Romish Dealing with Sins by John Norton Loughborough

Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Jun 23, 1874

Romish Dealing with Sins.

By John Norton Loughborough

There may be a greater fitness than we would at first imagine in the fact that Inspiration has called the papacy, “That man of sin.” It is a power that has a great deal to do with sins, and makes high pretensions of what it can do with sins. It may not be amiss here to notice its teachings relative to confession, penance, indulgences, and absolution. First, of confessions, we will see what it teaches. We will quote from Weninger’s Catechism.

Ques. What is the fourth precept of the church?

“Ans. To confess our sins to a priest, at least once a year, and to receive holy communion at Easter time.

“Q. What penalty does he incur who disobeys this precept?

“A. He thereby forfeits Christian burial.

“Q. What is confession?

“A. It is a secret and contrite declaration to a priest of at least all the mortal sins we have committed after baptism for the purpose of receiving absolution.”

“Q. Are we obliged to confess our venial sins?

“A. No: we are not. It is, however, useful to confess them, so that our confessor may know us better; or when we have no mortal sins to confess.”

“Q. Can we again confess sins confessed before?

“A. Yes, if we repent of them again.

“Q. When should we repeat former sins?

“A. When, by the help of God, we have committed no new sins, we have to repeat one or two of our past sins, in order to give matter for absolution.”

Mark the above. They must confess once a year. Their sins have all been confessed, hence, all absolved by the priest; but, to keep up the form, I suppose, they must confess absolved sins over again, so that the priest can have something to absolve.

Now we will quote from Hughes’ Catechism on this subject.

“Ques. What is confession?

“Ans. Confession is to accuse ourselves of all our sins to a priest, in order to obtain absolution.”

“Q. How must we declare our sins?

“A. We must declare the number of our sins and their different kinds.

“Q. Must we declare all our sins?

“A. We must declare all our mortal sins; for, if we were to conceal willfully any mortal sin, we should not obtain the forgiveness of any, and we shall besides commit sacrilege.

“Q. At what age do children begin to be obliged to go to confession?

“A. Children begin to be obliged to go to confession when they come to the use of reason, so as to be capable of mortal sins, which is generally supposed to be about the age of seven years.”

Next we quote from Butler’s Catechism.

“Ques. What means the commandment of confessing our sins, at least once a year?

“Ans. It means that we are threatened with very severe penalties by the church if we do not go to confession within the year.

“Q. Is it sufficient to go but once a year to confession?

“A. No; frequent confession is necessary for all those who fall into mortal sin, or who desire to advance in virtue.”

God calls on us in his word to turn from our sins, to turn to him, but the catechism calls on all over seven years of age to turn to the priest, and confess to him. Some difference.

Let us quote now the words of Kirwan on confession: “The doctrine of confession is one of the primary doctrines of your church. It requires every good papist to confess his sins to a priest at least once a year. If any sins are concealed, none are forgiven. This doctrine makes the bosom of the priest the repository of all the sins of all the sinners of his parish, who make a conscience of confession. And this is one of the sources of the fearful power which your priests have over your people. And with this doctrine of confession is connected the power of the father confessor to grant absolution to the confessing penitent. It is sometimes affirmed, and then denied, to suit circumstances, that the priest claims such power. But Dr. Challoner, in his ‘Catholic Christian Instructed,’ Chap. 9, asserts this power, and on what he deems scriptural authority. And I never knew an individual who came from confession, with the privilege of partaking of the communion, who did not feel and believe that his sins were forgiven him. And if they were not immediately forgiven, they would be on the performance of the prescribed penances. You, sir, will not say that I either misstate or misrepresent the doctrine.

“Now, sir, let me again turn querist and ask you, Where in the Bible do you find your doctrine of confession taught? With me the teachings of all your councils weigh not a feather; give me, if you can, Bible authority. Is there one text from Genesis to Revelation, which you, as a scholar, will say teaches it? . . . A poor, unlettered peasant from Mayo or Galway, into whose lips words are put, as into the mouth of a parrot, might quote to me James 5: 16, which says, ‘Confess your faults one to another;’ but will you do it? . . . If James is your authority, are not you bound to confess to me, if I am to you? ‘Confess your faults one to another.’ If this text teaches auricular confession, I hold you to it. When did you put the poor Irishman, who whispered his sins into your ears, in your seat in the confessional, and kneeling down outside, whisper through the little square hole cut in its side, your sins into his ear? This would be confessing your sins one to another. Did you ever do this, sir? Never, never.”

Of the tendency of the confessional, Brock says, “The confessional has proved to many Roman Catholic priests an awful snare, yea, a cause of eternal ruin. Is this a Protestant calumny? No, my friends, it is the sad admission of a canonized saint of Rome, whose ‘Moral Theology’ (if, indeed, we may call it moral) trains Rome’s priests for the confessional. It is Alphonsus Liguori who says, lamentingly, ‘Oh, how many confessors have lost their own souls, and those of their penitents, on account of some negligence in this respect.’ (Liguori’s Moral Theology, Vol. 9, p. 145.)”

“By means of the confessional, the breast of a frail, sinful man is made the receptacle of all the sins of every Roman Catholic man, woman, and child over seven, in the neighborhood. ‘Who will venture to say that the very machinery of the Roman church is not a cause of leading many to sin? It is very hard for a man’s mind to become turned into a common sewer without contracting pollution. And what want we with this polluting and polluted earthly confessional when our great High Priest summons us to the heavenly confessional, and bids us confess our sins to him, and promises us, if repentant and believing, the full and free forgiveness of all our sins?’”

We will conclude our notice of the confessional by quoting from Gavazzi, who served several years as a father confessor. He surely ought to know something of the nature, tendency, and power, of the confessional. He says: “Why is the system of auricular confession upheld by the Roman church? Its adherents say, ‘Because it promotes morality.’ I answer, simply, A thing immoral in its nature cannot promote the morality of those who use it, but renders them immoral. Poison cannot improve health, nor prolong life. But auricular confession is immoral in its nature, to prove which, it is enough to know that Christ has not commanded it; were it necessary, it would not have been left unenjoined by the divine Lawgiver.

“Although the Bible has been distorted by papists to prove auricular confession, the Sacred Volume offers no proof of it. The apostles never used it; we cannot find it in the first centuries and among primitive Christians. The earliest trace of confession is found in the case of apostates from the church, who, seeking re-admission, were compelled as the scandal they had given was public, to make a public confession, not an auricular confession, of their apostasy, before being received again.

“Immorality in the Roman church commenced with her confessors. The confessional is, to the young unmarried priest, a suggester of impurities; there he contracts the stain; outward from the confessional it travels, until it is scattered on every hearth, met in every crossway.

“Auricular confession is said to be a religious institution, but practically it is made, in astute hands, a political instrument. Master of the secrets, the conscience, the soul of the penitent, the priest is a more effective tool of despotism than armed legions.

“In the hands of astute priests, especially of Jesuits, auricular confession is no more than the machinery of a universal espionage all over the Christian world. It will be said, ‘No! because they cannot use it.’ Ah! my friends! you do not know Jesuitical practice. If one member of a family go to a Jesuit confessor, all the secrets of that family are discovered—and used. The confessor does not restrain himself to the secrets of the penitent; if that be a young lady, or a servant suppose, she is questioned about the actions of her father and mother, and masters, who came into the house, what kind of society was kept, what subjects were spoken of, if the food used on Fridays and Saturdays were such as the church prescribes; what books be read; if there be any daily worship in the house; which church they frequent; if they go to confess to the Easter sacrament, and so forth. Hundreds and hundreds of such questions are put, not appertaining to the penitent. Why? To know the secrets of the family—to get this great power—and to use it.

“All those revelations, made by the confessing person, of facts not personal, of circumstances and persons out of her confession, are not under the seal; the confessor is not obliged to keep silent upon other guilt than that of the penitent, or what is immediately connected with the penitent, who has become an instrument, a spy, in the hands of the cunning priest. I give a case which lately occurred at Milan. A poor man, keeper of a hotel, discovered some fire-arms in his house. As the punishment by martial law, which then operated there, for possessing arms, was to be shot, the man went alone to the father confessor, and said: ‘In such a part of my house I found five or six muskets and rifles; I desire to be discharged of the heavy gift; therefore arrange the matter so that I can avoid condemnation.’ The confessor said: ‘Oh! I will arrange it all; go in peace!’ Two hours afterward, the police came to the hotel, went directly to the part indicated by the confessor, and found the arms; a few hours after, that poor man was shot. This is the silence, or if you please better to say, this is the prudence and charity of confessors.”

J. N. LOUGHBOROUGH.

(Concluded next week.)