# Der Lutheraner_St. Louis Missouri_1853 12 20_S65
# AI translation — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

Der Lutheraner.
(Rev. John, Chap. 14, v. 6.)
"God's Word and Luther's doctrine pure shall now and evermore endure."
Published by the German Ev. Luth. Synod of Missouri, Ohio, and other States
Edited by C. F. W. Walther.
Year 10.  St. Louis, Mo., December 20, 1853.  No. 9.
Terms: Der Lutheraner appears once every two weeks at the annual subscription price of One Dollar for subscribers out of town, who are to pay it in advance and bear the postage. – In St. Louis each single number is sold for 5 cents.
Only those letters which contain communications for the paper are to be sent to the editor; all others, which contain business matters, orders, cancellations, money, etc., are to be sent hither under the address Mr. F. W. Barthel, care of C. F. W. Walther, St. Louis, Mo.

Jesuitism.

(Continuation.)

John Sanchez, a Spaniard, not to be confused with Thomas Sanchez, died 1610, writes: "If the penitent (?) has the strong suspicion that the confessor will not grant him absolution if he should confess that a sin has become a habit with him, he may, by the use of an ambiguity, deny the habit, so that the sense comes out thus: it is not absolutely a habit with me, but not such a one as I would have to confess at present.– If a penitent should be known to the confessor, who knows very well that he, for example, has not put out of the house the sister with whom he commits the sin, he may pretend to be another person, by changing his voice, his clothes, his name, his birthplace, and the like, without sinning by a lie, since he makes use of an ambiguity. Yes, he may deny that he belongs to an order or that he is married, supposing that he is to be absolved and the confessor would not grant him absolution if he learned these circumstances.– The penitent, if he is unable to make restitution "(of what was stolen)", might assure him that he has already made restitution, if he supposed it probable that the confessor, in case restitution has not taken place, would not grant absolution, however much the penitent might assure the confessor of his inability; for he is not obliged to favor the confessor's error." (See: Selectae et pract. disp. Ant. 1644. fol. Disp. 9. n. 7. 10.) Who would think that such things could pass the censorship of the superiors of the Jesuit order? Yet the astonishment vanishes when one reads in the Institutum itself the following: "Infamy on account of enormous (altogether dreadful) sins excludes in the place (from the Society of the Jesuits) where the same is manifest. But whoever had fallen into them in very distant places, such infamy would not exclude from the (Jesuit) order." (Vol. I. f. 343.) What sort of people there may be among the Jesuits here in distant America, according to this!

Azorius, died 1607, writes: "Before Gregory was elected pope, he had publicly and solemnly sworn that he would renounce the papal power. But when he was afterwards elected pope, he would not lay down the papal dignity. But the Roman pope can release himself from a vow and from the bond of an oath and from the law, if only he has a proper cause for it." (Inst. moral. lib. V. c. 15. p. 127.)

Laymann: "If one is asked under oath whether he comes from a place which is believed to be infected with the plague, he may swear that he does not come from there, understanding in addition: from a place such as one imagines it. Yes, most add that even if the place were really infected, he could still swear that he had not been there, if only he had passed quickly through it and had the certain conviction that he was not infected with the plague." (In this, says Laymann, loc. cit. (Azorius, Sanchez, Suarez, Rodriguez and others agree with him.) From this it is evident what guarantee all plague and cholera quarantines afford against Jesuits. The good purpose, to do mission work somewhere and to do something for the welfare of the "Church," sanctifies the means of perjury.

Azorius of Lorca in Spain, died 1607, writes: "It is a custom not to be disapproved, according to which a widow after the death of her husband stays at home for a year for the sake of mourning and hears no Mass." (Lib. 7. inst. moral. c. 7.) It goes without saying that this Jesuit still more, in regard to the hearing of the Word of God-