not in large quantities at one time. It is a small matter for servants to steal, provided they do not take too much at one time (which might lead to their detection). This possibly may, in part, account for the incessant small stealing for which many of their servants are so noto- rious. Again : *'When thefts are committed by children, or by wives, a much greater quantity is required to constitute the sin mortal; SINS, MORTAL AND VENIAL. 71 and rarely are these held under strong obligation (gravi obli- gatione) to restore." Comment is useless ; theft is sanctioned, and the amount indefinite. It is a much greater quaniiiy than some other quantity, but no definite specification in either case. Again : "If he [the thief] can not make restitution without reduc- ing himself to severe want; that is, without falling irom that state which he has justly acquired, then he may defer restitu- tion, provided the loser be not in severe want. T^ay, though the loser be in severe want, probably even then the debtor is not bound to restitution, when he is likewise in severe want, and by restitution would be placed, as it were, in extreme necessity. This, however, is understood, provided the thing stolen does not exist in species, and provided the loser was not reduced particularly by the theft to that severe necessity." Circumstances must determine Avhether the property stolen must be restored. *'If the theft is uncertain, that is, if the person injured is uncertain, the penitent is bound to restore, either by causing masses to be said, or giving alms to the poor, or giving it to pious places; and if he is poor, he may apply it to himself or his family. But if the person is certain, restitution should be made to him: wherefore it is indeed wonderful that there are found so many confessors so unskillful, who, when it is known who the loser is, impose on their penitents, that for the thing to be restored they should give alms, or cause masses to be celebrated." Here is a genuine Roman Catholic process of restitu- tion. A theft has been perpetrated by a Romanist, and the fact known to the priest — is the thief denounced, or excluded from the Church ? No. If he is not certain as to the person injured, he h hound to restore, either hy causing masses to he said, or giving alms to the poor, or giiy 72 AURICULAR CONFESSION EXPOSED. ing it to pious places. That is, in plain English, give it to the priests. This is not only authorizing theft, but requiring the thief to divide Avith the priest. And facts may be exhibited to show that this villainous practice is now sanctioned, and furnishes a source of revenue to the Roman Church. Among the thousands of Roman Catholics annually convicted of theft, who throng the house of correction, the county jail, and State-prison, not one in a thousand was ever known to make restitution to a Protestant. The question arises. What becomes of the property ? Does the thief appropriate it to his own use, and conceal the fact from the priest in confession? If so, how can the priest grant valid absolution ? Or does he confess, and pay it to the priest for masses ? Or do they divide the stolen property between them? These are nice points in Romish theology, and Protest- ants demand answers. What right has a priest, more than any other man, to conceal stolen property, or to appropriate it to his own use, or that of his Church ? This subject requires inves- tigation, and justice demands that, where a confessing Catholic is convicted of theft, and does not make restitu- tion, the priest should be held for his knowledge of the crime and complicity in the act. The priest has knowl- edge of the crime, or he has not. If he has not, all his pretended absolutions are impositions, and he is ohtaining monejj under false pretense. If he has knowledge of the crime, he knows where the stolen property is, and to whom it belongs, and if he does not restore it, or cause SINS, MORTAL AND VENIAL. 73 it to be restored, he is, by implication, ^'particeps criminisy He has, in equity, no more right to screen himself from punishment under the sanctimonious garb of his profes- sion, than any other felon. Thousands of families who reside in cities can testify that thefts among Romanists are of daily occurrence. The police court of any city will attest this fact. From the small articles in the wardrobe, bed-chamber, and cupboard, to gold watches, bracelets, and pocket-books — nothing is safe. And so far as our observation has extended (with few excep- tions), the more zealous the penitent in attending confes- sion the more frequent the thefts. These facts may not be successfully denied. It will be observed in the last extract from St. Liguori (that dear saint of blessed memory) that there is one contingency which may de- prive the priest of the stolen property, that is, if the thief "is poor he may apply it to himself or his family.'* And history establishes the ffict there is no scarcity of poor thieves where the Romish clergy exercise a con- trolling influence. Look at Italy, Spain, Mexico, and other Romish countries, where the streets are thronged with Roman lOatholic paupers. And in our own country nearly all the itinerant beggars are of Romish origin. With these facts before us, will any sane man pretend that Romish schools are adapted to the wants of Ameri- can youth ? It requires not the wisdom of Solomon to predict that children trained under such principles are liable to be corrupted — ruined. The worst of liars began their downward course by 74 AUEICULAB CONFESSION EXPOSED. telling lies which they considered of trifling importance. The Avorst thieves and robbers began their course by stealing small quantities. If children are taught to regard such lying and thieving "a small and very pardonable offense," they may be induced to yield to temptation, which will terminate in disgrace and ruin. Such morality Romanists must teach in their schools and in the confessional or discard their own doctrines, which they profess to believe are ipfallibly true. But such is not the training required by American youth and citizens. This division of sins into mo7ial and venial is grossly absurd, nnd more grossly immoral, and doubtless ac- counts, in part, for the prevalence of immorality in Homan countries, and among Homanists in Protestant countries. Dishonesty is the legitimate result of such teaching. God says, " Thou shalt not steal." The priest says you may steal and give it to him for saying masses. Thus, by precept and example, making void the law of God. The Bible teaches that all unrighteousness is sin, and " the wages of sin is death." It does not say the wages of mortal sin is death. Ezekiel declares "the soul that sinneth it shall die." He did not say the soul that sinneth mortally shall die. If a man is a thief, he is so at heart ; and whether he steal one dollar or ten thousand, he is morally a thief, and would he so at heart if there was not a dollar in the universe to steal. The impure stream only proclaims the quality of the fount- SINS, 310RTAL AND VENIAL. 75 ain. Sin is estimated not by weights and measures, or by dollars and cents, but by the nature of the law violated and the majesty of the Being offended. All sin is against God and his law; and if ever pardoned, God must do it. Away Avith the blasphemous jugglery of self-constituted judicial dictators and clerical pretenders. '6 A VBICULAB CONFESSION EXPOSED, CHAPTER YII. POWER OF THE KEYS. rpO make a show of decency, and to justify the abom- -*- illations of the confessional, the Roman clergy, with accustomed audacitj^, have quoted and perverted the Scriptures. In proof of this system, we are referred to Numbers v, 6, 7, Matthew iii, 6, Acts xix, 18, and James v, 16, as authority for the confessional. But what rehition have these Scriptures to the subject ? Do they teach the duty of Auricular Confession? Do they de- fine the seal of confession, which enjoins eternal secrecy? Do they affix the penalty of "eternal damnation" to be inflicted on either priest or penitent who shall reveal the secrets of the confessional ? Do they prove that " all are ohligcd to confess to the priests at least once each year?" Do they show that the priest, in the confes- sional, " is as God," and in the court-room " is as man ?" Do they prove that Auricular Confession constitutes any part of Christian duty, or that, under any circumstances; a penitent may " behold in the priest the person of Jesus Christ?" Do these Scriptures teach that Christian men and women should crouch in self-abasement before a Romish priest — regarding themselves as criminals before their judge?" Do they say any thing about " mortaV^ ■POWER OF THE KEYS. 77 and venial sins,'' or about absolution from sin " by the power of the keys?" No; not one word about all this; not so much as a form of prayer to the Virgin Mary, nor a word of instruction about the use of '^ frayer-headsr Truly, Moses, John the Baptist, Luke, and James were poor specimens for R-oman priests. They seemed to be entirely ignorant of Auricular Confession, and nowhere inculcated the practice, either by precept or example. But, since Romanists refer to these Scriptures as authority for their abominations in the confessional, each shall receive a separate examination. "Speak unto the children of Israel, When a man or woman shall commit any sin that men commit, to do a trespass against the Lord, and that person be guilty: then they shall confess their sin which they have done," etc. (Num. v, 6, 7.) Now, let it be observed that this instruction was given to Israel, and related to ceremonial restitution ; and neither furnishes precept nor example for Auricular Confession. The context show^s that reference is here made to certain fraudulent transactions for which restitution Avas due; and the confession was intended to show why, and for w^hat, the indemnity w^as offered. This text does not speak of confessing in the ear of a priest in secret. A man or Avoman was not required to ransack every corner of the conscience, as papists are, and in detail enumerate every evil thought, word, or deed. The confession may have been made to God, or it may have been made to the party wTonged. But if it be admitted that it w^as 78 AURICULAR CONFESSION EXPOSED. made to the Jewish priest, there is no evidence that it was whispered in his ear in a dark corner of the Taberna- cle, or any pledge of secrecy imposed on either party. The common people did not enter into the Tabernacle ; but met the priest in the outer court, where it Avas im- possible to communicate privately. Again, with an air of confidence, we are referred to Matthew iii, 6 : "And were baptized of him [John] in Jordan, confessing their sins." This certainly is a bad specimen of Auricular Confession. 1. John the Baptist was a Jewish, and not a Romish, priest. He was also the first-horn son of a high-priest, and consequently a high-priest himself His father was a married man, and certainly not good authority with Romish priests. 2. The people confessed not in secret to John the Baptist, but in the presence of the multitude "from Je- rusalem, and all Judea, and all the region round about Jordan." (Matthew iii, 5.) This confession was not whispered in the ear, under a mutual pledge of secrecy; but open, free, and volun- tary. It was not in a dark corner, nor in the confession- box; but at the River Jordan, and in presence of all the people. There is no record to prove that the people fell down upon their knees before "father" John, made the sign of the cross, "kissed the good priest's hand," recited the "Confiteor," and whispered their confessions in his POWER OF THE KEYS. 79 ears. Not one word is said about "penance" to be per- formed, after confession or absolution " by the power of the keys." They came publicly, and confessed their sins; and John publicly required them, as an evidence of sincerity, to "bring forth fruits meet for repentance." They desired to "flee from the wrath to come;" and John directed them to believe on Christ. (Acts xix, 4.) Again, we are referred to Acts xix, 18 : ''And many that believed came, and confessed, and showed their deeds." This text, also, fails to prove Auricular Confession. 1. It may be observed that many^ not all, came and confessed. 2. They showed their deeds. Their confession became a matter of public record; it was known not only to Paul, but Luke published it to the Avorld ; and yet there is no evidence that he was excommunicated, or consigned to endless perdition. "Many of them, also which used curious arts brouo:ht their books together, and burned them before all men : and they counted the price of them, and found it fifty thousand pieces of silver." They did not burn their books in the confession-box ; for it is distinctly stated that they burned them before all men. Books valued at fifty thousand pieces of silver would produce an unpleasant amount of smoke in a modern confession-box. And yet there is as much evi- dence that they burned their books in secret as that they confessed their sins to Paul in secret. The truth is, 80 AURICULAR CONFESSION EXPOSED. Paul preached to the people, not in an unknown tongue, but in a language which the common people could un- derstand, "and the name of the Lord Jesus was mag- nified." Men were converted by the power of God, through the truth. They came and sJioived their deeds — exhibited their past folly as beacons to warn others. They renounced their former practices, and publicly espoused the cause of Christ. Again, we are referred to James v, 16 : "Confess your faults one to another," etc. This text, also, proves too much for those Avho advo- cate Auricular Confession. It does not say. Confess your faults to ih^ priests, and regard yourselves as crim- inals; but it does say. Confess your faults "one to an- other ^ Now, if this refers to Auricular Confession, it requires the priest to confess to the penitent, and the penitent to confess to the priest. The obligation is as binding on the one as on the other. And, after all, there might arise a question as to who should grant absolution. We have learned, from Peter Dens's "Moral Theology/' that the priest in the confessional may break the Seventh Commandment (sixtji of the Douay Bible), and imme- diately grant his accomplice in guilt absolution from "all other sins," "theft and homicide" not excepted. And in case that his accomplice in guilt is in danger of death, the priest can also grant her absolution from the sin of fornication or adultery with himself. But where there is not present danger of death, the case of his accomplice THE CONFESSIONAL. 81 must be referred to another priest for absolution. It does not require extraordinary sagacity to see how two licentious priests could confess their ftiults one to the other, and each pronounce on the other absolution. This would not be more difficult than to absolve an accomplice ; and, under the circumstances, might entirely dispense Avith penance. If the priest guilty of adultery or fornication may grant absolution to his accomplice in the crime, Ave see no good and sufficient reason why he may not grant absolution to himself also. This certainly Avould super- sede the necessity of confession on his part, since he already knows the facts and circumstances of the case. But, after all, it appears^ from Dens's "Theology," that there are certain restrictions upon the immorality of the priests. They are required to exercise their gifts in moderation; and the priest Avho "deliberately falls" only "two or three times a month" ought to doubt his qualification for the holy dffice of confessor. Thus it may be seen that, in theory/ at least, all sense of decency and propriety is not wholly excluded from sacramental confession. Having failed to find Scripture proof for Auricular Confession, the priests of Rome have recourse to infer- ential evidence predicated ui^on fake assumptions: 1. They assume that the Apostle Peter was the vicar of Jesus Christ on earth; that he held the keys of the* kingdom of glory, with power and authority to open' heaven or hell at discretion. 2. They assume that they are the apostolic succe&sors^ 6 82 AURICULAR CONFESSION EXPOSED. of Peter; and, by virtue of their relation to him, they possess judicial power to forgive sin, or to retain sin ; and that the kingdom of glory can only be entered by their permission. 3. They assume that, in order to obtain the remission of sin, all mortal sins must be confessed to them in secret. 4. They assume that all, of every creed and nation, Avho will not bow the knee to them in confession are to experience endless perdition. These arrogant assumptions are set up by men Avho, according to their own admission, are liable to break the Seventh Commandment two or three times a month; and whose history furnishes many melancholy proofs of their wickedness in this respect. Again, they refer to Matthew xviii, 19 : • Yerily I say unto you, Whatsoever ^"0 shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." This Scripture also fails to furnish inferential proof of their assumptions. The context shows that it referred to the discipline of the Church by the apostles on earth; and, when administered by them according to the princi- ples of their religion, it would meet the approbation of Heaven. The apostles neither claimed nor exercised the power of which Romish priests boast. If the power which they claim had been given to Peter, there is no evidence that he was authorized to transmit it to any other person. But there is no evidence that either POWER OF THE KEYS. ' 83 Peter or any other apostle received or exercised the power to forgive sins. Our Lord addressed not Peter alone, but all the apos- tles: "Whatsoever ye shall bind," etc. He did not say whosoever, but whatsoever. He referred to things, and not to persons ; to the discipline of the Church, and not to the destint/ of its members. The language is plain, "Pe shall hind" The phrase to hind and to loose, among the Jews, often signified nothing more than to prohibit and to permit* To hind a thing was to forbid it • to loose a thing was to allow it to be done, and on that occasion the phrase was without doubt employed in this sense. Thus, relative to gather-- ing Avood on the Sabbath-day, they said, "-The School of Shammei hinds it " — that is, forbids it ; " the School of Hillel, looses it " — that is, allows it. The phrase " king- dom of heaven" is frequently employed to denote the Church of Christ on earth. Matt, iii, 2, "The king- dom of heaven is at hand." John the Baptist did not mean the kingdom of glory. No, he referred to the new dispensation into which the Church was about to enter. So in the parables of our Lord, " the kingdom of heaven is like unto a grain of mustard seed;" "the kingdom of heaven is likened unto a man which sowed good seed in his field;" it "is like leaven which a woman took and hid in three measures of meal;" it "is like unto a net." Again, the disciples asked "w^ho is greatest in the kingdom of heaven?" (Matthew xviii, 1.) "From the days of John the 84 AURICULAR CONFESSION EXPOSED. Baptist until now, the kingdom of heaven sulTereth violence, and the violent take it by force." (Matthew xi, 12.) These and other Scriptures evidently refer to the Church under the new dispensation. The apostles of Christ were ministers of the Church on earth. They were not priests to offer sacrifice. They were not dictators to lord it over God's heritnge. They were not judicial " vicars " of Jesus Christ to consign men to perdition at pleasure. They were not as Gods in confession- boxes to forgive sins. They were ministers of Jesus Christ on earth, authorized to preach the Gospel, to ad- mit to Church privileges those who ought to enter, and exclude the unworthy. They were authorized to admit those who gave evidence of piety, and exclude others, and the legitimate exercise of this power ^vould meet the approbation of Heaven. Again we are referred to John xx, 22 and 23 : "And when he hud said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto tliem^ Eeceive ye the Hoi}' Ghost; whosesoever sins ye remit, they are remitted nnto them; and whosesoever sins ye retain, they are retained." This is a parallel Scripture with Matthew xviii, etc., and inculcates the same doctrine. Did he breathe on Peter alone? No, "he breathed on thern, and saith unto them [to those who Avere present, Judns and Thomas only were absent, but probably were both pres- ent on the former occasion], Receive ye the Holy Ghost." This was a pledge of the miraculous endoAvment POWER OF THE KEYS. 85 experienced by them on the day of Pentecost. (Acts ii, 1 and 2.) "Whosesoever sins ye remit," etc. The meaning of this Scripture is not that men can for- give sins, but that the inspired apostles, in founding the Church under the new dispensation should be taught by the Holy Ghost to declare on what terms, to what charac- ters, and to what moral state of mind God would bestow the forgiveness of sins. They were by inspiration au- thorized to establish in all the Churches the condition on which men might be pardoned, with the assurance that all who would coniplj^ should have the evidence of forgiveness and reconciliation, and those who would not comply with the condition, should not be forgiven, but be rejected on account of their willful rejection of offered pardon. Again, we are referred to Matt, xvi, 18 : "And I say also unto thee, that thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." This is the chief corner-stone in the temple of popery, and without it the building will fall to ruin. This Scrip- ture is pressed into almost every sermon, in advocacy or defense of popery. It is on the lips of papists every- where, and often quoted by those who never read it, and who could not read it if they had access to a Bible de- pository containing all the languages of earth. As to the fact that it is the language of Jesus Christ, none will deny ; but the great question is. What does it mean ? What was the great lesson intended to be taught? Is it 86 AURICULAE CONFESSION EXPOSED. true that Jesus Christ was about to establish popery, and took this occasion to announce the appointment of Peter i\\Q first pope, with power to continue his succession to the end of time? Did he then and there intend to appoint him Vicar-general, with "divine righf to govern the world, to dictate to kings, emperors, governments, and states? to preside over the Church; to hold the keys of heaven and hell, and, in person or by proxy, save or damn men at pleasure ? If this Avas the place of Peter's corona- tion it must have been attended with far less pomp and parade than that of many of his pretended suc- cessors. And in imparting such extraordinary power to be perpetuated by successors to the end of time, the commission w*ill be found clear and unequivocal, and the instructions detailed and specific. What are the facts ? When driven from every other subterfuge, Romanists appeal, in vain, to the Bible to sustjiin their system. They use the Scripture as Satan did on the mountain and on the pinnacle of the temple. They quote it that they may pervert it. If they really believe that the Scriptures are a sufficient rule of faith and practice, why are they continually appealing to tradition and the Church as authority ? Or if Ave must obei/ the Church, regardless of our convictions of truth, as revealed in the Scriptures, why refer to the Scriptures ? Why not go to the Church at once ? Why compel us to fonn opinions, and thereby become heretics, in order to believe Romish Infallibility and Auricular Confession ? POWER OF TBE KEYS. . 87 But since they have appealed to the Scriptures they shall go to their favorite text : ''- Tliou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven ; and what- soever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven : and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." (Matt, xvi, 18, 19.) The disciples were interrogated relative to their faith in Christ : " Whom, sny ye that I am ? Peter answered, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. And Jesus answered and said unto him : Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jona : for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father w'hich is in heaven. And I say also unto thee, thou art Peter," etc. This Scripture is evidently the main pillar by which they attempt to prop their ^assumed infallibility. They apply this Scrip- ture as if Christ had said, "Thou art Peter, and upon thee will I build my Church." Peter, and not Christ, is thus constituted the foundation of the Romish Church." Upon this exegesis the infallibility of the Church is boldly asserted. This is the rock on which that sect is built. Now let its solidity be tested by a few blows from the hammer of truth, and this sandstone of would- be infallibility will crumble to dust. Truth is consistent w4th itself. One Bible truth never contradicts another. The rules of interpretation require that any given pas- sage in any writing is to be understood in harmony with the whole. No single paragraph or passage is to be so construed as to clash with, or contradict the uniform sense 88 A URICULAR CONFESSION EXPOSED. of the author on the same subject. This Avill apply in the case before us. Christ said to Peter, Upon this rock I will build my Church. The question is, To Avhat rock did Christ refer? Was it to Peter, a short-sighted erring, fallible man ? Or was it to Christ, the object of Peter's faith? Some suppose this rock referred to Peter; others to Peter's profession ; others refer it to Christ himself; Avhile other learned linguists regard the declaration of Christ ns plain and unequivocal, and that it should be read. Thou art Petros (masculine gender), a rock, a stone, a pebble (movable). On this Petra (feminine gender), a rock, a granite, immovable, will I build my Church, and the gates of hell (councils of wicked men and devils) shall not prevail against it — shall not overcome, conquer, or subdue it. It is admitted that Petra is a Greek noun in the feminine gender; the pronoun '''taute,'^ (this) in the Greek text, is in the feminine gender agreeing with the noun '''Petrar And Petros (Peter) is in the masculine gender. Petra^ then, must refer to something different from Peter. If the Savior had proposed to build his Church on Peter, he Avould have used Petros twice instead of Petros and Petra. Can it be possible that the Omniscient Jesus, who knew the end from the beginning, and who knew the hearts of all men, would use such language on a subject so important that not one of his disciples understood it? Or that he gave to Peter the keys of heaven and hell, and that Peter was so stupid that during his life he went POWER OF THE KEYS. 89 about with the keys dangling to his girdle, and neither he nor any other person ever suspected that he had them. If Peter had the keys, and was so ignorant of his power, or otherwise so derelict in duty that he never used them, he must have been a poor specimen of pebble on which to build a Church. In a commission in perpe- tuity to save or damn men, to open and shut the king- dom of glory at pleasure, obscurity or ambiguity is not admissible. A just and holy God would not thus trifle with his creatures. And it is not less unreasonable to suppose that the Omniscient Jehovah w^ould send his Son to die for the world, that all might be saved, and then impart to a fallible man, or men, the keys of glory by which they may at pleasure exclude those for whom Christ died. 90 AURICULAR CONFESSIO:S EXPOSED. CHAPTER YIII. THE CLERGY AND CONCUBINES. " DE A"BSOLUTION£ COMPLICIS. "Advertendum quod null us confes?