American Lancaster gazette. [volume] (Lancaster, Ohio) 1855-1860, 1855-05-31
KIRWAN'S LETTERS.
TO THE RIGHT REV JOHN HUGHES, BISHOP
OF NEW YORK.
LETTER VIII.

LETTER VIII.
My DEAR SIR,-In my last letter en-
tered on the statement Of the reasons which
yetprevent me from returning to the pale
OF your church. l adyerted only TO four
your virtual prohibition Of the Bible; the
way and manner of your public worship oI
God;-your ceremonial law, which bur
dens and crushes, without instructiug or
correcting the conscience; and the obstruc-
tons which you erect between my soul
aud my God. These, or either Of them,
would be reason sufficient not merely to
excuse, but to forbid, my every returning
to your communion. For me to give far,
ther reasons would seem to be little like
your doctrine Of Supererogation, which is
not among the least of the absurd errors of
your infallible church; but as the argument
is cumulative, you will bear with me
whilst proceed to the statement Of few
others.
l cannot return to your church, until
you cease teaching for doctrines the com
mandments of men. Permit me here to
say, dear sir, that, without a solitory ex-
ception, the things which are peculiar to
your church,-the things which make it
distinctively what it is, are the command
ments of men, either in direct opposition
to the teachings ofthe Bible, or based up
on the most gross perversion of its mean
ing. In as brief manner as possible, per-
nit me to illustrate this position.
Your church teaches and enjoins the
celibacy OF its clergy, in language the most
pointed and positive; and the Council of
Tent hurls its anathemas against all who
would assert the contrary doctrine, or who
would admit the lawfulness of the mar
riage of priest. Thus you forbid the
priest to marry-you damn him il he does
maryland you anathematize all who
think or say that in marrying he sinned
not against God or man. All this, you ad
nit, is so. Now, then, ask your author
ity for SO teaching. I ask not your eccle-
siastical, but your scriptural authority
Did not the Jewish priests marry? Was
not Peter your first pope? This you as
sert. And was not Peters wife's mother
sick of a fever? Matt 8: IA. Pope Pc
ter, thon, had wife. Why would it be a
mortal sin in pope Plus TX. to have one
also? Would ne be the less pious or NOR
al on that account? You, sir, are a bish-
op. How far you are a scriptural bishop,
is not now the inquiry But Paul in writ
ing to Timothy says, "a bishop must be
the husband of one wife having
his children in subsection with all gravity
And even poor "deacons, the lowest or
der of your ministry, are thus instructed
by Paul, "Let the deacons be the husbands
of one wife, ruling their children aud their
own houses WELL" Tim. 8: 12.
Now, dear sir, put these things togeth-
er, and see in what position they place
you! Peter. your first pope. had wife;
and you damn to the depths of perdilion
any pope that would, in this respect, fol-
low pope Peter! Challoner says that he
had no commerce with his wife after he
was made an apostle Will you tell me
how Challoner found that out? Deacons
and bishops are commanded, or at least
permitted to have wives, and you would
empty the seven vials of your wrath, and
pour all the anathemas of Trent upon the
head of the priest or bishop that, in obey
ing God, would disobey your church,
Is it possible for you and the Bible to be
in more direct opposition? Is it wrong to
conclude that in thus forbidding to marry,
your church gives at leat one evidence that
ii is the Antichrist? Will you favor me,
dear sir, with common-sense exposition
of the meaning of Paul, Tim. 4: 8, where
he brands "forbidding to marry" as a doc
trine of "devils?" If half as literal in the
exposition of Paul, as IN your exposition
of, "this is my body" "this is my blood, "
how will you avoid the inference that you
are a devil?
Again; your church enjoins confession
under the most stringent rules. To this |
have already adverted in former letters
l advert to it again to illustrate how you
teach for doctrines the commandments of
men. The Council of Trent teaches that
"it is the duty of every may who hath
fallen after baptism to confess his sins at
least once year to priest" 1t teaches
that "this confession Of sin is to be secret,
for public confession is neither command
ed nor expedient." 1t teaches that "this
confession of sin must be very exact and
particular, together with all circumstances,
and that it extend to the most secret sins,
even of thought or against the 9th or 10th
Commandment" You know you omit
the end Commandment which forbids your
bowing to pictures and images, and divide
the 10th into two, so as to make up the
9th and 10th, and thus complete the num-
ber. On receiving confession as thus or
dained, the priest pronounces absolution
upon the penitent, "not conditional or dec
larative only, but absolute and judicial." :"
When l remember the use which your
church has made of this doctrine, and the
fearful power which it gives the priest over
the people, my heart swells with emotion
as l pen these lines; and, like the angel of
Manoah's sacrifice, my thanksgiving as
cend to heaven, that l have escaped the
snare of the fowlers.
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 feather; give me, ifyou can,
Bible authority. Is there one text from