Popery Unmasked

From The Art and Popular Culture Encyclopedia

"Many have a vague and indefinite notion that some queer questions are asked in the Confessional, but very few indeed have any idea of the fearful reality as disclosed in the following pages. "--Popery Unmasked

Related e

Wikipedia
Wiktionary
Shop

Featured:

Rhombicuboctahedron by Leonardo da Vinci

Popery Unmasked: showing the depravity of the priesthood and immorality of the confessional, being the questions put to females in confession. Extracted from the theological works now used by Cardinal Wiseman, his bishops and priests, as quoted in "The confessional unmasked," together with extracts from Dowling, Hogan, and Maria Monk; showing the crimes committed in the Black Nunnery, and a description of the Horrid Inquisition Rooms (1854)

[edit]

Full text

PREFACE.

My motive in publishing this book is. to show the teachings and the debasing tendency of Roman Catholicism and the works which I have quoted from stand as high as any historical works now in use. One is Bowl- ing's History of Romanism ; one is Popery as it Was and as it Is, by Hogan ; one is Maria Monk the escaped nun from the Black Nunnery Montreal, and the other is the Confes- sional Unmasked ; and for the description of that I shall here give the preface verbatim :

" In the first page of these " Extracts" attention has been called to the Preface. I shall now explain in a ve- ry few words the object I had in view in doing so.

Most clergymen are already aware of the acknowl- edged authority of all the works from which these selec- tions are made ; but, of the laity, for whom this pamphlet is paaticularly intended, comparitively few are well in- formed on this point. The reason of this is, that although Protestant ministers of all denominations are ready enough to expose the errors of Romanism when necessary, they have, with respect to this revolting subject, (perhaps) too generally considered that " It is a shame even to speak of those things which are done of them in secret." I have therefore thought it advisable that before perusing these extracts, the reader should be accurately informed as to the great authority of all the authors quoted, and of the high estimation in which they are still held by the " Infallible Church of Rome." I shall now adduce proofs from emi- nent Roman Catholic authorities to show, that the books from which I have quoted are the standard works in which

the student is instructed, and by which the finished priest is guided in the performance of his varied parochial duties.

I. Saint Alphonso M. De Liguoria, who was cannon- ized at Rome on the 26th of May, 1839, is the great exam- ple whom Cardinal Wiseman desires to imitate, and the saint whom he delighteth to honour.

In the Roman Catholic Calender for 1845, p. 167, we find that, preparatory to his canonization. ALL THE WRITINGS of Saint Alphonsus [Ligouri], whether PRIN- TED OR INEDITED, had been more than twenty times rigorously discussed by the Sacred Congregation of Rites, which decreed that not one word had been found in them worthy of censure.

n. Bailly Delahogue, and Cabassutius. — ^In 1826, a commission was appointed by the Crown to inquire into the educational institutions of Ireland. The President and Professors of Maynooth then furnished the commis- sioners with the materials to report to Parliament, in which they gave a list of the names of the class-books used in the college : in this list the three authors above named were included. Vide VIII. Report of Commissioners of of Education, App. p, 449.

When examined before the commissioners, Mr. Anglade, Professsr of Moral Theology, gave the following as the reason why these were the most suitable books in divinity which could be selected for* the instruction of students. He says —

" Our object has been, seeing the want of clergy, to choose among the treatises of divinity those which are most essential to them for the discharge of their duty in the ministry, as they have no other occasion of improving themselves ex- cept by reading books ; and so the treatises I have taught are relating to human acts, conscience, sins ; sacrements, penance in ALL its pa7is, MARRIAGE, restitution, con- tracts, laws, censures, IRREGULARITIES."— Vide VHI. Report of Commissioners of Education, App. p. 155.

III. Peter Dens. — In 1832, a new edition of 3,000 co- pies of this work, in 8 vols., was published with the appro-

Ill

bation of Doctor Murray, known ofMe ' officially' as " His Grace, Archbishop Murray, of Dublin^ On the appear- ance of an English translation of certain fortiom of this work in 1836, Dr. Murray denied that he had ever given any such approbation- The publisher, however, in a very independent manner, and much to his credit, contradicted the statement of his bishop. This soon created a feverish excitement in Dublin, in the midst of which. Dr. Murray thought fit to pay a visit to his Holiness — possibly for ad- vice. He did not remain long in Rome ; and, on his re- turn, he published a letter on the 5th of October, 1836, addressed to his clergy, in which he publicly acknowl- edged and adopted Dens, and thereby contradicted all he said a month or two before, previous to his departure for Rome. In this letter he states that when the publisher colled on him " to express a wish to reprint that work," his ' opinion of its conciseness, perspicuousness, and accuracy was such, that he "at once assented." After entering into other particulars relative to the publication of the work, he goes on to say to his clergy, " I have no hesitation in recommending it, as a useful summary, to your attentive perusal." Now, what can we think of a religion whose bishop, nay, even an archbishop, could be guilty of first publicly denying a solemn and public act, and who could come forward shortly afterwards, and as publicly assert that there was not one word of truth in all he had before so solemnly declared ? But what did take Dr. Murray to Rome in such a violent hurry? Was it not to be absolved by the Pope from the sin of the first mis-statement above alluded to? so, that when he returned, he was innocent, and ready to " begin a new score."

Let no one, however, imagine that the above named are the only theological works of this nature, for we are told by no less an authority than Dr. Grotty, the principal of Maynooth College, th it there are hundreds of others. In his examination befou the commissioners, he is asked, — " Are the works written by Dr. Delahogue original com- ^ positions of his own, or were they compiled ? " Aiis,

" They are original works. I should state, however, that there is no work yet written upon matters of that sort, of which a large portion has not been taken from previous works. A catholic divine who writes on matters of faith or MORALS, can write substantially only what has been waitten by HUNDREDS before him ! !" —Irish Education Report, App. p. 76.

The Rev. M. James, of Pembridge, wrote to Dr. Mur- ray, and asked him " Why was Den's Theology allowed to go to press without the omission of the objectional passag- es, or at lear.t a note ? " Hear his Grace's reply, dated 21st September, 1835. — " I am convinced that, because we dissent from the opinions of an author, it would not therefore be fair to mutilate his book, by omitting a trea.- tise which, in one shape or other, forms part of every similar work purporting to be a COURSE OF THEOLO'OY."

Thus, we see, it is almost impossible for any Roman Catholic divine who writes on Morals (or Moral Theology, as these filthiy treatises are styled), to produce anything novel even on this fertile subject ; so able and minute have been the commentaries of the earlier Saints and Fathers.

In this letter to Mr. James, relative to Dens, Dr. Mur- ray says, " This work, you are aware, was not intended for the ignorant. It was written in Latin, beyond, of course, the reach of that class of persons, and designed solely for the use of professional men." This is precisely the reason why these " Extracts " are now translated into English. They are intended for the information of general readers, who either are not able, or have not time to consult the original works for themselves. Many have a vague and indefinite notion that some queer questions are asked in .the Confessional, but very few indeed have any idea of the fearful reality as disclosed in the following pages.

Such, theu, is the theology, and such the morals, which, by granting £30,000 a year to Maynooth, w^e assist in propagating. Surely the coming session of parliament will not pass without this inquitious grant being withdrawn, and the nation rescued from the reproach of fostefing a

system, the details of which would put the most profligate to the blush, and would not be endured in the veriest den of infamy.

In conclusion, I would remark as to the practice of Con- fession, that in the Scriptures there is only one instance of going to confess to priests. It was at Easter, too, and the penitent paid the priests tlieir " Easter Dues." The peni- tent was Judas, and after his confession he immediately hanged himself The precedent is significant, but cer- ly not flattering. — Confessional UnmasJccd.

The reader will please bear in mind, that in quoting from the book, the Confessional Unmasked, I shall only give the names of the saints, instead of the name of the book ; and, Americans, our country is in danger ; you will find that papists have reduced political, as well as re- religious corruption to a systen, and are practising it amongst us, upon a great and gigantic scale ; and I hope every American will open his eyes, and enlist against our enemy; the Pope of Rome, and his doctrines.

POPERY UNMASKED.

To unmask Popery, and show its true color, it is only to give its origin, the practice and teachings of Popes, Priests, and Prelates. The first Pope of Rome was crowned by Pachos the murderer, for the purpose of tyrannizing and murder of the world, and to carry out the principles and teachings of the Father of all crime, the Devil ; and religiously have they kept the faith, which the Book of Martyrs will prove. And as the history of Popery is well known through the dark ages of the world, when Popery "was in its glory, I shall not dwell on that age of its practice and teachings, for, in giving its teachings at the present time, it cov- ers the whole, for it never changes. Popery is the same to-day, that it was in the dark ages, when Popery reigned — the world's despot. And as Papists are flocking to our shores by mil- lions, and their Bishops, Priests, and Jesuits are preaching re- ligion, good order, and good morals, and obedience lo the powers that be, and that they are good ciiizens ; it is only lo delude us, and cover their hellish designs. And they have so far succeeded in varnishing over their corruption in our own country, that many of our Protestant friends believe that the Priests are sincere and honest in what they say ; but if you will read this book, and then study the internal workings of the Roman Catholic Church, it will prove them to be the most detestable set of liars and liber- tines that ever infested this or any other country, and that they are traitors to their God and our country: that they aim at nothing but to destroy our liberty, and place the Pope of Rome at our head. And they have got aslronghold throughout the length and breadth of our land ; they have their army ready in our very midst ; they have their arsenals and castles, their con- vents and nunneries, and Sisters of Charity, and Sisters of the Sacred Heart of Jesus. I will call them by their right name : Sisters of Pollution and Crime of every grade. Let us look at some of their charity and sacredness ; and as they are called vir-

gins by the Catholic world, we will see what their virginity con- sists in.

In the first place, every nun is bound to the will of the Priests ; she is to live for their own use, whenever they choose. In all Popish countries, there is at the present day, a lying-in hospital attached to every nunnery. And what is the object of these hospitals ? It is to provide for the illicit offspring of priests and nuns, and such other unmarried females as the priests seduce, through the Confessional. But it will be said, there are no lying- in hospitals in America, attached to nunneries ; but I say, of my own knowledge, through the Confessional, it would be well if there were ; there would be fewer abortions ; there v/ould be fewer infants strangled and murdered. It is not generally known to Americans, that the crime of procuring abortion is a common evcry-day crime in Popish nunneries ; but let it henceforward be known to them, that strangling and putting to death infants is common in nunneries throughout this country ; it is not known that this is done systematically, according to Popish instructions* The infallible Church creed teaches that without baptism, in- fants cannot go to heaven. The holy Church not caring how the aforesaid infants may come into this world, but anxious that they should go from it according to the ritual of the Church, the infant is baptized. This being done, and its soul being thus fitted for heaven, the Mother Abbess generally takes between her holy fingers the nostrils of the infant, and in the name of the in- fallible Church, con?«igns it to the care of the Almighty.

But, Americans wdll say, the whole social system is different now. I tell you again, Americans, that you are mistaken in your inference. Priests, nuns, and confessors are the same all over the world. — Hogan, pp. 282-3.

Thus we see that the virtue of nuns is to live in criminal in- tercourse with priests, and their charity is to murder infants. What a pious and virtuous set of people those nuns mus' be ! Is this the morality that the Priests, Bishops, and Jesuits preach ? Does not this prove them liars ? But let us look further. They preach that they are Am.ericans — that they are citizens — that they will support our laws and Constitution — that they hold al- legiance to no foreign power w^hatever ; and in this I say they are liars ; and I will show that they are bound by the oath of allegiance to the Pope, to support him and the doctrine- of his Church, at the expense of all Protestant Governments. They are bound by their oath to hold no faith with heretics; they are bound by their oath to destroy all heretics ; and by their oath they are not citizens of this country, for any Romish Bishop or

Jesuit would recommend the devil himself to take the necessary oath of allegiance to overthrow, by all possible means, the heretical Government of the United States.

Americans, this is worthy of our serious consideration. We are jealous of our charters and privileges ; but we seem indifferent to the peril with which our liberty is threatened by Romish priests, inculcating treason in their confessionals. What avail our laws against treason, implied treason and con- structive treason ? What avail our bills of rights, either National or State, when a priest at our very door, aye, under our very roofs, is insidiously instilling into the ears of his penitent, at the confessional, treachery to our laws, to our religion, and our government ? What avails our trial by Jury, when a Roman Catholic is a witness, for oaths_lpse, their sanctity, for priests teach their penitents thafno faith is to be held with Protestants; that an oath given to them is not binding in any shape.

The priests connive at its infringement, and refuse them- selves to be amenable to your civil or criminal courts. This is probably new to many of you, but I make no statements which I cannot prove. In New York, priest Carbury perem- torily refused answering, while on the stand as a witness, apy questions put to him by the Court. He defied the judge on the bench, the sheriff, and all other officers of the Court. He contended the Constitution of the United States granted him the free exercise of his religion, and, by implication, the right of hearing confessions, and giving and receiving in confession such counsel and advice as his church required of him. And the court dare not commit him to prison for contempt, though under similar circumstances the officers of the court would drag an American to jail as they would a common felon. — Ho- g'an, p. 409.

Americans, what think you of this ? and, furthermore, they are building hundreds of colleges, nunneries, and monk houses in our very midst, in every city and town ; and from every one of these popish dens they are sending forth their daring and treasonable motto : " Americans shan't rule us." And we shall find by and bye, that this country of ours, this very land of freedom, will have Jesuits and priests and papists enough to drive our Bibles and tracts beyond their boundaries ; and Freedom's God will soon be dishonored, and the image of some popish vagabond, called saint, will be seated in its place ; and to stop this, the whole country must form into one grand American organization, and swear upon the altar of

Freedom that no man shall be admitted to the rights of an American citizen, until he forswears all allegiance, spiritual and temporal, civil and religious, without mental reservation or equivocation to the Pope of Rome ; and every appeal to the Pope of Rome, from any man living within the limits of this country, for the purpose of settling any difficulties about church rights or any other rights whatever, should be con- sidered treason ; and the individual who shall make such appeals, w^hether a popish archbishop, bishop, priest, Jesuit, or layman, should be persecuted as a felon and traitor, and subjected to the most ignominous punishment known to our laws. This is the only thing that can arrest the progress of popery in the United States ; and such a law is not at vari- ance with our Constitution, and if Congress, with its present members, won't make laws to protect our Constitution and liberties, let us put Americans, that have American principles born in them, there, w^ho will so alter our naturalization laws- as to protect us from^ foreign aggression and Roman Catholi- cism. But I am getting off of my subject, for I only intend to* show the depravity of the priesthood and the immorality of the confessional. I will now come to the inquisition rooms,, and in giving one I give all, for it is the infallible church.

THE DESTRUCTION OF THE INQUISITION IN SPAIN.

The Report of Col. L. " When we arrived at the wall and summoned them to surrender and open the gates, they presented a musket and shot one of my men. This was the signal of attack. It v/as soon obvious- that it was an unequal warfare. The walls were covered with the soldiers of the holy office. After a hard struggle, a breach was made. On rushing in we met the inquisitor genera 1 followed by the fathei confessors in their priestly robes. All came out of their rooms with long faces, and their arms crossed over their breasts, as though they had been deaf to all the noise of the attack and defence, and rebuked their own soldiers, saying, "why do you fight our friends, the French ? " Their intention was to make uj believe this defence was wholly unauthorized by them, and that they were friendly. (Just the same as the priests in America, after setting on the Catholics to do all kinds of crime, to murder,, steal, and lie, they, the priests, say it is not the teachings of the church ; that the church tells them better. But I say they are liars.) Their artifice was too shallow and did not suc- ceed. 1 ordered them to be secured as prisoners. We then proceeded to examine all the rooms ; we passed through room.

after room, found all perfectly in order, richly furnished, and wax candles, altars and crucifixes in abundance ; but could discover no evidence of iniquity being practiced there. The marble floor was arranged with a strict regard to order ; but where were those horrid instruments of torture, of which we had been told, and where those dungeons in which human beings were said to be buried alive ? We searched in vain ; and the holy father assured us that they had been belied — that we had seen all ; and I was prepared to give up the search, but Col. De Lile was not so ready and said to me, " let this marble floor be examined ; let water be poured upon it, and see if there is any place where it passes through more freely than others." I replied, "do as you please." Water was poured on the floor and every seam carefully examined, to see if the water passed through. Presently, Col. De Lile exclaimed he had found it by the side of one of these marble slabs ; the water passed through fast, and all hands were now at work for further discoveries — officers with their swords, soldiers with their bayonets, seeking to clear out the seam and pry up the slab, and others with the butts of their muskets striking the slab with all their might, trying to break it. One of the soldiers struck on the slab with the butt of his gun, and hit a spring, and the marble slab flew up. Then the faces of the inquisitors grew pale as Belshazzar's when the hand writing appeared on the wall. Beneath the slab there was a staircase. I stepped to the altar and took from one of the candlesticks a candle four feet in length, that I might explore the room below, — doing this, I was arrested by one of the inquisitors, who laid his hand on my arm, and Avith a very demure and holy look, said, ' my son, you must not take those hghts with your bloody hands — they are holy.' ^Weli,' I said, 'I will take a holy thing to shed light on iniquity,' and proceeded down the staircase. As we reached the bottom of the stairs we entered a large room, which was called the hall of judgment. In the centre was a large block, with a chain fastened to it, and small cells extending the entire length ol the edifice ; and here such sights were presented as we hope never again to see. These cells were places where the wretched objects of inquisitorial hate were confined, till death released them from their sufferings. In these cells we found the remains of some who had paid the debt of nature ; some had been dead but a short time, while of others, nothing remained but their bones, still chained to the floor of their dungeon. In other cells we found living sufferers of both

sexes, from three score years and ten down to fourteen, all naked as when born into the world, and all in chains. Here were the old man and woman that had been shut up for many years ; here, too, were the middle aged ; the young man and maiden of fourteen years. The soldiers went to work releas- ing them, and took their overcoats and other clothing, and gave them to cover their nakedness. We then proceeded to explore another room on the left. Here we found instru- ments of torture of every kind which the ingenuity of men or devils could invent." Col. L. here describes four of the hor- rid instruments: "The first was a machine by which the victim was confined ; then beginning with the fingers, every joint in the hands, arms and body was dra^vn out ; the second was a box in which the head of the victim was confined ; by a screw over the box was a vessel from which one drop of water fell every second on the head, in the same place, which put the sufferer in the most excrutiating agony, till death ; the third was an infernal machine, laid horizontally, to which the victim was bound, the machine was then placed between two beams, in which were scores of knives so fixed, that by turn- ing the machine by a crank, the flesh was torn from his limbs, all in small pieces. The fourth surpassed the others in fiend- ish ingenuity. Its exterior was a beautiful woman or doll, richly dressed, with arms extended, and around her feet a semi-circle was drawn; the victim who passed over this fatal mark, touched a spring, which caused the diabolical engine to open its arms, clasp him, and a thousand knives cut him into as many pieces in the deadly embrace. This was called the virgin. The sight of these engines of torture kindled the rage of the soldiers to fury ; they declared that every inqusitor and soldier of the inquisition should be put to the torture. The generals did not oppose them. When the inquisitor general was brought before the virgin, he begs to be excused.

No,' said they, 'you have made others kiss her and now you

must do it ; ' and pushed him over the fatal circle. The beautiful image instantly clasped him in its arms and he was cut into innumerable pieces." After witnessing the torture of four the Colonel left the soldiers to wreak their vengeance on the guilty inmates of that prison-house of hell. In the mean time it was reported through Madrid that the inquisition was opened, and multitudes hastened to the fatal spot. What a meeting was there ! It was like a resurrection. About one hundred, who had been buried for years, were now restored to life. Fathers found their long lost daughters, wives were

restored to their husbands, sisters to their brothers, and parents to their children. The scene was such as no tongue could describe.

Having sent to the city for a wagon load of powder, he deposited a large quantity in the vaults and placed a slow match in connection with it, and withdrew to a distance. In a few moments there was^a joyful sight. The walk and tur- rets of the massive structure rose majestically towards the heavens, impelled by the tremendous explosion, and fell back to the earth a heap of ruins. — Hogan. P. 436-438.

Americans, in the description of that inquisition, you have the description of every one in the world, for all are alike ; and, remember, it is the infallible church. Examine popery as I have done : stand upon its summit, and look into that unfathomable crater, the Court of Rome, from which it vomits and spews forth its corruption, its confessions, its indulgences, its penances, its masses, its purgatories, its pilgrimages, its transubsiantiations, its beads, its Jesuits, its treasons, its poisons, its recipes for compounding the best and most subtle poisons, its modes of procuring abortion. Let him keep a close watch on the movements of popish bishops in this country, especiallly Hughes, of New York, and Fenwick, of Boston, as I have done, and they shall find that frightful as is the picture which I have given of popery, it falls far short. — Hogan. P. 465.

Popish bishops and priests tell us that popery is not what it was once in olden times. This seems plausible. They say their schools are religious — schools where good morals are taught — that the confessional is a holy place, and without it the morals of our country would be reduced, and crime would be greater. And now, Mr. Bishops, Priests, and Jesuits, again I say, you are liars !

I Avill now come to the fountain of pollution, the confesjsional. To give the following pages the true sense and bearings of confession, the reader must suppose here a young man sitting in confessional, with a young lady kneeling by his side, whose lips almost press his. The lady is addressed by the priest in the following vAords : " God hears thee ; hears thee through me ; by me wnl reply to thee ; but thou tremblest ; thou darest not tell to this terrible God thy weak and childish acts. Well, then, tell them to thy father, an indulgent fatner, who wishes to know them in order to absolve them ; come, then, child, come and speak that which thou hast never dared to whisper in thy mother's ear ; tell me ; who will ever know it !

Then, among sighs from the swelling, throbbing breast, the fatal word mounts the lips, — it escapes, — he who has heard it has acquired a great advantage. Be careful he is not wood — the black oak of the old confessional — he is a man of flesh and blood ; and this man now knows of this woman what the husband has never known — that which the mother never knew — the day on which this mystery was made common, a magnetic force conquered her — she was fascinated like the bird before the serpent. — Hogan.

I will now leave the question for you to imagine for a time, then I will come to them again.

EXTRACTS,

ECT., ECT., FROM THE CONFESSIONAL UNMASKED.

[on the seal of confession]

"What is the seal of sacramental confession ?

Ansiver. It is the obligation or duty of concealing those things which are learned from sacramental confession. — Dens vol. 6, p. 218.

Can a case be given in which it is lawful to break the sacra- mental seal ?

Ans. It cannot ; although the life or safety of a man depended thereon, or even the destruction of the commonwealth : nor can the Supreme Pontiff give dispensation in this : so that, on that account, the secret of the seal is more binding than the obliga- tion of an oath, or vow, a natural secret, &c., and that by the positive will of God.^ — Dens, vol. 6, p. 219.

^We shall soon see that, when it suits their own purpose, or the interests of the Church, the priests do not hesitate to break this Sacramental Seal of Confession.

In the Roman Catholic Calendar for 1845, p. 167, we find that preparatory to his Canonization, the moral system of Lig- uori had been more than twenty times rigorously discused by the Sacred Congregation of Rites, which decreed that in all his works whether printed or inedited, not one word had been found worthy of censure ; which decree was afterwads con- firmed by Pope Pius VII. This Liguori is Wiseman's pet Saint, and the following are his doctrines, viz : —

We answer 1, That this seal is an obligation of divine right, most strict in every case, even where the safety of a whole na- tion would be at stake ; to observe silence, even after the death of the penitent, as to all things spoken in confession, (/. e., spo- ken in order to obtain sacramental absolution,) the revelation of which would render the sacrament itself grievous or odious. '^Lig'uori, vol. 6, p. 276, n. 634.

What answer, then, ought a Confessor to give when ques-

tioned concerning a truth which he knows from sacramental con- sionfes only ?

Atis. He ought to answer that he does not know it, and, if necessary, confirm the same with an oath. — DenSf vol. 6, p. 219.

It is asked, whether the Confessor, interrogated concerning the sin of his penitent, can say that he does not know it, even with an oath? It is answered in the affirmative, in accordance with the common opinion Avhich St. Thomas and others hold. The reason is adduced by the divine Thomas, in the quoted place, who says : " A man is not adduced in testimony unless as a man, thererefore 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 especially as minister of God, as Suarez and the be- fore quoted authors rightly say,) because a Confessor in no man- ner 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 cannot manifest. Hence, What if he should be asked to answer without equivocation ? Even in that case he can answer with an oath that he does not know it : as more probably Lugo, Croix, Stoz, et Holzm, with Michel, teach against others. The reason is, because then the Confessor verily answers according to the oath made, which is always understood to be made in the manner in which it was possible to be made ; to wit, of manifesting the truth without equivocation, that is, without that equivocation which lawfully can be omitted. But as the necessary equivocation which could not be omitted without sin, the other has not a right that an an- swer should be given to him without equivocation, neither, more- over, is the Confessor bound to answer without equivocation.^ — Lig-uoi'i, vol. 6, n. 646.

After reading this, who would believe any Roman Catholic

on his oath ?

Objection. In no case is it lawful to tell a lie, but that Con- fessor would be guilty of a lie because he knows the truth ; therefore, &c.

Ans. I deny the minor ; because such Confessor is interro- gated as man, and answers as man ; but now he does not know the truth as man, although he knows it as God, says St. Thom- as, and that is the spontaneous or natural meaning of the an- swer ; for when he is interrogated, or when he answers, outside confession he is considered as man. — Dens, vol. 6, p. 219.

If a priest is questioned by a magistrate as to matters which

he has learned from confession alone, he ought to reply that he is ignorant of them : nay, he ought to swear to it, which he may do without any danger of falsehood. It is added, on the au- thority of Estius, that in doing so, he neither lies nor equivo- caies, since he frames a true reply to the intention of the person interrogating him ; because the magistrate does not ask him what he knows fro;n confession " in his character as God," but what he knows " in his character as man" without confes- sion.— De la Hogm^ vol. 1, p. 292.

What if a Confessor were directly asked whether he knows it ihrous^h sacramental confession ?

Arts. In this case he ought to give no answer (so Steyart and Sylvias,) but reject the question as impious: or he could even say absolutely, not relatively to the question, I know noth- ing," because the word / restricts to his human knowledge. — Dens, v. 6, p. 219.

But if any one should disclose his sins to a Confessor with the intention of mocking him, or of drawing him into an alli- ance with him in the execution of a bad intention ?

Ans. The seal does not result therefrom, because the confes- sion is not sacramental. Thus, as Dominic Soto relates, it has been decided at Rome, in a case in which some one went to a Confessor with the intention of drawing him into a criminal conspiracy against the Pope. — Dens, v. 6, p. 220.

[Liguori, vol. 6, p. 276, n. 634 ; and Dens, in vol. 6, p. 219, both declare that the seal 7iever can be broken, "nor can the Pope give dispensation in this," {vide page 1.) We see, however, from Dens, vol. 6, p. 220, that they show very little compunction in violating this most explicit law whenever they wish . ]

In line, all things are reduced indirectly to the seal, by the revealing of which the sacrament would be rendered odious, according to the manners of the country and the changes of the times ; and thus Steyart observes from Wiggers, that some things are at one time opposed to the seal, which at an- other time are not considered as such. — Densw. 6, p. 222.

Whence you will resolve,

1. The violation of this seal involves a twofold wickedness ; of sacrilege against the reverence due to the sacrament, and of injustice, from the virtual compact between the penitent and the confessor concerning the observance of secresy in every case. Neither is the insignificance of the matter here to be taken into account. (We say more justly that it possesses a threefold wickedness, viz : the sin of sacrilege against the sa-

crament; of grievous unfaithfulness, since, on tiie pari of the confessor there intervenes a weighty, though tacit promi.-<e of keeping the secret ; also of detraction, if the sin be not public.) — Liguori, V. 6, p. 276, n. 635.

Does a Confessor, narrating the sins which he has heard in confession, act contrary to the seal ?

Ans. If the sinner or person can by no means be discovered, not even in general, nor any prejudice to himself happen there- from, he does not act contrary to the seal, because the seal has reference to the penitent or sinner. — Dens, v. 6, p. 222.

Wherefore the Doctors providently advise that we should abstain from these narrations, when not moved by reasons of utihty.

[We have already called attention to the very stringent ob- ligation of the seal, — but here, we see, a mere consideration of UTILITY enables a Confessor to divulge what was considered an inviolable secret.]

On account of the scandal, vere people to suppose that the Confessor recollected the sins of each individual ; and on ac- count of the remote danger and the suspicions of others. Me- dina tells us, that a Confessor had thus discovered on an adultress, first, by saying that his first penitent had confessed an adultery, and afterwards imprudently naming the person who had been his first penitent. Wherefore, even in asking advice, it is better to state the case simply, without declaring that it has occurred to him in confession. — Dens, v. 6, p. 222-3.

What persons contract the obligations of the sacramental seal?

Ans. All those who have got their knowledge from Confes- sion, mediately or immediately, lawfully or unlawfully.

In this manner intepreters in confession are bound by the seal, and those who, sitting about the confessional, accident ally hear any thing. But they commit sin who voluntarily listen or hear. In like manner they are bound by the seal, to whom the Confessor has revealed with out the license of the penitent. — Dens, v. 6, p. 231.

[This admits that Confessors do reveal without the permis- sion of the penitents.

' They search the secrets of the house, and so

Are worshipped there, and feared for what they know."]

It is answered, 2, That all are bound to the seal, to whom a knowledge of the sacramental confession comes, conveyed in whatever way it may ; such is 1st, the Confessor, who, if he be asked concerning things heard in confession, can denv that he

knows them, even, if it be needful, with an oath, by under- standing, what he knows with a knowledge useful for answer- ing, being interrogated out of confession. Yea, his own sin could not be confessed with an unbroken seal, he ought to omit it, because the seal more strictly binds than the completeness of confession. — Liguori, v. 6, n. 645.

After stating that a penitent can give either a written or verbal license to a Confessor to disclose what he has heard in that penitent's confession, the following objection is raised, and an- swered in a manner which, no doubt, will be very satisfac- tory to all Confessors.

Objection. Bad priests could thus abuse the seal by saying they had liberty.

St. Thomas answers, it is incumbent on them to prove that they have received the license ; but a Confessor is believed when he swears he has obtained license from the penitent.— La C?'oix, vol. 6, n. 1969.

Du Jardin also, and Suarez, A.ntoine, and Sylvius, remark, that a penitent can sometimes be compelled to concede some such license, or otherwise be not absolved. — Dens^ vol. 6, p. 232.

It is not necessary that it (the license) should be had in writing. If it be doubtful whether the Confessor may have spoken with the permission of the penitent, the priest is to be believed rather than the penitent ; or rather than even the heirs ; for example, if, from the license of the dead, he reveal that restitution should be made by them ; but, however, some other divines advise in that case that he should not say that it was due from Iheir fault, but only that he wished that it should be given to such purposes ; and that it would be better to per- suade the dying person that he should impose such things upon his heirs by a secret codicil. — Liguori vol. 6, n. 651. q. IV.

Is it lawful for a Confessor to avail himself of that knowl- edge which he has acquired solely from the sacramental con- fession of another ?

Although it is always unlawful to break the seal, however it is inquired, whether it is contrary to the reverence of the seal, to do any thing, or to omit any thing, on account of that knowledge, which the Confessor could otherwise not have done ? To which it is answered, it is sometimes contrary to the seal, and sometimes not.

[We are told in Bens, vol. 6, p. 219, and Liguori, vol. 6, p. 276, n. 634, that the seal can never be broken ; but here we are informed it may be broken whenever a Confessor pleases,

or that It suits his purpose, provided generally, that he does not do it in away that would render confession odous. How- ever, when any unpleasantness does arise from his making use of knowledge acquired in the confessional, he has only to swear that the penitent gave him license ; and although the penitent swears to the contrary, "the priest is to be believed rather than the penitent." — Vide Dens, v. 6, p. 232 ; Liguori, v. 6, n. 551. q. IV. ; La Croix, lib. VI. n. 1969.

Also, Du Jardin, Saurez, Antoine, and Sylvius, say that a penitent can sometimes be compelled to concede a license, or otherwise not be absolved. — Dens, vol. 6, 232.]

When is it contrary to the seal to make use of the knowl- edge of confession ?

Ans. When it is attended with danger, lest anything be re- vealed directly or indirectly respecting the confession of a known person. Nay, although no such danger appears, and although it be not known that the Confessor avails himself of the knowledge of confession ; yet if it might turn out to be a real or apprehended grievance to the person or his accomplice, it would be acting contrary to the seal, inasmuch as confession would thus be rendered odious ; for instance, if a Confessor should from the sole knowledge of confession deny a penitent or his accomplice a testimonial of morals. — Dens, v. 6, p. 235,

[ Testimonial. Masters and magistrates read this, and learn what value to set upon " a character from a priest." It is not worth the piece of paper it is written upon.]

4. When many persons, for example, students, courtiers, &c., are bound to produce a testimonial of having attended confes- sion, the Confessor is bound to give that, even to those he does not absolve ; First, lest by refusing he might betray in some manner the seal and the penitent. Secondly, because by giving it he does not he, since he only bears testimony that he confessed. But Bonac, &c., teach that, to deny a certificate to such, would not be an infringement of the seal. And Avers concedes the same, if it be not known that the penitent ap- proached to the Confessor ; First, because he says nothing, but only does not prove the confession by positive testimony, to ^^hich he is not bound, neither does he do any thing from which the sins of the penitent could be known. Secondly, be- cause otherwise a way would be opened for frauds, and many wicked persons would deceive the parish priests at Easter. Thirdly, because he establishes a custom, that he may certify in writing that the penitent was absolved, which will be false if he writes it, and, if he omit to do so, he will break the seal. Lastly,

because it will be scandalous and unjust to give a testimonial of confession to a public courtezan continuing in sin (as al^o to a concealed sinner, thus palliating his iniquity,) neither will it be imputed to the Confessor that he did not positively defend him.

It is more probably and commonly held, that if in the parch- ment it be only writien that the penitent confessed, that testi- monial may be granted, as Laymen and many others hold : because to deny the certificate would be the same as indirectly to reveal that he was not duly confessed. And this is against Bonac, who says it can be refused, and against Lugo, who, with Henr., says it can be denied ; because, although a Confessor cannot reveal a sin, however he is not bound to prove with positive testimony his confession. But to this reason I do not give my acquiescence, because, although he is not bound to co-operate to the truth of that confession, however, he is bound to avoid an indirect diclosure, which, if the certificate be de- nied, cannot be avoided. But otherwise, if the Confessor ought to write in the parchment, that the penitent not only confessed but was absolved ; because, since a lie is intrinsical- ly evil, it can never be told, as the doctors generally teach ; but if the certificates be now printed, in which it is asserted that absolution was given, it appears probable (as some more recent say,) that they may be given to those who have con- fessed, but who did not receive absolution, at least if they be sought publicly, because then the Confessor tells or writes no lie, but only performs a material act in giving such certificate. — Lig. V. 6, n. 639.

Here follows a curious and most ingenious disquisition as to whether priests, guilty of grave offences, can be removed from their offices ; also, whether the Communion can be denied to unrepentant sinners in certain circumstances.

All these things must be more carefully discussed. It is doubted, 1., Whether a superior, on account of a sin heard in confession, may remove his subject from office. Sambovius affirms that he can, which also the divine Thomas hath before taught, provided that there is no disclosure of sin, thus saying,

' If, therefore, the removal of a subject from office can lead to

the manifestation of sin heard in confession, or to the entertain- ing of some probable suspicion concerning him, by no means should the prelate remove him. But if, by removal, in no way would the sin be made known, then another occasion bing ta- ken, he can remove the subject from office, and he ought to do this with due caution." — Lisr. v. 6, n. ^^Q,

It is doubted, 3., Whether a Confessor can deny commun- ion to a penitent to whom, as unlit, he liad before refused ab- solution, if he, after these things, secretly seek communion. The first opinion affirms that he car. However, the second true opinion denies it ; and this Sanchez, an.i many others hold ; the reason is, because such a denial of the sacrament or admonition would render confession odious, not only to peni- tents unlawfully seeking it, but also to others, who, if they knew that the Confessor could by any means use the knowl- edge acquired in confession, would easily be frightened away from the sacrament of penace. This opinion in the present day should by all means be held according to the above-men- tioned quoted decree of Innocent XL, who forbids any use of the knowledge of confession, from which any loss whatsoev- er would follow the penitent. — Lig. v. 6, n. 658.

Here the Saint instructs Confessors how to deceive invalids or the dying, though Confessors are always supposed to be acting in the capacity of God ! !

However, I approve that which the same Roncagl. says,-— That if an indisposed penitent threaten a Confessor on account of absolution denied, the Confessor can justly fly from him, and not return ; because, in that case, these threats are not a sin made known for the purpose of obtaining absolution, but a sin of confession, which does not require the seal.

[ This is a very nice distinction indeed.]

But that flight is only allow^ed to a Confessor, if, by flying, he does not give others the suspicion of a denied absolution ; be- cause if he would give that, he can recite some speech, not in- tended to deceive the penitent, but only to obtain freedom from that trouble, although the penitent may deceive himself, be- lieving that declaration to be the form of absolution. — Lig. vol. 6, n. 659.

When is it lawful for the Confessor to make use of the knowledge acquired in confession ?

Aris. When the sinner is by no means discovered, also when no grievance is occasioned to him or to another ; in fine, when nothing intervenes to render confession odious. — Dejis, V. 6, p. 238.

ON MIXED MARRIAGES.

Bat is the condition of educating the offspring in heresy re- pugnant to the substance of matrimony, namely — that the sons may follow their heretical father in his sect, and the daughters their Catholic mother ?

Alls. Daelman observes, that if the Catholic party entering matrimony under such condition, directly intended the educa- tion of her offspring in heresy, the marriege would be invalid ; whence it is supposed, he says, that she only obliges herself not to prevent such education.

[ And thus they make bastards of the offspring of all mixed marriages.]

After giving the opinions of divines, Dens proceeds as fol- lows : —

In the meantime, this kind of stipulation is null, since it is repugnant to the obligation of parents ; and although some en- deavor to excuse such compact, Avhilst the Catholic party only obliges herself to permit such education, for the sake of avoid- ing greater evil in a community where Cotholics and heretics live mingled together ; however, we must say with Pontius, &c., that such marriage, with express or tacit compact, or un- der the condition " that either all, or any of the children, for instance, the males be educated in the sect of their heretical father," is always and everywhere unlawful, most iniquitous, and grievously sinful against the natural obligation of parents, and against the divine and ecclesiastical law ; for every parent is piously bound to take care that her offspring be educated in the true faith, and acquire the necessary means for salvation; therefore she is bound by no obligation to permit the educa- tion of her offspring in a damnable sect.

[ Thus, if the Hierarchy Avere established in England, and the Canon Law introduced into these couaitries, all the chil- dren from every mixed marriage would be obliged to be brought up as Roman Catholics, or else be declared illegiti- mate. Let us look at Prussia and take warning in time.]

Nor does usage and custom openly existing in several places make against this ; for this compact is against divine law, against which even immemorial custom operates nothing. — De?iSj V. 7, p. 144, 5.

Note, that if a Catholic knowingly contract marriage with a heretic, he cannot on that head separate himself from her,because

he has renounced the right of divorce ; except, however, unless the heretic promised her conversion, and would not stand to her promise ; also, if the Catholic knows that he is in imminent danger of losing the faith by cohabiting with a heretic. — Dens^ V. 7, p. 180.

[ Dcutger. That is, even if there was no agreement before marriage ; and thus they make bastards of the offspring of all mixed marriages.]

In like manner, Sanchez is of opinion, that when a Catholic commits fornication with a heretic there is found in the act, a malice against religion ; because, although the marriage of a Catholic with a heretic is valid, it is, however, in itself invalid, and a disgrace to religion, as also on account of the danger of perversion, and of educating the offspring in heresy, which reasons militate even in fornicarious copulation. — Dens, v. 7, p. 196, 7.

[ His holy horror of heresy carries him so far as to pronounce it more sinful to commit fornication with a Protestant than with a Roman Catholic girl. No doubt these Divines speak from experience ! We hope, therefore, . (though no advocates for immorality of any kind,) that when young Roman Catholics feel their blood too hot, they will, for their soul's sake, recollect the distinction.

LIGUORI TEACHES THAT IT IS LAWFUL TO CONCEAL OR DISSEMBLE THE FAITH.

ui m

In the Second Book, Treatise First, he treats of the myste- ries and obligation of faith ; in Chapter Third, he goes on to treat of concealing, dissembhng, and even denying the faith.

It is asked, whether it is lawful to deny the faith, or to pro- fess a false one ? He answers : —

In no case is it lawful, whether it be done by voice or any other sign, Christ having said, ' He who hath denied me before men,' &c. In the meanwhile, indeed, though it is not lawfal to lie, or to feign what is not, however, it is lawful to dissem- ble what is, or to cover the truth with words, or other ambigu- ous and doubtful signs, for a just cause, and when there is not a necessity of confessing."

'^ He who, being asked either by private or public authority, is silent, or answers obscurely, or says that he does not wish to answer — that he is not justly interrogated — that he is not

bound, nor does he wish to speak to others what he himself may believe, and in like manner tegiversates, does not appear to deny the faith, but is unwilling to betray it. Whence, if thus he may be able to deliver himself from a troublesome investiga- tion, it is laivful ; for, generally it is not true that he who is in- terrogated by public authority is positively bound to profess the faith, unless when that is necessary, lest he may appear to those present to deny the faith."

[ But Christ says, " Whosover shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father Avhich is in Heaven." And how did Paul act when he wasexamined in public, and was in danger of death ? ]

He now considers the case of a Romanist not asked con- cerning his faith.

When you are not asked concerning the faith, not only is it lawful, but, often more conducive to the glory of God and the utility of your neighbors to cover the faith than to confess it ; for example, if concealed among heretics you may accom- plish a greater amount of good — or, if from the confession of the faith more of evil would follow — for example, great trouble, death, the hostility of a tyrant, the peril of defection, if you should he tortured ; whence it is often rash to offer one's self willingly."

Observe how Popery adapts itself so as to bamboozle the people of every country, viz.: —

' In Germany, to hear the sermons of heretics — to attend

at a funeral — to act as sponsor for a child in baptism, are not esteemed signs of professing the faith, or of communion with the religious offices of heretics. Whence, other things apart, viz: scandal, peril, prohibition, &c., if they may be done for a good cause, they are lawful."

[Mark ! in Germany these are not sins, but elsewhere they are.]

ON EQUIVOCATION IN GENERAL.

In treating on the subject of oaths, this approved Saint (Li- guori) asks, in the fourth question, if it is lawful to use equiv- ocation in an oath. He replies by saying, that there are two general reasons for swearing with equivocation.

First, for a just cause.

Secondly, without a just cause.

In Number 151, he quotes the opinion of Sanchez and af- terwards gives his own views.

" To swear with equivocation wiien there is a just cause, and equivocation itself is lawful, is not evil ; because, where there is a just cause for concealing the truth, and it is con- cealed without.'^ljie, no detriment is done to an oath ; but if it is done withjjfe^ a just cause, it will not indeed be a perjury, since, accordn^ to one sense of the word, or mental restric- tion, he swears true ; however, it will be, of its own nature, a mortal sin against religion, since it will be a great irreverence to take an oath to deceive another in a grave matter."

[Irreverence. — That is, it would be as w^ell to avoid it ; but, if hard pressed, don't stick at a trifle.]

We shall now submit the " First Principles of Equivocation "by (Saint?) Liguori , and then proceed to give a few^ cases (by w^ay of illustration) as we find them stated by the Saint himself.

First, to swear with equivocation for a just cause, is, he says, undoubtedly lawful.

' For the clearer understanding of what is said here, and to

be said in this very difficult question, many distinctions are necessary. In the first place, we are to distinguish that one is ^'double speaking^ or equivocation, and the other is menial restriction, or reservation.

" Double speaking can be used in a threefold manner : — I. AVhen a word has a double sense ; for example, volo signifies to wish, and to fly. 11. When an expression has a double principal meaning, as. This is Peter's book, can signify either, that Peter is the owner, or the author, of the book. III. When words have a double sense, one more common, the other less common, or one literal and the other spiritual, as are these words which Christ spake of the baptist, ' He is Ehas,' and the Baptist said, ' I am not Elias.' "

These things being established, it is a certain and a com- mon opinion amongst all divines, that, for a just cause, it is lawful to use equivocation in the propounded modes, and to confirm it (equivocation) with an oath. Thus Less, and many others say, that simulation is useful, and on an occasion to be used ; which St. Thomas explaining, says that St. Jerome uses the comprehensive term of simulation for any sort of feigning. The reason is, because, on the one hand, we do not deceive a neighbor, but permit him to be deceived for a good cause ; on the other hand, we are not bound to speak so that others may understand us, if a just cause exists. But, a just cause is any

honest end in order to preserve good things for the spirit, or useful things for the body."

[Oaths are never administered except to assist us in obtain- ing or ^^ preserving' g-ood things ; ^^ therefore "a just cause exists " on all occasions when an oath is required. Ergo^ whenever we have occasion to take an oath, we need not hesi- tate about perjury, but may practise a little of what is techni- cally phrased " hard swearing."]

2nd. To swear with equivocation, without a just cause, is, he says, only a venial sin.

" The reason of this more probable opinion is, because in such an oath, already truth and justice are present, only judg- ment or discretion is wanting, which deficiency is only venial ; neither does what Viva says afford any obstacle to this opinion, namely, that a person swearing in such a manner invokes God to witness a falsehood, for he in very deed invokes God to witness what is true, according to his own sense, although he permits, for a just cause, that another, either through want or inadvertency, should be deceived."

We now proceed to instances of equivocation and mental restriction, by way of illustration : —

" The accused, or a witness not properly interrogated, can swear that he does not know a crime which in reality he does know, by understanding that he does not know the crime con- cerning which legitimately he can be inquired of, or that he does not know it so as to give evidence concerning it."

When the crime is altogether concealed, the witness is bound to say that the accused did not commit it.

' The same is true if a witness on another ground is not

bound to depose ; for instance, if the crime appears to him- self to be free from blame, or if he knows a crime which he is bound to keep secret, when no scandal may have gone abroad.

" However, the accused, or witness, or one legitimately in- terrogated by a Judge, cannot use any equivocation, because he is bound 1o render obedience to the just command of his superior. The opinion is common to Salm. and others ; and the same is to be said concerning an oath in important con- tracts, because, if it were not so, another would suffer injury, (Salm. ibid.) Except, however, in a trial, where the crime is altogether concealed. For then he can, yea, the witness is bound to say, that the accused did not commit the crime. And the same course the accused can adopt, if the examination is not complete, because then the Judge does not legitimately interrogate."

He now teaches that a false witness, and a man who, in making a coniract deceives another, by swearing equivocally, may be absolved, and that neither is guilty of perjury.

" But here it is enquuxd, i. If such an accused person, or one who, making a contract, deceives by swearing with equiv- ocation, may be absolved unless he makes known the truth ? Some not improbably answer in the negative, but more proba- bly Sanch. and Salm. with Philiarch. say tliat he can be absolvedy because in such an oath (which cannot be called a perjury) he has not sinned against commutative justice, but against legal justice, and due obedience to a Judge whose command of un- folding the truth is transient, and only lasts while the Judge interrogates. And the same thing Sanchez says in the same book concerning a lying witness. And, therefore, each of them can be absolved, but he should reveal the truth."

" It is asked, 2. Whether the accused, legitimately interro- gated, can deny a crime, even with an oath, if the confess^ion of the crime would be attended with great disadvantage ? "

Elbel denies that he can, with S. Th. d. art. 1 ad 2, and indeed more probably, because the accused is then bound for the general good to undergo tlie loss. But sufficiently proba- ble, Lugo de Just. d. 40. n. 15. Tamb. lib. 3. c. 4. § 3. n. 5, cum Sanch. Viva q. 7. art. 4. n. 2. with many others, say, that the accused, if in danger of death, or the prison, or perpetual exile — the loss of all property, the danger of the galleys, and such like — can deny the crime even with an oath, (at least without great sin) by understanding that he did not commit it so that he is bound to confess it, only let there be a hope of avoiding the punishment. The reason is, because human law cannot lay men under so great an obligation with so severe a penalty. And Elbel adds, that this opinion, although less probable, should be suggested to the accused and Confessors, that they may be delivered from great blame, into which they would easily fall if they should be bound to the confession of the crime."

[This caution is evidently intended to screen the Confessor from the consequences of his complicity.]

Passing over a few unimportant matters, we come to some- thing '^ short and sweet."

" He who hath sworn that he would keep a secret, does not sin against the oath by revealing that secret, when he cannot conceal it without great loss to himself, or to another, because the promise of secresy does not appear to bind, unless under this condition, if he does not injure me.

' He who hath sworn to a Judge that he would speak what

he knew, is not bound to reveal concealed thuigs. The rea- son is manifest ! "

Thus we see, while Rome weakens the obligation of all oaths, to serve her own purposes, she can render them strin- ge^^ ' accomplishment of sin.

tue same manner, he who is chosen to fill an office, being interrogated whether he has any impediment, can deny that he has impediment, if that is not such as m.ay impede." ^ [Thus Roman Catholic tutors and governesses may deny theh' religion^ because that does not " impede " them from being qualified to teach. In this manner they have many in- sidious opportunities of poisoning the minds of their pupils. Protestant parents beware of this !]

" But it is asked, 1. Whether a creditor can assert by a deed, with an oath, that nothing was paid to him, though a part was paid, but he may have credit on another account which he may not be able to prove ? We answer that he can, only he cannot swear that that quantity was due to him on that deed, lest other former creditors might incur loss. Salm., with many others.

Our Saint now proceeds to offer a few practical suggestions on Domestic Virtue, viz: — 1. How women may commit adultery with impunity. 2, How they may afterwards deceive their husbands.

" It is asked,it2. Whether an adultress can deny adultery to her husband, understanding that she may reveal it to him ? She is able to assert equivocally, that she did not break the bond of matrimony, which truly remains ; and if sacramentally she confessed adultery, she can answer, I am innocent of this crime, because by confession it ivas taken away. Card., how- ever, here remarks, that she cannot affirm it with an oath, be- cause in asserting anything, the probability of a deed suffices, but in swearing certainty is required- To this it is replied, that in swearing moj'al certainty suffices^ as we said above, which moral certainty of the remission of sin can indeed be had, when any, morally well disposed, receives the sacrament of penance." m m

On the same subject he says —

In answer to inquiry, Salm. n. 144, with Soto, say that a woman cannot deny adultery, because it would be purely men- tal restriction ; Cardenas, however, n. 60, admits that, when in danger of death, it is lawful to use a metaphor which is common in scripture, where adultery is taken for idolatry, as

in Ezek, 23, 37, because they committed adultery, and were guilty of fornication with idols. Yea, if the crime may truly be concealed, probably with Bus, &c., a woman can deny with an oath and say, I did not conimit the crime ; in the same way that the accused can say to his judge, not legitimately in- terrogating, I did not commit the crime, understanding that he did not so commit it, that he is bound to manifest it to him, as Tamburin," &lc.

[We suppose this is what, in Papal logic, would be termed a mixed metaphor I

In connection with this subiect, he adds the question —

" Whether an adultress be bound to betray herself, if she know that her offspring is not legitimate, for the sake of avoid- ing detriment to her husband and legitimate children ? Adrian, &c., affirm that she is ; but Sotus and others deni/ that she is^ unless there be great injury, for example, to the kingdom, principality, and the like. But others, as Cajetan, Less, Sco- tus, &c., deny that in any case a mother is bound to make known her guilt, and they prove their views from Cap. Officii 9, de Poen, et Rem., where it is said : To the woman who, the husband being ignorant of the adultery, receives offspring, al- though she may fear, to confess that to her own husband, pen- ance is not to be refused."

He now goes on to recommend the safest and most syste- matic means of encouraging profligacy. The reader will observe that we are still quoting from our old friend, the immaculate Saint of 1S39.

" Thus, likewise, if any one may ^^ave been forced into matrimony, he can assert to a Judge, even with an oath, that he did not contract marriage, to \\\\.^ freely^ as it was fit ; ToL and Spor. say the same thing concerning a man who has en- tered into marriage, which is null and void. Likew^ise he who hath promised marriage, but thence is not bound to marriage, can deny the promise, that is, so as to be bound by it."

" It is inquired, 1. Whether he who hath promised to a har- lot, with an oath, that he would not know any other, is bound, to that oath ? Dian. and Fagn. deny that he is, because the end of such a promise is wicked, to wit., of preserving friend ship, and because such an oath would afford an occasion of continuing in sin. But Salm. Sanch., and Prad. answer, with more probability that the oath should be observed ; because, according to the general rule, an oath ought always to be ful- filled, and can be fulfilled without sin ; but that occasion comes by accident."

Here we are told, that not only those who have promised marriage, but those also who are actually married, can assert to a Judge, even with an oath, that they did not enter into either of these solemn engagements ; meaning thereby, that they did not enter into them freely, or so as to be bound by them. Nevertheless, if a man has promised to a harlot, with an oath, that he would not knoiv any other, he is bound by that oath. Thus, we see that, between betrothed persons, and. between husbands and wives, the obligation of oaths may be entirely disregarded; and that, in cases of adultery, a wife may use an oath to screen her own wickedness and deceive her husband. But the depraved fornicator is bound by his oath to a degraded harlot. But after such a declaration, surely her Scarlet Ladyship crmnot object to our calling her by the ap- propriate appellation of " Alother of Harlots." It is interest- ing to observe the maternal solicitude which she here displays for the protection of " the young ladies of her establishment. To her unmarried sons she has entrusted the performance of this delicate office of

" Bending the tvvig, To give the inclination to the tree ;

and faithfully do they perform it ; for, if we may judge from the nature of their studies, they do not allow much else to in- terfere with this

" Delightful task ! To teach the young idea "

Without much fear of doing violence to their holy horror of equivocation and mental reservation, they may say —

" Our only books are women's looks, . And follys all they've taught us."

We are now informed by the Saint, that the Pope can ex- onerate an individual from any oath accepted by a third per- son, no matter hoiv binding.

However, the second assertion, just now made, is limited in three cases. — I. If he that swears is a subject, and the oath is about those things which are under the control of the supe- riors, as St. Thomas teaches. Therefore the Pope can abrogate all oaths about benefices, ecclesiastical offices, &c. Parents also can abrogate the oaths of children under age, but not of children who are of age, in matters concerning their own pro- perty. Tutors can anrml the oaths of their pupils. Superiors of the religious orders ; husbands of their wives about dowry goods ; masters of their servants."

II. It is limited if an oath cannot be observed without com-

mon loss, such as woald be the oath of not denouncing — nor accusing, &o., or about a contract forbidden by law, for ex- ample, of inflicting punishment if any one does not adhere to espousals ; which is prohibited in chap. Gemma de Sponsa (whether also of paying money lost by forbidden game. See what is said on ganiing in the tract which treais of contracts, d. 13.) Such oaths truly do not need relaxation, since they are of themselves null and void, in accordance with what is said in number 177, v. Alitor. However , let them be ever so validj they can be relaxed by the Church ; but in the name of the Church arc included not only the Pope, but also bishops, chapters, the episcopal seat .being vacant, and others having episcopal jurisdiction, and also confessors having a delegated faculty of dispensing in vows, who are able, also, to relax such oaths.

TO DO EVIL THAT GOOD MAY COME.

In page 419 he says — " Whether it may be lawful to induce or to permit a lesser evil for the avoiding of a greater one. The first opinion denies that it is, according as Laym. and others hold. The reason of which opinion is, because a com- parative does not take away the positive evil ; whence he who induces one to commit a smaller sin, truly induces him to com- mit a sin. But Laym. with Azor limits it unless that evil is virtually included in that other greater evil. Thus you may be able to persuade any one who is determined to commit murder, that he should only cut off the hand, however, of the same per- son, not another chosen person : thus also you may persuade a man wishing to commit adultery, to commit fornication with an unmarried person in general, but not with any one in par- ticular. This Salm., in the place cited, wuh Nav., &c., admit, provided that he hath determined to commit either evil. But Laym. speaks indistinctly with the second opinion, (as will hereafter be shown,) and Sanchez regrets expressly this limita- tion, because, he says, then a less evil is proposed to him, not that the other should perpetrate that, but that he should be drawn from a greater.

" Therefore, the second opinion is the more probable one, that it is lawful to induce a man to commit a less evil, if the other has already determined to perpetrate a greater. The reason is, because he that persuades does not seek an evil, but a good, to wit : the choice of a lesser evil ; thus Sanch. and many

others think it probable. Hence Sanchez, &c., teach that it is lawful to persuade a man, determined to slay some one, that he should commit theft or fornication, and he proves it from St. Augustin, ' For, if he is about to do that which is not lawful in that case he may commit adultery, and he may not commit homicide ; and, though his own ivife is alive, he may marry another, and not shed human blood.' From which words,

now he may commit adultery,' Sanchez and others prove that

the doctor not only was spealdng of permitting, but even of persuading. And this, adds Sanchez, &c., that it is lawful not only for private persons, but even confessors, parents and others, upon whom the duty is officially incumbent to prevent the sins of those under them."

Surely this one^^earful extract is quite enough on this subject. We are also told in another part of the same volume that the wretch who invades his father's bed, and commits incest with his mother, is not so guilty in the eyes of the church as the man who circulates the Bible.

IS IT LAWFUL TO AFFORD AN OCCASION OF

SIN?

Some of the doctors say it is not lawful ; but Liguori, and a great many others, whom he quotes, hold the contrary opin- ion, as you shall see by the following extracts : —

It is lawful for a master not to take away the occasion of stealing from his children or servants, when, notwithstanding, he knew that they had a propensity and were prepared to commit theft, that, thus taken in the act, they may be pun- ished and come to repentance ; for, then, reasonably he per- mits one theft that more may be avoided. (And thrs opinion appears sufficiently general, with Sanchez de Matrim., who quotes in its support many others ; and St. Thomas agrees with it where he says — Whensoever a man, having a wife suspected of adultery, lays a snare for her, that he may be able, even with witnesses, to detect her in the act, and thus is able to proceed against her.

Sanchez thinks it probable that it is not lawful to place an occasion of sin before a person.

"It is probable that it is not lawful willingly to place such things or to put them in the way, because that would be not so much the taking away of an occasion, as the placing it in the way. Sanchez and others, for the same reason, teach that

it is not lawful for a husband to give to his wife the occasion to commit adultery, or to the adulterer an opportunity to se- duce his wife, for the sake of bringing her virtue to the trial."

But Laym. and Liguori maintain that it is lawful.

" Meanwhile, Laym. probably teaches the contrary opinion, which can be confirmed by the example of Judith, who scarcely appears to have done otherwise, c. 9. For when she knew that the permission of lust in Holofernes would be an impedi- ment to evils, placed before him the occasion, namely, her own beauty, otherwise lawful, and yet in this she is commonly thought not to have sinned."

Liguori now states his own view as follows : —

" But this reason not being valid, the first opinion appears sufficiently probable, because when a husband or master af- fords an opportunity of committing adultery or theft, he does not truly induce to sin, but he affords an occasion of sin, and permits the sin of another for a just cause, viz., that he may preserve himself from an evil which is about to come. For it is one thing to induce to — another thing to afford an occasion of sin. The former is intrinsically evil; the latter is not in- trinsically evil."

He then proceeds to ask, Whether it may be lawful to co- operate materially in the sin of another ? " Here again our Saint is not guided by the immutable principles of right and wrong, but makes a solemn "league and covenant" with sin, purely from motives of expediency.

^' Query IH. — Whether it is lawful for a servant to open the door for an harlot ? Croix denies it, but more commonly Bus. and others, say that it is lawful ; neither does the 51 pro- position of Innocent XL oppose this opinion, saying, * A servant who, submitting his shoulders, knowingly assists his own master in ascending by the windows for the purpose of deflowering a virgin, and oftentimes renders assistance fo him in bearing a ladder, in opening a door, or in like manner co- operating, does not sin mortally, if he does that from a fear of great injury ; for example, lest he should be badly treated by his master, incur his displeasure, or be expelled from his house.' For, by ' opening the door,' from the context itself, is understood opening it by force. Only (they say) if he does not open it, another is present who will."

" Query IV. — Whether from fear of death, or of great loss, is it lawful for a servant to stoop his shoulders, or bring a lad- der for his master ascending to commit fornication, to force open the door, and such like ? Viva, Milante and others, deny

it ; because, as they say, such actions are never lawful, inas- much as Ihey are intrinsically evil. But Busemb., (^c, speak the contrary, whose opinion, approved of by reason, appears to me the more probable ! '

IS IT LAWFUL TO STEAL ?

Liguori not only teaches that it is allowable for servants and others to steal, but he furnishes a regular "scale of thefts," to inform thieves how much they may steal from persons in the various ranks of life, without committing a mortal sin.

In Book III. No. 521, he discusses the question, "Whether a creditor can compensate himself?" and afterwards proceeds to the case of servants and others, as follows : —

" Note here the thirty-seventh proposition of Innocent XL, which said, ' Domestic servants, men and women, can steal from their own masters for the purpose of compensating them- selves for their own labor, which they judge to be greater than the salary they receive.' The Salm. with others, speak- ing concerning this condemned proposition, say, 1. That if a servant without necessity, and of his own accord, make an agreement with his master for an inferior salary, he cannot afterwards compensate himself ; othenvise (he may,) if from necessity, for the purpose, doubtless, of alleviating his own misery, he agrees upon a salary notably less than just ; the reason is, because the pontificial decrees are not designed to lay servants under an unjust obligation."

" The Salmanticenses say, in the second place, that if a ser- vant, of his own choice, increase his labor, he cannot steal (surripere) anything; because then he is considered to give freely his own labor for the sake of conciliating the favor of his master. But otherwise, if he do so from the expressed or tacit will of his master ; because then the rule is to be ob- served, that the laborer is worthy of his hire."

But who is to be the judge of the amount to which the ser- vant may compensate himself? Liguori thinks the servant himself may be the judge.

"But the Salmanticenses say, that a servant can, according to his own judgment, compensate himself for his labor, if he without doubt judge that he was deserving of a larger stipend. Which indeed appears sufficiently probable to me, and to other more modern learned men, if the servant, or any other hired person, be conscientiously prudent, and capable of

forming a correct judgment, and be certain concerning the justice of the compensation, all danger of mistake being re- moved.'*

' A poor man, absconding with goods for his support, can

answer the judge that he has nothing. In like manner, a master who has concealed his goods without an inventory, if he is not bound to settle with his creditors with them, can say to a judge, that he has not concealed anything, in his own mind meaning those goods with which he is bound to satisfy his creditors."

In Dubiiwi II. he considers what quantity of stolen property is necessary to constitute mortal sin.

" There are various opinions concerning this matter ; Nav. too scrupulously has fixed the half of a regalis, others, with too great laxity, have fixed ten aurei ; Tol. Med. Less., &c., moderately have fixed two regales, although less might suffice if it would be a serious loss.

In another volume our Saint teaches, " that it is lawful for the son, for a just cause, to desire to be drunk, that in his drunkness he may murder his father, so as to inherit his proper- ty, and may get drunk for that purpose. (Remember a just cause is any thing that is for your own benefit).

^' These things are not to be measured mathematically, but morally ; not only according to the value of the thing stolen, but also according to the circramstances of the person from whom it is stolen — to wit, if he would suffer great loss, or Christian charity be grievously violated ; wherefore, in respect of a very rich man, or even of a king, one or two aurei appear something notable ; but in the case of a man of moderate wealth, about four regales, or the half of an imperial ; in the case of a mechanic, two ; in the case of a poor man, one."

" As to this point, so necessary for a practical knowledge, viz : — What may be the grievous matter in a theft ? it will be worth while here to elucidate many things. Whatsoever some may say, it is the common opinion of divines, and it does not appear possible to be denied, that in determining the quantity of the matter, the same quantity cannot be absolutely assigned for all, but it is to be measured according to the circumstances of person, property, place, and time, since the seriousness of the theft consists in the quantity of the loss which is sustained by the neighbor ; certainly a loss which will be light in respect of one man will be grievous in respect of another."

The amount of guilt depends on the place in which the theft

is committed, as the following most ludicrous paragraph states : —

" Here it is asked, whether it be mortal sin to steal a small piece of a relic ? There is no doubt but that in the district of Rome it is mortal sin, since Clement VIII. and Paul V. have issued an excommunication against those who, the rectors of the churches being unwilling, steal some small relic : othe?'- wise, Croix probably says with Sanch., &c., if any one should steal any small thing out of the district of Rome not deforming the relic itself, nor diminishing its estima- tion ; unless it may be some rare or remarkable relic, as for example, the holy cross, the hair of the blessed Virgin, Sfc ! ! ! "

In Dubium III. he asks, " When does he sin grievously who commits many small thefts ? Observe how he aids and abets thieves.

' Here also the quantity of the loss or injury which the

neighbour endures, and what the thief intends, is the measure of the quantity of sin.

Whence you will resolve, —

If any one, on an occasion, should steal only a. moderate sum either from one or more, not intending to acquire any notable sum, neither to injure his neigbour to a great extent by several thefts, he does not sin grievously, nor do these, taken together, constitute a mortal sin ; however, after it may have amounted to a notable sum, by detaining it he can com- mit mortal sin. But even this mortal sin may be avoided, if either then he may be unable to restore, or have the intention of making restitution immediately of those things which he then received.

" Query II. If small thefts, which together amount to a large sum, be made from various known masters, whether a thief be bound under great blame to make restitution to them, or whether he may satisfy by distributing them to paupers ? On the one hand it appears, that restitution should be made to the original possessors, unless the danger of losing fame or very grievous loss or inconvenience excuse."

' Whence it appears, that a thief may have rendered suffi-

cient satisfaction to his own weighty obligation, from the pre- sumed consent of the republic, if he make restitution to paupers, or pious places, which are the more needy parts of the repubhc."

[Hence it appears that the unprincipled maxim of " Make money, honestly, if you can, at all events make money," is adopted for the support of pious places. This is something

like a Free Church obtaining subscriptions from Slave Ovmers for Missionary purposes. Balaam's ass would have spurned both of these mercenary pranks of his sable, but more loqua- cious brethren.]

' This opinion of Bus. is most probable, viz . : If many per-

sons steal small quantities, that no one of them commits griev- ous sin, although they may be mutually aware of their conduct, unless they do it by concert ; and this, although each should steal at the same time. The reason is, because then no one person is the cause of injury, which, by accident, happens to the master by the others."

In Dabium IV. Liguori considers thefts of domestics or friends.

" A wife can give alms and gifts, in accordance with the custom of other women of that place and condition, although her husband may prohibit her from giving any alms, because custom hath appointed this right to her, of which her husband cannot deprive her."

Speaking of sons stealing, he says: —

" Salas apud Croix says, that a son does not commit grievous sin, who steals 20 or 30 aurei from a father possessing nearly 1500 aurei. and Lugo does not disapprove of it. If the father be not tenacious, and the son have grown up, and receive it for honest purposes. Less, &c., say, that a son stealing two or three aurei from a rich father does not sin grievonsly ; Ban- nez says, that 53 aurei are required to constitue a grievous sin on the part of a son w^ho steals from a rich father, but this opinion Lug. and La Croix reject ; unless perchance he be the son of a prince, in which case Holmz. consents, and even says that it is not a grievous sin to receive ten aurei from a rich parent."

ON RESERVED CASES AND ABSOLUTION OF

ACCOMPLICES. i

What is understood by reserved cases .^

Annver. Certain sins, the sacramental absolution of which the sui-'erior especially reserves to himself.

Thi> simple reservation is not censure, since it is not prop- erly a punishment, but a simple negation of approbation or jurisdiction. — Dens, v. 6. p, 263.

Who can reserve sins ?

Ansiver. That superior for whom it is competent to grant approbation or jurisdiction to absolve from sins.

The Supreme Pontiff determines the reserved cases for the universal Church ; the Bishop in his own diocese ; the Supe- riors of Regulars can reserve cases for their own subjects, but according to the limitation of Clement VIII. — Dens, v. 6. p. 270.

Let it be observed that, except in case of danger of death, no Confessor, though he may otherwise have the power of ab- solving from reserved cases, may or can absolve his accomplice in any external mortal sin against chastity, committed by the accomplice with the Confessor himself."

This case of an accomplice is not placed amongst the re- served cases, because the Bishop does not reserve the absolu- tion to himself; but any other Confessor can absolve from it, except the priest who is himself the partner in the act. — DenSj vol. 6, p. 291, 2.

[This case. Thus seduction of females in the Confessional appears to be a very common occurrence, and does not con- stitute even a reserved case. But what is reservation ? •' It is not censure, but merely a witholding of approbation or juris- diction." Therefore as approbation is not withheld, any Con- fessor may absolve a novice, a nun, or a lay woman, a priest, a friar, or a monk, though they may ail be guilty of committing fornication ; for it is only " the graver and more atrocious crimes" that are reserved to the bishops, such as heresy, and the reading of the Bible and other heretical books, &c.

In this way two priests in neighboring parishes can absolve each other's /ra// 0/165, and afterwards absolve each other.]

As copulation with a novice, or a nun, or any other woman bound by a simple vow of chastity, does not constitute a reserv- ed case ; neither is a religious man or a priest comprehended (in a reserved case) ; so, therefore, a free woman transgressing with a Religious priest does not incur this case (of reserva- tion).-— Dens^ vol. 6, p. 287.

For the three following reasons it appears there never can be a reserved case against a " Religious Priest," — Because,

1st. "Frequenting" a novice^ a nun, or any other ivoman, bound by a simple vow of chastity, does not constitute a reserv- ed case.

2nd. Transgressing " with Q.free woman does not constitute a reserved case.

3rd. " A religious man or a Priest " is never comprehended in a reserved case.

The first two reasons include all ivomeii, whether free or under vows; and the third reason includes all religiovs men or Priests, Therefore all women are subject to the will and pleas- ure of all religions men or Priests, What would Jeptha's daughter and her maiden companions say to this mode of keep- ing a vow of celibacy ? Probably the irreligious priests are in the habit of imitating the daughters of Israel upon the moun- tains ; viz., bewailing the virginity of their self-denying com- panions.

Is a male accomplice in venereal sin, to wit, by touches, comprehended in this decree ?

Answer. Yes, because the Pope extends it to whatsoever person.

, It is not required that this sin of an accomplice be commit- ted in confession, or by occasion of confession ; for in what- ever place br time it has been done, even before he was her Confessor, it makes a case of an accomplice.

Lastly, take notice, that since the restriction is made to carnal sins, the confessor will be able to give valid absolution to his accomplice in other sins, namely, in theft, in homicide, &c. — Dens, v. 6, pp. 281-2.

[That is, if she should happen to poison her husband.]

After telling us that, in obedience to a bull of Gregory the Fifteenth, and a constitution founded thereon by Benedict the Fourteenth, any priest is to be denounced who endeavors to seduce his penitent in the Confessional, he asks the following question : —

A Confessor has seduced his penitent to the commission of carnal sin, not in confession, nor by occasion of confession, but from some other extraordinary occasion ; Is he to be denounc- ed ?

Ayimver. No. If he had tampered with her from his knowl- edge of confession, it would be a ciiflferent thing; because, for , instance, he knows that person, from her confession, to be given to such carnal sins. — P. Antoine, t. 4, p. 430.

For which reason Steyart reminds us, that a Confessor can ask a penitent who confesses that she has sinned with a priest, or has been seduced bv him to the commission of carnal sin, whether that priest was her Confessor or had seduced her in the confessional, &c.

Ought the denunciation to be made, when there exists a doubt whether the solicitation to carnal sin was real and suffi- cient ?

Ansiver. Some say No ; but Card. Cozza, with others whom

he cites, doubt 25, says, Yes, if the doubt be not light, adding that the examination of the matter is to be left to the Bishop or Ordinary. — Dens, v. 6, p. 294, 5.

[Should the Bishop think that it was only a joke, or that the " solicitation " was insufficient, the matter is then hushed up to save the character of the Confessor.]

ON THE MODE OF DENOUNCING THE AFORESAID

SEDUCER.

The first and most convenient mode is this — if the person upon whose chastity the attempt has been made would pro- ceed herself immediately to the Bishop or the Ordinary, with- out revealing the circumstance to any one else. 2nd. She can write a letter, closed and sealed, to the Bishop, in the following form : J, Catha?'ine N., dwelling at Mechlin, in the street N., under the sign N., by these declare, that I, on the 6th of March, 1758, on the occasion of confession, have been se- duced to improper acts by the Confessor N. N., hearing confes- sions at Mechlin^ in the church N., lohich I am ready to confirm on oath.

3rd. But if she cannot write, let a similar letter be written by another, namely, by a second Confessor with the license of the penitent, and let the name of the penitent or person seduc- ed be expressed as above: but let the name of the seducing Confessor, in order that it may remain a secret to the writer, be not expressed, but let his name be written, under a different pretext, by some third person ignorant of the circumstance, on some scrap of paper which may be enclosed in the aforesaid letter.

In this case (of denouncing), however, some are of opinion that moderation must be observed, and that the circumstances of frequency, of danger &c., must be considered. — Dens, V. 6, p. 295.

Hence it appears, that if this " amiable weakness " is not very frequently exhibited, the affair is to be passed over, if possible; or, at all events, the Bishop is to make the best fight he can with the seduced penitent, to screen the priest and hush up the matter. We shall soon see how often a Confessor may deliberately sin with penitents in the confessiona.

Confessors are advised not lightly to give credit to anyivomen whatsoever accusing their former Confessors ; but first to search

diligently into the end and cause of the occasion, to examine their morals, conversation, &c. — Dens^ vol. 6, p. 295.

Credit should not be readily given to penitents when they make such accusations as these ; and the Confessor, particular- ly if he be a young man, ought to do nothing in so arduous an affair without the advice of the more prudent priests. — De la Hog-iie de Pcen., p. 302.

[See how exactly Dens and De la Hogue agree upon this critical affair. Their opinions are given almost verbatim ei lit- eratim.]

For which reason observe, that whatever person, either by herself or by another, falsely denounces a priest as a seducer, incurs a case reserved for the Supreme Pontiff. Thus Bene- dict the Fourteenth, in the Constitution called " Sacramentum PcBnitentice^^ in Antoine, p. 418.

Benedict the Fourteenth, in the Constitution cited in No. 216, reserves to himself and his successors, the sin of falsely denouncing a Confessor for seducing his penitent to commit carnal sin. — Dens, vol. 6, pp. 295, 6, 7.

ON THE PROXIMATE OCCASION OF SIN.

What is the proximate occasion of sin, concerning which the Pastoral speaks ?

Answer. It is that which is naturally calculated to lead into mortal sin.

It is also well defined :

That which brings with it a moral or probable danger of mortal sin.

We adhere to those who teach as follows : —

Frequenting of taverns is a proximate occasion (of sin) with .espect to him who is wont, out of every three times, to fall once ; or out of every ten times, to fall twice or thrice into drunkenness, into quarrels, or into other mortal sins.

In like manner, speaking to a girl is a proximate occasion (of sin) to him who, out of every ten times, is w^ont to fall twice or thrice into carnal sin, or into deliberate carnal delight.

Daily frequenting a tavern or a girl, is considered a proxi- mate occasion (of sin) in respect of him who, on that account, falls twice or thrice a month into like mortal sin.

P. Dn Jardin is of the same opinion, p. 51, respecting the daily administration of any office, however honest ; for in- stance, of a physician, a confessor, a lawyer, a merchant, if any should, on that account, be accustomed to fall deliberately

tivo or three times a month; and page 53, he concludes, that the Confessor is bound lo abandon that ministry.

[Even Du Jardin, who is considered a severe disciplinarian, thinks tliat a Confessor may deliberately "frequent" a female penitent once a month (just to keep him from sinning) ; by which it would appear that the sin consists not in the act, but in performing it two or three times a month.]

Obj. That Confessor every day occupied in the ministry of hearing confessions, falls very seldom in comparison with the times he does not fall ; therefore, the ministry of hearing con- fessions is not with respect to him a proximate occasion (of sin).

Answer. I deny the consequence, because he, though not comparatively, does^ however, absolutely fall frequently ; for he who would commit two or three unjust homicides every month, should be said absolutely to commit homicide frequently ; so often does that Confessor slay his own soul. — Dens^ v. 6, p. 175.

The following words of an old song illustrate the progress of the Confessional : — m

A lovely lass to a Fryar came, The greatest ftiult of myself I know,

To confess in the morning early : Is what I now discover ;

In what my dear were you to blame ? You for that crime to Rome must go,

Now tell to me sincerely. And discipline must suffer ;

I have done, sir, what I dare not name, Lack-a-day, sir ! if it must be so,

With a man that loves me dearly. With me you must send my lover.

Oh ! no, no, no, my dear you dream,

We must have no double dealing ; But if you'll repeat to me that same,

I'll pardon your past failing. — I own, sir, but I blush for shame,

That your penance is prevailing.

ON JUST CAUSES FOR PERMITTING MOTIONS OF

SENSUALITY.

Just causes of this sort are, the hearing of confessions, the reading of cases of conscience drawn up for a Confessor, ne- cessary or useful attendance on an invalid.

The effect of a just cause is such, that anything from which motions arise may be not only lawfully begun, but also law- fully continued : and so the Confessor receiving those motions from the hearing of confessions, ought not on that account to abstain from hearing them, but has a just cause for persevering, providing however, that they always displease him, and there

arise not therefrom the proximate danger of consent. — Dens, V. 1, pp. 299, 300.

Thus it appears to be a matter-of-course, that hearing con- fessions is a. just cause for entertaining sensual motions. Dens explains " sensual motions" to be, " sharp tingling sensations of sensual delight shooting through the body, and exciting to corporeal pleasures." Now, if a lady appears modest, the Confessor is instructed that " that modesty must be overcome, or else he is authorized to deny her absolution." " Pudorem ilium superandum esse, et nolenti denegandam esse absolu- tionem." — De la Hogue de pasn^p. 68.

Attendance upon invalids ! ! is also a just cause for sensual motions. After reading this, who would marry a frequenter of the confessional. Only think of allowing a wife or daughter to go alone to confession to such beastly sensualists, or of per- mitting such hideous monsters to enter their sick chamber, especially when they are recovering.

About what can young men be specially examined at the age of about twenty years, sufficiently vigorous and like men of the world, or given to drink ?

Answer. About the sins of luxury, first by general aues' tions and from afar : for example, whether the pemiem fre- quents persons of the other sex ? If he allows that he does ; whether any improper words were said ? What followed, &c. If he answer in the negative, it can be asked, whether he is at any time tormented with improper thoughts or dreams? If he say Yes, it is fit to proceed to further questions.

The same form of prudence shall be observed about a young girl, or a woman vainly decked. — Dens^ v. 6, p. 125.

In speaking of interrogating young men and women, Bailly uses almost the same words, viz : —

The prudent Confessor will endeavor, as much as possible, to induce his confidence by kind words, and then proceed from general to particular questions — from less shameful to more shameful things ; not beginning from external acts, but from thoughts such as^ Has not the penitent been troubled, inadver- tently as it were, with improper cogitations? Of what kind was the thought indulged ? Did he experience any unlawful sensations ?

If the penitent be a girl, let her be asked — Has she orna- mented herself in dress so as to please the male sex or, for the same end, has she painted herself ; or bared her arms, her shoulders, or her bosom ? Whether she has frequented church in order that she might show herself to be looked at in the

porch or at the vvnndow ? Whether in company with others she has spoken, read, or sung anything immodest ? Whether she is not attached to some one ? Whether she has not allowed him to take liberties with her ? Whether she has not allowed him to kiss her ? But if opportunity shall offer for carrying the inquiry further, the Confessor will do his duty, but, however, prudently and cautiously. — Bailly^ vol. 7, p. 366.

Does any one bound by a vow of chastity act against his vow, if he be the cause of lechery to others who are free from such vow ; for instance, if he advise others to commit fornica- tion with one another ?

Answer. He is guilty of the sin of scandal, and stands ar- raigned of their fornication ; however, he does not seem to violate his own vow, merely on account of the fornication of others, if he feel no complacency himself, because he has made no vow to preserve the chastity of others, but his own, just as a married man advising it does not sin against the faith of his matrimony! ! I

Obj. He that makes a vow of chastity, vows not to co-op- erate with, or consent to any sin against chastity.

Answer. That is denied. — Dens, vol. 4, p. 377.

Can a Confessor absolve a young woman betrothed in mar- riage, whilst he knows solely from the confession of the be- trothed husband, that she does not disclose in her confession the fornication she has been guilty of with her betrothed ?

Ansiver. I find various opinions : La Croix thinks that she ought not to be absolved, but that the Confessor should dis- semble, and say Misereatur iui, &c., so that she may not know that absolution has been denied her.

[Even when the priest acts in the capacity of God, he may practice deception !]

Prudent Confessors are wont, and la^f it doivn as a ride, reg- ularly to ask all betrothed young women, whether from occasion of their approaching marriage there occurred to them any im- proper thoughts ? whether they permitted kisses and other greater alternate liberties, because perhaps they thought that greater freedoms were now allowed them ?

And since the young woman is more under the influence of modesty, we are wont for that reason to hear the betrothed husband's confession first, that she may afterwards more con- fidently reveal to the Confessor what she knows to be known to him already.

Some divines add,, that the betrothed husband, who makes his confession first, can be induced to tell her that he has openly

confessed that sin. After the young woman's confession, that would he no Ioniser in the Confessor's power. — Dens. v. 6, pp. 239, 2^0.

What is morose delight ?

Answer. It is a voluntary complacence about an illicit object without a wish of performing or executing the work. — Vens^ vol. 1, p. 303.

Is morose delight allowed on a thing prohibited by the law of nature, but here and now having taken place without a formal fault; for instance, delight on nocturnal involuntary pollution ?

Answer. No ; because the object of delight is intrinsically bad ; and therefore deliberate delight respecting it is also bad.

Although many think that it is unlawful to delight on homi* cide, drunkenness, &c., involuntarily committed ; it is not un- lawful, however, on account of the good end, to delight on merely natural and involuntary pollution, or to desire it with a simple and inefficacious affection.

Of this opinion also is St. Anthony, part 2, tit. 6, chap. 5.

[Wha.t a. pure saint! — what does he consider is the "good end "'to be gained.]

They say " wiih a simple and inefficacious affection ; " be- cause, if it be desired efficaciously, so as that the pollution be caused by the desire, or if means be employed that it may happen, it is certain, according to all, that it is a mortal sin. The reason of these Authors is, that pollution merely natural and involuntary is prohibited by no law ; since it is a merely natural effect, or a mere evacuation of nature, like sweat, sahva, &c. ; and therefore it is by no means materially or objectively bad ; whence it is not a sin to wish for it inefficaciously as such. — Dens, v. 1, pp. 310, 11.

ON REFUSING OR DENYING MARRIAGE DUTY-

In every carnal sin let the circumstance of marriage be ex- pressed in confession.

Are the married to be at any time asked in confession about denying the marriage duty ?

Answer. Yes : particularly the "WOMEN, who through ignorance or modesty, are sometimes silent on that sin ; but the question is not to be put abruptly, but to be framed pru- dently ; for instance, whether they have quarrelled with their husband — what was the cause of these quarrels — whether

they did upon such occasion deny their husbands the marriage duty ; but if they acknowledge they have transgressed, they ought to be asked chastely, whether anything followed con- trary to conjugal continence, namely pollution, &c. — Dens, V. 7, p. 149.

[The following is a tolerably minute description, considering that the author was sworn to celibacy from early youth : —

Hence let the wife, accusing herself in confession of having denied the marriage duty, be asked whether the husband de- manded it with the full rig'or of his right ; and that shall be inferred from his having demanded it mstantly, from his having been grievously offended or from aversion or any other evils having followed, of which she ought also to accuse herself, because she w^as the cause of them. On the other hand, if she confess that there exists quarrels and aversions between her and her husband, she can be asked whether she has denied ilhe marriage duty. — Dens, v. 7, p. 150.]

Thus, if a married woman confesses, that in sulk, or whim, or for any other reason, she has not rendered due benevolence, she is compelled to give the Coiifessor a full, true, and partic- ular account of the way in which her husband insisted upon his right, viz., whether in anger and with threats, or with en- treaties and coaxing endearments. In this manner the Con- fessor not only ferrets out the most secret acts of the married, but also ascertains, whenever he chooses, what is the peculiar mettle of the husband, and disposition of the wife.

The following passages from the " Moral Theology " of Bailly, the .reader will perceive, are almost word for word, the same as those selected from Dens on the same subject. Are married persons bound to render the marriage debt ? Ariswe?'. They are bound under pain of mortal sin, because the matter is of itself important, since from thence arises quar- rels, hatreds, dissensions. It must be rendered when it is re- quired expressly or tacitly, w^hen sought after by means of words or signs (saith St. Thomas.)

But I have said that each is bound ; for in this affair both man and wife are equal, as is clear from the words of the apostle.

I have said in the second place, that they are bound under mortal sin, because it is a weighty affair in itself, since it is the active cause of quarrels, hates, dissensions, and since the party defrauded of duty is exposed to the danger of incontinence, which is a deadly sin, hence the Parish Priest, either himself personally in the Tribunal of Penance, (the Confessional,) or

at least, and sometimes more prudently, by the agency of a pious matron, ought to inform married persons, and particu- larly married luomen^ of what they should observe with respect to this matter. Bui since women, through nriodesty or igno- rance, not unfrequently conceal sins of that sort in sacra- mental confession, it is expedient sometimes to interrogate them concerning those sins, but cautiously, prudently, not ab- ruptly : for instance, it may be asked whether there have been any dissensions between her and her husband — what was the cause — and what the effect of them — whether she has on that account denied to !ier Jiusband what is due to him by the laws of marriage ? — BaiUij^ vol. 4, p. 482.

He then gives thirteen reasons for excusing the parties from paying the marriage debt. We shall quote only tw^o or three of them viz : —

If the party demanding asks it carelessly ! !

If the party demanding be drunk or mad — Bailly^ vol. 4, p. 485.

If one party demands too often and immoderately.

The debt can neither be paid nor demanded in a public place, nor before children or domestics ! ! ! nor in that manner which is contrary to nature. — Bailly^ vol. 4, p. 486. Dublin edition.

He now proceeds with a few Miscellaneous Estimates, such as : —

Is it lawful for married persons using matrimony, to wish that thence offspring should not be born ?

Is it permitted to demand the use of matrimony, for the purpose of avoiding incontinence in the partner ?

Is it lawful to use matrimony solely for pleasure ? — Bailly, vol. 4, p. 481. Dublin Edition.

By accident intemperance of this kind may be a deadly sin : — 1. If it be immoderate and injures the health of either party. 2. If the married party intend another and not his own partner ! ! ! as St Thomas expressly teaches. 3. If it be so frequent as to interrupt the time due to prayer, (the two last peculiarities must have been confined to the age and clime in which these saints flourished), as St. Augustine openly main- tains. Bailly, v. 4, p. 482. Dublin Edition.

If it be mantfest that one of the married parties be guilty of adultery, can the innocent refuse the debt to the guilty par- ty ? — A married party cannot refuse the debt to the one guilty of adultery, if that party be guilty of the same crime — because then there is compensation ; neither, moreover, can the inno- cent party do the same (viz, refuse) if the injury has been

pardoned — as, for example, by spontaneously rendering the debt, or by exhibiting other sig^s of conjugal love. — Bailly, v. 4, p. 485.

Ligouri enters more fully into this subject, and apparently with great familiarity. We shall now give one or two extracts from his Works, viz : —

Here it is asked, 1st. Is the husband bound to demand the debt ? Speaking of itself, he is not bound to demand ; but he is by accident bound, namely, if the wife should tacitly require it, for instance, if she shows some token, by which she signi- fies a tacit demand ; because in the case of women, on account of their innate modesty, such signs are held in the place of real demand. This should be presumed to be on the part of the man, rather than that of the woman, as for instance, if she happened to possess greater authority (that is, wear the breech- es) or be of a fierce disposition, and the husband should hap- pen to be very pusillanimous and bashful. But Sanchez very properly suggests, that as a general rule, the wife is not bound to pay the debt, unless this pusillanimity and shame on the part of the husband, are very evident to her. — Lig. vol. 6, n. 928.

It is asked 2d, whether the wife is sometimes bound to pay the debt. But it becomes a doubt whether the wife be in that case bound to demand it from charity or from a sense of jus- tice. The reason is, because married parties are bound to observe good faith when one is in danger of incontinence ; in that case although the other does not demand, still necessity itself requires that good faith should be observed in avoiding the incontinence of the other, and therefore in that case it is rew- dering rather than the demanding of the debt. This is con- firmed by example — for if a physician is bound by contract to heel the sick, he is bound in justice to offer him medicine al- though the patient may not demand it. But the second opinion ^ which seems more probable^ and which is maintained by San- chez, &c., affirms that they are only bound by charity. The reason is that when there is no petition, express or tacit, on the part of either, there is no obligation of justice to pay the debt. But it belongs indeed to the good faith of matrimony, that the husband should not commit adultery, but not that he should avert the other from adultery; for although this also may in some measure pertain to good faith, it does not, however, so far pertain that it should strictly obhge from a sense of justice to demand ; and on that account a demand of this kind is not said by Saint Thomas to be absolutely a rendering but

only a certain rendering of the debt ; and this is adduced by the holy Doctor only to expose the party demanding, if he de- mands it in order to avoid incontinence in the other, but not to oblige him to demand it. Nor does the instance of the physi- cian militate against this, for the physician is bound, as it were, to supply medicine to the sick man, although not demanding it, because according to his contract he has bound himself to cure him ; but the married party has bound himself only not to break his own contract, but not to prevent the other from violating his or her contract. From this opinion it is inferred, that the maried party, since he is not bound by justice, but only by charity, in that case to make the demand, is not bound to demand at great inconvenience ; hence then, probably, the wife is excused from making the denjandjif in this she is oblig- ed to suffer from great bashfulness. — Lig. vol. 6, n. 929.

Let the confessors take notice, that the maried, ^lest their their children should multiply too fast, sometimes commit a detestable turpitude like that of Er and Onan, about which they are to be examined. — Dens^ v. 7, p. 153.

Lest the confessor hesitate in tracing out these different sins let him have the following lines in readiness : —

Her state, married or single the sinner shall tell; the sin when and where ; the auxiliaries by which she fell ; the mo- tives that led her and the posture she chose. For absolution to fit her she must these disclose, the motives, the why and wherefore, the mode and manner, whether wife, maid, or widow, all these the penitent must tell I — Dens,

Our bachelor priest and saints now go on with a very lengthy piece on the various possible postures and other delicate mat- ters, such as I think verv few of our married friends could com- pose. Such a masterpiece of filthy and degrading sentiments, that would be a disgrace to the lowest dens of infamy.

We are also told in another part of the same volume, that the wretch who invades his father's bed and commits incest with his mother, is not so guilty in the eyes of the church, as the man who circulates the bible.

There is nothing done, it appears, that can escape the knowl- edge of the priest. He knows all the secrets of young and old. He can tell the real father of every child in the parish, nay, the very attitude in which each was begotten, and there is no doubt but many a family has their own iUigitimate chil- dren, and yet these licentious inquisitors are called pure, up- right, virtuous, and equal to God, and cannot sin. " O, con- sistency, thou art a jewel."

Here is a long train of suggestions that are studied and practiced in the Maynooth college, which the ingenuity of the very fiends could not surpass, and all the students in May- nooth college devote 59 hours every week to the study of these filthy treaties upon what their professors are pleased to call Moral Theology — Confessional Unmasked.

Our bachelor saint now expatiatas upon the various possible postures, ways, and means and other deHcate matters, that composed such a masterpiece of matrimonial mysteries, that I will defy any of our own marrted friends to compose such a filthy hst, yea, they could not be endured in the lowest dens of infamy, for it would make an American cow blush to hear the treatises that these bachelor saints and divines have written. I wish every person could read them, it would show you what these Catholic colleges in the United States are, for the same doctrines and teaties are studied in America as in the May- nooth college, for it is the infalliable church and never changes, and such matters are more congenial to the tastes of Roman Catholic saints, bishops, priests, and Jesuits than the dry sub- ject of common studies.

It has been asked me why I didn't publish all of these facts which I have in my posssession. My answer is this, it is such a filthy list that every family would consign it to the flames, and furthermore I should be prosecuted, for I should violate the laws of my country. Americans, do not forget what is studied in these Catholic colleges ! and those virtuous sisters of charity, what is the result of their teachings ? They are taught that the priest is as God, having power to forgive sin, that by confessing their crimes to a Romish priest he can obtain par- don— the blackest murderer if he can escape the hangman or the penitentiary believes the priest can forgive him and all is at rest.

Americans, do you desire to establish in our midst colleges and schools for the purpose of bringing up our children in the faith and practices of these priests and nuns ? I tell you if you do or even allow them, the rising generation will .be with- out morals, and our glorious republic will die in the arms of despotism, for that is the aim of all popish bishops, priests, and Jesuits in America. Look at Bologna in 1832. The sanfe- distes took the following oath literally : " I swear to elevate the altar and the throne upon the bones of the infamous lib- erals, and to exterminate them without pity, for the cries of their children or the tears of their old men ; " and they put to death many, sacked the town and ravished the women. And

.»•«•..

■-r.

the papists stand ready to-day to take the same oath in Amer- ica, and the priests stand ready and will as soon as they get a little stronger here, administer such an oath and say as inno- cent III said to his French followers when they landed in England, "Sword, sword, leap from thy scabbard; sword, whet thyself for vengeance." And will not every Roman Cath- olic obey their call to raise the cross and crown in America ? Yes, for they dare not do otherwise. And is not the Pope of Rome all ready sending his canon laAvs to this country ? Yes. And will Americans allow this ? Echo says no ! !

Let us say as Cromwell told the Pope through his ambassa- dor at Rome, " that if he (the Pope) did not silence his can- ons in the valley of Piedmont, he would silence them himself by his own brass cannons at the gates of the Vatican." Let us single out such impostors as those Popish bishops, priests, and jesuites are, — let us brand them in italics with the words,

' deceivers and traitors," that our children may know and shun

them.

And how many are there of those detestable and demorali- zing devils in human shape in the United States ? The accu- rate numbers cannot be obtained — but the following report will give as near as we can get, the numbers : —

" There are now 7 Archbishops, 32 bishops, 1574 priests, 1712 churches, and 41 dioceses. There are believed to be nearly 3,000,000 of Romanists in the country at the present time. This Society has employed 92 men of different denominations as missionaries."

The above is from a report of the American and Foreign Christian Union, made at the Tremont Temple. We beg to direct the attention of the person or committee who made the above report to a very important error ; which is in relation to the number of Catholics in this country. It is there put down at three millions, in round numbers. Now this is notoriously under the mark. There are upwards of seven millions ; and the number is increasing, proportionally, some 20 per cent faster than the Protestants. The increase is by immigration from Europe. The above report does not include the order of Jesuites, nor the colleges, nor the Sisters of Charity, Sisters of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, nor the missionary stations and nun- neries in the United States which is a very important matter ; and as I cannot obtain the accurate number, I can only say it is hundreds too many.

Note here the 37th proposition of Innocent the XI, which said domestic servants, men and women, can steal from their

own masters for the purpose of compensating themselves for their own labor, which they judge to be greater than their salary ; for the laborer is worthy of his hire. (Note which they judge to be greater.) They teach that the servant can, according to his own judgment, compensate him or herself for their labor. What quantity of stolen property is necessary to constitute moral sin? These things are not to be measured mathematically but morally. According to CathoHc morals, they may steal from as many as they can without being detect- ed by the civil authorities. The sums are stated, how much from persons in different ranks, but it is such that we can safely say as much as they can, and I will now ask you Pro- testants and Americans that have for your domestic help Catholic girls, how much wages do you pay them ? Is there any scale you can give of the rates or quantity of stolen goods that every one of such stamp of help carries from your houses. They have Bridget, and Michael, and O'Flarigan, and cousin in every other Catholic in the place, that are fed from your store- house and pantrys ; and besides the amount of property thus stolen, you are in danger of death by their hands, for the priest has only to say to any or all of these Catholic servants on such a day put this poison into the victuals of your mas- ters or mistresses family, so as all shall eat it or a part of them and it is done. For they are taught and do believe that the priests are as gods," and cannot sin, and whatever they (the priests) tell them to do they will do it, believing that it is doing God service, and it has been thrown out by some of the Cath- olic priests that they coiild poison two-thirds of the population of the United States in a day. Americans, you who have Catholics in your families, if you think anything of your own lives and your children's lives, I warn you to drive every Catholic from your roof before you receive the dreadful drug to your stomach, and it is too late. You may think that this one or that one is a very fine woman and is attached to your family and would lay down her life for your children, and you may think that you know that she would not do such a thing. But I tell you this is a delusion, for I don't care what their morals may appear to be, if they go to confession regular they will do whatever the priests tells then, and if you won't beheve it test them, and ask them if they believe what the priests says? if the priest sins, &c., if they would do as the priest tells them, and if the priest should tell them to leave your house if they should go ? if he should tell them to poison such an animal, &c., and lastly, if he should tell them to poison your

own family or be eternally damned, sent to purgatory, and never be pardoned, &c.? you will see that they will try to elude these questions by saying that the priest would not tell them to do so, &c., but press the questions as suppositions, &c., and you will see that my statements are correct, — for all Catholics are bouud to do the priest's bidding, which they receive from him at that sink or fountain of polution, the confessional box. I said sink or fountain of polution, why call it a fountain ? becaus*^ from that place flows the corruption, vice and crime of Catholicism ; for the seduction of females in the confession is a common occurrence by those men who style themselves as God and are believed to be equal to God by the Catholic peo- ple, and the young virgin is told by them that she must resign herself to the will of God, that is the priests. Any priest or confessor may absolve a novice, a nun or lady, w^oman, priest, friar or monk, or any person for committing fornication, adul- tery, theft, or even murder, for these are only a venal sin, but the graver and more atrocious crimes are reserved to the bishop, such as heresy, reading the Bible, and other heretical books. These are mortal sins, and are styled reserved cases, as copulation with a novice or a nun or any other "woman bound by a simple vow of chastity, does not constitute a re- served case. For the three following reasons there never can be a reserved case against a priest, because " frequenting or "^»

ravishing a novice or nun or any other woman, bound by a simple vow of chastity does not constitute a reserved case." 2d. " Or with a free woman and no religious man nor priest is ever comprehended in a reserved case ; the first two reasons include all women, whether free or under vows," and the 8rd, " all rehgious men and priests, therefore all women are subject to the will of all rehgious men and priests."' According to the Catholic creed, a confessor who has seduced his penitent in con- fession and she reveals it to any one except a confessor, it is a mortal sin. But if lo a confessor he is to pass it off as a joke, and do the same himself ; but if the seduced penitent^ should tell it to any one else, which w^eakness is not very frequently exhibited, the affair is to be passed over if possible, or at all events, the bishop is to make the best fight he can with the seduced penitent, to screen the priest and hush up the matter. We shall soon see how confessors may deliberately by any means they can, accomplish their end, seduce any penitents in the confessional. Catholics are to give credit to no woman thus accusing the confessor, but acquaint him of the report, and the seduced penitent has told them where and what, the seduced

penitent is then sent for at once. And what is the consequence ? I will give you one instance which will illustrate every case of that unpardonable sin. The case I am about to relate, I re- ceived from a gentleman in the year 1852, while travelling in Central America and Mexico, who, through a little craft and by the help of another gentleman gained admittance to the nun- nery and to the Inquisition rooms. There is an Inquisition room in every nunnery throughout that entire country, and there is, no doubt, but there are in America. But what did he see in this room ? When he first came to the door and it was thrown open, he heard a shriek, such as can come from nothing but a person in the keenest pain of torture, and on looking, what should meet his eyes but a young girl about fifteen years old, stripped naked, and bent over a rail with her chest resting on the rail about three feet from the floor, her ancles fastened to the floor on one side, her hands on the other, stretched to her full length, and by her side stood one of the inquisitors with a scorge with which he had been beating her body till the purple gore was running from her lacerated body from head to foot and had formed a pool on the floor with her life's blood ; and the scorge was dripping in his hand.

A little further on there hung another lovely looking girl by the hands with an iron ball to each foot and life has almost left her, and still further on there hung another by the middle, her face up by the middle of the back, and still further on there was another young girl hung by the hands and feet on a kind of a triangle and life was to be seen in them all. They had not got through with their sufl'erings, but were there real- ly in the last agonies of death. These were all perfectly naked. For what ? We will soon see, — when he entered this room he did not think that there was an inquision room in ex- istence but what must have been his feelings on entering here. They must have been the same as any Americans would have been in seeing such an inhuman sight, his interpretor saw the workings of his feelings and stept between the priest and him for fear the priest would discover it, and mistrust the decep- tion that had been played, for the consequences would have been death. The priest looked on these scenes with apparent delight and as though he was familiar with such scenes. He en- quired what they were punished in such a way for, through his interpretor, and was answered by the priest, that it was for violating the rules of faith. He then put the question what those rules were in particular, the one that is scourged ; and was answered, that her confessor seduced her in confession

and she told it to her mother. And the others were for similar offences. Thus you see that if a yoang virtuous girl is seduced by her confessor she cannot even mention it to her own mother for council even if she is — for the moment she mentions it to her own mother her death* warrant is signed and sealed, and she is consigned to the rack by her own mother ; for the super- stition of the Catholic faith is such she dare not for her soul's sake and the fear of the power of the priest do otherwise. After reading the above fact, is it any wonder that the priests are not exposed by some of their victims. No, for well do they know their doom if they even hint that such is or has been the case.

And there is a rule in the priesthood that frequenting a tavern or a girl, is a sin, unless it is with a just cause. The same rule states as follows — " if he falls 2 or 3 times a month

- with the same person it is a venal sin, but a confessor may

" deliberately frequent any female penitent once a month just to " keep him from sinning," thus it appears that the sin consists not in the act of seduction, fornication or any crime of that description where lust and pleasure is the aim, unless it is more than three times a month to the same woman, \\ithout a just cause, and a just cause is such that any thing from which mo- tions arise is a just cause ; for example, the confessor every day sitting, as God, in hearing confessions and reading the cases of conscience drawn up for a confessor to ask the peni- tents on private things, if his blood begins to heat and he

wishes to he may lawfully begin and lawfully carry out

his ends by any means he choses, for he has a just cause. We will now come to the confessional box.

Now if a lady is modest and appears modest this modesty must be overcome or the confessor is authorised to not give her absolution. The prudent confessor will endeavor as much as possible to induce confidence by kind words and then pro- ceed from general to particular questions, from less shameful to more shameful things which they have a general rule for asking the penitent questions — first I shall give is the general questions as given by Dowling.

" Have you b)' word or deed denied your religion, or gone to the churches or meetings of heretics, so as to join in any way with them in their worship, or to give scandal — how often ; have you blasphemed God or his Saints — how often ; have you broke the days of abstinence commanded by the church, or eaten more than one meal on fasting days, or been accessary to others so doing. How often have you neglected to confess

your sins once a year, or to receive the blessed sacrament at Easter. Have you received the sacranrient after having broken your fast ; have you exposed yourself to the evident danger of mortal sin — how often, and of what sin ; have you entertained with pleasure the thought of saying or doing any thing which would be a sin to do or say — how often have you had the desire or design of commuting sin of what sin — how often ? The disgusting indecency of auricular confession, and its ne- cessarily corrupting influence, both to priest and penitent must be evident to all, when the nature of the subject is considered upon which the priests are bound to examine their female penitents relative to the violation of the laws of charity. I shall now proceed with the particular and shameful questions that are asked a young girl and young women with the omis- sion of the most vulgar sentences of tbe querries, which are of the most vulgar and degrading character and would not be heard even in the lowest sinks of infamy, but these so called very pious priests can form and ask to every female that be- longs to the Catholic church, which are calculated to suggest modes of polution and crime, that no well minded person would think of — and it is nothing but right that Protestants should know them and especially those who send their daugh- ters to Roman Catholic schools and seminaries and especially those who have Catholic wives and those that are bringing up their daughters under the Catholic creed should know the kind of querries that are proposed by the priests, in the secret con- fessional to their wives and their daughters, and every person can see for what they are asked, and the consequences I leave you to judge- I must be excused for omitting the most inde- cent portions of the uilest questions in the filthy list, and leave them for you to imagine.

" Have you ornamented yourself in dress to please the male sex, or for the same end painted yourself or bared your arms, your shoulders, your bosom. Have you frequented church in order to show yourself, to be looked at in the porch or at the window, or giving or taken kisses or embraces or any such liberties. How often have you looked at immodest objects with pleasure, read immodest books or songs to yourself or others, kept indecent pictures, willingly given ear to or taken pleasure in hearing loose discourses, &c., or sought to see or hear anything immodest ? How often have you exposed your- self to wanton company, or played at any indecent play ? Have you been guilty of any immodest discourses, wanton stories, jests or songs in company with either male or female ?

tiow Hoften,and were they married or single ? for all these h Ingsyou are obliged to confess to me, for I sit here as God, and know already every thought and action that you have ever had or done ; but it is your duty to confess them, and you must or I shall not and cannot absolve you, and you must suffer eternal damnation in purgatory. Have you been guilty of thinking about the young men ? Have you thought of marrying, or of the marriage bed ? Have you never thought you should like to marry some one in particular. Have you thought of him when in bed ? Did you feel any sensations that was pleasing at the time.* Did you not wish he was with you, or would you have liked to had him whh you, (recollect you are in the presence of (iod.) Would not you let him into your bed-chamber if he should want to ? Have you never been

by him or no one else, neither man or any other creature ?

Have you designed or attempted to do any such thing or sought to induce others to it ? "

After reading this, will you think that these priests are so holy and virtuous. Parents may this be a warning to you and if you have any desire to protect the virtue of your daughters, keep them from the confessional. " Have you abused the mar- riage bed by or by any polutions, as or been guilty

of any irregularity in order to how often, without a just

cause refused the marriage debt, and what sin may have fol- lowed it. How often have you debauched any person that

was innocent before. Have you tried to with any person ? "

After reading this, I leave it to the judgment of the reader, what will follow after placing a man that has a right by the laws of his church to gtatify his lust with any female penitent, and has only to use his power of argument which the penitent must believe or be sent to purgatory or excommunicated, the consequences need no explanation.

We will look at the character of these men once more that are stiled as God on earth, and setting in judgment to forgive sin or send to hell such as he choose and as we have been told that they can not sin. It will only be needful to show the pious and holy design of those gods, or fathers from popes to prelates, to look at a very few of the passages in the life of Maria Monk. " Before I took the veil I was ornamented for the ceremony being well prepared with long training and fre- quent rehersals the bishop made his appearance. I threw my- self at his feet, and asked him to confer upon me the veil, he expressed his consent and threw it over my head, saying, ^' Receive the veil O Thou spouse of Jesus Christ." I then

kneeled before the holy sacrament, this is a large Avafer held by the bishop between his fore finger and thumb, and made my vows. This wafer I had been taught to regard with the utmost veneration as the real body of Jesus Christ, which made the vows before it binding in the most solemn manner. The bishop naming over a number of worldly pleasures to which I replied, " I renounce, &c." I was then put into a coffin and when I was uncovered I rose, stepped out of my coffin and kneeled. The bishop then addressed these words to the superior, " take care and keep pure and spotless this young virgin, whom Christ has consecrated to himself this day," (mark this and see what follows.) I was informed that one of my greatest duties was to obey the priests in all things. I soon learnt to my utter astonishment and horror I was to live in criminal intercourse with them. I expressed some of the feelings which came upon me like a flash of lightning ; but the only effect was to set her angry with me, and representing the crime as a virtue acceptable to God, and honorable to me. The priests, she said, were not like men, while they lived secluded and self-denying, lives for our salvation, they might be consid- ered our saviours, for without them we could not obtain par- don of sin, and must go to hell, (among the many things in praise of the faith.) Priests, she insisted could not sin, it was a thing impossible ; every thing they did and wished was right. She gave rne a matter piece of information, infants w^ere some times born in the convent, but they were always baptised, and immediately strangled. The baptism purified them from all sin and being sent out of the world before they had time to do anything wrong, they were at once admitted to heaven. How happy are those who secure immortal happiness to such little beings ; their little souls would thank those who kill their bodies if they had it in their power. Says the mother abbess: I now learnt that the priests were often admitted into the nunnery and allowed to indulge in the greatest crimes wdiich they and others (Catholics) call virtues.

[What is this virtue, Americans ? look at this and study. Is this the religion of the so-called by some better citizens ? is this the reverence ; the men that can't sin ; but let us look further.] I had long been familiar with the corrupt and licentious ex- pressions, which some of these use at confession, and believed that other women were also. I had no standard of duty to refer to and no judgment of my own, — all around me insisted that my doubts proved only my own ignorance and sinfulness. Nothing important occurred till late in the afternoon, when I was

called out by Father Dufresne, saying he wished to speak with me in a private apartment. He treated me in a most brutal

manner, and by force compelled me to ; two other priests

gave me the same usage that evening. Father Dufresne after- wards appeared again the same evening and I was compelled to remain with him till morning ; (there are hundreds of these cases which I pass over.) One day the superior sent for me and several others ; we found the bishop and some priests with her ; " Go to the room of conscience and drag Saint Frances up stairs,*' said the bishop. I spoke to her thus : " Saint Fran- ces we are sent for you." The poor creature turned round with a look of meekness and resigned herself to our hands.

When we had brought our prisoner before them, Father Richards began to question her, and she made ready but calm replies. He asked her if she was not sorry for what she had been overheard to say ? She said no ; that she still wished to escape from the convent, and that she had resolved to resist every attempt to compel her to the commission of crimes — that she would rather die than cause the murder of harmless babes. This is enough, finish her ! " said the bishops. She maintained the calmness and submission of a lamb; the gag was forced into her mouth ; she was then laid on the bed with her face upward, and bound with cords ; another bed was thrown upon her ; the priests sprang like fury first upon it and stamped upon it with all force ; they were speedily followed by the nuns, and all did what they could ; some stood up and jumped upon the poor girl with their feet, some with their knees, and seemed to seek how they might best beat the breath out of her. After 15 or 20 minutes, it was presumed she was smothered — the priests ceased trampling on her — the body was then taken and dragged down stairs, and unceremoniously thrown into the hole in the cellar covered with lime, afterward sprinkled with a liquid. Some time afterwards, some of St. Frances' friends called to inquire after her and they were told that she had died a glorious death, and further told that she made some heavenly expressions, which were repeated in or- der to satisfy her friends. (Americans, want that a most glo- rious (ieath ! what heavenly expressions !) A number usually confess on the same day, but only one can be admitted at a time ; she enters and closes the door behind her and no other dared touch the latch until she came out. I shall not tell what was transacted at such times under the pretence of confessing and receiving absolution from sin, far more guilt was in- curred than pardoned, and crimes of the deeoest c1^-^ ^&rQ

committed. I cannot persuade myself to speak plainly on such a subject as I must offend the virtuous ear. I can only say that suspicion cannot do any injustice to the priests, because their sins cannot be exaggerated. — Maria Monk.

Thus we see those reverend priests in their true character.

Thus we see that according to Roman Catholic teachings and practises it is no sin to lie, cheat, steal and murder, provid- ing it is any benefit to them. What then is a sin, according to Roman Catholic faith ? It is as follows : — Reading the Bi- ble, the Protestant version, is a mortal sin, and cannot be for- given, only by the bishop, for it is a reserved case, or any book that is published by Protestants, treating on the subject of religion, or if any one does not obey the priest in all things these are mortal sins and reserved cases. To show my read- ers the hatred that Papists have of Protestant books, Iwill give a part of the 10th rule on printing : " In the printing ol books or papers and all other writings in every city, house and place where the art of printing is exercised, shall be frequently visit- ed by the bishop or his vicar with the inquisitor of heretical de- pravity ; so that nothing that is prohibited may be printed, kept or sold, nor shall they keep, or sell, nor in any way dispose of any book without permission from the bishop under pain of forfeiting his books and such other penalties as the inquisitors judge ; also the buyers shall suffer punishment. Finally, it is enjoined on all the faithful, that no one presume to keep or read any book contrary to these rules, but if any one keep or read any book composed by heretics or the writings of any author, suspected of heresy or false doctrine, he shall instantly incur the sentence of excommunication ; and besides the mor- tal sin committed, they shall be severely punished by the bishop. In popish countreys and even in priest-ridden Spain, these books are prohibited, and woe be to the man who dare to sell or read a book that is proscribed. — Doivluig.

These priestly and popish enemies of the freedom of thought and speech and freedom of the press, the Jesuits, are using all their power to stop the free school system and the liberty of speech and the freedom of the press in America, and are backed up by our pohticians, urging peace and safety and telling us that it is right that the CathoKcs should have a part of our school fund and hold office, &c., that they have done a good deal for the party and we must promote them. Yes, and give them up our own rights and liberty, for in a few more years in this way and you may bid farewell to liberty. But may the lime never come when the free-born sons of America will, like

the degraded inhabitants of popish countries, sue for permis- sion to the tripple- crowned tyrant, or the inquisition to read, write or publish anything they choose.

An impression is prevalent that Popery of the present day is different from Popery of the dark ages, when amidst the gloom and the superstition of the world's midnight, it reigned despot of the world, under this belief the Protestants have laid down their weapons and forsaken their watch tower ; but the champions of Rome tell us that the doctrines of their church is unchangeable, and that it is a tenet of their creed that what their faith ever has been, such it was from the beginning, such it is now, and such it ever will be. I shall now proceed by citation from various authentic documents to show that Popery is the same now that it ever was, in its hatred to the bible, and freedom of opinion and the press, and in its debasing, super- stitious and grovelling idolatry ; its blasphemous pretended power of indulgences, and its forged miracles and lying won- ders.

I quote from a document which no Roman Catholic will presume to dispute, as it is from the supreme pontiff himself in 1832, Pope Gregory XXI ; from that polluted fountain of in- difference, flows that absurd and erroneous doctrine, or rather raving, in favor and in defence of the liberty of conscience, for whioh most pestilential error, the wild liberty of opinion, which is everywhere attempting the overthrow of civil and religious institutions, which is shown by the zeal of some to separate the church from the state, and burst the bond which unites the priesthood to the empire. For it is clear that this union is dreaded by the profane lovers of liberty, only because it has never failed to confer prosperity on both. Hither tends that worst of all and never sufficiently to be execrated and detested liberty of the press. No means must be here omitted, as the extremity of the case calls for all our exertions to ex- terminate the fatal pest. Nor can the error be otherwise destroyed than by the flames, for the falsity, the rashness and the injury, offered to the apostolic see, by that doctrine, preg- nant with the most deplorable evils to the Christian world, {Catholic luorld.) And we have been truly shocked at this most crafty device, the Bible societies by which the very foun- dation of religion (priestcraft.) Roman Catholic religion, or priestcraft, are under-minded — we ha,ve deliberated upon the measures to be adopted to abolish this pestilence. It becomes Episcopal duty, first of all, to expose the wickedness of this nefarious scheme : warn the people entrusted to your care,

that they fall not into the snares prepared for their everlasting ruin. That as they value their souls have nothing to do with the bible societies, or the bibles they circulate. Let all know the enormity of the sin against God and his church (the Pope and his church) which they are guilty of who dare associate with or abet them in any way ; moreover, we confirm and renew the decree delivered in former times by Apostolic author- ity against the publication, distribution, reading, and possesvsion of books or the Holy Scriptures, &c. — Dowling.

Who will deny that the Catholics would not enforce their abominable doctrines on the native sons of America by the rack, ihe fagot and the stake ? The same as in the palmy days of Popery, when Popery was in its glory ; for the Pope still sits among the blood and bones, ashes and mangled bodies of its millions of martyrs if it had but the power.

And Popery is now gathering up her strength in this coun- try to establish her power in this country, and already has the tocsin of war been sounded along her lines, her recruiting offi- cers are abroad, she has her despots here and there, her pay- masters and recruiting Serjeants are at all points under a mask. Go to the woods of Oregon, and you will find them there preaching freedom, liberty of conscience, and equal rights. Go into the swamps of Texas and you find them there advo- cating civil rights and perpetual slavery. In New England, w^e find them shouting the Pope and abolition of slavery. In the Southern States they hurrah for slavery, perpetual slavery In the Northern States they brand the slave holders with the epithets, robbers, slave breeders and stealers of men. And in the South they denounce the Northerners as fanatics, pirates, and sons of pirates.

How long will Americans tolerate these wolves in sheeps clothing ? I answer, as long as we countenance among us barn-burners, butt-enders, repealers and empire clubs, and the popular names of Democrats, Whigs and Freesoilers ; and I say down with these parties, leave them, for they are headed by Jesuits.

And all Papists are bound to obey them, and according to the best of estimation that we can get we have already between 8 and 10 millions of Papists in the United States, and they are flocking to our shores a half a million every year and forming themselves into military companies as fast as possible. Ameri- cans, will youn»t open your eyes to our danger and put a stop to the progress of Popery in this our beloved country ? Look at the efforts of Romish priests and Jesuits in Europe ! Look

at the vast sums of money and the mighty humigration that ia sent to our shores and devoted to Romish missions. Besides the propaganda at Rome, there are two societies in Europe, whose principal object is to reduce America to submission to the Pope of Rome, viz., the Leopold Foundation in Austria, and the Society of St. Charles in Borroneo, in Lyons. The society at Lyons alone transmitted to the Jesuites in the United States in 1840 and 1842, $341,823,80. About seventy years ago there was but one bishop, seventy priests and a few scat- tered Romish churches, and what are they now ? and to show the probable increase of Papists in future years which is by emigration from popish countries in Europe, mostly the follow- ing statistics are from Bowling's history and the American and Foreign Christian Union : —

Archbishops

in 1835

in 1840

in 1845

1854

Bishops

Dioceses

Churches

272

459

675

1712

Priests

((

327

482

709

1574

Ecles. Sem's.

((

Colleges '• 9 " 11 " 15 "

Romish population in the United States in 1845, 1,071,800, ill 1854, 7,000,000, according to the best estimation. From this w^e can judge what the strength or the enemies of Liberty will be in ten years from this.

We have two grand political parties, and in the political con- tests each party have courted the Catholic votes and they have supported the party that gave them the most favors ; they have laid their plans to subvert and conquer America, and they will give us a hard struggle for our rights and liberty if not our lives. In the present position of parties, much is expected from the great American Republic association w^hich has recently been formed throughout the United States. Every eye is fixed upon its movements, and the hopes of all the Americans and all the Protestants would hang upon its success. Do not dis- appoint us, American Republicans, you alone can save our constitutions and our country from the persecutions of Popery, and we call upon you, by the memory of Washington and your sires, to shield us from it.

Native Americans, you have a great part to act. You are young, but the purity of your principles and the justice of your cause abundantly supplies what is w^anting in age. You are the mediators between the political parties — neither of those parties have the moral courage to come forth boldly and say to Popery, stand off thou unclean thing — thou hast pointed all

Europe for ages past ; stand aloof from us ; wash thy poluted hands and blood-stained garments, until then thou art unfit to enter the temple of our liberties, for thou art in thy very nature impure, and hast already diffused amongst us too much of thy deadly poison before we took the alarm, hke an infected atmo- sphere, thou hast silently entered the abodes of our morals ; thou hast penetrated the strongholds of our freedom without giving any warning. Avaunt, thou scarlet lady of Babylon, recede to the pontine marshes whence thou camest, and no longer infect the pure air of our freedom. The foul stains of thy corruption shall no longer be permitted to spot the pure and unsulled insigna of our independence. Americans, guard your ballot-box, for the Roman Catholics have united them- selves together to establish the temporal power of his holiness (?) the pope in this our beloved country with the priests and jesuites at their head, they have resolved to carry through the ballot-box by the help of some of our unprincipled politicians, and the Jesuits, — first, the division of our school fund, and then the subversion of our country. The priests are all poli- ticians— they preach peace, good order and obedience to the powers that be, but they tell the people in confession to disre- gard those instructions and stop at nothing wiiich may promote the interests of the church. They cry out persecution, that they are persecuted, that their's is true religion, but if this is rehgion, God save us from it, for any man that has an eye can see that it is nothing but politics and crime of every hue, and politics of the most corrupt nature, aiming at nothing short of monarchy of the most tyrannical stamp ; they mean to over- throw our laws and our government through the ballot-box, and unless we repeal our naturalization laAV they will, for in a few more years the increase of Papists by emigration is such that they will have the majority of votes in this country. They have no regard whatever for an oath that is given to any nation or magistrate that is Protestant. They come amongst us from every nation. Roman Catholics, they bring with them their principles and they strictly adhere to them, and are our bitter enemy. They will take an oath of allegiance to our country, then they have full liberty to our ballot-box, and what is a Roman Catholic's oath of allegiance ? It is a mockery to our nation and throwing defiance in our teeth.

After reading this book I leave it for every American to judge the use, or good, or the power of an oath to ferret out the truth or to bind any Roman Catholic. I will now give their oath of allegiance to the Pope.

THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CREED.

This is a small part of the Roman Catholic Faith, that non- Catholics on their admission into the Catholic Church repeat and testify to without restriction or qualification. I, M. N., believe and profess with a firm faith all and every one o^ the things which are contained in the symbol of Faith, which is used in the Holy Roman Church ; I most firmly admit and em- brace Apostolical and Ecclesiastical tradition ; I also admit the Sacred Scriptures according to the sense which the Holy Mother Church has held to whom it belongs, to judge the true sence and interpretation of the Holy Scriptures. I profess also that there are seven Sacraments in the new law, viz: Baptism, Confirmation, Eucharist, Penance, Extreme Unction, Order, and Matrimony, that they confer grace. I also receive and admit the ceremonies of the Catholic Church. I receive and embrace all and every one of the things which have been de- fined and declared in the holy counsel of Trent, I profess that in the Mass is oifered to God a true and proper sacrifice for the living and the dead. I constantly hold that there is a Purgatory and souls detained therein are helped by the suffra- ges of the faithful. I most firmly assert that the images of Christ, the Virgin, and other Saints are to be had and retained, and that honor and veneration are to be given to them. I also afl^rm that the powor of Indulgences was left by Christ in the Church. I acknowledge the Holy Catholic and Apostolic Roman Church ; and I promise and swear true obedience to the Roman bishop to the successor of St. Peter, the Prince of the Apostles and Vicar of Jesus Christ. I also profess and receive all other things delivered and declared by the sacred cannons and general council, and likewise I condemn, reject, and anathematize all things contrary thereto, and all heretics, whatsoever to be cursed. This true Catholic Faith out of which none can be saved, which I now freely profess and truly hold.

I, N., promise vow and swear most constantly to hold and profess the same whole and entire to the end of my life; and to procure as far as lies in my power, that the same shall be taught and preached by all who are under me. So help me God.

This Creed is binding this day upon every Romanist what- ever.—Daz^/zwg-.

bishop's oath of allegiance to the pope.

- I, A. B., elect of the Church of N., from henceforward,

will be faithful and obedient to St. Peter, the Apostle, and to the Holy Roman Church, and to Our Lord, the Lord N., Pope N., and to his successors canonically entering. I will neither advise, consent, nor do any thing that they may lose life or member, or that their persons may be seized or hands in any wise laid upon them, under any pretence whatsoever, the coun- sel with which they shall intrust me by themselves, their mes- sengers or letters, 1 will not knowingly reveal to any to their prejudice. I will help them to defend and keep the Roman Papacy, and the regalias of St. Peter saving my order against all men. The Legate of the Apostolic See going and coming I will honorable treat and help in his necessities, the rights, honors, privileges, and authority of the Holy Roman Church of our lord the Pope and his aforesaid successors. I will en- deavor to preserve, defend, increase, and advance. I will not be in any counsel, action, or treaty in which shall be plotted against our said lord, and the said Roman Church any thing to the hurt or prejudice of their persons, right, honor, state or power, and if I shall know any such things to be treated or agitated by whatsoever, I will hinder it to my utmost and as soon as I can will signify it to our said lord, or to some other by whom it may come to his knowledge, the rules of the holy father, the Apostolic decrees, ordinance, or disposals, reserva- tions provisions, and mandates. I will observe with all my might, and cause to be observed by others, heretics, schismatics, and rebels to our said lord, or his aforesaid successors. I will to my utmost, persecute and oppose heretics. I will come to a council when I am called ; when I be not hindered by a canonical impediment, I will by myself in person visit the theshold of of the Apostles every three years, and his aforesaid successors, of all my pastoral office and of all things any wise belonging to the state of my church, to the discipline of my clergy, and people and lastly to the salvation of souls committed to my trust ; will, in like manner, humbly receive, and diligently ex- ecute the Apostolic command, and if I be detained by a lawful impediment I will perform all the things aforesaid by a certain messenger hereto specially empowered a member of my chap- ter or some other in ecclesiastical dignity, or else having a par- sonage, or on default of these by a priest of the diocess by some other secular regular priest of approved integrity and religion, fully instructed in all things above mentioned, and

such impediments I will make out by lawful proofs to be transmitted by the aforesaid messenger to the cardinal propon- gent of the holy Roman Catholic Church in the congregation of the sacred council, the possession belonging to my table I will neither sell, nor give away, nor mortgage, nor grant anew in fee, nor anywise alienate, not even with the consent of the chapter of my church without consulting the Roman Ponliff, and if I shall make alienation I will thereby incur the penal- ties contained in a certain constitution put forth about this matter. So help me God, and those holy gospel's of God. — Dowling^s History.

Jesuit's oath.

" I, A. B., now in the presence of Almighty God, the blessed Virgin Mary, the Blessed Michael, the Archangel, the Blessed St. John Baptist, the Holy Apostles, St. Peter and St. Paul, and the Saints, and sacred hosts of heavens, and to you my ghostly father, do declare from my heart and without mental resvation, that Pope Gregory is Christ's Vicar General, and the true and only head of the Universal Church throughout the earth, and that by virtue of the keys of the binding and losing given to his Holiness by Jesus Christ, he hath power to depose heretical kings, princes, states, commonwealths, and govern- ments, all being illegal, without his sacred confirmation, and that they may safely be destroyed — therefore, to the utmost of my power. I will defend this doctrine and his Holiness's rights and customs against all usuri)ers of the heritical, or protestant authority, whatsoever, "especially against the now pretended authority and in England, and all adherents in regard that they be usurped and heretical opposing the sacred mother Church of Rome. I do renounce and disown any allegiance as due to any heretical king, prince or state named Protestant, or obedience to any of their inferior magistrates, or officers. I do further declare the doctrine of the Church oi England of the Calvanists Huguents and other Protestants to be damnable, and those to be damned, who will not forsake the same. I do further declare that I will help, assist, and advise all, or any of his holinesses agents in any place wherever I shall be and do my utmost to extirpate the heretical protestants doctrine and to destroy all their pretending power legal or otherwise. I do further promise and declare that notwithstanding I am dis- pensed with to assume any religion heretical for the propoga- tion of the mother churches, interest to keep secret and private

all her agents, counsels, as they entrust me, and not to divulge directly or indirectly by word writing or circumstance whatev- er but to execute all which shall be proposed, given in charge, or discovered unto me by you my ghostly father or by any one of this convent all which I, A. B., do swear by the blessed trin- ity and blessed sacrament which I am now to receive to per- form and on my heart to keep ininiably and do call the heaven- ly and glorious host of heaven to witness my real intentions to keep this my oath. In testimony hereof 1 take this most holy and blessed sacrament of the euchristand witness the same fur- ther with my hand and seal in the face of this holy convent. — Dow ling s History.

After reading thus far is there any wonder, reader, in your mind, that our almshouses are filled with foreigners ? it was the Roman Catholics ihat said and do call our native-born Ameri- cans, cowards, and sons of cowards, and their pilgrim fathers pirates. These are the men that are now filling many of the offices in our government, and are working our ruin, and to stop this and save our constitutions without the shedding of blood, it is indispensably necessary that no Roman Catholic should hold any office whatever, nor even vote until he ceases to have connection or hold any alliance with the Pope oi Rome, and as long as a papist refuses to do this trust him not, for he is a spy amongst us, a traitor to our country, and the warm enemy of our religion and our liberties, they cross the Atlantic under instructions from their priests to bring nothing with them but their bigotry, intolerance, ignorance, and superstiiion. Their tastes, their passions, and their hatred of Protestants, are brought with them, and wafied over us and are corrupting the morals of our people. There is not a Catholic who leaves for Amer- ica, but feels it his duty to resist the laws of protestants, and by perjury or otherwise, their execution. They are trying as fast as possible to reduce this country to a level with that in which their vile and pretended religion — popery — has placed themselves, and far as they have the power now, we deserve to be censured for it. Should there be amongst us a house even of equivocal fame, our guardians of the night and civil officers are allowed to demand entrance into it at any hour, and if refused they may use force ; yet we have convents and nunneries that have their private vaults and burying places, and these nunneries and convents are no less than serai^lios where poor helpless females are confined and kept unwilling prosti- tutes, where crime of the blackest dye is committed, but not an

officer in the States will presume to enter, and no force must be used. The poor imprisoned females, the victims of the priest, must bear it without a groan or a murmur. There is no way for them to make known their sufferings or the crime that ^is there committed by the priests, for there is only one egress and that is the grave ; and I make the assertion that if the peo- ple of the United States knew but half of the crimes that are committed in these convents and nunneries, they would raze them to ground in an hour ; and I hope the day is not far dis- tant when the walls of every one of these dens will be thrown down or converted into prisons for the Roman Catholic priests instead of helpless females. Give our civil officers power to investigate these places and I am confident that if they sift it to the bottom they will have to convert them into prisons for men instead of women.

As we have seen that all Catholics believe in the power of indulgences, I will give the popish doctrine of indulgences: — Priests and bishops deny that such a thing as indulgences are either granted or sold to Catholics, and never were. I pro- nounce all Roman Catholic priests, bishops, popes, monks, fri- ars to be the most deliberate and willful set of liars that ever infested this or any other country. I assert and defy contra- diction that there is not a Roman Catholic church, chapel or house where indulgences are not sold, and further there is not

' a Roman Catholic priest in the United States that does not sell indulgences, and yet these priests and bishops of sin, falsehood, impunity, impurity and immorality talk of morals and preach

. morals, and in their practice they laugh at such ideas as moral obligation. In popish countries is published from the pulpits these words : — " Take notice, there will be an Indulgence on

day in Church. Confession will be heard on

day to prepare to partake of Indulgences." I have sold them myself, in Philadelphia nearly three thousand in one year, as the agent of the Holy INIother, the infallible church. Some explanations are necessary here : The doctrines called pious frauds, held and acted upon by the infallible church, the Pope of Rome and the propoganda taking into consideration the savage ignorance of Americans, deemed it prudent to substi- tute some other name for the name of indulgences, and some- thing else for the usual document, to be given to pious sinners in the new world. They thought it possible that the Yankees might read the written indulgenices, and consequently are called scapulas. They are made of small pieces of cloth with the letters I. H. S. written on the outside, and are worn

on the breast. This enables all to swear that indulgencies are not sold in the United States. This is what the holy mother calls pious frauds. — Popery as it Was and as it Is^ pp. 175- 177.

INDULGENCES.

We have seen that all good catholics believe iu the power of indulgences I will now give them as sold by Tetzel. " In- dulgence, are the most precious and sublime of God's gifts. This cross f has as much effiacy as the cross of Jesus Christ. Draw near and I will give you letters duly sealed by which ev- en the sins you shall here after desire to commit shall be all forgiven you.

I would not exchange my privileges for those of Saint Peter in heaven, for I have saved more souls with my indulgences than he with his sermons. There is no sin so great that the indulgences cannot remit ; and even if any one should ravish the holy virgin, mother of God, let him pay largely and it shall be forgiven him. Indulgences save not the living alone — they save the dead. Ye parents, wives, husbands, maidens and young men, harken to your departed friends who cry to you from the bottomless abyss. We are enduring horrible torment, a small alms would deliver us ; will you give it, and will not the very moment the money clinks against the bottom of the chest, the soul escape from purgatory, and fly free to heaven. O sense- less people ! who do not comprehend the grace so richly of- fered. This day, heaven is on all sides open. I protest that though you have only a coat, you ought to strip it off, and sell it to purchase this grace. Our Lord God no longer deals with us as God. He has given all power to the Pope. (O consis iency^ thou art a jewel I)

The form of a letter of indulgence is as follows :

' Our Lord, Jesus Christ, have mercy on thee, N. N., and

absolve thee by the merits of his most holy sufferings, and I, in virtue of the apostolic power committed to me, absolve thee from all ecclesiastical censure, judgments and penalties, that thou mayst have merited ; and further, from all excess, sin and crime that thou mayest have committed, however great and onerous they may be, and of whatever kind ; even though they should be reserved to the holy father, the pope. I efface all I he stains of weakness, and all traces of shame that thou mayest have drawn upon thyself by such actions. I remit the

pains thou wouldst have had to endure in purgatory. I receive thee again to the sacrament of the church. 1 hereby recipro- cate thee in the communion of the saints, and restore ihee to the innocence and purity of thy baptism ; so that at the moment of death, the gate of the place of torment shall be shut against thee, and the gate of the paradise of joy shall be opened unto thee. And if thou shouldst live long, this grace continueih unchangeable, till the time of thy end. In the name of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.

Amen." Signed, ,

Sealed.

Bear in mind, reader, that now they sell this piece of cloth, with I. H. S. on it, which is believed to be the same as the written document, and held in the same reverence and belief as when sold by Tetzel ; and all that don't receive and be- lieve this and all the doctrines of the church are cursed.

If you will notice, you will see J. H. S. on their churches, and many other things, which in my mind is very appropriate, for it reads, thus.

Ignorance — Hypocricy — Superstition.

This curse is pronounced on all who do not receive and be- lieve all the doctrines and teachings of the Roman Catholic Church.

THE POPE'S GREAT CURSE.

TRANSLATED FROM THE ORIGINAL LATIN.

" By the authority of the Omnipotent God, the Father, Son and Holy Ghost, and of the holy Canons, and of the holy and undefiled Virgin Mary, Mother of God, and of all the celes- tial virtues, angels, archangels, thrones, dominions, powers, cherubim and seraphim, and of the holy patriarchs, prophets, and of all the apostles and evangelists, and of the holy iimo- cents, who in the sight of the spotless Lamb are found worthy t) sing the new song, and of the holy martyrs, and of the holy confessors, and of the holy virgins, together with all the holy and elect of God — We excomunicate and anathemise these malefactors [ho'e the persons to be cxwsed are mentioned sepa- rately by name], and from the precincts of the holy church of Cxod we cast them out, that they may be tormented with ever- lasting torment, and that they may be delivered over with Da- V^ than and Abiram, and with those who have said unto the Lord

" Depart from us for we will have none of thy ways ! " And as fire by water is extinguished, so let their light be quenched now and through all eternity, unless they recant and make sat- isfaction ! Amen.

May God the Father, who created man, curse them ! May God the Son, who was crucified for man, curse them ! May the Holy Ghost which is poured out in Baptism, curse them ! May the Holy Cross, which Christ ascended for our salvation, triumphing over the enemy, curse them !

May the Holy Mary, ever virgin. Mother of God, curse them ! May St. Michael, the advocate of holy spirits curse them I May all the angels and archangels, principalities and powers, and all the heavenly host, curse them !

May the wonderful company of patriarchs and prophets, curse him ! May Saint John the precursor and baptist ol Christ, and Saint Peter and Saint Paul, and Saint Andrew, and all the apostles of Christ, together with the rest of the dis- ciples, and the four evangelists, who by their preaching con- verted the whole world, curse them ! May the wonderful army of Martyrs and Confessors, who by their good works are found pleasing to God, curse them !

May the choirs of holy virgins, who for the honor of Christ have despised the vain and worthless things of the world, curse them ! May all the saints, who from the begin- ning of the world to everlasting ages, are found beloved of God, curse them ! May the heavens, and the earth, and all the holy things that are therein, curse them !

May they be cursed wheresoever they may be, Avhether in the house or in the stables, or in the road, or in the footpath, or in the wood, or in the water, or in the church ! May they be cursed living, dying, drinking, eating, hungering, thirsting, fasting ! May they be cursed sleeping, slumbering, Avaking,

standing, sitting, lying down, working, resting, , ,^

blood letting.

May they be cursed in all the powers of their bodies ! May they be cursed in\vardly and outw^ardly I May they be cursed in the hair ! May they be cursed in the brain ! May they be cursed in their heads, in their temples, in their foreheads, in their ears, in their cheeks, in their jawbones, in their nostrils, in their teeth, in their lips, in their throats ! May they be cursed in their shoulders, in their w^riste, in their arms, in their hands, in their fingers, in their breasts, in their hearts and pur- tinences, down to their stomachs ! May they be cursed in their

The words here left out are too indecent for translation.

s^roins, in their thighs, in their genitals, in their hips I May tiiey be cursed in their knees, in their legs, in their feet, and in their nails !

May they be cursed in all the powers of their bodies, from the crown of their heads to the sole of their feet ! May there be no health in them !

May Christ, the Son of the living God, with all the glory of his majesty^ curse them I And may heaven, with all the pow- ers that move therein, rise up against them to their utter dam- nation, unless they recant and make satisfaction I Amen. So be it, so be it. Amen."

HOW TO BRING A SOUL OUT OF PURGATORY.

[The following is taken from the original card.] ALL SOULS PURGATORIAN SOCIETY.

At the mission of St. Ann, Spicer Street, Spittalfields.

member's payment card. No. 41, Mr. O. W. Molloy.

Amount

s. d. 0 2

Commencing due.

Paid up.

Whom paid.

June 8,

1851.

Secretary.

0 2

" 15,

Secretary.

0 4

" 22,

29th June.

Secretary.

0 4

July 6,

13th July.

Secretary.

0 2

20,

Secretary.

0 4

27,

3d August.

Secretary.

0 2

Aug. 10,

Secretary.

0 2

" 17,

17th

Secretary.

0 2

' 24,

Secretary.

2 0

John Clarke, Secretary. N. B. — Please to bring this Card when you pay your sub- scription. [Confessional Unmasked,

Look around you Americans, and you will scarcely find an individual in office, from the President to the lowest office hold- er ; that dare to raise his voice against popery. Why ? because they are courting the catholic vote, and are led by a few un- principled politicians ; yea, demagogs and Jesuits, and catholic priests. These are the men that are the leaders in our govern- ment, and it is now high time that the people should take this matter into their own hands, and so alter the constitutions of their respective States, as to exclude all papists from any posi- tive or negative participation in the creation, or execution of our laws. The pope tells Americans through his agent what the designs of papists, in the United States, are ; read them Americans :

" Where you have the electoral franchise, give your votes to none but those who will assist you in so holy a struggle, you

should do all in your power to carry out the pious intentions of his hohness the Pope."

This is plain language, there is no misunderstanding it ; it was uttered in the Loyal National Repeal Association in Dub- lin, and addressed to the Irish papists in the United States. What are the intentions of the Pope ? The object in the first place is to extirpate protestantism, secondly to overthrow our government, and place in our executive chair a popish king; and this is the sole design of all the ramifications of the nume- rous repeal clubs, and foreign secret orders, throughout the length and breadth of the United States ; is not every meeting of these foreign Clubs, and every parade of foreign military companies, a direct assault upon our constitution ; is it not throwing defiance in our teeth. Sons of Washington how long will you submit to this ? let us raise the veil which hides the past from our eyes, and we shall find, if we don't allow ourselves to be misled by faithless historians, that the infallible church is filled with crime of every hue and grade.

•

Arn 6 li^^y

[edit]

Popery Unmasked

From The Art and Popular Culture Encyclopedia

Full text

See also

Views

Personal tools

Search

Metas

Navigation