The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1850-12-24 00:00:00

Pet. 24,15

..oNAL•

DR. MINEILE AND THE CONI'ESN.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE MORNING CH..—
le"
SIR,— I do not often see your paper, and since fies
the impression of last Friday I have been incessantiLls
cupied. With your readiness to publish a statelnerw
my prejudice, without any inquiry into its accurae9,
predate the courtesy which induced you to offer tn!chs
lish my reply. It will be an act of justice, in "lhale
free press should delight, for all the journals il'h'quer,
reprinted your statement to give insertion to this e
Without further preface, I will state facts :
On Sunday morning, the Bth inst., preached a ser,urll
on the words of St. Paul (1 Cor., iv. 5), " Therefareti, ge
ad
nothing before the time until the Lord come." sueh'ici•
from the context that the things referred to were the 0
den things of man's heart, in reference to which 0134
should attempt to judge his fellow-man ; and distingins,li,
them from outward actions, which are to be, and nit
judged by man ; pointir, ont the appropriate tribrr,
which God has appointed for each of these judginen
the civil magistrate, from day to day, for the one; tbir
Lord Jesus Christ, in the day of His coming, for
other.
the
Enlarging on the Christian duty of not judging tej
secret things of the heart " before the time," I contras is
with ft the anti-Christian practices of the confessions, to
which the Romish priest institutes inquiry into these elt.
of men fee the express purpose of pronouncingiudgales&
I shewed that, according to their system, the priest se-lig
there as God, and that it is mortal sin to conceal sulitt a
from him. All is told, and he appoints what he Pug'"
suitable and adequate penance. The penance being c's
formed, the affairs of the penitent's soul are considered
settled up to that date. He is distinctly told that thetlest
solution given him is judicial, and that what the pried
thus declares on earth God ratifies in Heaven. The of
tent is relieved from the working of an accusing conseie.,'
and society defrauded of the benefit which would have'
suited from an open confession.
This led to a statement of the secrecy of the Rnm
of
confessional, on which I quoted thus from the evideneer,
Drs. Doyle and Magaurin (Roman Catholic bishops)bef°
a committee of the Douse of Lords in 1825 :

" re
Right Rev. J. Doyle, D.D.
" Would a priest consider himself justified, in case be to
ceived in confession a knoWledge of an intended crilpe!
take arty measure by which he could prevent the execution.'
that crime?
•
" No, he cannot, more than the means he uses with the in-
dividuals themselves. s• ei
" Could he not warn the person against whom the crap
intended to be committed?
" He cannot.

" Right Rev. James Magauria, D.i7noWn
" Are not the parties who commit a murder genera k
l
to the priests?
. . _ _

" I do not think they are.
the
PO Supposing it were stated to him in confessions vieois
priest think it consistent with his duty to divulge any Pal'
communication which was made to him in confession?
" I do not think he would.
prevent the
" Might he not disclose so much of it as would.prev---., „to
perpetration of the crime without committing the peep -
has made the confession.

, He-could not divulge any part of it."
Commenting upon all this, I said that whatever fit d
miNht be in the priest's mind concerning his church an
her authority, he was, in the eye of the law of both
and man, as guilty of the murder in such a case as.thedbe:
luded wretch who actually committed it, and no pups,3
ment could be too severe for him ; no, not even caP'
punishment. I had no sooner uttered this expresslar
than I felt it would be taken out of its context and Os"
understood, and I immediately made an attempt to Inn:
dify it. In this I did not succeed. I felt at the motnenttv
that I had not expressed myself clearly, and Pd°ll°
wonder that I was misunderstood.
Under ordinary circumstances I would have taken Ila
further notice of the affair in public ; but the eiredvre,
stances of Liverpool at the time were very peculiar. to,
had just had a town's meeting convened by the Mar,t,.„
address her Majesty on the subject of the Papal
cently published. At that meeting several Roman Cr
tholic priests appeared, and an attempt was made to crop.
a disturbance and defeat the object of the meeting•
had been my privilege to resist that attempt, and
Ttie,_r 7,when„.
failed to address the meeting at some length.
~1.-
citement occasioned by this in the town had not subsn'ua
I was engaged and advertised to deliver a lecture on tm
felt
Papal canon law on the 10th, and some anxiety was itt,
lest further disturbance should arise. My apprebenat
was, that the expression 1 had made use of, as abovenG,
scribed, would be seized upon and turned to accouattble.
aggravate the feeling already excited against me 'l'd's.
Papal party in the town. I determined, therefore, to
arm hostility, as far as I could, by candidly expressing:og
the evening, the regret which I sincerely felt at havi ,
used a phrase in the pulpit so liable to misconception•lei.
was not to preach in the evening ; and, therefore, „to.
the second lesson, said a few words from the reaul"c.
desk, avowing my regret for having used an expressiono
my sermon in the morning which a moment's retlectiga
would have caused me to avoid, as palpably liable to
eii,
T • t. --1 • • efter

before God, and expressed it honestly before them. it
These are the facts of the case. And now, sir, Per.o
me to add, that it is not a fact that any peculiar sensatLo
ot
was manifested in my congregation in the morning ; t•

a fact that any remonstrance of any kind

e 0915
gation after the morning's, service ; that it is not 3:lthe
that I ever said Ihad no consciousness of having use-hat
language in question. Ilnew, and knew perfectlY,ten-
I had said; One gentleman of the congregation wO-
a note, not-of remonstrance, but of kind inquiry, Otarer scaS
tain whether he understood me aright. His Orgtiot
brought into the vestry before the evening service,lt'd not
I we were leaving the vestry to go into the church, $l3
read till after the service

self
make
ed upon td any comments in deb
defence upon all this. I:understand full well the or is.
to which awry man must be exposed who adopts 0?.133$
tently the tone which, for man years, I have fe":,„4
Christian duty to adopt. I'have counted the cost' :ra- e
make no complaint. It is, however, right that exagg'

tion and misrepresentation should be met by facts. our
In conclusion, bear with a little further trespass onYrit-
space, while I transcribe a passage from a pamphlet, ;ea
ten by a clergyman, the Rev. J. Nolan, who 10°, the
a Popish priest; He was converted to the faith o' an
Gospel, and aedressed several pamphlets to his R° but
Catholic fellow-countrymen. He challenged r inquirY' his,
no priest responded. He lived several years ettheipt,'
publications, but is now dead. His •` third panWii—this
published in Dublin in 1838, at pp. 23-25, contains
ltatement :
-1000

.my frienab, .he most awful of all considera:,, ap:
this, that tin oughthe confessional I bad been frequent.4oo-
prised of intended assassinations and most diabolical clone
racier, and still I dared not-give the slightest intima!i?n,t.nosc.

._
marked-out victims: of slaughter. Buti though my begtlili all
trembles at my recollection of the murderous acts, '__, la-
duty obliges me to proceed, and enumerate one or LP
stances of the cases alluded to. r•
d e'r.edh,been'aii of
etifinrdstwiisththewchaosseeoifnateniewrseodnwho wasassassination barbarouslyi
quainted at . confession. One of the fi‘e conspirators .0 vie
whom were sworn to commit the horrid deed) broach e 46 t.o_
the bloody conspiracy in the confessional. I implore('
.s. ti.o
desist from his intention, but, alas, all advice was usele:„d to'
dissuasion could prevail; his determination was fixed, '1"to bi 6
only reason for having disclosed the awful machinationlat his
confessor seemed to have originated from a hope ',`,,,decig'
wicked design would be hallowed by his nrpvious tickw_i_A the

• aaau s•-••••-- anti
ment ef it to a priest. Awful to relate! • yes. awful • pn'i
band that now pens it shudders at the record it makes' era
death by the band of ruthless assassins. Oh,
inoffensive man, the victim of slaughter, died a "'sprees-
death
countrymen, yotvwill now naturally ask, whether n1....1!
the perpetrators of the bloody deed most to be cenaol:"to the
who knew the murderers and the murdered previous in die
act,—l who had met the intended victim of slaughter
public streets but a short time antecedent to his death
" I must now proceed to the recital of another case• flt•
" It is that of a female administering poison to betni to to
Her first attempt at parricide n.- wed ineffectue. t"
my dear _ or

immediate retching that seized the man after ta/i?ie'saion.
draught. The perpetrator of this foul deed came to an!e'd that
and acknowledged her guilt ; but circumstances prod
and
she only sought -for priestly absolution to ease her Inr*lcritne:
prepare her for a speedy repetition of the heinnu,'. Was
Again she attempted the act, and it was successful,'
called on to attend the dying parent. The unnattir„ced
and convulsive agonies of the unfortunate man conv.P2„, Con
that the disease was of no ordinary nature. The pro it:raricel.
fessfon of the daughter, who at the time made her aPP'Ils a se
rushed upon my mind, and suggested that the parent ;cafes"
sional, I could not even hint at the propriety of
cond time poisoned. From what I had:known in "ding CP
send • ,vie-
se
medical assistance, for the Romish doctrine impresthe sllgkp.
bible secrecy on my lips, and prevented my giving_,

est intimation of itiein-qtlaCii, ;.t:l;iiiiiiiePO:tnl' Parent;.,,c"fatil*
scions of the came of his death, died in the most exc h! 01001
agonies. O Ih, monstrous system of confession • ,ettor
iniquitous tribunal ! " Thou cloaker of crimes—thou ."
wickedness—thou brutal murderer !"-
I am, sir, your obedient servant,
• HUGH v. 31,pr.,..r.
London, Dec. 17.

ilo-..111
ssiunictee-ly re:
rarnoo°E.
TO rzE EDITOR OF THE MORNING v.-- lotion
• Sir.—l am cbliged by the opportunity your
ii:l ogre'
affords me to explain the use I made of the werofTnee"
dome, on the occasion referred to. In my leqe I weg
pd desirous
heneni gt
ahtptsh,pi
simply
ccporalimtytitomtenoni
tell
finol under
esf
famuchecevtsenop mafr
seets:,sl Jet rcea fors e, talii :Ids ee
oat iii.o,
toi
Iv
attempt to specify the very words I had Inadei6l,olo,t;the
sycl, i however, !a„-
the exception of one expzession " capital Pen 3 it, °and,
intendgurder: to
cathrseouogfh aanpyriefistacioongniosaf natnyof
Cahnuricnhtrd a
et Iterfertnogthe
pulpit, to say the least of it, and as
gretted having usectit. My appreheesinctlY
that I had not limited the expression 'ropposition that`
case, but had given just grounds for fiie ofessional itself
I intended to apply it generally to the
r characterised itt;
This was indeed- atrocious, and as se horror horror of gel'
no one can eatert. in a more unfe'e—
a sentiment than I do.
ervant,
I am, sir, your crbedieso g Gil ArNEII4
Nu .
Liverpool, Dec. 20, 1850. to such

Caostnlen. COURT AND, EON";
.----- dOf
Lord John Russell left town on Tuesday for Win,
...,
Castle, and the Duke and Westminster
of Bedford. the iSII,
Mn R. B. Sheridan's play of " The -
quis and Marchioness of Westminster and Lady OctOria
Grosvenor, the Marquis and Marchioness of Exeter 3
d 14°1
Lady M. Cecil, the rkarl and Countess Spencer an ~,e
G. Spencer, and Lord George Lennox, also arrived at ti
l 0
tic" was performed at Windsor before the Queen. A 0
The Princess Mary of Cambridge was confirorss.
Kew on Thrsga?. by the Archbishop of CanterblPZlnce
Thursday
slated by the Bishop of London. The Queen aked.rr.-
d
Mr. liraterhouse, jeweller, of Dame-street, Dublin, bad
the honour, on Friday, of submitting to the Queen .
Prince Albert a curious ancient Irish tvoch,,, celled w"
Tara brooch.
The Earl of Lincoln and Lord and Lady Mille/
'dined
with her Majesty, QC Saturday, at \cow castle.
Albert were present.