rb
t
oN°_^
ul^l L
g,^
^
3
\
^^
t>2^<3c^ /
Pamphlets.
^
/
7a
Accession No.
9^<^ .
o 0. 6
Added
^
i8^K
Catalogued by
Revised by
Memoranda.
'•rfev
'X
%
/
POPERY UNMASKED,
SHOWING THE
DEPHAYITY OF THE PRIESTHOOD
AND
EVIMORALITY 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;
WITH NOTES. &C.,
BY H. M. HATCH.
PUBLISHED BY
H. M. HATCH,
23 Central Street,
LOWELL, MASS.
Entered; according to Act ot'Ooiigress! in the j'ear 1354,
By H. M. hatch,
In the Clerk's Office ol~ the District Court of the District of
Massachusetts.
PREFACE.
My motive in publishing this book is. to show the
teachings and the debasing tendency of Roman Cathol-
icism 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
i
u
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,
IV
" 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-
9
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
10
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.
11
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
12
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
n
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 !
14
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.
15
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-
16
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
17
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-
18
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
19
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,
20
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,
21
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,
22
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.
23
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
24
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
25
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.
3
26
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
27
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."
28
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.
29
*' 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
3^
30
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."
31
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 folly''s 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-
32
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
33
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
34
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
35
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
36
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
37
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
4
38
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 ?
39
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.
40
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
41
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
42
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
43
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
44
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
45
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
46
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
47
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
48
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
49
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
5
50
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."
51
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.
52
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
53
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
54
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
55
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
56
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
57
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 ?
58
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
59
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
.^
60
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
61
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
6
62
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,
63
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
64
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
in
1854
7
Bishops
K
14
17
26
33
Dioceses
<;
13
16
21
41
Churches
(C
272
459
675
1712
Priests
((
327
482
709
1574
Ecles. Sem's.
((
12
IG
22
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
65
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.
66
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-.
67
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
68
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
69
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
70
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
71
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
5/
72
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
73
" 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.
74
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."
75
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.
2
Commencing due.
Paid up.
Whom paid.
June 8,
1851.
Secretary.
2
" 15,
Secretary.
4
" 22,
29th June.
Secretary.
4
July 6,
13th July.
Secretary.
2
'' 20,
Secretary.
4
'' 27,
3d August.
Secretary.
2
Aug. 10,
Secretary.
2
" 17,
17th ''
Secretary.
2
*' 24,
Secretary.
2
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
76
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
