Rutland herald. [volume] (Rutland, Vt.) 1823-1847, 1842-07-19
TTEE PoPE's CORNER.
From NcUins' Thoughts On PoPery.l
The Power to Forgive Sins.

distinguished in history from her sister centuries.
know not whether any age has been more remarka-
BILE for cases of unounJed preienSion than the pre-
sent. The case, however, of which l am TO take
notice, did not originate in the 10Th century II has
existed many hundred years. l do not wonder at
its surviving the dark ages but that it should have
lived so far into the luminous 10Th does somewhat
surprise me. The pretension TO which allude is
made by the Catholic priesthood They pretend to
have power over sins, to remit retain them
They claim that the prerogave of pardon is lodged
with them. And that is the reason, why they re-
ceive confessions.
The hrst thing that strikes me, Isl the contrariety
OF this notion to common sense. The idea of being
pardoned by any other than God, seems absurd
What fellow sinner of priest to pardon sins a.
gainst God! 1t is as if of t,oo debtors, one should
play the creditor and forgive the other his debt,
without any consultation of the real creditor. That
would be strange way of getting rid of debts
always thought he to whom the debt was due ought
Ito have say in the matter of renting it, If had
disposed of debt in that manner should always be
afraid it would one day be exaced-hat the real
creditor would appear and make his demand. Then
it would be poor of for me to say that my
fellow debtor forgnve the debt. expect that
a great deal which the priests forgive will be ex-
acted notwithstanding Catholics talk of going to
the priest and getting their old scores wiped off"
just as if twere but slate and pencil memorandum
which my one can rub out.
But is there not scripture in support of the priests
claim See John 90: 80. Does not Christ say to
his disciples "Whosesoever sins We remit, they are
RENTED unto them; and whatsoever sins We retain
they retained 7" Yes, he says that to his apos-
ties. But pray what right have The pricfts to found
claim of theirs on grant made to the apostlesl
should like to know how the priests prove that they
inherit the apostoical power of RENTING sins. But
forgot that they scorn 10 resort to proQc
The power communicated in that grant to the "a
postles was merely ministerial and declayatiue 1t
was no less true after than before the grant was
made, that none can forgive sins than God only.
That the powerwas decorative merey-that is, that
the apostles were empowered to remit and retain
sins only as they were authorized and enabled to
make correct statement to mankind of the way
and means Of salvation, to express the conditions of
pardon and condemnation, and to propose the terms
OF lie and death, is clear to from tho fact that
the comforting of it Immediately preceded by
tho Saviors breathing ON them and saying, Gre
ceve We the Holy Ghost" Now this communica-
lion OF the Spirit qualified them for the declaraive
remission and retention of sins. They were there
by inspired to pronounce on what grounds sins are
RENTED a ID retained by God.
This was the power over sins granted to the apos-
ties, and shall show presently that this decaratve
power is all they pretend ever to have exercised.
Now the priests have right to claim even this
power, except in that subordinate in which it
is possessed by all who are authorised TO preach
the Gospel. Did Christ ever breathe on them, and
say to them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost Z" that
they should claim equality with the apostles The
r al, r
of the priests as it in the case of tho apostles,
il may be permitted TO express an opinion.
But the priests claim far more than ever entered
the thoughts of the apostles, They are not satisfied
with the ministerial and declarave power over sins,
but they claim magisterial and authoritative power
TO remit and retain them. Consequently they call
sinners to come and confess their sins to them Did
Peter and the other apostles, the very men to whom
Christ said, "whosesoever sins ye remit" &c. ever
do such thing! You read in the Acts of the A.
postes of synqgogues and proscuches, or places of
prayer, but do you find anything about confession
bOres there Does there seem to have been anv
thing duriculGr in the transactions of the day of
Pentacost
There is the case OF Simon Magus that strikes me
as in point If Peter and John had had the power
OF orglving sin, could they not have exercised in
favor of Simon! But we find Peter addressing him |
just as any protestant minister would have done,
Repent therefore of thy wickedness, and pray God
II perhaps the thought of thine heart may be lorgv-
en- thee" How differently the Roman priest would
have done! He would have said "Well, Simon
and what have you to say for yourself! All! that
IS bad, very bad. But if you are sorry, Simon, |
forgive you, only cannot let you off without you
do some penance. You must say so many pater-
nosters, and you must not eat meat for so many
days" This is the way in which the boosted sue
cessors Of Peter manage such matters.
But it is no wonder the priests treat the people as
they do, for if they allowed them to know what the
Lord says to them in the Bible they would be very
apt to 60 directly to God and Christ, and leave the
priest out of the question altogether. And then
where would be the importance Of the priest-and |
his emollment, where?