Image TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage Tile
Image size: 6144x7680 Scale: 35% - PanoJS3
Page overview thumbnail
Hide article pages Show article pages
  1. Page 2
    Page 2 thumbnail
  2. Page 3
    Page 3 thumbnail

Article text

On this Page 2
XDOZ.ATRT.-No. X3CXXX.
To the Editor of The Sydney Gazette.
SIR,
I have shewn in these letters that the
custom of penance which the Christians
introduced into the church many years
after the time of the apostles, was taken
from the discipline used by the members
of the heathen mysteries for the
practice of the apostles for continuance
in sin, or for the profession of false
doctrine, was merely excommunication
or removal from society of the faithful
that the little leaven might not
leaven the whole lump. This was a sufficient
punishment to the sincere Christian,
who, through the devices of Satan
and his own carnal will and frailty, had
been led astray from the paths of purity.
This appears from the case of the inces-
tuous Corinthian, who kept his mother-in-law
when, after excommunication, he
ceased from his sin, and shewed and professed
Borrow for it the Apostle Saint
Paul exhorts the Church to restore him to
the society of the faithful, lest he should
be overwhelmed with over much sorrow ;
but whosoever continued in their sin after
removal from the church were never restored
if they never ceased from their sin
for this was a sure sign that they had not
the spirit of Christ in them. They regarded
not the honor of Christ's Church,
nor the honor of Christ's religion, nor the
salvation of their own souls, therefore
they were not Christ's people. If any
man have not the spirit of Christ, he is
none of his. They who do not believe in
Christ Jesus who have no taste or inclination
to live as Christians ought
to do-whose souls are not delighted
by hopes of immortal glory in Heaven,
cannot cordially unite with believers,
with those whose hearts are charmed
by these hopes. The one-party delight
in their expectation of a crown of glory
in heaven-the other delight in those
gratifications which this world affords.
If a similarity of desires and aversions is
the most lasting bond of friendship, how
can two such parties coalesce ? How
foolish and absurd to force such parties
to unite by penance and civil pains and
punishments ! Water and oil may be
forced to come into contact together, but
will never thoroughly unite or be completely
mixed together ; such a union of
two parties together, of such different
tastes and predominant passions, can have

other effect than to make both miserable,
neither can penances make any atonement
for sins committed. What Christ has
done and suffered is the only and sole
sacrifice and atonement for sins ; even if
penances can make atonement, how can
they be bought off or commuted for
money thy money perish with thee,
because thou hast thought that the gift
of God may be purchased for money, says

Saint Peter. Acts viii. 20-Would it
not be purchasing the gift of God for
money given to His Church, to purchase
the remittance of penance for money ?
this is called an indulgence. The universal
reign of ignorance in the twelfth
century was dexterously yet basely improved
by the Rulers of the Church to
fill their coffers and to drain the purses
of the deluded multitude; and, indeed,
all the various ranks and orders of the
clergy had each their peculiar method of
fleecing the people. The Bishops, when
they wanted money for their pleasures or
for the wants of the Church, granted to
their flock the power of purchasing the
remission of the penalties imposed upon
transgressors, by a sum of money, which
was to be applied to certain religious purposes
; or, in other words, they published
indulgences, which became an inexhaustible
source of opulence to the Episcopal
orders, and enabled them, as it is well
known, to form and execute the most difficult
schemes for the enlargement of their
authority, and to erect a multitude of sacred
edifices which augmented considerably
the external pomp and splendor of the
Church, see Stephanus Obazinonsis aged
Moslem, in Baluzii miscellany Tome

this, page 130. When the Roman Pon
j tiffs cast an eye upon the immense area
| sures that the inferior rulers of the Church
were accumulating by the sale of indulgences,

they thought proper to limit the
, power of the bishops in remitting the pe
S Halles imposed upon transgressors, and

assumed almost entirely, this profitable
k traffic to themselves. In consequence

of this new measure, the court of
I' Rome became the general magazine of
I indulgences and the Pontiffs, when
1 either the wants of the Church, the emptiness

of their coffers, or the demon of
, avarice prompted them to look out for
a new subsidies, published not only an uni
I vessel, but also a complete, or what they
t called a plenary remission of all the tem
? paral pains and penalties, which the
church had annexed to certain transgressions

They went still further, and not
only remitted the penalties which the civil
and ecclesiastical laws had enacted against

transgressors, but audaciously usurped

the authority which belongs to God
alone, and impiously pretended to abolish
even the punishments which are

reserved in a future state for the work

'ers of iniquity; a step this, which

the bishops with all their avarice and
presumption had never once ventured to
take, see Merinos, de Administrations
Sacrament! penitently, book v, chapter
j sx, xxi, xxii, page 768; also Mabillon.
From this is it is probable, that even now,

in 1839, the money which the priest obtains
for indulgences must be transmitted
to the Pope, and that to keep back any
of it would be a crime worthy of de-
gradation.

The Pope's first employed this pretended
prerogative, in promoting the holy
1 war, and shed abroad their indulgences,

though with a certain degree of moderation
in order to encourage the European
princes to form new expeditions for the
conquest of Palestine, the Holy Land; but
in process of time, the charm of indul-
gencies was practiced upon various occa
% sions of much less consequence, and
merely with a view of filthy lucre, see
Muratori Antig. Italic medic Ovi, page
6 761. To justify, therefore, these scandal
( lous measures of the Popes, a most men
a strous and absurd doctrine was newly
| invented, which was modified and cm
f bellished by St. Thomas, in the following
century, and which contained among

others, the following enormities, that
there actually existed an immense area
' sure of merit, composed of the pious

' deeds and virtuous actions, which the

saints had performed beyond what was
necessary for their own salvation ; these
are called works of supererogation, and
which were therefore applicable to the
benefit of others that the guardian and
dispenser of this precious treasure was the
I Pope of Rome, and that of consequence
i lie was empowered to assign to such as he

thought proper, a portion of this incx

habitable merit suitable to their respec-
1 five guilt, and sufficient to deliver them
li from the punishment due to their crimes.
I" What was the certainty of this deliver-

ance we will hereafter see, from a modern
publication of an Irish Roman Catholic
bishop of acknowledged great abilities, and
powerful intellect. These indulgences

were the cause of the Reformation in the

sixteenth century ; when, during the pope
dom of Leo X, John Telzel was chosen,
by Albert, Archbishop of Mentz and
Magdeburg, to preach and proclaim, with
uncommon impudence in Germany, these
famous indulgences of the then Pope,
which administered the remission of all
sins past, present, and to come, however
enormous their nature, to those who were
rich enough to purchase them. The front
v less Dominican Monk executed this iniquitous

commission, not only with match-
less insolence, indecency and fraud, but
even carrried his impiety so far as to de-
rogate from the all-sufficient power and
influence of the merits of the Son of God.
At this, Martin Luther, unable to smo-
ther his just indignation, raised his warning
voice, and in ninety five propositions
maintained publicly at Wirtemberg, censured
the extravagant extortion of these
questions, and plainly pointed out the
Pope of Rome as partaker of their guilt,
since he suffered the people to be seduced
by such delusions, from placing their
whole confidence in what Christ had done
and suffered for them.

$