{"collection":"scripture-revelation","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_37695/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_37695","id":"gutenberg_37695","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/37695","summary":null,"tags":["Anti-Catholicism","Category: Biographies","Category: History - Religious","Category: Religion/Spirituality","Catholic Church -- Controversial literature","Confession -- Controversial literature","Convents -- Controversial literature","Jesuits -- Controversial Literature"],"text":"Produced by David Widger\n\n\n\n\n\n\nAURICULAR CONFESSION and POPISH NUNNERIES\n\nBy William Hogan\n\nA Roman Catholic Priest\n\nVolume I. (of II.)\n\n1854.\n\n\n\n\n\nAURICULAR CONFESSION and POPISH NUNNERIES, Volume I.\n\n\n\nTO THE PUBLIC.\n\nThe readers of the following work, who have not any acquaintance with\nthe author, may wish to know who he is, in order to enable them to\nascertain what degree of credit is due to his statements. We are\npermitted to publish the following documents, which show that the author\nis a member of the Georgia bar, and that his standing among his brethren\nis that of a moral, upright, and honorable gentleman. This is a high\ncharacter--as high as any man can produce, or any American citizen\nrequire--and entitles Mr. Hogan's statements to full credit, in the\nestimation of every honest man and impartial reader of this work.\n\n[Certificate from Judge Wayne.] State of Georgia. At a Superior Court\nholden in and for the County of Effingham, in November Term, 1827. Know\nall men by these presents, that, at the present sitting of this Court.\nWilliam Hogan made his application for leave to plead and practise in\nthe several Courts of Law and Equity in this State: Whereupon, the\nsaid William Hogan having given satisfactory evidence of good moral\ncharacter, and having been examined in open Court, and being found well\nacquainted and skilled in the laws, he was admitted by the court to all\nthe privileges of an Attorney Solicitor and Counsellor, in the several\nCourts of law and Equity in this State.\n\nIn Testimony whereof the presiding Judge has hereunto set [L. S.] his\nhand, with his seal annexed, (there being no Seal of Court,) this first\nday of November, 1827. Jno. Chas. Ston, Clerk. James M. Wayne.\n\n[Certificate from Judge Law.] I hereby certify that the within named\nWilliam Hogan, has been at the bar of the Eastern Circuit of Georgia,\nsince November Term, 1827, the date of his admission, and that he has\nconducted himself, during my acquaintance with him at this bar, as\nan Attorney and Counsellor at Law, with uprightness and integrity of\ncharacter.\n\nWilliam Law, Judge Sup. Courts, East District, Georgia, Savannah, 25th\nJune, 1832.\n\n\n\nSavannah, 25th June, 1832.\n\nDear Sir,--Understanding from you that it is your intention to leave\nthe State, with a view to the practice of the law elsewhere; it will,\nI apprehend, be necessary that the certificate of admission to our bar,\nfurnished you by the Clerk, should be accompanied by a certificate from\nmyself as the presiding Judge of the Court in which you were admitted.\nThis is necessary to give it authenticity in another State. It will\nafford me pleasure to append that verification to it, if you will be\npleased to send me the certificate.\n\nPermit me, as you are about to leave us, to offer you my humble\ntestimony to your correct and upright deportment as an advocate at the\nbar of the Superior Courts of the Eastern District of Georgia, since\nyour admission to the practice of the law in the same.\n\nWishing you success and prosperity wherever you may settle, I am, dear\nsir, very respectfully,\n\nYour obedient servant,\n\nWilliam Law.\n\n[Recommendation from the Georgia Bar.]\n\nSavannah, June, 1832. We, the undersigned members of the bar of\nSavannah, having been informed that Wm. Hogan, Esq., in consequence of\nill health, is about removing to a northern climate, take leave to\nstate that he has been admitted to practise as Attorney, Solicitor and\nCounsellor in all the Courts of Law and Equity in this State.\n\nMr. Hogan has been a resident of this city for some years, during\nwhich time, we further feel a pleasure in stating that his professional\nstanding among us, has been that of a moral and honorable gentleman, and\nas such, recommend him to the professional attentions of the Honorable\nthe Judges and members of the bar generally, wherever his health may\ninduce him to locate himself.\n\nThos. U. P. Charlton, Jno. C Nicoll, W. W. Gordon, Rich. W. Habersham,\nK. R. Cutler, Levi S. D'Lyon.\n\n\n\n\nINTRODUCTION.\n\n\"Three score years and ten,\" and those often full of care and anxiety,\nseem to constitute the space of human life. So it is said in that\nvenerable volume, which never has been, and never can be equalled, in\nbeauty of truth, wisdom, and instruction. This, it would seem, ought to\ncheck all the vain and inordinate aspirations of poor, weak man; yet it\nhas not, and probably never will do so. To a reflecting mind, nothing\ncan Appear stranger than this. Notwithstanding this solemn truth, such\nis the presumption of man, that lie has often dared,--and does so at\nthis moment,--to set himself up as the viceroyal or vicegerent of the\nKing of Heaven; and fancies himself sent upon this earth for the purpose\nof rectifying or correcting any mi? takes or defects which might have\nescaped the vigilance of the great I Am, in the organization and fitness\nof things This is truly a serious and melancholy reflection.\n\nThe population of this world of ours is supposed to amount to\n812,553,712. Of this vast number, 137,000,000 are Roman Catholics, who\nnow, on the 19th of July, 1845., bend the knee and bow down in homage\nto a weak, helpless, and worthless being, the Pope of Rome; and thus, if\nhistory does not deceive us, proving themselves conspirators against the\nhappiness of the human race.\n\nTo meliorate the condition of this almost countless multitude of our\nfellow-creatures, is among the first duties of every good man. No one\nis exempted from it; not the king nor the peasant; not the sage nor the\nphilosopher; not the priest nor the layman; for there are as many modes\nof discharging this duty, as there are grades in the social system.\n\nAs a member of the human family, and being once an instructor myself,\nI feel that I have too long neglected this common duty. Many suns, and\nmany shades, too, have passed over me, without doing much in the great\nwork of promoting the happiness of my fellow-beings; and if I can make\nany atonement for this omission, by devoting the necessarily short\nperiod of the remnant of my life for the benefit of others, I shall\nretire to my eternal home with feelings of happiness which I have not\nenjoyed for years.\n\nWith a clear and full view of my duty, I have recently written a work\nentitled, \"_A Synopsis of Popery as it was, and as it is._\" It has been\nwell received; it awakened Americans to a proper sense of their duty.\nUntil then they saw not, they felt not, they dreamed not of the dangers\nwhich threatened their religion and their civil rights from the stealthy\nmovements of the Church of Rome, and her priests and bishops, in this\ncountry. Americans have now a steady and watchful eye upon them. This\nwas necessary, and so far, I have done my duty. The Popish presses,\nwhich, until then, had lulled Americans into fatal repose by their\nmisrepresentations, have been, in a measure, silenced. No one, before\nme, dared to encounter their scurrilous abuse. I resolved to silence\nthem; and I have done so. The very mention of my name is a terror to\nthem now; though, until the appearance of my book, there was not a\nPopish press in the United States, which did not weekly, almost daily,\nabuse me in the most scurrilous manner; and in my apprehension, a\nstronger evidence cannot be given of the iniquity of Popish priests and\nbishops who edit those presses, than this very fact.\n\nProtestant writers in the United States have long been kept in check by\nthe bullying and vaporing of Popish priests, when some resolution and\na little tact, might at all times have silenced them. I found no\ndifficulty in muzzling the whole body; and the mode of doing it was\nsuggested to me by a little incident in my own life. Will the reader\nallow me to relate it?\n\nAs soon as I was admitted to the practice of law, I went into\npartnership with a Mr. Gray, a young gentleman of promising talents and\ngentlemanly manners. Our office was in one of the upper districts of\nSouth Carolina, separated only by a narrow river, from the State of\nGeorgia, where I have resided ever since. There was at the back of\nour office, a swamp, containing,--if we may judge from the noise they\nmade,--myriads of frogs, ugly and filthy as the slime from which they\nsprung. As soon as the sun of heaven retired to its home in the west,\nand darkness covered the face of the earth and the waters, these frogs\nset up a most hideous chorus,--just as Papists have done for more than\ntwenty years, against myself. The noise became a perfect nuisance to\nme. I felt at a loss how to silence these filthy frogs. I purchased and\nborrowed every work I could get upon frogs, to see if any remedy had\nbeen discovered to abate this nuisance; but all to no purpose. On they\nwent, night after night; nothing could be heard but croak, croak, croak.\nFinally, I became impatient, when necessity, which is properly called,\n\"the mother of invention,\" suggested to me the following remedy, which,\nI believe, might have been tried before. I procured a well-lighted\nlantern, concealed it under a thick overcoat, went down to the pond, sat\npatiently on its bank until the frogs commenced their evening chorus;\nbut just as they were upon their highest notes, I uncovered my lantern,\nand threw its full blaze of light over the whole surface of the pond.\nInstantly, as if by magic,\n\n     \"Every frog was at rest,\n     And I heard not a sound.\"\n\nIt occurred to me, that a similar experiment might, with equal\nadvantage, be made upon Popish priests and confessors. I knew no other\nliving animal or creeping thing, so closely resembling these frogs in\nrepulsiveness, as a Romish priest or bishop who hears confessions. I\nresolved to throw light upon them, and show them to each, other and to\nthe world, in their native deformity. I published my book on Popery;\nI threw the light-of my experience as a Popish priest, upon the whole\nbody. The result has been entirely satisfactory. Never, since then,\nhas a Popish priest, Popish bishop, or Popish press, published a single\nsentence against me. How truly is it said in holy writ, \"Resist the\ndevil, and he will flee from you.\" I have resisted Popish priests; they\nhave fled from me; and if the reader will do me the honor of perusing\nthe following pages, he will see that 1 am still pursuing them in full\nchase; nor do I feel disposed to abandon my pursuit, until they renounce\nallegiance to the Pope of Rome, and become true, peaceable, moral, and\nwell-behaved citizens of the United States.\n\nWILLIAM HOGAN.\n\n\n\n\nAURICULAR CONFESSION AND POPISH NUNNERIES.\n\nWhen a writer acknowledges, in advance, that he cannot relate the whole\ntruth, his position is far from being enviable. It augurs badly for what\nhe writes, and so far plages him in a disadvantageous light before the\npublic. This is, however, precisely the condition in which I now find\nmyself. Such is the nature of the subject on which I feel it my duty to\nwrite, that I shrink with native abhorrence from relating, at least,\nthe whole truth. It is repugnant to my feelings, to my taste, and at\nvariance with the general tone of my conversation, ever since the God\nof purity enabled me to disentangle myself from the society of Romish\npriests and bishops,--men whose private lives and conversation with each\nother and with their _penitents_ in the confessional, breathe nothing\nbut the grossest licentiousness and foetid impurities.\n\nI do not wantonly and without provocation make any expose of the\niniquities of Popery. My entire life, since I left them, is evidence\nof this; but they have pursued me with such persevering malignity\nand demoniac malice, that further silence would be criminal\nand disrespectful to my Protestant fellow-citizens, from whom,\nnotwithstanding the malice of papists towards me, I have always\nexperienced kind attentions and hospitality. Nor should I, even now,\nallow the subject of Popery to occupy my mind, or taint the current of\nmy thoughts, if I did not see it striding with fearful rapidity over\nthe fair face of this my adopted country, infusing itself into every\npolitical nerve and artery of our government, while its members are\nasleep and dreaming of its future glories.\n\nIt is not pleasant to me to contend with papists, who look upon it as\na matter of duty, and as a fundamental article of their faith, to\npersecute myself and all other heretics. That they should dislike me, is\nnot a matter of surprise; that men whose confessions I have heard, and\nwho have heard mine, should even dread me, is not to be wondered at.\nMany of these men deserve (I speak of bishops and priests exclusively)\nnot only public censure, but the gibbet, the dungeon and the gallows. I\ncannot blame men, under these circumstances, for detesting my very name.\nThey are in my power--they tremble in my presence--and were I to blame\nthem for some degree of opposition and dislike to me, I should be\nquarrelling with that instinct which teaches the profligate and\ndebauchee to shun the society of a virtuous and upright man. While I\nlive among papists they are naturally afraid that I should lift the\nveil, which conceals from the eyes of Americans the deformities of\nPopery. They are in momentary fear that I shall show to their _American\nconverts_, which Bishop Fenwick of Boston says he \"is daily making from\nthe first families,\" the _Old Lady_ of Rome in her _dishabille_. They\nhave long hidden from them her shrivelled, diseased, distorted, and\ndisgusting proportions, and they are unwilling that this painted harlot\nshould be now seen by Americans. This is good policy, and hence much of\ntheir opposition to me. A curse seems to have rested upon Rome since its\nvery foundation. Pagan, as well as modern Rome, seemed always to delight\nin deeds of darkness.\n\nWe are told in history of a singular practice illustrative of this in\nancient Rome. I mention it merely to show the apparent natural fondness\nof Romanists, ancient as well as modern, for deeds of darkness. It is\ntrifling in itself, and may be deemed, perhaps, irrelevant; but it may\nbe interesting to the historian, whose curiosity extends further than\nthat of theologians or moralists.\n\nThe ancient Romans were epicures. Some say they were greater gluttons\nthan those of the present day. Poultry, of all kinds, was a favorite\ndish with them, and how to fatten fowl most expeditiously, became a\nquestion of vital importance with the philosophers of the Eternal City.\nAfter several experiments, it was found that the best plan was to close\nup the eyes of geese, turkeys, ducks, and all other kinds of poultry,\nand, in that condition, cram and stuff them with food. This succeeded\nadmirably. The fowls fattened in less than half the time.\n\nIt seems that man was always, as well as now, a progressive animal, and\naccordingly, as soon as Popery fixed its head-quarters at Rome or at\nAntioch, no matter which for the present, popish bishops commenced\na similar experiment upon man. Anxious for his conversion to the\ninfallible church, they determined to close his eyes and compel him to\nreceive from themselves, as so many turkeys and geese would from their\nfeeders, such food as they pleased to give them. They were not to\nquestion its quality, but, like so many blinded geese, swallow-all that\nwas given them. The practice continues to the present day in the Romish\nchurch; even American converts to Romanism are not to question the\nquality of the food, or spiritual instructions, which popish priests\nplease to give them. _Blind obedience_ is a necessary article of\nspiritual diet for a convert to Popery; and whether his priest tells him\nthat he must worship God, the Virgin Mary, St. Peter and St. Paul, or\nthe wafer which he carries in his pocket and calls the body and blood of\nChrist, he must obey without murmur or inquiry.\n\nThis unreasonable, unscriptural, and impious doctrine, is inculcated\nespecially in the confessional. No man, not even a papist, dare preach\nin public such a dogma as blind obedience in anything, or to any man. I\nhave always been instructed, while a Catholic priest, never to intimate\nin public that the Romish church ever required unconditional submission\nto her will, unless I was morally certain that all my hearers were by\nbirth and education Roman Catholics; but my orders were positive,\nand under pain of losing my sacerdotal faculties, never to lose an\nopportunity of inculcating this in the confessional. There and there\nalone do Romish priests teach and fasten upon the minds of their\npenitents all the iniquities which the church of Rome sanctions.\n\nIf I can satisfy Americans that _Auricular Confession_ is dangerous to\ntheir liberties; if I can show them that it is the source and fountain\nof many, if not all, those treasons, debaucheries, and other evils,\nwhich are now flooding this country, I shall feel that I have done an\nacceptable work, and _some service to the State_. I fear, however, that\nI shall fail in this; not because what I state is not true, and even\nadmitted to be so, but because Americans seem determined,--I would\nalmost say fated,--to political and moral destruction.\n\nFor twenty years I have warned them of approaching danger, but their\npoliticians were deaf, and their Protestant theologians remained\nreligiously coiled up in fancied security, overrating their own powers\nand undervaluing that of Papists. Even though they see and feel, and\noften blush at the logical triumph, which popish controversialists have\ngained, and are gaining over them in every intellectual combat in\nwhich they engage; yet such is their love of ease or love of money, or\nsomething else, that they cannot be roused until the enemy falls\nupon them with an annihilating force. It is painful to me to see this\nindifference upon their part. They are better able than I am to contend\nwith Papists. They possess more talents, and have more friends than I\nhave to sustain them. This is the land of their birth. It is not\nmine, but not the less dear to me. The religion of this country is the\nreligion of their forefathers, and of the Bible; it is peculiarly their\nduty to defend both.\n\nNothing could induce me to undertake the present work but the universal\napprobation which my recent book on Popery has received from the\njournals of the country. I should leave it to be done by Protestant\ntheologians. The notices which my book on Popery received were\nflattering. They gave me credit for talents, candor, and frankness. But\nI am in reality entitled to no credit for that book. The utterance of\nthe truths contained in it was a spontaneous emotion. It was, if I may\nuse such language, but the breaking up of some moral iceberg, which for\nyears lay heavily on my soul. It was a sort of inspiration fanned into\na blaze by an irresistible consciousness that I had too long neglected\na duty which I owed to my adopted country. But I now feel relieved and\nwilling to enlist in the cause of moral and civil rights.\n\nThe following pages, I apprehend, will appear to some of a rather random\nand fugitive character. It will be said that much of the matter is\nirrelevant--that I fly too rapidly from one subject to another. To\nsuch men I will say, that they know very little of Romish intellectual\ntactics. A well trained reverend Romish soldier cares little about\nthe polish of his armor, or whether he aims his blows according to the\nsystem of this or that commander. He steps into the battle arena in his\nlightest armor, and with his sharpest weapon. A Protestant theologian\nmeets him, with a face as solemn as if he was accompanying to the grave\nall that was dear to him, wearing his heaviest coat of mail, and armed\nwith claymores and battle-axes. While the latter is wasting his strength\nupon \"the desert air,\" and aiming his harmless blows at every spot but\nthe right one, the Papist goads him to death, and seldom fails to obtain\nthe crown of victory from the spectators. Many Protestants who are in\nthe habit of contending with Papists in this manner will disapprove of\nthis book; but I trust that in differing from them in my mode of warfare\nwith Papists, they will on reflection see that, although they may be\nright, I am not wrong. I shall, therefore, beg leave to pursue my own\ncourse. I will give my ideas to the public just as they strike me,\nfresh from my own mind, with no regard whatever to style, ornament, or\ncriticism; and I am vain enough to wish that all controversialists, and\neven all Protestant and Popish writers should pursue a similar course.\nWe should then have more truth in controversy; more soul and more\nsterling morality in religion. All that is pedantic would be exploded,\nand truth, fresh and warm from the heart, would be substituted in their\nplace.\n\nAs I have stated, every crime which the Romish church sanctions,\nand almost all the immoralities of its members, either originate in\nAuricular Confession, or have some connection with it In order to\nexplain this to my readers, it will be necessary for me to go back and\nstate the causes which first induced me to doubt the infallibility of\nthe Romish Church.\n\nI have been often asked the following questions: Why did you leave\nthe Roman Catholic Church? Before I answer this question, I may well\nexclaim, in the language of the ancient poet, omitting only one word,\n\"_Oh! nefandum, jubes, renovare dolorem_\" But however painful the\nrelation may be--however offensive to the ears of the virtuous and\nchaste--however disgusting to the pious and moral portion of our\ncommunity--however at variance with the elegancies and formalities of\nprivate life--however heavily such a narrative may fall upon Romish\npriests and bishops, and however disreputable it may be to Nuns and\nNunneries, I will answer the above question so often made.\n\nSeveral causes have contributed to induce me to doubt the infallibility\nof the Popish church, and to renounce its ministry altogether. Among the\nfirst was the following:\n\nWhen quite young and but just emerging from childhood, I became\nacquainted with a Protestant family living in the neighborhood of\nmy birthplace. It consisted of a mother (a widow lady) and three\ninteresting children, two sons and one daughter. The mother was a widow,\na lady of great beauty and rare accomplishments. The husband, who had\nbut recently died, one of the many victims of what is falsely called\nhonor, left her, as he found her, in the possession of a large fortune,\nand, as far as worldly goods could make her so, in the enjoyment of\nperfect happiness. But his premature death threw a gloom over her future\nlife, which neither riches nor wealth, nor all worldly comforts combined\ntogether, could effectually dissipate. Her only pleasure seemed to be\nplaced in that of her children. They appeared--and I believe they really\nwere--the centre and circumference of her earthly happiness.\n\nIn the course of time the sons grew up, and their guardian purchased\nfor both, in compliance with their wishes, and to gratify their youthful\nambition, commissions in the army. The parting of these children, the\nbreaking up of this fond trio of brothers and sister, was to the widowed\nmother another source of grief, and tended to concentrate, if possible,\nmore closely all the fond affections of the mother upon her daughter.\nShe became the joy of her heart. Her education while a child was an\nobject of great solicitude, and having a fortune at her command, no\nexpense was spared to render it suitable for that station in life, in\nwhich her high connections entitled her to move when she should become\nof age. The whole family were members of the Protestant church, as the\nEpiscopal church is called in that country. As soon as the sons\nleft home to join their respective regiments, which were then on the\ncontinent, the mother and daughter were much alone, so much so, that the\nfond mother soon discovered that her too great affection for her child\nand the indulgence given to her were rather impeding than otherwise her\neducation. She accordingly determined to remove her governess, who up\nto this period was her sole instructress, under the watchful eye of the\nfond and accomplished mother herself, and send her to a _fashionable\nschool for young ladies_. There was then in the neighborhood, only about\ntwenty miles from this family, a _Nunnery_ of the order of Jesuits. To\nthis nunnery was attached a school superintended by nuns of that order.\nThe school was one of the most fashionable in the country. The nuns\nwho presided over it, were said to be the most accomplished teachers in\nEurope. The expenses of an education in it were extravagantly high,\nbut not beyond the reach of wealth and fashion. The mother, though a\nProtestant, and strict and conscientious in the discharge of all the\nduties of her church, and not without a struggle in parting with her\nchild and consigning her to the charge of Jesuits, yielded in this case\nto the malign influence of _fashion_, as many a fond mother does even\nin this our own land of equal rights and far-famed, though mock\nequality--sent her beautiful daughter, her earthly idol, to the school\nof these nuns. Let the result speak for itself.\n\nUp to the departure of the sons for the army, and this daughter for the\nnunnery, I had been ever from my infancy acquainted with this family,\nand had for them the highest respect and warmest attachment. The elder\nbrother was about my own age, and only a few years between the eldest\nand the youngest child.\n\nSoon after the daughter was sent to school, I entered the College of\nMaynooth as a theological student, and in due time was ordained a Roman\nCatholic priest by particular _dispensation_, being two years under\nthe canonical age. An interval of some years passed before I had an\nopportunity of meeting my young friend again; our interview was under\npeculiar circumstances. I was ordained a Romish priest, and located\nwhere she happened to be on a visit. There was a large party given, at\nwhich, among many others, I happened to be present; and there meeting\nwith my friend and interchanging the usual courtesies upon such\noccasions, she--sportively, as I then imagined--asked me whether I would\npreach her _reception sermon_, as she intended becoming a nun and taking\nthe _white veil_. Not even dreaming of such an event, I replied in the\naffirmative. I heard no more of the affair for about two months, when\nI received a note from her designating the chapel, the day and the hour\nshe expected me to preach. I was then but a short time in the ministry,\nbut sufficiently long to know that up to the hour of my commencing\nto read Popish theology, especially that of _Dens_ and _Antoine de\nPeccatis_, I knew nothing of the iniquities taught and practised by\nRomish priests and bishops.\n\nOn the receipt of my friend's note, a cold chill crept over me; I\nanticipated, I feared, I trembled, I felt there must be foul play\nsomewhere. However, I went according to promise, preached her\nreception sermon at the request of the young lady, and with the special\napprobation of the _Bishop_, whom I had to consult on such occasions.\n\nThe concourse of people that assembled on this occasion was very great.\nThe interest created by the apparent voluntary retirement from the\nworld of one so young, so wealthy and so beautiful, was intense, and\naccordingly the chapel in which 1 preached was filled to overflowing\nwith the nobility and fashionables of that section of the country. Many\nand large were the tears which were shed, when this beautiful young lady\ncut off her rich and flowing tresses of hair. Reader, have you ever seen\nthe description which Eugene Sue, in his Wandering Jew, gives of\nthe lustrous, luxurious and rich head of hair worn by Charlotte De\nCardoville, and shorn from her head by Jesuits, under the pretence that\nshe was insane? If you have not, take the Wandering Jew, turn over its\npages till you find it, and you will see a more accurate description of\nthat shorn from the head of the young lady to whom I allude, than I can\npossibly give.\n\nTurn back to the picture given by this same Eugene Sue, of the personal\nbeauty, piety, charity, and many virtues of Mademoiselle De Cardoville,\nand you will have a correct portrait of this young lady of whom I speak.\nYou may therefore easily judge, from her immolation upon the altar of\nfanaticism, or, more properly speaking, her personal sacrifice to the\nidol of Popish and Jesuit lust, the nature of that feeling which such an\nevent must have produced in the mind of every Christian believer.\n\nHaving no clerical connection with the convent in which she was immured,\nI had not seen her for three months following. At the expiration of that\ntime, one of the _lay sisters_ of the convent delivered to me a note. I\nknew it contained something startling.\n\nThese lay sisters among Jesuits, are spies belonging to that order,\nbut are sometimes bribed by the nuns for certain purposes. As soon as I\nreached my apartments, I found that my young friend expressed a wish to\nsee me _on something important_. I, of course, lost no time in calling\non her, and being a priest, I was immediately admitted; but never have\nI forgot, nor can I forget, the melancholy picture of lost beauty and\nfallen humanity, which met my astonished gaze in the person of my once\nbeautiful and virtuous friend. I had been then about eighteen months a\nRomish priest, and was not without some knowledge of their profligate\nlives; and therefore I was the better prepared for and could more easily\nanticipate what was to come. After such preliminary conversation as may\nbe expected upon occasions of this kind, the young lady spoke to me to\nthe following effect, if not literally so. I say _literally_, because so\ndeep, and strong, and lasting was the impression made upon my mind, that\nI believe I have not forgotten one letter of her words.\n\n\"I sent for you, my friend, to see you once more before my death. I have\ninsulted my God, and disgraced my family; I am in the _family way_, and\nI must die.\" After a good deal of conversation, which it is needless to\nrepeat, I discovered from her confession the parent of this pregnancy,\nand that the _mother abbess_ of the convent advised her to take medicine\nwhich would effect abortion; but that she knew from the lay sister\nwho delivered me the note, and who was a confidential servant in the\nconvent, that the medicine which the mother abbess would give her should\ncontain poison, and that the procuring abortion was a mere pretext. I\ngave her such advice as I could in the capacity of a Romish priest. I\nadvised her to send for the bishop and consult him. \"I cannot do it,\"\nsaid she. \"My destroyer is my confessor.\" I was silent I had no more\nto say. I was bound by oath to be true to him. In vain did the noble\nsentiment even of the Pagan occur to me; a sentiment sanctioned almost\nby inspiration itself. It fled from my mind as smoke before the wind. I\nwas one of the priests of the _infallible church_, and what was honor,\nwhat was honesty to me, where the honor of that infallible church was\nconcerned? They were of no account; not worthy the consideration of a\nRomish priest for a second. The almost heavenly sentiment of the noble\nPagan, \"_Fiat justitia, mat coelum_,\" let justice be done even if the\nheavens were to fall, fled from my mind. I retired, leaving my friend to\nher fate, but promising, at her request, to return in a fortnight.\n\nAccording to promise, I did return in a fortnight, but the foul deed was\ndone. She was no more. The cold clay contained in its dread embrace all\nthat now remained of that being, which, but a few months before, lived,\nand moved in all the beauty and symmetry of proportion; and that soul,\nonce pure and spotless as the dew-drop of heaven, ere its contact with\nthe impurities of earth, which a fond mother confided to the care\nof Jesuit nims, had been driven in its guilt and pollution into the\npresence of a just but merciful God. All, all, the work of Jesuits and\nNuns!\n\nThis was the first check my Popish enthusiasm met with; and now for the\nfirst time did a doubt of the infallibility of the church of Rome enter\nmy mind. After witnessing these events I could not help asking myself,\ncan a church which sanctions and countenances such flagitious iniquities\nas I have just witnessed, be a Christian church? Can a body of men, who\nindividually practise such deeds of blood, treachery and crime as those\nwhich I have seen, be, collectively, _infallible?_ Are these the men\nwhom the Saviour commissioned, in a particular manner, to preach the\ngospel to every creature? Are these the men, as a body, with whom he\npromised to be always, even to the consummation of the world? Are\nthese the men who collectively constitute an infallible church? If so,\nunprofitable indeed has been my life. It is high time to come out from\namong them; and if I cannot live the life of luxury and ease, of sin and\ncrime which a Romish priest can live, let me, at least, live that of an\nhonorable man, and a useful member of society.\n\nThese were some of my reflections; and accordingly, that evening, I\ncalled on the Right Reverend Protestant bishop of--------, with a view\nof making a public recantation of my belief in the doctrine of the Roman\nCatholic church. But as chance would have it, he was out of town that\nweek, and when next I made an effort to see him I found that effort in\nvain. I had not properly weighed the chains that bound me to Popery.\nI knew not their length, nor their strength. They were stronger than\nadamant, than steel. They were chains woven for me, in some measure, by\nbeings that I loved. They were thrown around me and fastened to me by\nhands that I reverenced. They were the chains of early education. I\ncould not break them; they were too strong for me. The force which alone\ncould do this was the grace of God. This I had not. Until then I went\nabout without faith in the world. I soon fell back, in a measure, into\nmy former belief, but not without a resolution to examine more fully the\nnature of Popery itself, and the practices of its priests. It is well\nsaid, a drowning man will catch at straws. It occurred to me that,\nperhaps, all the crimes and iniquities committed by popes, priests and\nbishops, and sanctioned by the church of Rome, might be confined only\nto the old countries, where \"use makes law,\" and that by leaving the old\nand coming to the new world, where the people made their own laws, and\nthe human mind had its full swing, and thought is only bounded by its\nown interminable extent, I might find a different state of things.\nI fancied, at any rate, that man might worship God according to the\ndictates of his own conscience, without the interference, let or\nhindrance, save the inherent power and sovereignty of the people. I\nlittle supposed that a pure and enlightened people, such as Americans\nboast themselves, would sanction such institutions as those in which the\nyoung friend of whom I have spoken, lost her virtue, her honor and her\nlife. But alas! how sadly have I been disappointed.\n\nEurope is not the only portion of the world that contains legalized\nSodoms. Its people are not the only people that support them. Its\nlawgivers are not the only men, nor its lawmakers the only ones, that\nmake laws for them and give them charters. Its people are not the only\npeople who contribute their time, their lands, their moneys, and who\ntake almost from the necessaries of life, to support monk houses and\nnunneries, Jesuits and Dominicans. No, no. The new world, the new\npeople, if I may say so, who boast of being the most enlightened people\non the face of the earth,--these are the people who, in proportion\nto their number, contribute most to the support of Popish brothels,\nmodestly called nunneries.\n\nBut it will be said that the young lady to whom 1 have alluded, has\ngiven no evidence of her being virtuous. As far as you tell us, she has\nmade no resistance, and it is scarcely possible that one whom you have\nplaced upon so high a prominence of virtue, could have so suddenly\nfallen into the depths of vice. This is all very plausible, and\nnaturally to be expected from those who know nothing of _auricular\nconfession_,--a Popish institution, one of the most ingenious devices\never invented by the great enemy of man, for the destruction of the\nhuman soul.\n\nI am personally acquainted with several respectable Protestant\nAmericans, both male and female, whose ideas of confession in the Romish\nchurch have often amused me, though not unaccompanied with feelings of\ngrief and sorrow, at their unacquaintance with this, what may be called\nmantrap, or rather woman-trap in the Romish church.\n\nAmerican Protestants suppose that Popish confession means little more\nthan that public confession of sin, which is made in all Protestant\nchurches, or that which we individually make to Almighty God in our\nprivate chambers. Such may well inquire how this apparent sudden fall\ncould have taken place. These inquiries will cease when I state that the\nyoung lady became a convert to Popery, and give my readers some idea of\nwhat _auricular confession_ is, and how it is made. Every Roman Catholic\nbelieves that priests have power to forgive sins, by virtue of which\npower any crime, however heinous, may be remitted. But in order to\neffect this, the sinner must confess to a priest each and every sin,\nwhether of thought, word or deed, with all the circumstances leading\nto it, or following from it; and every priest who hears confessions, is\nallowed to put such questions as he pleases to his _penitent_, whether\nmale or female, and he or she is bound to answer under pain of _eternal\ndamnation_.\n\nIt is very difficult, I admit, to suppose that the daughter of a\nvirtuous mother, and that mother a protestant too, brought up in the\nelegances of life, from her birth, breathing in no other atmosphere than\nthat of the purest domestic morality, should be precipitated, in the\nshort space of a year or two, from a state of unsullied virtue and\ninnocence, to the veriest depth of crime; and it is a melancholy\nreflection to suppose a state of society, in which, by any combination\nof human events, the fond mother of a virtuous child could be made the\ninstrument of that child's ruin. Such an event is scarcely possible in\nthe eyes of Protestant Americans, and I feel a pride in believing, from\nmy acquaintance with many of them, that if American mothers were aware\nof the existence of a society among them, whose object was to demoralize\ntheir children, shut out from them the noonday light of the gospel, and\nultimately decoy them into the lecherous embraces of Romish priests and\nJesuits; they would, to a woman, rise in their appropriate strength, and\ndeliver our land from those legalized Sodoms called nunneries.\n\nI will here take the liberty of showing them how the young friend to\nwhom I have alluded, was debauched. The nunnery to which she was sent,\nas I have heretofore stated, had attached to it a _fashionable school_;\nall nunneries have such. The nuns who instruct in those schools in\nEurope, are generally advanced in years, descendants from the first\nfamilies, and highly accomplished. Most, if not all of them, at an early\nperiod of life met with some disappointment or other. One perhaps\nwas the daughter of some decayed noble family, reduced by political\nrevolutions to comparative poverty, and now having nothing but the pride\nof birth, retired to a convent. She could not work, and she would not\nbeg. Another, perhaps, was disappointed in love; the companion of her\nown choice was refused to her by some unfeeling, aristocratic parent. No\nalternative was left but to unite her young person with the remains of\nsome broken-down debauchee of the nobility. She prefers going into a\nconvent with such means as she had in her own right. Another, perhaps,\nlike my young friend,--and this is the case with most of them,--was\nseduced, by some profligate priest while at school, degraded in her\nown eyes, unfitted even in her own mind to become the companion of an\nhonorable man; seeing no alternative but death or dishonor, she goes\ninto a convent. These ladies, when properly disciplined by Jesuits and\npriests, become the best teachers. But before they are allowed to teach,\nthere is no art, no craft, no species of cunning, no refinement in\nprivate personal indulgences, or no modes or means of seduction, in\nwhich they are not thoroughly initiated; and I may say with safety, and\nfrom my own personal knowledge through the confessional, that there\nis scarcely one of them who has not _been herself debauched by her\nconfessor_. The reader will understand that every nun has a confessor;\nand here I may as well add, for the truth must be told at once, that\nevery confessor has a concubine, and there are very few of them who have\nnot several. Let any American mother imagine her young daughter among\nthese semi-reverend crones, called nuns, and she will have no difficulty\nin seeing the possibility of her immediate ruin. When your daughter\ncomes among those women, they pretend to be the happiest set of beings\nupon earth. They would not exchange their situation for any other this\nside of heaven. They will pray. So do the devils. They will sing. So\nwill the devils, for aught I know. Their language, their acts, their\ngestures, their whole conduct while in presence of thee scholars, or\ntheir visitors, is irreproachable.\n\nThe mother abbess, or superior of the convent, who invariably is the\ndeepest in sin of the whole, and who, from her age and long practice, is\nalmost constitutionally a hypocrite, appears in public the most _meek_,\nthe most bland, the most courteous, and the most _humble_ Christian.\n\nShe is peculiarly attentive to those who have any money in their own\nright: she tells them they are beautiful, fascinating, that they look\nlike angels, that this world is not a fit residence for them, that they\nare too good for it, that they ought to become nuns, in order to\nfit them for a higher and better station in heaven. Nothing more is\nnecessary than to become a Roman Catholic and go to confession. Such is\nthe apparent happiness, cheerfulness, and unalloyed beatitudes of the\nnuns, that strangers are pleased with them. They invariably make a\nfavorable impression on the minds of their visitors. The inference is\nthat they must be truly pious and really virtuous.\n\nI had recently the honor of a conversation with a lady, who is herself\none of the most accomplished and elegant women in the country, and who\na few weeks previously had paid a visit to the Roman Catholic nunnery\nat--------, D. C. She spoke of the institution in the highest terms of\ncommendation and was struck with the seeming content and cheerfulness\nof the lady managers, and could scarcely see why it was not a good place\nfor the education of young ladies; but I will venture the assertion,\nthat had this interesting lady known, as I do, the heartlessness with\nwhich crime was committed within its walls, she would fly from it,\nas from a den of thieves, or a city of plague. A peculiar coldness, a\nheartlessness not to be found elsewhere, nor under other circumstances,\nexists in Jesuit convents, to which order that of---------belongs.\nNothing like it can be traced out in the records of the world's doings.\nAnd had I the talent to point it out,--could I fix it in a position, so\nas to stand out solitary and alone in its naked deformity, before\nheaven and before men,--instead of meriting the commendation of the\naccomplished mothers and daughters of our land, they would soon be left\nwithout support, and crumble to dust amid the brutalities which their\nsilent walls alone have witnessed, and would proclaim to the world, had\nnot the inanimate materials of which they are composed forbidden it.\n\nWhen crimes are committed in open day, there is some palliation for\nthem; but when committed in the dark, and in recesses ostensibly\ndedicated to virtue, they are marked with an atrocity, which God, or\nman, or woman cannot witness without shudders of horror. Such are those\ncommitted in Jesuit nunneries, and by those very Jesuit nuns who appear\nso happy, and so chaste, not only in the nunnery in--------, but in\nevery nunnery throughout the world.\n\nThis it will be said, and has often been said, even by Christian mothers\nand Christian daughters, cannot be. They suppose that a sinner can\nnever be happy, or even appear so. How little these people know of\nhuman nature! How perfectly unacquainted they are with the power of\ndiscipline, or force of education! Yet it would seem as if they should\nknow better than to conclude hastily, that because nuns are cheerful and\nhappy in appearance, they must be also chaste and virtuous. Many ol\nour American ladies have been in the East; some of them have been in\nConstantinople. I believe that one or two have visited the harem of the\nEmperor of Constantinople, and might have seen there numbers of ladies,\naccomplished in their own way, covered with crime and sin, yet cheerful\nand apparently happy. But show me the Christian lady, who ever witnessed\nthis, that will not weep at the bare mention of the fact, that will not\nsigh for the conversion of the Turk and Mahomedan, who will not mourn\nthe fate of her sisters--for sisters they are of the same family--thus\ndegraded and still content:--all the result of circumstances, education\nand want of pure religion.\n\nBut these sympathizers with Turks, Mahomedans and Pagans have not a tear\nto spare for their sisters of the United States. Not a sigh escapes them\nfor their relief. Not a dollar can they give to remove from our land\nthat accursed thing, Popery--the primary and sole cause of all those\nevils. On the contrary, if Jesuits want to build a _nunnery_, the\nhusband has no peace from his wife, the father from the daughter, the\nbrother from the sister, the lover from his betrothed, until they make\nup money to build a nunnery for the _poor nuns_. Well, indeed, may\nI apply to such individuals the language of the Jesuit Rodin, in the\nWandering Jew:--\"_Fools, dolts, double dolts_.\" But Rodin was wrong. He\nwas entirely premature in the use of these expressions; and I am not at\nall pleased with his depriving me of the opportunity of being first to\napply those sweet-sounding terms to American Protestants,--a people who\nhave done, and are still doing, more to merit them, than any other of\nthe past or present age.\n\nI find, though I have not the merit of intending it, that I am strictly\nperforming my promise to my readers, viz., that I will go entirely upon\nmy own hook, pay no attention to order, style, or to what critics may\nsay, but give them my ideas at random of things and facts, just as I saw\nthem, and precisely as they struck me at the time. This, I must confess,\nis rather a Tristramshandish mode of writing, particularly to Americans,\nwho are a most precise, systematic and business people; but it is a\nfree country, and, as the poet said, \"_Cur ego invidior si pauca querere\npossim_\" &c.\n\nBut to return to the causes which induced me to leave the Romish church.\n\nThe young lady of whom I have spoken in a previous page, was sent to\nschool, as I have stated, to a Popish nunnery. She was a Protestant when\nshe entered; so are many young ladies in this country when they enter\nsimilar schools. The nuns immediately set about her _conversion_. The\nprocess by which such things are done is sometimes slow, but always\nsure. It is often tedious, but never fails; though the knowledge\nEuropean Protestants have of such institutions, renders the process\nof conversion more tedious than in this land of freedom and Popish\nhumbuggery. The work of her conversion proceeded with the usual success,\nuntil she finally joined the Romish church. The next step, in such\ncases, is to choose a _confessor_. This is done for the young convert\nby the mother abbess of the nuns; and now commences the ruin of the soul\nand the body of the hitherto guileless, guiltless scholar, and convert\nfrom Protestant _heresy_. She goes to confession; and recollect,\nAmerican reader, that what I here state is \"_Mutata fabula de te ipso\nnarratur_.\" Every word of what I am about to state is applicable to\nyou. This confession is, literally speaking, nothing but a systematic\npreparation for her ruin. It is said that there is, among the creeping\nthings of this earth, a certain noxious and destructive animal, called\nAnaconda. It is recorded of this animal, foul, filthy and ugly as he is,\nthat when he is hungry, and seizes upon an object which he desires to\ndestroy and subsequently devour, he takes it with him carefully to his\nden, or place of retreat. There, at his ease, unseen and alone with his\nprey, he is said to cover it over with slime, and then and there swallow\nit. I now declare, most solemnly and sincerely, that after living\ntwenty-five years in full communion with the Roman Catholic church,\nand officiating as a Romish priest, hearing confessions, and confessing\nmyself, I know not another reptile in all animal nature so filthy, so\nmuch to be shunned, and loathed, and dreaded by females, both married\nand single, as a Roman Catholic priest, or bishop, who practises the\ndegrading and demoralizing office of _auricular confession_.\n\nLet me give American Protestant mothers just a twilight glance at\nthe questions which a Romish priest puts to those females, who go to\nconfession to him, and they will bear in mind that there is no poetry\nin what I say. It contains no undulations of a roving fancy; there is\nnothing dreaming, nothing imaginative about it; it is only a part of a\ndrama in which I have acted myself. I may truly say of all that occurs\nin Popish confession, \"_Quorum magna pars fui_.\"\n\n[Illustration: A young lady confessing to a priest p265]\n\nThe following is as fair a sketch as I can, with due regard to\n_decency_, give of the questions which a Romish priest puts to a young\nfemale, who goes to confession to him. It is, however, but a very brief\nsynopsis. But first let the reader figure to himself, or herself, a\nyoung lady, between the age of from twelve to twenty, on her knees, with\nher lips nearly close pressed to the cheeks of the priest, who, in all\nprobability, is not over twenty-five or thirty years old--for here it is\nworthy of remark, that these young priests are extremely zealous in the\ndischarge of their sacerdotal duties, especially in hearing confessions,\nwhich all Roman Catholics are bound to make under pain of eternal\ndamnation. When priest and penitent are placed in the above attitude,\nlet us suppose the following conversation taking place between them,\nand unless my readers are more dull of apprehension than I am willing to\nbelieve, they will have some idea of the _beauties of Popery_.\n\nConfessor. What sins have you committed?\n\nPenitent. I don't know any, sir.\n\nCon. Are you sure you did nothing wrong? Examine yourself well\n\nPen. Yes; I do recollect that I did wrong I made faces at school at\nLucy A.\n\nCon. Nothing else?\n\nPen. Yes; I told mother that I hated Lucy A. and that she was an ugly\nthing.\n\nCon. (Scarcely able to suppress a smile in finding the girl perfectly\ninnocent) Have you had any immodest thoughts?\n\nPen. What is that, sir?\n\nCon. Have you not been thinking about men?\n\nPen. Why, yes, sir.\n\nCon. Are you fond of any of them?\n\nPen. Why, yes; I like cousin A. or R. greatly.\n\nCon. Did you ever like to sleep with him?\n\nPen. Oh, no.\n\nCon. How long did these thoughts about men continue?\n\nPen. Not very long.\n\nCon. Had you these thoughts by day, or by night?\n\nPen. By----!!!!!\n\nIn this strain does this reptile confessor proceed till his now\nhalf-gained prey is filled with ideas and thoughts, to which she has\nbeen hitherto a stranger. He tells her that she must come to-morrow\nagain. She accordingly comes, and he gives another twist to the screw,\nwhich he has now firmly fixed upon the soul and body of his penitent.\nDay after day, week after week, and month after month does this hapless\ngirl come to confession, until this wretch has worked up her passions to\na tension almost snapping, and then becomes his easy prey. I cannot as\nI before stated, detail the whole process by which a Romish confessor\ndebauches his victims in the confessional, but if curiosity, or any\nother motive creates in the public mind a desire to know all the\nparticulars about it, I refer them to Antoine's Moral Theology, which I\nhave read in the college of Maynooth, or to Den's treatise,\n\"De _Peccatis_\" which I have read in the same college, and in the same\nclass with _some of the Romish priests now in this country_, hearing\nconfessions perhaps at the moment I write, and debauching their\npenitents, aye even in New England, the land of the pilgrims! In those\nbooks I have mentioned, they will find the obscene questions which are\nput by priests and bishops of the Romish church, to all women, young and\nold, married or single; and if any married man, or father, or brother,\nwill, after the perusal of these questions, allow his wife, his\ndaughter, or his sister, ever again to go to confession, I will only say\nthat his ideas of morality are more vague and loose than those of the\nheathen or the Turk. Christian he should not be called, who permits\nthese deeds in our midst. I beg here to lay before my readers an extract\nfrom a work, recently published in Paris, entitled, \"Auricular\nConfession and Direction.\" The work is written by M. Michelet, one of\nthe most distinguished writers in France. It has been noticed in the\nlast number of the Foreign Quarterly Review, and in that admirably\nconducted press, the Boston Courier.\n\nThe following is given as the mysterious opening of the book:!!!!!\n\n\"The family is in question;\n\n'That home where we would all fain repose, alter so many useless\nefforts, so many illusions destroyed.\n\n'We return home very wearied--do we find repose there?\n\n'We must not dissimulate--we must frankly confess to ourselves the real\nstate of things. There exists in the bosom of society--in the family\ncircle--a serious dissension, nay, the most serious of all dissensions.\n\n'We may talk with our mothers, our wives or our daughters, on all those\nmatters about which we talk with our acquaintances: on business, on\nthe news of the day, but not at all on matters nearest the heart, on\nreligion, on God, on the soul.\n\n'Take the instant when you would fain find yourself united with your\nfamily in one common feeling, in the repose of the evening, round the\nfamily table; there, in your home, at your own hearth, venture to utter\na word on these matters; your mother sadly shakes her head, your wife\ncontradicts you, your daughter, although silent, disapproves. They are\non one side of the table, you on the other, alone.\n\n'It would seem as if in the midst of them, opposite to you, sat an\ninvisible man to contradict what you say.'\n\n\"The invisible enemy here spoken of, is the priest. The reviewer\nproceeds!!!!!\n\n'The priest, as confessor, possesses the secret of a woman's soul; he\nknows every half-formed hope, every dim desire, every thwarted feeling.\nThe priest, as spiritual director, animates that woman with his own\nideas, moves her with his own will, fashions her according to his own\nfancy. And this priest is doomed to celibacy. He is a man, but is bound\nto pluck from his heart the feelings of a man. If he is without faith,\nhe makes desperate use of his power over those confiding in him. If he\nis sincerely devout, he has to struggle with his passions, and there\nis a perilous chance of his being defeated in that struggle. And even\nshould he come off victorious, still the mischief done is incalculable\nand irreparable. The woman's virtue has been preserved by an accident,\nby a power extraneous to herself. She was wax in her spiritual\ndirector's hands; she has ceased to be a _person_, and is become a\n_thing_.'\n\n\"There is something diabolical in the institution of celibacy\naccompanying confession. Paul Louis Courrier has painted a fearful\npicture of the priest's position as an unmarried confessor; and as\nCourrier's works are far less read than they deserve to be, we make no\nscruple of transferring his powerful sentences to our pages.\n\n'What a life, what a condition is that of our priests'? Love is\nforbidden them, marriage especially; women are given up to them. They\nmay not have one of their own, and yet live familiarly with all, nay, in\nthe confidential, intimate privity of their hidden actions, of all their\nthoughts. An innocent girl first hears the priest under her mother's\nwing; he then calls her to him, speaks alone with her, and is the first\nto talk of sin to her, before she can have known it. When instructed,\nshe marries; when married, he still confesses and governs her. He has\npreceded the husband in her affections, and will always maintain himself\nin them. What she would not venture to confide to her mother, or confess\nto her husband, he, a priest, must know it, asks it, hears it, and yet\nshall not be her lover. How could he, indeed? is he not _tonsured?_\nHe hears whispered in his ear, by a young woman, her faults, passions,\ndesires, weaknesses, receives her sighs without feeling agitated, and he\nis five-and-twenty!\n\n'To confess a woman! imagine what that is. At the end of the church a\nspecies of closet or sentry-box is erected against the wall, where the\npriest awaits in the evening, after vespers, his young penitent whom\nhe loves, and who knows it; love cannot be concealed from the beloved\nperson. You will stop me there: his character of priest, his education,\nhis vow.... I reply that there is no vow which holds good, that every\nvillage _cure_ just come from the seminary, healthy, robust, and\nvigorous, doubtless loves one of his parishioners. It cannot be\notherwise; and if you contest this, I will say more still, and that is,\nthat he loves them _all_, those at least of his own age; out he prefers\none, who appears to him, if not more beautiful than the others, more\nmodest and wiser, and whom he would marry; he would make her a virtuous,\npious wife, if it were not for the Pope. He sees her daily, and meets\nher at church or elsewhere, and sitting opposite her in the winter\nevenings, he imbibes, imprudent man! the poison of her eyes!\n\n'Now, I ask you, when he hears that one coming the next day, and\napproaching the confessional, and when he recognizes her footsteps, and\ncan say, 'It is she;' what is passing in the mind of the poor confessor?\nHonesty, duty, wise resolutions, are here of little use, without\npeculiarly heavenly grace. I will suppose him a saint: unable to fly, he\napparently groans, sighs, recommends himself to God; but if he is only a\nman, he shudders, desires, and already unwillingly, without knowing it,\nperhaps, he hopes. She arrives, kneels down at his knees, before him\nwhose heart leaps and palpitates. You are young, sir, or you have been\nso; between ourselves, what do you think of such a situation? Alone\nmost of the time, and having these walls, these vaulted roofs, as sole\nwitnesses, they talk; of what? alas! of all that is not innocent They\ntalk, or rather murmur, in low voice, and their lips approach each\nother, and their breaths mingle. This lasts for an hour or more, and is\noften renewed.\n\n'Do not think I invent. This scene takes place such as I describe it; is\nrenewed daily by forty thousand young priests, with as many young girls\nwhom they love, because they are men, whom they confess in this manner,\nentirely _tete-a-tete_, and visit, because they are priests, and whom\nthey do not marry, because the Pope is opposed to it.'\n\n*****\n\n\"The priest has the spiritual care of her he loves; her soul is in his\nhands. He is connected with her by the most sacred ties; his interest in\nher he disguises to himself under the cloak of spiritual anxiety. He\ncan always quiet the voice of conscience by an equivoque. The mystic\nlanguage of love is also the mystic language of religion, and what guilt\nis shrouded under this equivoque, the history of priestcraft may show.\n_Parler l'amour c'est faire l'amour_, is a profound truth. From the love\nof God, it is easy to descend to the love of man; especially when this\nman is a priest, that is to say, a mediator between the woman and God,\none who says, 'God hears you through me; through me he will reply.'\nThis man whom she has seen at the altar, and there invested with all the\nsacred robes and sacred associations of his office; whom she has visited\nin the confessional, and there laid bare her soul to him; whose visits\nshe has received in her _boudoir_, and there submitted to his direction;\nthis man, whom she worships, is supposed to be an idea, a priest; no one\nsupposing him to be a man, with a man's passions!\n\n\"M. Michelet's book contains the proofs of what I have just said; but\nthey are too numerous to quote. I shall only borrow from his work the\npassages he gives from an unexceptionable authority, Llorente.\"\n\n'Llorente, a contemporary, relates (t. hi., ch. 28. article 2, ed. 1817)\nthat when he was secretary to the Inquisition, a capuchin was brought\nbefore that tribunal, who directed a community of _beguines_, and\nhad seduced nearly all of them, by persuading them that they were not\nleaving the road to perfection. He told each of them in the confessional\nthat he had received from God a singular favor: \"Our Lord,\" he said,\n\"has deigned to show himself to me in the Sacrament, and has said to me,\nAlmost all the souls that thou dost direct here are pleasing to me, but\nespecially such a one, (_the capuchin named her to whom he spoke_.)\nShe is already so perfect, that she has conquered every passion, except\ncarnal desire, which torments her very much. Therefore, wishing virtue\nto have its reward, and that she should serve me tranquilly, I charge\nthee to give her a dispensation, but only to be made use of with thee;\nshe need speak of it to no confessor; that would be useless, as with\nsuch a dispensation she cannot sin.\" Out of seventeen _beguines_,\nof which the community was composed, the intrepid capuchin gave the\ndispensation to thirteen, who were discreet for some length of time; one\nof them, however, fell ill, expected to die, and discovered everything,\ndeclaring that she had never been able to believe in the dispensation,\nbut that she had profited by it.\n\n'I remember,' said Llorente, 'having said to him: \"But, father, is it\nnot astonishing that this singular virtue should have belonged exactly\nto the thirteen young and handsome ones, and not at all to the other\nfour, who were ugly or old?\" He coolly replied, \"The Holy Spirit\ninspires where it listeth.\"\n\n'The same author, in the same chapter, while reproaching the Protestants\nwith having exaggerated the corruption of confessors, avows that,\n\"In the sixteenth century, the Inquisition had imposed on women the\nobligation of denouncing guilty confessors, but the denunciations\nwere so numerous, that the penitents were declared dispensed from\ndenouncing.\"'\n\nI should not have laid the above extract before the public, were I not\nwell aware that such is the extraordinary infatuation of Americans\non the subject of Popery and confession, that they may suspect my\nstatements of exaggeration. This alone could induce me to give more\nthan my own assertion for the truth of my statements, as no writer\nupon Popery knows more, or can relate more of _Auricular Confession\nand Direction_, than I can myself, of my own knowledge, and from my own\npersonal experience. I shall not, however, ask American Protestants\nto take my naked word for anything which I may say on Popery. I shall\nsubstantiate all I assert by proofs from history.\n\nThe title of Christian land should not be given to this country, nor to\nany country, which legalizes institutions where deeds of darkness are\nsanctioned, and the foul debauchers of our youth, of our wives and our\nsisters, find a shelter.\n\nShall the cowl shelter the adulterous monk in this land of freedom?\nAre the sons of freemen required to countenance, nay, asked to build\nimpassable walls around a licentious, lecherous, profligate horde of\nforeign monks and priests, who choose to come among us, and erect little\n_fortifications_, which they call nunneries, for their protection? Shall\nthey own by law and by charter places where to bury, hidden from the\npublic eye, the victims of their lust, and the murdered offspring of\ntheir concupiscence? Beware, Americans! There are bounds, beyond which\nsinners cannot go. Bear in mind the fact that the same God who can limit\nthe sphere of an individual's crimes, can also limit those of a nation.\nYou have flourished. Take heed lest you begin to decay before you come\nto full maturity; and I regret to say, that symptoms of this are now\napparent. Already can I see the hectic flush of moral consumption upon\nthe fair face of America. Already can I see a demon bird of ill omen\nplunging its poisoned beak into the very vitals of your national\nexistence, stopping here, and stopping there only to dip his wings\nin the life streams of your national existence, with the sole view of\ngiving its spread more momentum, until it encompasses the whole length\nand breadth, centre and circumference of your country.\n\nInfidelity is now fast careering and sporting over the whole face of\nour land, and if history has not deceived us, and our own personal\nexperience has not been vain, it never moves, it never travels, it\nnever exists, unaccompanied by political as well as moral death. Look at\nancient Rome, how it fell in its pride! Look at France--how often it\nhas tottered and stumbled in its beauty! Look at England at the present\nmoment,--see how she trembles even in her strength. Think you that all\nthese things were brought about by the causes to which the world would\nattribute them? What signifies the Texas question in the sight of God?\nWhat the Oregon difficulties? what the trade with China? what the repeal\nbrawlings? Such things would have happened if our \"mother's cat had but\nkittened, and we ourselves had ne'er been born.\"\n\nThe decay of nations, the fall of thrones, are brought about by\ninfidelity, by national insults to the God of nations, by the sins of\nthe people against the King of glory; and how can this country, deeply\nsteeped as it is, and darkly stained as it is, with the crime of aiding\nPopery, idolatry, and auricular confession; how can it expect, I repeat\nthe words, that the moral breezes of heaven should breathe upon her,\nand restore to her again that strong and healthy constitution, which her\nancestors have left to her sons? No, no. It cannot be. You must, as the\nlawyers would say, stand \"rectus in _curia_,\" before your God. Withdraw\nyour countenance and your support from Popery. Touch not the unclean\nthing. Then, and not until then, can you raise clean hands and pure\nhearts to the throne of God, and ask for a blessing upon the United\nStates and its territories.\n\nBut it may be replied, all you say of Popery in the _old_ countries may\nbe true, but it is a different thing altogether in the United States.\nThis is a great error on the part of Americans, and I feel it my duty\nto correct it if possible. I am not surprised that, Americans should\nentertain ideas of this kind. I was once partly of that opinion myself,\nand, as I stated in a former page, I determined to visit this new and\nfree country, in the hope--alas! it was a vain one--of finding true\nreligion, and purity of life, even in the Roman Catholic church. I\nremember well, having consulted a friend on the propriety of such a\ncourse, he strongly dissuaded me from it, assuring me that I would\nfind Popery here essentially the same that it was in Europe, with\nthis difference only, that the crimes and private lives of priests\nand bishops were more grossly immoral, and, though indirectly, more\neffectually sanctioned by the laws of the land. This, however, did not\nsatisfy me, and accordingly, having received from my then ecclesiastical\nsuperior, what in church parlance is called _an Exeat_, (the document\nis in my possession, if any one wishes to see it,) or, as American\ntheologians would term it, \"a regular dismission\" from the church where\nI officiated, I arrived in New York, in Nov., 18----. But the reader may\nwell judge of my disappointment, when I found, on my arrival there, not\naltogether such Romish priests and bishops as I had left behind me,--for\nmany of them were gentlemen by birth, and paid some regard to public\ndecency, even in their profligacies; but a set of coarse, vulgar, half\neducated, I may say, half civilized, Irish and French brutes, most of\nwhom might be seen daily lolling in grog-shops, and electioneering among\nthe lowest dregs of society. I have met but one exception to this, and\nthat was the Reverend Wm. Taylor, who was then in New York.\n\nHaving stated to Taylor my object in coming over, I shall never forget\nthe sad and sorrowful smile which but dimly lit up his naturally kind\nand cheerful countenance. \"My friend,\" said he, \"all your hopes in\ncoming to this country will be disappointed. You must not stay in this\ncity. Go into the country. Go to Albany; you may there see less of those\nscenes from which you have fled; and as I perceive your introductions\nfrom Europe to De Witt Clinton, are numerous and of the best kind, you\nwill find much pleasure in the society of that excellent gentleman, and\nmake up your mind either to leave this country, or to retire from the\nRomish church altogether. The latter I will do myself, but not without\nan effort to correct the abuses of Popery.\" This effort he has made, as\nI have stated in my _Synopsis of Popery, as it was and as it is_; but he\nlacked moral as well as physical courage to carry it through.\n\nI lost no time in retiring to Albany. The legislature of the State of\nNew York was then commencing its annual session, and though an entire\nstranger, so high were my testimonials, both from the Romish bishops,\nas a priest, and from private individuals, as a man of honor and correct\ndeportment, that I was unanimously elected chaplain to the legislature,\nwithout any application on my part for such an appointment. I will not\nallude to the flattering attentions which were paid to me by the people\nof Albany, during my residence among them, which was only about six\nmonths. The public presses in that city, while I was there, bear\nwitness to the fact. Even the Roman Catholics, some of whom were native\nAmericans, left nothing undone to render me happy. My salary was more\nthan I desired, and more than I wanted of them. As a body, I have no\ncomplaint to make against them, so far as money was concerned. Why then,\nit will be said, did you leave them? This too is a sad tale. But, as\nsome of them are now living, justice even to them demands that I should\nstate the cause which forced me to leave them.\n\nThe Roman Catholics of Albany had, during about two years previous to\nmy arrival among them, three Irish priests alternately with them,\noccasionally preaching, but always hearing confessions. I know the names\nof these men; one of them is dead, the other two living, and now in\nfull communion in the Roman church, still saying mass and hearing\nconfessions. As soon as I got settled in Albany, I had of course to\nattend to the duty of _auricular confession_, and in less than two\nmonths found that those three priests, during the time they were there,\nwere the fathers of between sixty and one hundred children, besides\nhaving debauched many who had left the place previous to their\nconfinement. Many of these children were by married women, who were\namong the most zealous supporters of those vagabond priests, and whose\nbrothers and relatives were ready to wade, if necessary, knee deep in\nblood for the holy, _immaculate infallible church of Rome_. There is\na circumstance connected with this, that renders the conduct of these\npriests almost frightfully atrocious. There are in many of the Roman\nCatholic churches, things, as Michelet properly calls them, like\nsentry-boxes, called confessionals. These are generally situated in the\nbody of the church, and priests hear confessions in them, though the\npriest and lady penitent are only separated by a sliding board, which\ncan be moved in any direction the confessor pleases, leaving him and the\npenitent ear to ear, breath to breath, eye to eye, and lip to lip, if\nhe pleases. There were none of these in the Romish church of Albany, and\nthose priests had to hear confessions in the _sacristy_ of the church.\nThis is a small room back of the altar, in which the Eucharist,\ncontaining, according to the Romish belief, the real body and blood of\nJesus Christ, is kept, while mass is not celebrating in the chapel. This\nroom is always fastened by a lock and key of the best workmanship, and\nthe key kept by the priest day and night. This sacristy, containing\nthe wafer, which the priests blasphemously adore, was used by them as a\nplace to hear confessions, and here they committed habitually those acts\nof immorality and crime of which I have spoken.\n\nThese details must be unpleasant to the reader; but not more so than\nthey are to me. I see not, however, any other mode in which I can give\nAmericans anything like a correct idea of that state of society which\nmust be expected in this country, should the period ever arrive when\nPopery and Popish priests shall be in the ascendant. There are portions\nof Europe, and of South America, where parents well know that the\nchildren, who take their name, whom they are obliged to support,\nare only their legalized, but not their legitimate offspring; but so\nentirely brutalized are their feelings and notions of morality by the\npredominance of Popery among them, that these things are considered\nmatters of little moment. I saw an instance of this very recently at\na place called Hailappa, in Mexico. I met there a gentleman, a man of\nwealth, some distinction, and one who had travelled a good deal. Knowing\nthat I intended leaving the place next day, he said he would introduce\nme to two Dominican friars, who were going to Vera Cruz, and were\nto travel in the same stage with me. In the course of conversation I\nobserved to him, that the reputation of Dominican friars and Jesuits for\nmorality, was not good in some parts of Europe which I had visited, and\nI wished very much to know how it stood in Mexico. He frankly replied,\nin very good Latin,--a language more familiar to me than the Spanish, or\nperhaps any other,--\"they are not considered as a body very moral men in\nMexico, but these reverend gentlemen to whom I will introduce you, bear\na high character for morality. They do not trouble their neighbors'\nwives and daughters; they have for years kept their _female friends_,\nand provided for their children.\" \"Are they married, sir?\" said I;\nthough I of course knew the reverse from the fact of their being\npriests. \"Oh no, sir,\" replied my Mexican acquaintance; \"our _holy\nchurch_ does not allow that, but they are _chaste_ men.\" \"What do you\nmean by chastity?\" said I. \"Living an _unmarried_ life,\" answered\nhe promptly. In the course of that evening, I met with a respectable\nAmerican citizen, a native of New Jersey; I asked him whether he knew\nthese priests, naming them. He told me he did; that one of them kept\n_three sisters_, the eldest not over twenty-five years old, and that _he\nhad children by each of them_, but was still reputed a good priest, and\nwas, as far as he could discover, one of the best of them. The next day\nI obtained an introduction to these worthies, and travelled with them to\nVera Cruz. They were dressed in their appropriate garb of sanctity,\nthe crown of their heads being shaved close, and bearing marks of\nsanctimoniousness. It is well known that in the city of Mexico, and\nthroughout that sham republic, Romish priests live habitually and\npublicly with the mother and daughter at the same time.\n\nThese are the men, and their code of moral law is that which Americans\nare fostering and encouraging, by contributing their money to the\nbuilding of convents and Romish chapels throughout the United States.\n\nPrevious to my leaving Albany, many overtures were made to me by Roman\nCatholics to continue among them; but I peremptorily declined. The\nreader may well imagine the awkwardness of my position, and state of\nmy feelings on this occasion. I could give the people no reason for my\nleaving them; my lips were sealed, my hands were bound, my voice was\nsilent. I saw many worthy families on the brink of ruin, and I could not\nput forth a hand to save them. I saw their children almost in the jaws\nof the lion, but I dared not warn them of their danger. I saw their\nfoes, in the garb of friends and moral guides, leading them into the\nrecesses of guilt and crime, and I dared not utter a warning cry. I knew\nall in the _confessional_, and of course I was silent. The only resource\nleft me was to leave these scenes, where the occurrences which I have\nstated had taken place; and I accordingly decided to make another trial\nof Popery, by proceeding on to Philadelphia, a city which, at that\ntime, was preeminently distinguished for the virtues and morality of its\npeople.\n\nI expected that in a community so remarkably distinguished for the\nobservance of all law, human and divine, as the city of Penn was, that\neven Papist priests and Jesuits might, at least, observe the externals\nof correct deportment; and, full of better hopes and brighter\nprospects, I hastened among them, and was received with a cordiality and\nhospitality truly flattering. Fortunately for this people, they had no\nbishop for some time previous to my arrival. The diocese was under the\nsuperintendence of a Vicar-general, a Jesuit, I think from Switzerland,\nnamed De Barth. This reverend gentleman had been settled in the interior\nof the State; and having there a _housekeeper and some nieces_, to whom\nhe was _attached_, he visited the city of Philadelphia but seldom; owing\nto this circumstance, and to the fact that three or four friars and one\nIrish curate, who was in the city, had their own way in everything, the\nPopish congregation was comparatively quiet. American Protestants knew\nnothing of their private lives, knew nothing of the plans and schemes\nwhich they were laying to entrap their children, by suppressing the\nreading of the Bible, to perpetuate amongst them the seeds of moral\ndeath. Here, at least, I expected to find Popery as I fancied it\nbefore I was ordained a priest. Notwithstanding what I had witnessed\nimmediately after my ordination in Europe; and though the death-knell,\nwhich announced the departure to the grave of a young and virtuous\nfriend, had scarcely ceased to reverberate in my ears; though the\nknowledge that a human soul was launched into eternity by Jesuit lust\nand poison, and that within the walls of a nunnery, was yet fresh in\nmy mind; though all that occurred in Albany, under my own eye, and\nwitnessed by the testimony of my own senses, the one twentieth of which\nI have not even alluded to; I still expected that I might find Popery\nwhat my early education represented to me, or, at least, that I might\ncontribute to render it so, in this free country, by casting to the\nwinds the legends and silly traditions of the Romish holy fathers, and\nsubstituting in their place the Word of God.\n\nI little thought that there lived a Romish priest or bishop, who, in a\nland of free thought and noble deeds, such as this was then, would dare\nprohibit the circulation of the Word of God. I little dreamed that the\nfirst opposition I should meet in my efforts to circulate the Bible\nshould be in Philadelphia. Who could even fancy that Papists were\nso devoid of prudence, or so utterly reckless of consequences, as to\nproclaim, in the city of Penn, we will have no Bible? Though I knew well\nthat Popery boasts of being always the same, that it never changes, I\nalso knew that the _infallible church_ always yielded to _expediency_;\nand I thought, as a matter of course, ===that Americans were too\ncourageous, and too virtuous a people, to permit Papists to proceed\nso far, at that early period of American history, as to close up the\nfountain and the source even of their political existence as a nation,\nand consequently that I should meet with no opposition from Papists\nin any effort which might bear upon the face of it any evidence of my\nintention to advance the cause of morals. But I was mistaken. Americans\nwere not then free. They are, not free now. They had, it is true,\nshaken off the yoke of foreign dominion, but even then they were tamely\nharnessing themselves in stronger chains to a heavier yoke; even then\nthey were passively submitting to the dictation of Rome, and to the\ninsolent bravado of Irish priests and bishops. I repeat it; they were\nnot free then. They made their country free, as we are told by history,\nbut it was not for themselves they made it free. It was done for\nforeigners; it was done for Papists, for Jesuits, for Dominicans, and\ntheir courtesans, Popish nuns. The day is not far distant,--I may not\nlive to see it, nor do I desire to witness it,--when some historian may\nwell apply to Americans that sentence in Virgil, which that beautiful\npastoral poet applied to the yoked oxen: \"_Sic vos non vobis jujum\nferatis boves_\" Well indeed may this be applied to Americans; they have\nborne the yoke, they have toiled with it upon their necks in cultivating\ntheir fair fields of freedom, but, like the poet's oxen, the crop is not\ntheirs. It belongs to foreign Papists and their _lord_, the Pope, King\nof Rome. Nor should I be in the least surprised, if, in less than\nthirty years, that thing called the Host, made of flour and water, and\nconverted, by the mumbling of a few Latin words by a priest, into the\nGod of glory, should be conveyed through that city, under a canopy of\nsatin, supported by Popish priests, and guarded by a file of Popish\ndragoons, preceded by a trumpeter, announcing its approach, in order\nthat the populace may uncover their heads, and fall upon their knees to\nadore this god of Popish manufacture. Base idolatry! And history will\nsay of Protestant Americans,--Base people, to tolerate such profanations\namong you!\n\nBut, on reflection, why blame Americans? They knew little or nothing of\nPopery, except from history, and, in some histories, the picture given\nhad two sides to it. One was fair and seductive; the other was stern and\ntrue. The former was exhibited with industry and care. It was sought for\nand gazed at with pleasure. The latter had comparatively but few worldly\nattractions, had no admirers but the votaries of truth, and, alas!\nthey were but few. Under these circumstances, how were Americans to be\nblamed? Knowing them well, I cannot become their accuser, but I can,\nwithout any disrespect towards them, pity them, and mourn over the\ndelusion under which they labor, even though that delusion should be in\npart well earned.\n\nHow, for instance, could it be expected that American Protestants should\nbelieve what is related of the capuchin friar by Michelet, whom I have\nquoted in one of the preceding pages? Can an American Protestant suppose\nit possible that a Romish priest could _persuade all the nuns_ in\na convent that he had a revelation from God, commissioning him,\nespecially, to tell those nuns individually, that it was their duty to\nhave a criminal connexion with himself, under pain of eternal damnation?\nSuch a thing would only excite the risible faculties of an American\nProtestant; even the male portion of Roman Catholics will not believe\nsuch a thing possible. There was a period when I would not believe\nit myself, and when the idea of a Popish priest seducing a nun, or\nadministering poison to get possession of a man's wife, or his daughter,\nor his property, was impossible, though history informed me of such\nthings being done in the Romish church; and, had I not become a Roman\nCatholic priest, and been myself a confessor, I should, until this day,\nturn a deaf ear to the relation of such facts. I should look upon Popish\npriests and bishops, who were charged with them, as persecuted men,\nand probably extend to them that sympathy and support, which Protestant\nAmericans are now doing throughout this country.\n\nWere any one to come to me before I was a Romish priest and confessor,\nand tell me that the Protestant young lady to whom I have so often\nalluded, should go to a school kept by Popish nuns,--that they would\nconvert her from the religion of her birth, make her a Papist, cause her\nto go to confession,--that the confessor would seduce her, and that\nthe superior mother abbess would cause her death in trying to procure\nabortion,--I would not have believed him. I should have looked upon\nhim as some fanatic, or some evil-disposed person, actuated by malice\nagainst Romish priests and nunneries; but after becoming a priest\nmyself, and a confessor, I not only believed such a thing possible, but\nwitnessed it. And though I could weep, I could not prevent it, such was\nthe nature of my sacerdotal oath of secresy; such were my obligations to\nsupport the Pope and the honor of his _infallible church_.\n\nPoisoning is a practice of ancient date in the Romish church: and I tell\nyou, Americans, it is still in full force, and you will taste of its\nfruits before you are aware of it. Let me give you a well authenticated\ninstance of this. It is related in the fifth volume of Sanuto,\nan eminent Popish writer. Pope Alexander the Sixth, _graciously_\ncondescended to inform one of his cardinals, Adrian de Corneto, that\nhe intended to visit him at his vineyard, and that he, the Pope, would\nbring his supper with him. The cardinal, being himself a priest and a\nconfessor, suspected that the _holy Pope_ intended to poison him, with\na view of possessing his fortunes and a lovely _sister_ of his. The\ncardinal's fortune was great, and the lady in question was beautiful. He\nwell knew his fate, unless something could be done to avert it, and he\nknew of but one way of doing that. He sent for the Pope's carver, and\nprevailed upon him to accept and keep, \"for his sake,\" ten thousand\nducats, with large sums beside, which he had not then in cash, but which\nhe would have in a short time. \"You know,\" said the cardinal to the\ncarver, \"that the Pope has _compassed_ my death by poison at your hand,\nwherefore, I beseech you, have pity on me, and spare my life.\" The\ncarver, yielding to compassion, promised to save him, and explained the\nmode in which the _holy Pope_, the vicegerent of the Lord of Heaven,\nand, as some Catholics will have it, not only the infallible, but even\nthe impeccable head of the church, intended to put him to death.\n\nThe carver was instructed by the Pope, to have two boxes of lozenge\nconfectionary prepared, and to present one to himself and the other\nto the cardinal. That to the cardinal was to contain poison. His\n_holiness_, the Pope, according to engagement, came to sup with the\ncardinal at his vineyard, but matters being arranged between the carver\nand the latter, the poison which the Pope intended for the cardinal was\ngiven to himself; he was taken sick and died. This occurrence, which\ntook place centuries ago, though it may appear incredible to many\nreaders of this book, is as well authenticated by history, and is as\ndemonstrable therefrom, as it will be in some future generation,\nthat such a city as Boston, where this book is written, had ever an\nexistence. But it will be said, that such things might have existed in\nancient times; that popes might have poisoned cardinals; that cardinals\nmight have poisoned popes, and that popes might have poisonfed each\nother; that priests might have seduced their _penitents_, and then\ncaused them to be poisoned, to save the honor of the _holy church_;\nbut that no such thing has ever occurred in these United States. Fatal\ndelusion, this; and thrice fatal will its consequences be to you,\nAmerican Protestants, as well as American Catholics, if you do not give\near to my statements, and full credit to my word and warning, when I\ntell you that such an event has taken place in the city of Philadelphia,\nto my own personal knowledge; and that the reverend wretch, who seduced,\nand subsequently caused to be poisoned, an innocent and virtuous orphan\ndaughter of a worthy American citizen, was a few months ago, and is now,\nfor aught I know, officiating as a Romish priest and confessor in the\ncity of Dublin, Ireland.\n\nNo wonder, I repeat it, that American Protestants should not believe\nthese things. No wonder that Americans who have joined the Popish\nchurch, should not believe them. No wonder that some honorable and\nhigh-minded young men in the United States, who have been decoyed by the\nsophistry, apparent sanctity and _liberality_ of Romish priests, from\nthe faith of their Protestant forefathers, should disbelieve those\nthings, and feel indignant against all who advance such accusations.\nBut let them pause. Let them not be too precipitate in judging of the\nmotives of others. Some of these young men, like myself, in the days of\nmy youth, may take it into their heads to become Romish priests, and, I\nunderstand that, even now, there are several of them in Rome preparing\nto do so. Let them proceed. They will soon find, as I did, that such\nfacts as I here relate, horrible and revolting as they seem, are matters\nof daily occurrence in the Church of Rome.\n\nDuring every vicissitude in the history of the Popish church; during\nevery fluctuation, and every rise and fall of successive popes; during\nall the metamorphoses and changes that took place in their lives, and\nsuccessive pretensions to power, their iniquitous practices were never\nabandoned. Let us raise the veil which hides the past from our eye;\nwe shall find, if we do not permit ourselves to be misled by faithless\nhistorians, that the only thing in which they never differed, was the\nsanctioning of the crimes of plunder and rapacity for the aggrandizement\nof the power of Rome, and that murder, rape, and even incest, lost\ntheir atrocity when committed by priests and bishops of the _infallible\nchurch_, who are her sworn and devoted supporters.\n\nThe power of the popes has often been shaken, yet they have stood every\nshock. Their system of policy is such, that they have kept and are\nkeeping the nations of the earth engaged in some civil or ecclesiastical\nbroils among each other, and thus divert their attention from the\nstealthy march of Papal power amongst them; and while nations are thus\nengaged, they are enveloping the people in ignorance and darkness, so as\nto blind them to their own atrocities and crimes.\n\nThis country is now a fair field for Popish manoeuvring. Rome has\nseen this for the last twenty years, and has made her preparations\naccordingly. While this new country was busy in forming her alliances\nabroad, regulating her commerce, and making her treaties with foreign\npowers; while she was dividing her states, settling her domestic\nterritorial disputes, regulating their laws, and defining their\nboundaries; Rome was awake,--her spies were amongst you. They walked\ncarefully round the citadel of your freedom; they saw that it was\nnot sufficiently manned, that it was accessible from many points, and\naccordingly, they poured into it platoon after platoon, regiment after\nregiment, of the Pope's troops, until they had sufficient force to take\npossession whenever they deemed it necessary and they now tell Americans\nthat the Pope is their legitimate sovereign, and that Americans are\nbut the \"cowardly sons of cowardly pirates.\" They even go further; they\nperpetrate the grossest outrages upon every law, moral and civil, in\nutter defiance of American jurisprudence. They keep their _nunneries_,\nor rather seraglios, in the very midst of them, surround them with\nramparts, and not only deny to their civil magistrates the right of\nentrance, but defy them to do so. This every American citizen knows\nto be a fact; at least, it is known in the city of Boston, where I now\nwrite. No one was admitted within the walls of the Ursuline convent,\nwhich an indignant populace reduced to ashes, without special permission\nfrom the mother abbess,--allowing the nuns within to assume the\nappearance of decency and propriety before they showed themselves,\nhowever flagrant their conduct might have been. Time was given to them\nand to the priests to assume their usual sanctimoni-appearance; but then\nall the cells were never seen at the same time. Many were reserved\nfor hidden and criminal purposes, and when some of those nuns were\napparently cheerful and happy, leaving on the visitor's mind an\nimpression that nothing but happiness reigned throughout the whole\nnunnery, there were probably some of them, unseen and unheard by\nstrangers, writhing in the agonies of childbirth. This is no fancy\nsketch. Read Llorenti's History of the Inquisition, and you will find\nthat the picture I give is far short of the reality. Such was the\nprofligacy of friars and nuns, as Llorenti informs us, in the fifteenth\ncentury, that the Pope, from very shame, had to take notice of it. He\nhad to invest the inquisition with special power to take cognizance of\nthe matter. The inquisitors, in obedience to orders from their sovereign\nPope, entered immediately upon the discharge of their duties. They\nissued, through their immediate superior, a general order, commanding\nall women, nuns and lay sisters, married women and single women, without\nregard to age, station in life, or any other circumstance, to appear\nbefore them and give information, if any they had, against all priests,\nJesuits, monks, friars and confessors.\n\nThe Pope was not fully aware of what he did, when he granted the\naforesaid power to the inquisition. He supposed that the licentiousness\nof his priests did not extend beyond women of ill fame; but in this his\n_holiness_ was mistaken, as he subsequently discovered. All were obliged\nto obey the summons of the inquisition. Disobedience was heresy--it\nwas death. The number who made their appearance, to lodge information\nagainst the priests and confessors, in the single city of Seville,\nin Spain, was so great that the taking of depositions occupied twenty\nnotaries for thirty days. The inquisitors, worn out with fatigue,\ndetermined on taking a recess, and having done so, they reassembled\nand devoted thirty days more to the same purpose; but the depositions\ncontinued to increase so fast, that they saw no use in continuing them,\nand they finally resolved to adjourn and quash the inquiry. The city of\nSeville was found to be one vast area of pollution. But Americans will\nstill say, this occurred in the fifteenth century; no such thing can\ntake place now. The whole social system is different now from what it\nwas then. I tell you again, Americans, that you are mistaken in your\ninference. Priests, nuns and confessors are the same now that they were\nthen, all over the world. Many of you have visited Paris, and do you not\nthere see, at the present day, a _lying-in hospital_ attached to every\nnunnery in the city? The same is to be seen in Madrid, and the principal\ncities of Spain. I have seen them myself in Mexico, and in the city\nof Dublin, Ireland. And what is the object of those hospitals? It is\nchiefly to provide for the illicit offspring of priests and nuns, and\nsuch other unmarried females as the priests can seduce through the\nconfessional. But it will be said, there are no lying-in hospitals\nattached to nunneries in this country. True, there are not; but I say,\nof my own knowledge and from my own experience through the confessional,\nthat it would be well if there were; there would be fewer abortions,\nthere would be fewer infants strangled and murdered. It is not generally\nknown to Americans, that the crime of procuring abortion,--a crime which\nour laws pronounce to be felony,--is a common every-day crime in Popish\nnunneries. It is not known to Americans,--but let it henceforward be\nknown to them,--that strangling and putting to death infants, is common\nin nunneries throughout this country. It is not known that this is done\nsystematically and methodically, according to Popish instructions. The\n_modus operandi_ is this. The _infallible church_ teaches that without\nbaptism even infants cannot go to heaven. The holy church, not caring\nmuch now the aforesaid infants may come into this world, but anxious\nthat they should go from it according to the ritual of the church,\ninsists that the infant shall be baptized. This being done, and its soul\nbeing thus fitted for heaven, the mother abbess gently takes between\nher holy fingers the nostrils of the infant, and in the name of the\ninfallible church consigns it to the care of the Almighty; and I beg\nhere to state, from my own knowledge through the confessional, that the\nfather is, in nearly all cases, the individual who baptizes it; thus\nliterally verifying what Erasmus has said in sheer irony,--\"_Patres\nvacantur et Sepe sunt_.\" I desire to assert nothing, of a character so\nfrightful and disgusting as this, on my own unsupported authority. I\ncould give numberless instances of the truth of my assertions, but let\none suffice.\n\n[Illustration: The Mother Abess Strangling the Infant p295]\n\nLlorenti, in his History of the Inquisition,--and the reader will\nbear in mind, that Llorenti is good authority with all Roman\nCatholics,--relates the following fact. There was among the Carmelite\nnuns of Lerma, a mother abbess, called mother Agueda. (All the nunneries\nin the United States have a mother abbess, like the nuns of Lerma.)\nAgueda was accounted a saint. People came to her, from all the\nneighboring country, to be cured of their respective diseases. Her mode\nof curing all diseases was this. She had in her possession a number of\nsmall stones, of which she said she was delivered, in all the pains of\nchildbirth. She was delivered of them periodically, for the space of\ntwenty years, according to her own statement and that of her biographer,\nand by the application of those stones to any diseased person, he was\nforthwith cured. Rumor, however, got abroad that the _mother abbess_\n\"was no better than she ought to be,\" and that, in place of bringing\nforth stones, she and the other nuns of the convent were bringing forth\nchildren for the friars of the Carmelite order, who arranged all her\nmiracles for her, and enabled her for twenty-years to impose upon\nthe public, as the lady prioress of a nunnery and fashionable\nboarding-school. Whenever she was _confined_ and delivered of a child,\nthe _holy nuns_ strangled it and buried it. All the other nuns did\nlikewise, and probably would have continued to do so to this day,\nthrough their successors in office, had not a niece of the mother abbess\nand _saint_, in a moment of anger, arising from maltreatment, let\nfall some observations which excited the suspicions of the public\nauthorities. The burying-ground of the nuns was examined, the spot where\nthe strangled infants were buried was pointed out by the niece of the\nmother abbess, and the bodies found.\n\nThis fact is as well authenticated, as that such a place as Lerma has\nhad existence, or that such a wretch as Mother Agueda has ever been\nborn; and I will hazard the assertion, that if the burying-grounds of\nthe nunneries in the United States were dug open, hundreds of the bodies\nof strangled infants, the offspring of nuns and Popish priests, may\nbe found in them, though it is said they have discovered some chemical\nprocess, by which the bones, as well as the flesh of infants, are\nreduced, in a little time, almost to perfect annihilation.\n\nVirtuous ladies, into whose hands this book by chance may fall, will\nexclaim, on reading the above, This cannot be true. I will not believe\nit. Such a thing is impossible. If even nuns had witnessed such things,\nhowever depraved they may be, they would fly from such scenes; or at all\nevents, no _nun_, who has ever been once guilty of such crimes, would\ncommit them a second time.--Here, again, we see how little Americans\nknow of Popery, and of the practices of its priests and nuns.\n\nThe fact is, Roman Catholic laymen know almost as little of Popery as\nProtestants. They are not aware, that, when a female goes to confession,\nshe virtually binds herself to answer every question which her confessor\nproposes, and that the concealment of any thought or deed, which she\ncommitted, was a _mortal sin_, sufficient of itself to consign her soul\nto hell. She believes that the priest sits in the confessional, not as\nman, but as God. Attend, fellow-citizens, to what I here state to you,\nand you will easily conceive the possibility, nay, even the probability,\nnay, even further, the truth of every word I relate to you in relation\nto the crimes of nuns and priests, within the walls of nunneries.\n\nThe woman who goes to confession to a priest, whether a nun or a\nlay-sister, whether married or single, believes, that while in the\n_sacred tribunal_ of the confessional, he is divested of his humanity,\nand acts, not as man, but as God. Nothing, then, is easier, if he\nhas the least fancy for the penitent, than to persuade her that he is\n_divinely_ commissioned to--------. She does not doubt this, and yields\nto his wishes. There have been instances,--and there are now thousands\nof them in Europe, and even in this country,--where a priest tells every\ngood-looking woman who goes to confession to him, that it is her duty\nto have children by him! Be not startled, American husbands. I make\nnot these statements to hurt or outrage your feelings. I make it in\ncompassion for you, and to prevent you, if possible from permitting\nyour wives or your daughters to go in future to these dens of vice,\ncalled _confessionals_.\n\nI can easily fancy one of you saying to your neighbor, who is also\na Roman Catholic, and whose wife, as well as yours, goes to\nconfession,--\"Well, Mr. A., I care not what may be said against _our_\npriest, or against _auricular confession_. My wife goes regularly to\nconfession, and if she heard or saw anything bad on the part of the\npriests, I should soon know it. I have no doubt of it, says Mr. B.\nMy wife goes also, and so does my daughter, and I suppose nobody will\npretend to say that a priest could do anything wrong to _them_. _They_\nknow better than to be imposed upon. There is no better woman in the\nworld than _my_ wife; come over and dine with me. My wife just told me\nthat she asked the priest to dine with us, and you must come.\" I can\nnot only fancy this, but I have seen such meetings. I have seen husbands\nunsuspiciously and hospitably entertaining the very priest who seduced\ntheir wives in the confessional, and was the parent of some of the\nchildren who sat at the same table with them, each of the wives\nunconscious of the other's guilt, and the husbands of both, not even\nsuspecting them. The husband of her who goes to confession has no hold\nupon her affections. If he claims a right to her confidence, he claims\nwhat he can never receive; he claims what she has not to give. She has\nlong since given it to her confessor, and he can never recover it. She\nlooks to her confessor for advice in everything. She may appear to be\nfond of her husband; it is even possible that she may be so in reality.\nShe may be gentle, meek, and obedient to her husband,--her confessor\nwill advise her to be so; but she will not give him her confidence; she\ncannot,--that is already in the hands of her confessor. He stands an\nincarnate fiend between man and wife, mother and daughter. All the\nties of domestic happiness and reciprocal duties are thus violated with\nimpunity through the instrumentality of _auricular confession_.\n\nWould to God I had never entered that _tribunal_ myself! Would to God it\nwas never in my power to relate as facts what I have now put to paper!\nBut no such happiness was intended for me! It was the will of Providence\nthat I was reserved to witness and relate those deeds of darkness\nand crime committed under the mask of Popish religion, from which my\nfeelings and disposition shrink with horror. Voltaire, Rousseau, Raynal,\nPrice, Priestley, Paine, Diderot, and others, have done evil by\ntheir infidel writings. Evils, great and heavy evils, have been the\nconsequence of their introduction into the United States; but ten-fold\ngreater have been the evils which the introduction of Popery and\nauricular confession amongst us have brought in their train.\n\nThe writings of these infidels have in them, it is true, many of the\nmost exceptionable passages, but, as far as we know, their private lives\nwere generally good. Even in their writings, there was much that was\ngood. They advocated the cause of civil liberty; they pleaded, and\npleaded strongly and eloquently, the cause of human rights, and the\nliberties of man. These were redeeming qualities. These were noble\ndoctrines, and nobly pleaded. But what has Popery brought amongst\nus? What have Popish priests introduced into this country? Idolatry,\ndebauchery in every shape, and of every hue. Yet Americans will cast\ninto the fire the works of those infidels,--they will not allow their\nchildren to read them, lest they may corrupt their morals, though the\nauthors are cold in their graves. But they will send them to Popish\nschools,--they will allow them to drink lessons of depravity from the\neyes of licentious nuns, and hear them from the lips of Popish priests.\nStrange inconsistency, this! Infidels in theory are shunned as plagues,\nwhile practical infidels are cherished amongst us. It is well known to\nProtestants even in the United States, that it is a common practice of\nRomish priests to seduce females in the _confessional_, and it is,\nor should be equally well known that these very priests hear the\nconfessions of the very females whom they seduce. It is an article of\nfaith in the Roman Catholic church, that the crimes of a priest do not\ndisqualify him from _forgiving the sins of his penitent_, and hence it\nis that their opportunities of demoralizing every community, where they\nare in the ascendant, almost exceed conception. Persuade a woman that if\nshe sins, you can forgive her as thoroughly and effectually as Almighty\nGod could forgive her, and you take away every check from vice. All\nrestraint is removed. The voice of true religion is silenced, and sin\nprevails.\n\nThe iniquity of Romish priests in the confessional can scarcely be\nimagined. There is nothing else like it; it is a thing by itself; there\nis a chasm between itself and other crimes, which human depravity cannot\npass. Could I state them all, as I have known them, my readers would\nfeel themselves almost insulated; an ocean and a sea of wonders, and\nwaters of grief and sadness for fallen humanity would ebb and flow\naround them. Just fancy an innocent female on her knees before an\nartful, unbelieving priest! But why is she there? Why does not instinct\nwarn her off? Why does not conscious innocence tell her to fly from him?\nHow often do we thank God that we are endowed with reason? How often\ndo we sing his praises, and glorify his name, because he has \"made us a\nlittle lower than the angels,\" giving us reason for our guide, and thus\nraising us above all things that are created? Would it not appear as if\nthings were not so; as if the God of heaven were more bountiful to the\nbeasts of the field, and the birds of the air, than to man? Would it not\nappear that the poet was mistaken, when he said, in the fulness of his\nheart, and depth of his belief in revelation,!!!!!\n\n\"And to be innocent is nature's wisdom; The fledge-dove knows the\nprowlers of the air, Feared soon as seen, and flatters back to shelter;\nAnd the young steed recoils upon his haunches The never-yet-seen adder's\nhiss first heard. O surer than suspicion's hundred eyes Is that fine\nsense, which, to the pure in heart, By mere oppugnancy of their own\ngoodness. Reveals the approach of evil.\"\n\nWould it not seem from this that the gift of reason was no bounty in\nreality to man? as if instinct was something superior to it? Why does\nnot innocence,--native, conscious innocence,--if, in reality, there is\nsuch a thing,--teach woman to flee from those incarnate demons, Romish\nconfessors? Why will they entrust themselves, alone and unprotected\nby father or mother, brother or honorable lover, with these scheming,\nartful seducers? Why will mothers, married women, go to confession to\nthese men, or why will husbands be such inconceivable dupes as to permit\nit? Have husbands any idea of the questions which a confessor puts to\ntheir wives? They have not even the remotest. Let me give them a few\nof these questions, and I assure them, as I have more than once done\nbefore, that I state nothing but what I know of my own knowledge. The\nfollowing are a few of them. 1st. Have you been guilty of adultery or\nfornication, and how often? 2d. Have you desired to commit either, and\nhow often? 3d. Have you ever intended to commit fornication or adultery?\n4th. Have you ever taken pleasure in thinking upon these subjects? 5th.\nHave you dwelt upon them for any length of time? 6th. Have you ever\nendeavored to excite your own passions? 7th. Have you ever taken\nindecent liberties with yourself, or with your husband?\n\nDoes any husband really know that when his wife goes to confession,--and\nprobably she leans on his arm while she is going there,--that the above\nquestions are put to her? Assuredly, he does not. Otherwise, we must\nsuppose him a man of base principles in permitting such a thing. But\neven should he suspect it, and ask his wife whether they were put to\nher; should he call upon the priest, and bring him and the wife face to\nface; should he ask them severally whether such interrogatories were put\nby the priest to the wife, they will jointly and severally deny it under\noath, if required, and in doing this, they both feel justified; or, to\nspeak more correctly and plainly, the priest is laughing in his sleeve,\nand the wife is his dupe. The reason, however, for the course they\npursue, is this. The _infallible_ church teaches, that when a priest is\nin the confessional, he sits there as God, and not as man; and when he\ndenies under oath that he put such questions, he means that he did not\nput the questions as man, but as God; and when the penitent is asked\nwhether such questions were put to her, she will say on _oath_ they were\nnot, because it was God, and not man, that asked them. I am well aware\nthat this will appear strange to Americans, but it is not the less true.\nI have asked such questions, and given such reasons over and over\nagain, while acting as a Romish priest. I have asked them, till my\nsoul sickened with disgust. Every priest in Boston asks those questions\ndaily; there is not a priest in the United States who does not\nask them. No, not one,--from Aroostook to Oregon, nor from Maine to\nLouisiana. Judge, then, of the moral waste and wilderness which Romish\npriests are effecting by hewing and clearing down everything that blooms\nor bears the fruit of virtue and holiness.\n\nBut can such things exist in a civilized country? It is all the result\nof education,--of bad, vicious, and corrupt education. Let us suppose\nthat a married man has a neighbor whom he believes to be honorable\nupright, and correct in all his dealings, so much so, that he never had\noccasion to doubt his word, and would trust him with thousands, nay,\nmillions if he had it. Suppose his wife had the reputation of a good and\nvirtuous woman. Suppose she was considered so by the pious members of\nher own and every other church in this city. Suppose this individual, to\nwhom I have alluded, should discover that his wife was in the habit of\nmeeting his neighbor very frequently in some retired nook or corner, and\nholding long and confidential conversation with him,--think you he would\nnot suspect something wrong? Suppose he were to ask his wife what they\nwere talking about, and she should say that he was giving her spiritual\ncounsel,--think you that this would be satisfactory to him? Would he\npermit those interviews to continue? Surely not. But why distrust the\nwell-known prudence of his wife, and the honor of a man he has known for\nyears? Is it wise in him to suspect a worthy man? It is not only wise,\nbut it is proper. It would even be criminal not to do so. The man who\nwould not forbid these interviews, would be considered a low-spirited\nwretch, unworthy the society of all honorable men. He would sink even\nin his own estimation; and how comes it, then, that this very man, so\nsensitive, so distrustful of the virtue of an honorable neighbor,\nwill permit the same wife to hold _private_ meetings, and _private_\nconversations in confessionals and in private rooms, with Romish\npriests,--strangers, some of them, and foreigners,--notorious for the\nprofligacies of the orders of monks and Jesuits to which they belong,\nand the countries from which they came. This, I will frankly confess, is\na paradox, which my limited powers of ratiocination do not enable me\nto solve. I will not say that some of those married ladies, who go to\nconfession, are not virtuous women, but I will unhesitatingly say,\nthat many of them have been ruined in the confessional, that they run\na fearful risk in going there at all, and as it is truly said, \"he that\nloves the danger, shall perish therein.\"\n\nLet not married men, or married women, who belong to the Roman Catholic\nchurch, suppose that I mean to be disrespectful to them in what I have\nsaid or what I may say hereafter. The reverse is the fact To them I have\nno personal enmity, but I have for them the most sincere compassion. I\nwould rescue them, if I could, from those wolves in sheep's clothing,\nRomish priests. It is my duty to do so as their fellow-citizen, and it\nis peculiarly incumbent on me to do so, as I feel that I am the only\nman in the United States, whose personal knowledge of facts fits him\nfor such a task, and whose peculiar circumstances enable him to do so\nwithout bias or prejudice. I am aware they will raise a fresh hue and\ncry against me; Popish priests and bishops will give tongue, and the\nwhole Romish pack, young and old, married and single, widows and maids,\nwill follow in full chorus. They can do no more than they have done.\nThere is scarcely a law of this land which they have not accused me\nof violating, ever since I presumed to say that the Bible should be\ncirculated among the poor Roman Catholics, and that the holy mother\nchurch was not infallible. The accusations against Luther, Zuingle and\nCalvin, were not greater or much more numerous, than those which Papists\nhave brought against me, month after month, and year after year, ever\nsince I left them. They have indicted me for assault and battery, for\ndisturbing public worship, by which they meant the crime of worshiping\nGod otherwise than the Pope directed. They have indicted me for\nrape--keep your countenance, reader--those chaste, moral priests of\nthe Romish church have indicted me for rape. Is not that a high idea,\nAmericans?--scarcely anything equal to it to be found in antiquity,\nexcept, perhaps it may be in the conduct of Claudius, the Roman\nemperor, who, like the priests of the Romish church, had a very _great\nabhorrence_ of everything that was in the least degree unchaste.\nClaudius, as the reader must know, succeeded the emperor Caligula, and\nthat notorious wag, though elegant poet and satirist, Juvenal, tells us\nthat he was much in the habit of accusing his subjects of the crime of\nadultery. \"Claudius accusat macchos,\" says Juvenal; whether he spoke\nironically or not, those who know the life of Claudius as well as I do\nthe lives of Romish priests, can tell best. But this is not all. They\nhave accused me of robberies, sending and receiving challenges to fight\nduels, having two wives--I know not but more--at the same time. In all\ncases, true bills of indictment have been found; Papists appeared\nbefore the grand juries in all cases, and swore like true sons of the\n_infallible church_, and as long as they had no one to contradict them,\nthe holy church triumphed. In this country, however, there happens, as\nyet, to be no inquisition, and there are several who doubt not only the\ninfallibility of the Romish church, but even the impeccability of\nsome of her beloved children; and hence it happened that all their\nindictments evaporated into thin air. These Protestant Americans,\n\"cowards,\" as Papists call them, \"and _sons of cowards and pirates_\"\nhave no faith in the infallible church, and doubted the veracity of her\npious children, even upon oath The consequence was that I am left to\nwrite the history of my venerable but guilty mother, the infallible\nchurch, and am not without hope that I shall lead her back to the paths\nof virtue, from which, in very wantonness of crime, idolatry, brutality\nand wickedness she has long since departed.\n\nIt would be really amusing to see a correct list of the various\naccusations which Papists have made against me, with the various names\nand legal titles which they bore. The infallible church alone could\nproperly classify them. There is euphony in the very sound of them;\nthere is a variety, nothing short of oriental, in them. But to be\nserious; I never did, nor do I now, fear the persecution of Papists,\nwhile in the discharge of a duty which I owe to my Maker and Preserver.\nI could always say with sincerity and with humble gratitude, and I can\nsay so now:!!!!!\n\n     \"Let then, earth, sea and sky\n     Make war against me! On my heart I show\n     Their mighty Master's seal. In vain they try\n     To end my life, that can but end its woe.\n     Is that a death-bed where a Christian dies?\n     Yes! but not his--'t is death itself there dies.\"\n\nBut to return to the subject from which I have digressed, without even\nthe formality of taking leave of my reader; married ladies, who are\nmembers of the Roman Catholic church, will bear with me a little longer,\nI cannot consent to leave them without farther warning; and should their\nhusbands and myself ever meet--which probably cannot be, till we meet\nin heaven--they will thank, in place of blaming me, for cautioning them\nagainst the seductive wiles and wicked intrigues of Romish confessors.\nIt is probable the wearisome repetitions in my statements may give the\nreader a distaste to following them out, and accompanying me through\nthem. It will, I fear, enfeeble the interest, which he might otherwise\ntake in the result. Besides, a higher tone of thought, of literary\ntaste, and intellectual feeling, would undoubtedly be much more pleasant\nto him. The nature of the subject will not admit of it, and I cannot\nhelp, in speaking upon a gross and indelicate subject, doing so in\na language as unpalatable to my own taste, as to that of the reader.\nBesides, I am not master of any other words in the English vocabulary,\nbetter calculated to convey to those for whom this book is intended, the\nfull meaning and purport of the statements which I make.\n\nThere is taught in the Romish church, and it prevails to an extent broad\nand long as the land we live in, a doctrine which I feel it my duty to\nexplain to Americans, whether they are Protestants or converts to the\nchurch of Rome. When I say that it prevails over the extent of this\ncountry, I believe I should qualify the assertion, as I know not fully\nand exclusively of my own knowledge, that American converts to the\nRomish church are aware that such a doctrine exists; but I know that\nEuropean Catholic women, especially the Irish, are taught it by their\npriests, and believe it as firmly as they do that their church is\ninfallible. It is a doctrine frightful even to think upon. I know\nnothing, in ancient or modern times, in heathen, pagan, or Mahomedan\ncreeds, of equal turpitude. It is calculated to overturn all laws, human\nand divine. It aims a fatal and deadly blow at the root of the whole\nsocial system. It snaps, it shatters, it tears into shreds, every cord\nthat binds community to community, man to man, wife to husband, and\nchild to parent. It is this. Married women, who have no children and\nnever had any, are taught by Romish priests that, in case they have no\nchildren, the church has the power of giving them fecundity, and thus\nenabling them to \"comply with the great object of their creation,\" viz.,\n\"to increase and multiply.\" The holy church, in her wisdom, or rather\nin her craft and deep knowledge of human nature, knows full well that\nmarried ladies, especially those who have property, are often unhappy\nbecause they have no children; and the priests, looking upon this as\na fine opportunity not only to indulge their own passions but to make\nmoney, tell such women, in the confessional, that they have the power,\nspecially delegated to them from Almighty God, of giving them those\nchildren for which they are so anxious. I well recollect an instance\nof this Romish infatuation--this worse than hellish belief. It proved\na source of much trouble to myself in after life, and I believe I may\npartly trace to it the very origin of my difficulties with the Popish\npriests in this country.\n\nWhile officiating as a Roman Catholic priest in---------, I became\nacquainted with a Roman Catholic lady and gentleman, of good character\nand considerable wealth. The husband stood well in society, and so did\nthe wife, and I believe both deserved it. There was but one barrier, to\nall appearance, in the way of their happiness. They had no children; and\nhaving no blood or family alliances in the country, this seemed a source\nof distress to the wife, though I could not help remarking that they\nwere an extremely fond couple. Not very long after my acquaintance\nwith them, the wife called on me, told me her grievance in not having\nchildren, and asked me how much it would cost her to purchase from\nthe church, her interference in the matter and the blessing of having\nchildren. I forgot my usual caution. Indignation took the place of\npolicy; I forgot, for a moment, that I was bound to keep the secrets of\nthe Pope and the infallible church, and to defend them both, right or\nwrong. I replied indignantly, \"Madam, you are the dupe of priestcraft.\nThere is no power in the church to countervail the will of God.\"\nThe lady retired; and I cannot give the reader a better idea of the\ninfatuation of Papist women, or the consummate villany of Romish priests\nin the confessional, than by relating what followed. She called upon me\nthe day following, stated to me that since she saw me, she called on\nthe reverend Mr.--------, a Franciscan friar, who lived only a few doors\nfrom me, and having told him what I said to her, he raised his hands in\npious astonishment, and told her that he expected nothing better from\nme; that he suspected me of _heresy_ for some time past, and had now a\nproof of it, and that I should be cast out of the pale of the church, as\nfit society only for the devils; and accordingly in a few months after,\nthis holy friar and the holy Romish bishop of the diocese, solemnly\ncursed me from the head to the toe-nails, casting me into _hell_ for\nsuch damnable heresies. I understand that the lady of whom I have spoken\nis now blessed with an interesting family of children, and the husband\none of the happiest _fathers_ in the world. The friar is an exemplary\nand reverend servant of the _infallible_ church, still hearing\nconfessions, while I am a wicked heretic, with no human chance of\nsalvation. \"_Sic transit gloria mundi_\" Thus are the streams of domestic\nhappiness and social life polluted in our very midst by Romish priests;\nand yet they are encouraged, they are fed, they are sustained, they are\nreceived into society by the very men whose wives and daughters they\nhave ruined, and with whose happiness they have sported and gambled. I\nsay sported, because I know of my own knowledge, that nothing affords\nthe reverend young Yahoos of the Romish church, especially those who\ncome from Europe, more pleasure in-their private conversation, than\nspeaking of the _gullible Yankee heretics_, who fancy themselves a\nmatch for priests in the infallible church. Could Americans witness the\ncarousals of these infidel and idolatrous priests at their expense, it\nwould have a better effect upon them than all I can say or write; but\nas time atone can effect this, I must content myself with entreating my\nfellow-citizens to be upon their guard with Romish bishops and priests,\nor they will one day rue the consequences. Once more do I find myself\nfar from the path in which I commenced these pages. I intimated to the\nreader, somewhere in the beginning of this book, that I intended to give\nmy reasons for leaving the Romish church; but it would seem as if I\nhad forgotten it; at any rate, I have as yet but little more than half\nfulfilled it. I have, however, the satisfaction to believe, that the few\nI have given, up to the time of my arrival in Philadelphia, are amply\nsufficient. Fresh proofs have there been given to me, that the Popish\nchurch was not infallible, and that I could not, consistently with\na correct sense of duty, support her doctrines or countenance the\npractices of her priests; but, even there, notwithstanding all I had\nseen and witnessed, such were the prejudices of education, that I still\ntried to persuade myself that Popery was religion; though I tried to\ncirculate the Scriptures, and believed in the necessity of so doing:\nduring four years that I spent in the college of Maynooth, they formed\nno portion of the education of the students. It is my firm conviction,\nthat out of the large number of students who received their education\nthere for the ministry, there was not one who read the four gospels\nthrough, nor any portion of them, except such as were found in detached\npassages, in works of controversy between Catholics and Protestants.\nUntil I went to college, I scarcely ever heard of a Bible. I know not of\none in any parish in Munster, except it may be a Latin, one, which each\npriest may or may not have, as he pleased. But I studied closely the\nholy fathers of the church; so did most of the students. We were taught\nto rely upon them as our sole guide in morals, and the only correct\ninterpreters of the Bible. A right of private judgment was entirely\ndenied to us, and represented as the source of multifarious errors. The\nBible, in fact, we had no veneration for. It was, in truth, but a dead\nletter in our college; it was a sealed book to us; though there was not\nan equal number of students who were obliged to study more closely the\nsayings, the sophistry, the metaphysics and mystic doctrines of those\nraving dreamers, called holy fathers, many of whom, if now living, would\nbe deemed mad men and dealt with accordingly. I looked back again to\nthose fathers for proofs of the infallibility of the Romish church, and\nfor some evidence to satisfy me that I had no right to the exercise\nof my private judgment, either in reading or interpreting the\nScriptures,--but I looked in vain. The fathers themselves were extremely\nobscure. I found them often inconsistent and at variance with each other\nupon many of the _fundamental_ articles, as they are termed, of the\nPopish creed. On a re-perusal of those fathers, I have found them often\ncontradict each other. Nay, more; such frequently were the theological\nvagaries of these semi-deranged though well meaning men, that a\ncareful reader will often find the same father contradicting himself.\nChrysostom, whom the Papists worship as a saint, and Tertullian,\nanother saint of theirs, flatly contradict themselves. Chrysostom says,\nin speaking of the _real presence_ in the eucharist that Christ gives\nhimself bodily to be eaten, and that those who receive him, that is,\nthe consecrated wafer, made of flour and water by a priest, may see him,\ntouch him, and if they wish, fix _their teeth in his flesh_. In another\nplace he says, that \"the nature of the bread is not changed at all,\nthough it is worthy to be called the Lord's body.\" Tertullian in one\nplace maintains the same doctrine in relation to the _real presence_,\nbut in another place, he tells us, \"that the meaning of the Scripture\nphrase, _this is my body_, is, _this is the representation_ of my body.\"\nIf these men were to live now,--if Jerome and Chrysostom and Tertullian\nwere to utter such rhapsodical nonsense, what should we think of them\nor their followers? Yet the Romish church requires that the present\ngeneration shall forfeit all its advantages of education, science, and\nall the progressive advancement and expansion of intellect, and take the\nwritings of those men as the only correct interpretation of the Word of\nGod. It occurred to me, therefore, on a second perusal of these works,\nthat I should reject them unconditionally. I knew full well, from my\nintimacy with the Romish church, that it was a maxim with the fathers,\nand expressly defended by them, as it is now by modern Papists, that\n\"fraud was sometimes justifiable for a holy end, and that falsehoods\nwere valuable auxiliaries to truth!\" This doctrine is now avowed, or at\nleast taught in the _confessional_, and in Catholic countries out of the\nconfessional, as well as in every Popish college in the universe.\n\nFrom these I turned to my neglected Bible, and in it I discovered no\nsuch maxims as were taught by the holy fathers, and are now inculcated\nby the priests. I have not found that any of the evangelists ever even\nintimated \"that fraud was justifiable, or that it was ever lawful to do\nevil that good may come.\" Apart from all this, it appeared to me not\nat all unlikely that the inspired men who wrote the Scriptures, knew as\nwell how to convey their own ideas to the world, as the holy fathers\nor the _infallible_ church did; nor could I see anything heterodox, in\nsupposing that if there was anything unintelligible or obscure in their\nlanguage, they would leave us some record or note of the fact. They\nwrote by command, and under the direct inspiration of God; they wrote\nto instruct and enlighten the world; and with all due deference to the\ninfallible church, and her holy fathers, I think it is fairly to be\npresumed, that their writings are less obscure, and more entitled to\nuniversal credence, than the rhapsodies of fathers and monks, one\nhalf of whom were as crazy as so many Millerites. It occurred to me,\nnaturally, as 1 think it would to any man who was not clean daft, that\nI might, without presumption, invoke the aid of the Holy Spirit, take up\nthe Bible, read it prayerfully, and interpret it honestly, according\nto the best of my judgment, the opinion of the holy fathers and the\ninfallible church to the contrary notwithstanding.\n\nUp to this very moment I was negotiating with the holy church, and the\nholy church negotiating with me, through Bishop England, of Charleston,\nand a very reverend divine now in New York, for an arrangement of our\n_misunderstanding_. But we could not agree. There was now a barrier\nbetween us, which I could not pass. It was now with me, not a question\nof church or salaries, of location or domestic associations. The\ncontroversy now between me and the Romish church assumed a grave\ncharacter: it was now a question with me of light or darkness, of life\nor death. I might have gone to Rome, fallen upon my knees, kissed the\nPope's toe, and obtained the blessing of that poor old man. I might have\nacknowledged the _holy fathers_ were better authority and were safer\nguides in matters of faith, and in all things that concerned eternal\nlife, than the holy Scriptures. It was an easy matter for me, so far\nas human effort was necessary, to cast aside the Bible altogether, and\nsubstitute in its place the sayings and opinions of the holy fathers,\nwhose vanity often led them to suppose themselves inspired. Nothing was\neasier for me than to reject the Bible as a rule of faith, and permit\nmyself to be governed by the babblings of popes and churchmen. This\nlanguage, perhaps, may be deemed disrespectful, but it is not so. I\ncannot apprehend how anything I say can be deemed disrespectful, while\nI confine myself within the limits which the example of South, Jeremy\nTaylor and others have prescribed. No theologian, no one acquainted with\nhistory, sacred or profane, or with the eminent Dr. Robert South, one of\nthe most learned divines of the seventeenth century, would accuse him\nof any intention to disparage the memory of the early Christians, who\ndeserve to be honored, nor any of the doctrines which they maintained,\nunless they were universally admitted to be so absurd, that no man of\ncommon sense could sustain them. Yet this eminent man, speaking of\nthe doctrine of _transubstantiation_, as taught by Chrysostom and\nTertullian, calls it \"_the most stupendous piece of nonsense, that ever\nwas owned before a rational world_.\"\n\nDr. Jeremy Taylor, a distinguished Irish theologian, speaking of\ntransubstantiation, as taught by the holy fathers, says, \"_By this\ndoctrine, the same thing stays in a place and goes away from it; it\nremoves from itself and yet abides close by itself and in itself and out\nof itself; it is brought from heaven to earth, and yet is nowhere in\nthe way, nor ever stirs out of heaven. It makes a thing contained bigger\nthan that which contains it, and all Christ's body to go into a part\nof the body; his whole head into his own mouth, if he did eat the\neucharist, as it is probable that he did., and certain that he might\nhave done._\" But the real presence of the body and blood of Jesus Christ\nwas not the only nonsense which these holy fathers taught. They believed\nlargely in the doctrine of miracles.\n\nAmbrose, who was Bishop of Milan about the year 350, has been always,\nand is now, considered by the Popish church one of her best authorities.\nPapists tell us, that while he lay an infant in his cradle, a swarm of\nbees settled upon his lips as a presage of his future eloquence; and I\nbelieve it is generally admit ted, that if any of the fathers quoted\nby Papists is good authority in matters of faith, he is among the best.\nDuring my doubts whether I should take the fathers of the Romish church,\nor the holy Bible for my guide, I was led especially to the examination\nof the doctrines maintained by St. Ambrose and those taught in the\nBible, and never before did I see that common, though vulgar saying,\n\"comparisons are odious,\" more strictly fulfilled. I will take one, for\nexample.\n\nAmong the many rhapsodies taught by St. Ambrose, a belief in Popish\nmiracles was the most prominent He taught, as I have stated above, that\nthe wafer which a Romish priest gives to a communicant, was the solid\n_flesh_ of Christ, and so solid, that he who received it might _stick\nhis teeth into the flesh_.\n\nThe following is another specimen of the miracles in which he believed.\nThe Empress Justina asked St. Ambrose for one of the Romish churches\nfor the use of the Arian sect. He refused her, and was then about to\nconsecrate that sumptuous basilic, afterwards called St. Ambrose's\nchurch. The people, as we are told, were anxious to deposit in the\nedifice the relics of some martyr,--relics were used by the holy father\nAmbrose then, as they are now by Popish priests,--to cure all diseases.\nThe people insisted upon having them, and accordingly the holy father\npromised that they should be procured. Paulinus and Augustine tell us\nthat \"he was favored with a vision of two martyrs, who were never before\nheard of, named Gervusius and Protusius, who, hearing in heaven of the\nholy father's design to build a Popish church, instantly fled from\ntheir place of repose, and told him that they were murdered by infidel\nheretics in such a place, and on such a day; that if he would send men\nwith spades and shovels to the place designated, they would find their\nbones, and to have them removed and deposited in the new church.\" The\nholy saint, in compliance with this glorious information, which he\nreceived in a vision, sent a number of men with spades, shovels,\npickaxes, &c., and they soon found the \"bodies of two men of wonderful\nstature.\" The heads were separate from the bodies, and the ground all\nround was soaked with blood. I use the language of the holy fathers\nthemselves, translated into English, which, considering that all the\nflesh had already disappeared, may be considered a complication of\nmiracles, unless it can be supposed, as the relator wickedly observes,\n\"that it may be new created.\" As the workmen proceeded down towards the\nmartyrs' resting-place, \"their skeletons began to bestir themselves\nin such powerful sort, that an urn was thrown with violence from its\npedestal, and rolled to the sacred spot; and some of the _possessed_,\nwho had been brought upon such a promising occasion to be exorcised,\nbegan to howl and scream in the most lamentable ways, thus giving\nattestation to the power of glorious martyrs.\" \"The relics, blood and\nbones were carefully removed to the new basilica, and on the road many\nmiracles were wrought on diseased persons, who were so happy as to touch\nthem; such was their virtue, that even to touch the pall which covered\nthem was sufficient.\" Among others, a butcher, who had been a long time\nblind, was restored to sight. The blood of these martyrs was worked up\ninto paste, and distributed all over Christendom, as an antidote against\nall diseases.\n\nThe writings of the _holy_ fathers abound with legends of this kind.\nWe are told by them, that one of the Romish saints in Egypt, named Apia\nTill, suffered martyrdom, after being cut to pieces ten times each day,\nfor ten successive days, by the tyrant, Maximin, and was every night put\ntogether by the angel Gabriel. Another tells us, that he has a bottle\nin which are corked up carefully some of the \"rays of the star of\nBethlehem, handed down to posterity by one of the wise men who went in\nsearch of the new-born Saviour.\" Another of those _infallible_ lunatics\ntells us, \"that he has sealed up in perfect preservation some of the\nsounds of the bells used at Solomon's Temple.\"\n\nAmong the innumerable miracles in which the holy fathers of the Romish\nchurch believed, or pretended to believe, there are some so ridiculously\nincredible, that humanity itself, in the lowest depths of degradation,\ninto which it has fallen, blushes at their repetition. It is gravely\nrelated by a Roman Catholic divine,--and no Roman Catholic in the United\nStates disbelieves it,--that the sacrament of the _Eucharist_, or, to\nmake it more intelligible to my readers, the wafer which the priest\ngives to the sick, and elevates to the people while saying mass, was\nconveyed into a bee-hive. In all probability, it dropped out of the\npocket of some priest. The bees were found dead, and in the midst of\nthem the wafer became an infant Christ, looking like other infants, but\nmore beautiful. (See Peter Cluniac, first book, first chapter.) It is\nrelated by another Romish writer, that a hive of bees was once heard\nsinging most harmoniously. A devout priest, passing by, happened to look\nin, and saw among them the holy sacrament of the Eucharist, to which\nthey were singing glory and praise.\n\nThere is scarcely an American traveller, of any note, who has not\nvisited Naples. There are now in that city of worse than Pagan idolatry,\nsome of those _converts_, which Bishop Penwick says he has made from the\n\"_most_ respectable Protestant families in Boston.\" The bishop was\nright in one thing. The families to which he alluded, are highly and\ndeservedly respectable; their children are respectable, and these\nparents can have no objection that I should appeal to them for the truth\nof any assertion I make. I appeal to those _American converts_ now in\nItaly, whether it is not believed there, that Saint Januarius, on a\ncertain day, is invoked to be \"propitious to the people.\" During this\ninvocation, in which the whole city, and thousands upon thousands from\nthe neighboring country, unite, certain ceremonies are performed, bells\nare rung, every one goes to _confession_, masses are said, incense\noffered, _holy water_ is sprinkled profusely, beads are counted relics\nare kissed, and when all this is over, a priest comes forth from the\nsacristy of the church, preceded and followed by an immense train of\nboys, bearing lights, &c., &c. The priest holds in his hand some of the\n_blood_ of St. Januarius, formed into a hard _crust_. He calls upon\nthe saint to be _propitious_, and to grant his prayer. If the saint is\nwilling to be _propitious_, the crust of the saint's blood, which the\npriest holds in his hand, bubbles into a red liquid. For a true account\nof this, I refer the general reader to Dr. Moore's Tour. The doctor was\nthe father of Sir John Moore, and was an eye-witness of this mummery;\nbut I will refer those _respectable Protest-ant families_, from whom the\nJesuit Bishop Fenwick says he has made so many converts, to their own\nchildren, now in Naples, and who have been seduced by these arrant and\ndesigning knaves,--Popish priests and bishops,--to abandon their homes,\ntheir country, and their civil rights, and give them in exchange for\nsuch degrading mummeries as they are now witnessing in Italy. Their\nchildren will tell them that what I state is correct. Let these parents\nreflect, that probably they themselves are the cause of the errors into\nwhich their children have been decoyed. It was recently observed by an\neminent divine of Boston, that the great prosperity of this country may\nbe the cause of the many evils which threaten our people. The sentiment\nappears strange to many, but the eloquent gentleman was right. The\ndownfall of nations might always be traced to their superabundant wealth\nand prosperity. The same may be applied to individuals. Reader, did you\never see infidelity in a cottage? Never, where the Bible has found its\nway. Misery you will find there, but that you will find in palaces. The\npoor love the name and the religion of Christ. The puritan fathers of\nthe nabobs of this land loved them, and they had reason to do so.\nTo religion and to the Bible they are indebted for all their worldly\ncomfort, their liberty, and their civil rights; and the parents who\npermit their children to be seduced from their tender care by Jesuits,\nnotorious for centuries for nothing but fraud, deception, seduction and\navarice, have a long account to settle with their Eternal Master. Let\nthem take heed, lest their wealth be the cause of the temporal and\nspiritual poverty of their beloved children.\n\nBe not startled, reader, if I inform you that a miracle, more incredible\nthan that of the blood of Januarius, has been wrought in these United\nStates only a few years ago, if we are to believe a Roman Catholic\nbishop, who was reputed to be one of the most talented men in the Romish\nchurch.\n\nWho is it, that does not recollect the notorious Prince Hohenloe, who, a\nfew years ago, played so many \"fantastic tricks before high Heaven,\"\nand who, if we are correctly informed by his Popish biographers, wrought\nmore miracles in one month, than the Saviour of mankind did during the\nwhole course of his ministerial life?\n\nIt appears that the Popish priests and nuns of the United States have\nbeen for several years expecting, or, at least, pretending to expect,\nsome miraculous evidence of divine favor in their behalf. The nuns and\n_sisters of charity_ in the convents of Emmetsburg and Georgetown\nfelt jealous that their _brothers_ and _sisters_ in Europe should be\nempowered to work and witness miracles almost daily, and thereby enrich\ntheir convents, while they themselves had not a single miracle among\nthem,--at least, of their own manufacture. Up to that time, as far as\nI know, no miracle was performed or witnessed by Popish nuns and lay\nsisters in the United States. This was deemed a serious calamity. It was\neven a loss of revenue, and this the priests and nuns knew full well.\nSomething must be done; revenue must be had from some source; and the\nunprincipled priests and bishops of this country, understanding well the\nweaknesses and imperfections of humanity, knowing that human nature\nis the same in all nations and among all people, and seeing the vast\nbenefits, which, in a pecuniary point of view, their church derived from\nthe belief of their people in miracles, resolved to try an experiment,\nupon a small scale, upon _brother Jonathan_. Accordingly, about the\nyear 1828, when _St. Hohenloe_ was in all his glory, his _divine_ power\nshining in full blaze, the bishops and priests of the Roman Catholic\nchurch resolved upon having a miracle of their own, instanter. The\nfollowing was their modus operandi:\n\nA _lay sister_ in the nunnery of Emmetsburg or Georgetown, I forget\nwhich, was taken ill. She bore her indisposition, which was attended\nwith _excruciating pains?--\"risum tenia tis\"--with angelic resignation_.\nThe best medical aid was always at hand, but she grew worse and worse\nevery day, until her case became hopeless. Her recovery was pronounced\nimpossible. Medical aid could do no more; her whole time was devoted\nto prayer; but,--_miribile dictu_,--one night, as she lay in momentary\nexpectation of death, the spirit of Prince Hohenloe paid her a visit,\nbid her be of good cheer, and directed her to have _mass_ said for her\nin her room on a certain day, and at a certain hour,--naming both,--and\nthat, when the priest raised up the wafer at mass, she should look at\nit, and would see the infant Saviour in his hands, body and blood, soul\nand divinity, and in shape and form like other infants. She communicated\nthis visit from the saint to her _confessor_. He, as is usual in these\ncases, did not believe it at first; but the saint visited him, too, and\nreprimanded him for his incredulity. Bishop England, of Charleston, was\nimmediately sent for. The circumstance of the saint's visit was related\nto him; he pretended to disbelieve it also for a while, but was finally\nconvinced of its truth, and consented to say mass on the appointed\nday and hour in the lay sister's sick room, and, almost incredible to\nrelate, this Bishop England, a man of talent, and a man of sense,\nthough the slave of the Pope of Rome, touches in a letter to the public,\nthrough the _Catholic Miscellany,_ which he himself then edited, that\nthe whole of this lay sister's falderal was true,--that the saint\nvisited her,--that he said mass according to his instructions, and that\nshe saw in his hands, not a little wafer, made of flour and water, but a\nfull grown infant, in all the natural proportions of humanity.\n\nI regret extremely that I have not the Catholic Miscellany, containing\nan account of this transaction by Bishop England himself, as it is\nhardly to be expected that Americans can otherwise believe it; but\nundoubtedly Bishop Hughs, of New York, and Bishop Fenwick, of Boston,\nmust have files of the Miscellany, containing an account of this\nmiraculous event.\n\nIs this not enough of itself to deter any man, endowed with the faculty\nof reason, from holding any communion whatever with Roman Catholic\nbishops and priests? A degradation of the understanding like this, and\namong a people like ours, cannot exist, unaccompanied with depravity\nof heart. The intellect cannot be darkened, when the heart is pure and\nbright, and such a heart cannot be possessed by a Papist who remains so\nafter a thorough knowledge of Popish iniquities, which all priests and\nbishops are supposed to have. I declare it as my solemn conviction, and\nfrom my perfect knowledge of Popery, that a thoroughly educated Popish\npriest, I mean thoroughly educated in Popery, can no longer retain\nthe image of the Deity, which the God of nature has stamped upon every\ncreated mind, undefiled or undebased, while he has any connection with\nthe church of Rome. That church is and ever has been the curse of the\nearth, the scourge of all good governments, and the greatest obstacle to\nthe Divine Will. Under this conviction, I have addressed myself to the\npublic in this book. Under this conviction I have taken the liberty\nof appealing to Protestant families, and cautioning them against\nthe intrigues of priests. It was this conviction that induced me to\ndisregard that ancient aphorism which says, \"If the people will be\ndeceived, let them be deceived.\" I felt that the people had no chance *\nto escape deception, unless the truth were known and fairly explained\nto them. When dust is thrown into the eyes of the people, or even into\nthose of private families, it is the duty of every man, and mine as well\nas that of others, to remove and clear it away; otherwise, I should be\nundeserving of the blessings and privileges secured to me by the laws\nof this country. Could I rest supinely and see a body of men prevail by\nartifice, who hate the very name of liberty, without resisting them as\nfar as in me lay, I should be acting criminally. It is bad enough to\ntolerate amongst us miracle-mongers and convicted idolaters; but to\nallow them to continue in the practice and propagation of such deeds,\nwithout warning our people and cautioning them against being drawn\ninto the whirlpool of Popish corruption, which now foams and boils and\nbubbles over our land, would show in me an ingratitude towards this\ncountry, to which I owe everything I am, and which gives me as good a\nright as others to expect much more.\n\nIt is strange that we should have amongst us a society called Puseyites,\nwho believe as firmly as Papists do in the long-exploded doctrine of\nmiracles,--a doctrine upon which age after age has pronounced an\nunqualified verdict of censure and reprobation. Yet so it is. Allow me\nto give you an example of the long list of miracles in which they\nbelieve.\n\n\"Sixty confessors were made prisoners by Humeric, the tyrant king of the\nAfrican Vandals, in the 4th century. He ordered their tongues to be cut\nout, even to the roots, inclusively; but notwithstanding this loss of\ntheir tongues, roots and all, they lived many years after, and spoke\nmore plainly than ever.\"\n\nThe reverend Mr. Ward, a distinguished friend of Puseyism, now living in\nEngland, and looked upon by the Puseyites in the United States as one\nof the most able advocates of their wild doctrine, assures us with great\ngravity, and on the authority of the holy fathers of the middle ages,\nthat the above fact is true, and as much entitled to credit as anything\nrelated in the holy Scriptures. He even tells us that \"to attribute\nanything like idolatry, or anything approaching it, to such men as\nrelated the above and similar facts, was a _fearful approximation to\nblasphemy against the Holy Ghost_.\"\n\nThe Mr. Ward to whom I allude is well known to many literary men in this\ncountry, as the author of a work recently published, and called _Wards\nIdeal of a Christian Church_, The name of the work is assuredly an\nappropriate one. His church must be ideal indeed. It is something\ninvisible, intangible, hitherto unknown and never heard of before.\neither in scriptural or church history; and where he found the\nmaterials, out of which he formed this ideal of a Christian church, must\nbe known only to himself. But Mr. Ward is a philosopher,--so say the\nPuseyites,--and philosophers now-a-days have some strange dreams. They\nhad such in all times and in all ages of the Christian, as well as the\nheathen world. \"Oh! there is a husk and shell, Yorick, which grows up\nwith learning, which their un-skilfulness knows not how to fling away.\nSciences may be learned by rote, said my father to Yorick. Yorick\nthought my father inspired.\"\n\nWhether Puseyites think Mr. Ward inspired or not, I am at a loss to\nknow; nor am I a judge; but that he is a philosopher, is beyond doubt.\nNor do I feel the least hesitancy in saying that he will have, one day\nor another, his name inscribed in the same niche, and his ashes rest in\nthe same urn, with such distinguished men as Joe Smith, Hiram Smith and\nO. Brownson, all conspicuously eminent philosophers. The fact of my not\nunderstanding one word these eminent philosophers have uttered, is no\nargument against their ideal churches, or their ideal theories.\n\n\"I will enter into obligations this moment, said my father, to lay out\nall my Aunt Dinah's legacy in charitable uses, if the corporal has any\none determinate idea, annexed to any one word he has repeated.\" Thus\nspoke the learned author of the Tristrapedia to Trim; but it by no means\nfollowed, that Trim was not a philosopher, no more than it does that Mr.\nWard and other Puseyite doctors are not philosophers, though not one of\nthem has any one determinate idea annexed to any one word they have said\nor written.\n\nThrice honored, then, be Monks, Mormonites, Millerites and Brownsonites.\nAll will have their day, and so will common sense.\n\nI am apprehensive that some will accuse me of levity in my manner of\nalluding to Puseyism. Others will say that I should have mentioned\nno names, or, if I did, I should have treated them with respect and\nkindness. Far be it from me to treat a grave subject lightly; but when\nI see the whole Christian world represented as profligate and the Popish\nworld alone represented as sinless and pure, by the authors of Puseyism,\nI can scarcely treat such a false representation and perversion of truth\notherwise than with contempt and irony; and when I bring before the\npublic the names of some of the individuals who have merited this,\nby exhibiting themselves as the authors and abettors of these gross\noutrages upon all that is sacred among men and among nations, I only do\nthem justice. Are acts alone, and not their consequences, to be noticed?\nAre we to take cognizance of effects, and pass by in silence their\ncauses? Are we to wage a seven years' war against Ward's _Ideal of a\nChristian Church_, and against other ideals of moonstricken dreamers,\nand say not a word of the dreamers themselves, or the consequences\nthat follow from them? Suppose we had here in Boston, or New York, the\nhydrophobia; suppose a citizen were in pursuit of the mad dog which\nintroduced it; would any of my readers say to the citizen, never mind\nthe dog, let him go but take care of the hydrophobia? Assuredly not\nthe name, the color, the appearance of the dog, and the symptoms of his\nmadness, should be proclaimed to the public, lest he might scatter the\nhydrophobia still further amongst them. Suppose an incendiary was\nseen on the streets of one of our large and populous cities, say, for\ninstance, Boston or New York, and that our police officers were in\npursuit of him; let us fancy a crowd of sympathizers interfering and\nsaying to the officers, let that man alone; pursue him no farther;\ndo not even mention that he is an incendiary; it may be the cause of\nsending him to gaol, or, perhaps, to the state prison for life; say\nnothing to any one against him,--but take care of fires. See well to it\nthat the city is not burned. What, under these circumstances would be\nthought of the sympathizers? Who would feel for them if the city was\nreduced to ashes? Who would feel for them if their homes were rendered\ndesolate, and their wives and children made houseless. I would not check\nthe generous or natural flow of human sympathy, but I do not know that I\nshould do wrong in saying, that such men deserved no commiseration.\n\nUnder these circumstances, why should I be accused of treating a grave\nsubject lightly or ironically? Never did the witty Lord Shaftsbury\nutter a plainer truth than when he said, that ridicule is one of those\nprincipal lights or natural mediums by which things are to be viewed, in\norder to a thorough recognition.\n\nI am aware that there are many objections to the use of ridicule and\nirony, in speaking on grave subjects; but, as Fielding very properly\nobserves, there can be no objection to making use of its assistance in\nexpelling and banishing all falsehood and imposture when once fairly\ndetected; and as this method is for my present purpose unexceptionable,\nI think it will also prove efficacious.\n\nHaving perused the dreams, or, if the reader prefers it, opinions of\nthe holy fathers, and taken a glance at those of a new sect amongst us\ncalled Puseyites,--which is but another name for Popery,--I could\nsee no reason why I should believe them of higher authority than the\nScriptures, or why I should not prefer the latter for my rule of faith.\nThe holy fathers of the church of Rome, and her unbaptized children,\nPuseyites, seem to me of equal authority. I say unbaptized, because I\nknow not that their reputed parents, the Pope and his spouse, the church\nof Rome, ever thought of such a thing as Puseyite. I am rather inclined\nto think that the venerable couple are, up to this moment, unconscious\nof having any paternity whatever in Puseyism. At any rate, their holy\nfathers, such as Mr. Ward, Newman and others, appear to me as _demented\nand clean daft_ as any that ever existed in the middle ages. The \"Knight\nof Cervantes,\" as a late number of the London Quarterly expresses it,\n\"never abandoned himself to delirious musings, on the faded glories of\nchivalry, more madly than these sentimentalists to visions of Popish\npowers, and the glories of the saints.\"\n\nThe Bible was with them a matter of minor consideration. I knew by\nexperience that it was so; and I know that it is so at the present day,\nwith every priest and bishop of the Romish church. I was aware then, as\nI am now, that it was perfectly useless to attempt reasoning with them,\nand I had, of course, no alternative left but to cast from me their\nwritings and doctrines, as the veriest trash that ever was written, and\nseek from the Bible, the fountain of truth, instructions for my future\nlife. I looked upon the majority of the holy fathers either as notorious\nblockheads or dishonest knaves. There is no alternative. There is not\neven a medium.\n\nBut to return to the subject, from which I have so widely, though\nunconsciously deviated.\n\nSoon after my arrival in Philadelphia, I became acquainted with a\nProtestant family. I had the pleasure of dining occasionally with them,\nand could not help noticing a seemingly delicate young man who\nwaited at the table. There was something in the countenance and whole\nappearance of this individual which struck me as singular. I could see\nno indication of positive wickedness or signal depravity in the external\nconfiguration of the young man's head. The expression of the eye\nindicated meekness, humility, and habitual obedience, rather than\nanything else; but I could see, nevertheless, in the closely-compressed\nlips and furtive glance, which I could only occasionally catch,--and\neven then by a sort of stealth,--something that puzzled me. I know not\nwhy, but I could not like him. There was no cause, as far as I could\nsee, why I should dislike the young man. Constitutionally, I was myself\nrather fearless than otherwise. I cannot recollect that, with equal\nmeans of defence, I ever before feared any one, I do not desire to be\nconsidered a braggadocio, nor do I make this assertion with any such\nview. I have not in my composition,--if I know myself,--a single\nparticle of bravery, neither do I covet its possession. I have often\nseen men of bravery tremble at the roaring of a lion, caged up and\nstrongly chained in a menagerie. I have often seen and heard a brave man\nwhistle as he passed through a church-yard; a brave man will shudder\nand quail at the very sight of his own shadow. A bully, a cut throat,\na highway robber, a Jesuit, or a traitor, may be brave; conspirators\nagainst the peace and prosperity of their country may be, and have been,\nbrave men. I desire not to belong to this class; but I desire sincerely\nto merit the high distinction of being considered a man of courage. To\nthis class all sincere Christians belong. To this class all who\nwere distinguished for virtue and morality, even among the heathens,\nbelonged. Witness the conduct of Cicero. He sought to shelter himself\nagainst the violent assaults and personal attacks of the conspirator\nCatiline; he wished no unnecessary, uncalled-for collision with this\nblood-thirsty villain, when no good could follow, and his duty did not\nrequire it. But when the good of his country demanded it, and the voice\nof conscience called upon him, Cicero came forth, alone, and met the\nconspirator, Catiline, in the presence of the whole senate of Rome,\nand charged him, face to face, with his crimes, his treason, and his\nconspiracy. Cicero was not a brave man, according to the acceptation of\nthe word bravery among the assassins and stiletto-bearers of his day,\nnor would he be considered so in the acceptation of the word among the\nbrawling _repealers_ O'Connellites, traitors and conspirators of the\npresent day; but he was a man of courage.\n\nThere is a wide difference between a brave man, and a man of courage.\nA brave man may stand at the mouth of the cannon, while under the\ninfluence of some animal emotion, and quail even at an imaginary danger;\nbut a courageous man smiles at all such things, and calmly prepares,\nand is always ready to meet those that are real. A man may be brave, and\nfear the whistling of the wind; but a courageous man fears nothing, not\neven the whistling of the cannon's ball.\n\nLuther was not a brave man, in the modern acceptation of that term. He\nrushed not among his foes; they hunted him like a wild beast, but they\nturned him not from his path. He met them face to face. He unfurled the\nstandard of Christianity; he took his stand, and met them, and fought\nthem under that glorious banner. He was not brave, but he was a man of\ncourage.\n\nThese are the men I should like to imitate, and their courage,--\"_Sic\nmagna com parvis componere solebam_\"--is that which Popish priests and\nJesuits, traitors to their God and this country of my adoption, will\nfind I possess, as far as my limited powers of mind or body will permit.\n\nCicero looked Catiline in the face, and told him he was a conspirator\nand a traitor. Luther looked the miracle and indulgence mongers of\nGermany in the face, and told them they were base idolaters; and I tell\nthe minions of the Pope in the United States, that they are worthless\nidolaters, traitors and conspirators against the peace of this country,\nand that their sovereign lord, the Pope of Rome, should be made to feel\nthat his bulls and insolent interference in the affairs of the United\nStates, shall soon meet that chastisement which is due to treason and\nits abettors.\n\nBut to return. I could never find the eye of this man fixed upon me\nwithout an involuntary feeling of dread. I met him often in the\nstreets; he always seemed neat and tidy in his person; he was civil and\nrespectful in his deportment; never seemed to forget that society had\nits grades, and that circumstances had clearly designated his own. With\nthat he seemed well contented; never, as far as I could see, seeming\nto feel the least desire of intruding upon that of others. This being\nrather a rare case in the United States, twenty years ago, at any rate,\nwhen it was difficult to get servants who knew their places, struck me\nas another singular feature in his manner and character, and did not at\nall tend to remove the unpleasant impressions which his appearance made\nupon my mind. Not long after this, a messenger called at my rooms to say\nthat \"Theodore------\" was taken ill, and wished to see me. I was then\nofficiating as a Romish priest, and calling to see him, was shown up\nstairs to the door of a garret room, into which, after a loud rap\nand announcing my name, I was admitted to the sick young man. He\nhad returned to his bed before I entered, and was wrapped in a large\novercloak. I asked him whether he wanted to see me, and for what\npurpose. He deliberately turned out of his bed, locked the door again,\nvery respectfully handed me a chair, and asked me to sit down, as he\nhad something very important to tell me. He wrapped himself again in his\ncloak, lay on the outside of the bed, and spoke to me in a firm, decided\ntone to the following effect:\n\n\"Sir, you have taken me for a young man, but you are mistaken. I am a\ngirl, but not so young as 1 appeared to you in my boy's dress. I sent\nfor you, because I want to get a _character_, and confess to you before\nI leave the city.\" I answered, \"You must explain yourself more fully\nbefore you do either.\" I moved my chair further from the bed, and\ntightened my grasp upon a sword-cane which I carried in my hand.\n\"Feel no alarm,\" said this now young woman; \"I am as well armed as you\nare,\"--taking from under her jacket an elegant poignard,--\"I will not\nhurt you. I am a _lay sister_ belonging to the order of Jesuits in\nStonyhurst, England, and I wear this dagger to protect myself.\" There\nwas no longer any mystery in the matter. I knew now where I was, and the\ncharacter of the being that stood before me. I discovered from her that\nshe arrived in New. Orleans, some time previous, with all necessary\nrecommendations to the priests and nuns of that city. She had the\nnecessary \"Shibboleth\" from the Jesuits of Stonyhurst, to their brothers\nand sisters, who were then, and are now, numerous in that city. They\nreceived her with all due caution, as far as could be seen by the\npublic; but privately in the warmest manner. Jesuits are active and\ndiligent in the discharge of their duties to their superiors, and of\ncourse, this _sister_, who was chosen from among many for her zeal and\ncraft, lost no time in entering on her mission. The _Sisters of\nCharity_ in New Orleans took immediate charge of her, recommended her\nas chambermaid to one of the most respectable Protestant families in the\ncity; and having clothed her in an appropriate dress, she entered upon\nher employment. She was active, diligent and very competent. The young\nladies of the family were delighted with her; she appeared extremely\npious, but not ostentatiously so. She seemed desirous to please in\nall things; talked but seldom of religion, but took good care that her\ndevotional exercises should be noticed, though she seemed to avoid\nsuch a thing. Her conduct was in every way unexceptionable. So great a\nfavorite did she become in the family, that in a short time she became\nacquainted with all the circumstances and secrets, from those of the\nfather down to those of the youngest child.\n\nAccording to a custom universally in vogue among the Jesuit spies, she\nkept notes of every occurrence which may tend to elucidate the character\nof the family, never carrying them about her, but depositing them for\nsafe keeping with the mother abbess, especially deputed to take charge\nof them. She soon left this family under some pretext or other, obtained\nfrom them an unqualified recommendation for honesty and competency,\nwhich, with the previous and secret arrangements of the _Sisters of\nCharity_, obtained for her without delay a place in another Protestant\nfamily. Here, too, she was without fault, active, honest and\nindustrious, to all appearance. Little did these families, know that\nwhile they and their children were quietly reposing in the arms of\nsleep, this apparently innocent waitingmaid or chambermaid was, perhaps,\nin the dead hour of night, reducing to paper their conversation of the\nday previous, and preparing it, at least as much of it as could answer\nany Jesuitical purpose, to be recorded among the secret archives of the\nJesuit college of Stonyhurst, from which they were to be transcopied to\nthose of the parent college in Rome.\n\nThus did this lay sister continue to go from place to place, from family\nto family, until she became better acquainted with the politics, the\npecuniary means, religious opinions, and whether favorable or not to the\npropagation of Popery in this country, than even the very individuals\nwith whom she resided. No one suspected her; all believed her innocent\nand industrious; the only fault they could find with her, was that she\nseemed too fond of going from one place to another. For this, however,\nthe _Sisters of Charity_ had some salvo or other.\n\nThis was not the best of the joke, if joke it may be called. This\nexcellent chambermaid, or another lay Jesuit sister, wished to leave New\nOrgans and come north to a better climate; and how-do you think, reader,\nthe means were raised to defray the expenses of travelling? There was\nno difficulty in the matter. Americans can be gulled at all times. The\n_Sisters of Charity_ have always some friend in readiness to supply them\nwith the means of performing _corporal works of mercy_. This friend went\nround to these American families where this chambermaid lived from time\nto time; told them that she wanted to come on as far as Baltimore; that\nit was a pity to have her travel as a steerage passenger; a person of\nher virtue and correct deportment should not be placed in a situation\nwhere she might be liable to insult or rude treatment. A cabin passage\nshould be procured for her: she should be introduced to some respectable\nfamily who were going north, and would take charge of her. The necessary\nfunds were immediately collected for her; the generous Protestants\nwith whom she lived, pitying the poor girl, told her she might want the\nlittle she had earned to support herself in the north, until she could\nget a place. A handsome purse was soon made up, a cabin passage was\nengaged, and the young ladies on whom she waited made her presents of\nevery article of dress necessary for her comfort or convenience. She was\nthe depository of all their love-stories,--she knew the names of their\nlovers, she heard their love-sighs, and probably witnessed many of their\ntears; at all events, if there were secrets among them, they were known\nto her; and having made herself acquainted with the state of things in\nNew Orleans, she started for Baltimore, laughing in her sleeves at the\nsuccess of her mission so far, and at the credulity of American _dolts_,\nas Jesuits very properly term them.\n\nOn arriving in Baltimore, she, of course, called upon the nuns of that\ncity, who were prepared for her reception, and had already a situation\nengaged for a \"chambermaid whom they expected from New Orleans, and\nwho was coming highly recommended by some of the first families in\nthat city.\" She took possession of a place as soon as convenient, spent\nseveral months in that city, discharging all her duties faithfully, no\none finding any fault with her, except her restlessness in not staying\nlong with any family. Having now become acquainted with the secrets and\ncircumstances of almost every Protestant family of note in Baltimore,\nand made her report to the mother abbess of the nunnery of her order in\nthat city, she retired to the District of Columbia, and after advising\nwith the mother abbess of the convent, she determined to change her\napparent character and appearance.\n\nBy advice of _that venerable lady, the holy prioress_, on whom many of\nthe wives of our national representatives, and even grave senators, look\nas an example of piety and chastity, she cut short her hair, dressed\nherself in a smart-looking waiter's jacket' and trowsers, and, with\nthe best recommendations for intelligence and capacity, she, in her new\ndress, applied for a situation as waiter at Gadsby's Hotel in Washington\ncity. This smart and tidy-looking young man got instant employment;\nand now we have the lay sister in quite a different character. His\nintelligent countenance,--we must not say her in future,--soon attracted\nthe notice of some of our most eloquent statesmen. He appeared so\nhumble, so obedient and so unattentive to anything but his own business,\nthat those senators on whom he waited, not suspecting that he had the\nordinary curiosity of servants in general, were entirely thrown off\ntheir guard, and in their conversations with one another seemed to\nforget their usual caution. Such in a short time was their confidence in\nhim, that their most important papers and letters were left loose upon\ntheir tables, satisfied with saying, as they were going out, \"Theodore,\ntake care of my room and papers.\"\n\nNow the Jesuit was in her glory. Now the lay sister had an opportunity\nof knowing many of our national secrets, as well as the private\ncharacters of some of our eminent statesmen. Now it was known whether\nHenry Clay was a gambler; whether Daniel Webster was a libertine;\nwhether John C. Calhoun was an honorable but credulous man. Now it was\nknown what value was put upon Popish influence in this country, and what\nwere the hopes of Papist foreigners in the United States. In fact, this\nlay sister in male uniform, and but a waiter in Gadsby's Hotel, was thus\nenabled to give more correct information of the actual state of things\nin this country, through the General of the Jesuit Order in Rome, than\nthe whole corps diplomatic from foreign countries then resident at our\nseat of government.\n\nAfter relating to me in her sick room,--as the family in which she lived\nfancied it was,--all these circumstances, she deliberately said to me,\n\"I want a written character from you. You must state in it that I have\ncomplied with my duty; and as it is necessary that I should wear a cap\nfor a while, having cut off my hair, you must say that you visited me in\nmy sick room, that I confessed to you, received the _viaticum_ and\nhad just recovered from a violent fever in which I lost my hair. My\nbusiness is not done yet,\" said she. \"I must go to New York, where the\nSisters of Charity will find a place for me as waiting-maid.\" It is\nneedless to say with what reluctance any man could comply with such a\nrequest as this; and my having done so, is a stronger evidence than I\nhave heretofore given of the indomitable strength of early education.\n\nThe conduct of this emissary of Satan, was the embodyment of all that\nwas iniquitous and dishonorable; it was a violation of every tie that\nholds society together; it was a part of a system of social, political,\nmoral, public and private treachery, which no other being than a devil\nor a Jesuit could devise. Yet I was a Popish priest. My education, my\nprofession, my oath, compelled me to sanction it; and I did sanction it.\nThe lay sister retired to New York, put on her female dress, and\nduring some months following, acted as a chambermaid in several of\nthe wealthiest Protestant families in that city. A few weeks after she\nobtained from me this character, the Rev. Mr.---------, (I will give\nhis name in full if necessary,) President of the Jesuit college in\nStonyhurst, to which I have alluded, and where this demon, now in\npetticoats, was a lay sister, called on me in Philadelphia. We were old\nacquaintances, he being Vice President of the college of Maynooth for\nabout twelve months.\n\nThe misunderstanding between myself and the acting superior of the\ndiocese of Pennsylvania, had just commenced, and my friend, the Jesuit,\nthought it his duty to call upon me. He hoped that I would abandon my\nschismatic course,--I was not then a heretic,--and cease to circulate\nthe Bible among the people. He never alluded to the lay sister during\nour whole conversation, though he was the very man who caused her to\nbe sent out to this country, and the one who first procured her the\nsituation of lay sister at Stonyhurst Both were relatives, and both\nnatives of Dublin, in Ireland.\n\nWhether the relation of this circumstance will have the effect of\nputting Americans on their guard against Jesuits and nuns, I know not;\nand in truth, such is their apathy on the general subject of Popery,\nthat I am tempted to say, I care not. My impression is, that until some\nattack is made upon an American's purse, and Popery becomes a question\nof dollars and cents, Jonathan will never be roused from his apathy. So\nfar as I know Americans, as the antagonists of Popery, they will listen\nto no argument upon the subject, either in their national councils or\nin their pulpits, except to the one great argument, the \"_Argumentum ad\ncrumonam._\" I will only say, \"_Qui vult descipatur_.\"\n\nIt is unnecessary, I presume, to remark here, that the conduct of the\nmodern fathers of the Popish church, in sending to this country the\nlay sister of whom I have been speaking, and encouraging her as a spy\namongst our citizens, did not tend much to diminish my doubts about the\nveracity of the ancient fathers.\n\nProvidentially, however, another circumstance occurred, which finally\ndecided me. It is of so atrocious a character, that if there were\nnot several now living, who witnessed the whole transaction, I would\nscarcely mention it; or if I did, it could be with little or no hope of\nbeing believed by Americans, although some money is mixed up with the\naffair.\n\nThere lived in Philadelphia, about the year 1822 or 1823, a gentleman\nof high character as a sea captain and otherwise. He commanded an\nEast-Indiaman, belonging to one of the wealthiest houses in that city.\nOne of the firm now lives there, though at an advanced period of life.\nThis captain of whom I speak, was in the habit of visiting Baltimore,\nwhenever he returned from the East Indies. He was a remarkably\nfine-looking man, and believed to be worth from one hundred and fifty to\ntwo hundred thousand dollars. He shipped largely upon his own account,\nand was successful.\n\nWhile in Baltimore, he formed an attachment for a Roman Catholic lady of\nbeauty, but no fortune.\n\nThe Reverend Mr. K------, the Stonyhurst Jesuit, whom I mentioned,\nhappened to be there during one of the captain's visits to that city, to\nsee this lady. The Jesuit having discovered who the captain was, what\nhe was, and how much money he was worth, obtained an introduction to him\nfrom this Roman Catholic lady. He soon found that, like most men whose\nlives have been spent upon the sea, he was a frank, open-hearted man. A\nlittle further intimacy satisfied him, that he was deeply in love with\nthis Popish lady. His course was now clear. The Jesuit serpent saw\nplainly that his prey was within striking distance; that he need only\ncoil himself into a proper attitude and spring upon it at his leisure.\nHe represented to the captain, that the lady to whom he was paying his\nattentions was one of the most amiable and excellent of her sex; highly\napproved of the captain's taste and judgment; with many other such\nobservations. The captain was more and more pleased with the object of\nhis affections, and urged his suit with increased assiduity. The Jesuit\nin the mean time was not idle; his eye rested with a serpent-like\nfascinating gaze upon the movements and money of the captain. He had\nprivate interviews with the lady. He contrived to have her become his\n_penitent_, and go to confession to him. 15\n\nHis control over her in future was boundless. She lost her identity as a\nmember of society. She almost ceased to be a human being; a rational\none she could not be. She became a thing, a mere thing to be shaped and\nmoulded as her holy father the Jesuit directed. He spoke to her of the\ncaptain, of his great attachment to her, and recommended to her to marry\nhim, but on condition that he should become a Roman Catholic. He\ntalked eloquently of the awful consequences of having a member of the\n_infallible_ church unite herself to a heretic, whom she knew to be\nexcommunicated and damned by the Pope and the holy church, as all\nheretics are, and finally obtained from the young lady a solemn promise\nthat she should never marry her suitor, until he became a member of the\nchurch of Rome.\n\nWhen the captain next called to see her, the lady told him that she had\none objection, and only one, to marrying him; unless that was removed,\nshe could never consent to do so; and stated to him what that objection\nwas. The unsuspecting and frank sailor, not being a professor of any\nreligion, and caring very little to what church he might go, replied,\nthat he would as soon be a Roman Catholic as anything else. All things\nwere now arranged, except the formality of uniting with the Popish\nchurch. The Jesuit was sent for, and it was agreed that the marriage\nshould take place in a few weeks, during which time the captain, under\nthe direction of the Jesuit, was to prepare himself for confession; a\nnecessary preliminary for joining the Popish church.\n\nIt is a custom with Jesuits, and almost with all priests of the Romish\nchurch, to require of those who are about uniting with them, to go into\nwhat they call a retreat; viz. to enter into some retired or secluded\nplace, where they will have an opportunity of communing with themselves,\nwithout interruption from the world or its busy citizens. The\nJesuit recommended to his unfortunate dupe, the captain, to retire\nto--------convent, where he might be alone as much as he pleased, and\nwhere he would hear nothing but songs of praise to the Most High God,\nfrom _blessed monks and nuns_.\n\nThe captain, according to orders, entered upon his retreat. Before\nI proceed further, I will observe that this captain, of whom I am\nspeaking, had a remarkably beautiful set of teeth, of which it was\nsaid he was extremely vain. He was not many days upon his retreat, when\nsymptoms of derangement became evident; and one day, while under the\ninfluence of some natural or artificial cause--the reader may guess\nwhich--the unfortunate gentleman went down to Alexandria, called upon a\ndentist in that city or neighborhood, and insisted that he should pull\nout seven teeth from each jaw. In vain did the dentist remonstrate; out\nthey must come, and out they did come.\n\nThe Jesuit hastened to Baltimore, called upon the lady who was engaged\nto be married, told her the captain was insane, beyond recovery,\nand that she should be thankful to the Virgin Mary, who caused this\nvisitation in time to prevent her from being married to a madman. Judge\nyou, Americans, of the feelings of this lady on that occasion, and say\nwhat ought to be the punishment of the incarnate fiend who occasioned\nthem. The poor captain, though considerably recovered, continued to be\npartially deranged; but it assumed a character of religious gloom and\nmelancholy. The Jesuit returned to--------, seeming to do all in his\npower to lighten the spiritual load which lay upon the captain's soul.\nHe became his confessor, and soon persuaded him that the only way of\nsaving his soul, was to convey to the order of Jesuits what property he\npossessed, and to become a Popish priest; that he had a visit from the\nVirgin Mary, who ordered him to tell him--the captain--that he must take\nholy orders; that there was a grand field opened for him to promote\nthe cause of religion and the saints; that he must go forthwith to\nPhiladelphia, where an infamous heretic called Hogan was spreading most\ndamnable heresies. Will you believe it, Americans? It is drawing almost\ntoo heavily upon you to do so. He did come to Philadelphia, and preached\nagainst the heretic Hogan and Hoganism, a fact which fifty thousand\npeople now living there can attest. But _quantum mutatus!_ When he left\nit some time before, he was a happy, honorable and fine-looking man. He\nwas wealthy, and he obtained his wealth by honest industry. But how was\nhe now, the distorted shadow of what he was; penniless, toothless, and a\nsenseless fanatic, drugged into madness, and by whom?--by nuns, who act\nin the treble capacity of cooks, teachers, and prostitutes for Jesuits.\nThis is harsh language indeed. Call it gross, if you please, reader; but\nif you will figure to yourself for a moment an honorable man, a native\nof these United States, a fine specimen of manly proportions and manly\nbeauty, and then conceive this individual reduced to the condition to\nwhich I and thousands now living have seen this noble-hearted sailor of\nwhom I have spoken, reduced, my language will appear neither harsh nor\ncoarse.\n\nWhat! must we call Jesuit assassins reverend gentlemen? Must we call\nrobbers honest men? Must we call their accessories--nuns--ladies of\nvirtue? Sympathizers may do so; but I do not write for them alone.\nI write for men of sense; I write for lovers of their God and their\ncountry; I write not for advocates of Puseyism, or such exploded\nfooleries as they believe in. Whatever I say, is intended for those\nalone who have the capacity of distinguishing between common sense and\nmental vagaries, and who have the honesty to call things by their proper\nnames.\n\nThe first sermon which this unfortunate man preached against me in\nPhiladelphia, was attended by crowds. Many had known him before he went\nto Baltimore. He was then universally popular, and on his return\namong them he was well received. His friends saw the change--the fatal\nchange--which had taken place in his whole external configuration;\nbut they knew not by what means it was effected. Some attributed it to\nself-denial, others to fanaticism, but none to the right cause. This was\nknown only in the confessional; and under all these circumstances,\nit may be easily supposed that his discourses against me, however\nunconnected they may be, however fugitive and irrelevant as a whole, had\na powerful effect upon the public mind.\n\nPublic sentiment, which up to this period sustained me in my opposition\nto Popery, and in my efforts to circulate the Bible, now began to flag.\nPopish priests and bishops went about industriously representing that\nthis reverend convert to Popery was inspired; reported that he had\nvisits from saints and angels, attesting the fact of his inspiration.\nThere was no difficulty in persuading a man of his shattered\nconstitution and now weak mind, that such was the fact; and he redoubled\nhis efforts in trying to persuade those who attended my church, and who\nwere becoming readers of the Bible, never to do so again. His disordered\nmind often \"saw me in hell, side by side with Luther, and the blessed\nVirgin spitting in our face.\" \"He often saw me with Ignatius Loyola,\nwho was breaking me on the rack as a punishment for my heresies.\" The\nutterance of those wild rhapsodies were not without their effect; almost\nall the poor Irish Papists believed them; and it required from me more\nbodily and mental labor than I was able to endure, to counteract the\neffects of this madman's rhapsodizing.\n\nI am now so well acquainted with the character of American Protestants,\nand even with American converts to the Romish church, that I know it is\ndifficult to persuade them that the Romish priests of Philadelphia,\nor other parts of the United States, were so utterly abandoned to\ndegeneracy, as to give credence to these Visions or visits from saints,\nwhich I have just spoken of. But let them recollect that practices upon\npopular credulity are now carried on, and were then carried on, upon as\nlarge a scale, as at any period in the existence of the Romish church.\nSuch impositions are encouraged all over the world, even at the present\nday. The wildest extravagances of intellect have circulated freely for\nthe last thirty years in the world. Read Eugene Sue. He tells us of\nnumerous instances of the kind. Read the last edition of Genin, page 82,\nand you will find an account of the Medal of the _Immaculate Conception\nof the Virgin Mary_, struck only the other day, 1838. Over _two hundred\nthousand copies_ of this medal have been already sold. The story\nis this, as now vouched for by the most eminent holy fathers of the\ninfallible church:--That the Virgin Mary showed herself to one of the\n_Sisters of Charity_ in France, a branch of which holy sisterhood we\nhave in this city of Boston, the capital of New England, and revealed\nto her the pattern of a medal to be struck for her; the dress she was to\nappear in, and the kind of rings she was to wear.\n\nThis medal has cured, and is now curing, according to the accounts\nwe receive from the holy fathers, all manner of diseases, such as\nparalysis, epilepsy, cancer, and, according to the belief of some\nPuseyite moral philosophers, it causes the blind to see, the dumb to\nspeak, and the lame to walk. A capital story is related of the potency\nof this medal. It is too good to be omitted, especially as many of\nmy Puseyite friends believe it, and no doubt will be glad to hear it\nrepeated.\n\nA Sister of Charity got acquainted with a married couple. The wife was\na Papist of the most exemplary character, obedient to holy Mother the\nchurch, and her confessor, in all things. The husband had no faith,\nespecially in his wife's confessor. He drank, cursed and swore, \"like\nall possessed.\" The holy Sister of Charity, seeing him at the point of\ndeath, and wishing to rescue his soul from hell, called to see him, and\nslipped one of these medals between the sheets of this wicked man's bed,\nand the next morning he gets up as well as ever and goes to confession.\nAnother miracle which was performed by this medal in 1838, deserves\nnotice, and may prove invaluable, if it finds its way into this country.\nOne Marie Laboissiere, aided by her lover, murdered her husband, and\nforced her son to take part in the murder, to prevent him from being\nwitness against her. The lady and her lover were, however, arrested,\ntried, and found guilty of the murder. They appealed to a higher\ntribunal. During the interval between the sitting of the higher and\nlower courts, one of the Sisters of Charity threw a medal round Marie's\nneck, and though the court and all saw that she was guilty, and ought to\nbe judicially declared so, they could not do it. The medal would not\nlet them, but obliged them to acquit her. If the reader will take into\nconsideration that such visions as the Rev. Captain fancied he had, were\nmatters of every-day occurrence with pious Papists, and that a belief\nin them is encouraged and enforced by Popish priests and bishops\neverywhere, they will cease to be surprised that a man tortured into\nmadness, as my reverend antagonist was, should have visions such\nas those ascribed to him; nor will they wonder at the effect of his\npreaching, upon a congregation principally composed of Irish and French\nPapists.\n\nI was alone, without a clerical friend; not a Protestant preacher, with\nthe exception of one, raised his hand or his voice in my support.\nThey seemed to like the fun, as some of them expressed it, amongst the\nPapists,--I suppose they considered me one then,--but they came not to\nmy aid. They appeared to me pretty much like the wife when she saw her\nhusband fighting with a bear, and was expected to interfere, but very\ncoolly replied, \"I don't care which of them gets licked.\"\n\nUnder these circumstances, I felt discouraged; became utterly disgusted\nwith Popery and its infamous practices, with the holy fathers and their\nfooleries, and resolved in future to have no more to do with Popery. I\ncollected such volumes as I had of the holy fathers, piled them up into\none heap, added to them the lives of the saints, and placing on the top\nof the pile the Pope's bull of excommunication, which the poor old man\nthought would frighten me out of my wits, I consigned them, book by\nbook, volume by volume, together with the aforesaid bull, to the warm\nembraces of a good hickory fire. I knew the day was not far distant,\nwhen Americans would see something besides fun in Popish quarrels;\nand in the mean time, I determined to employ myself in the study of\nBlackstone, Chitty, &c.; a much more profitable employment, in\na pecuniary point of view, than fighting in the cause of American\nProtestants with European Papists.\n\nIt was said of Erasmus, that he laid the egg of the reformation, and\nthat Luther hatched it. I trust it will not be deemed vanity in me to\nsay that I have done as much for American Protestants, as Erasmus did in\nhis day. At least, I have done all I could; but whether they or any of\nthem will do as Luther has done, time alone can decide.\n\nIn this connection, it is not improper for me to state the ultimate\nfate of this reverend convert to the Romish church. After I retired\nfrom Philadelphia, and Hoganism was put down, the Jesuits measurably\nneglected their convert; a thing very unusual with them, to do them\njustice. He felt the loneliness of his situation. With a mind enfeebled\nby drugs, a correct view of his situation could only strike him by\nglances; but they were terrible and fearful. He saw himself robbed of\nthe one beloved object of all his earthly affections; plundered of a\nfortune, the fruit of honorable toil and industry. He saw in himself\nbut the mutilated skeleton of what he once was, and the dupe of crafty\nJesuits and licentious nuns. He shrunk from the view, and as if God, in\nhis mercy, wished to hide it from him' by means which may appear to\nus incomprehensible, he fell into fits of real madness, from which he\nrecovered but occasionally. The last I have heard of him was that he was\narrested somewhere near Newcastle, Delaware, for attempting to commit a\nrape on a child nine years old; but the poor maniac was acquitted on\nthe ground of insanity. Several priests were called as witnesses in his\nbehalf; and well they may be witnesses. It was they that caused him to\nbe what he was; it was they that maddened him.\n\nThose who are not familiar with crime, whose hands are unstained by\nblood, and whose consciences have not been seared and discolored by the\nblackness of guilt, may hesitate to give credence to these disgusting\ndetails. Comparatively short as our national existence is, and though\nbrief the period since we cut loose as a nation from what we deemed the\npolluted governments of Europe, still there was a time, even in these\nUnited States, when such deeds as I have related would not and could not\nbe believed amongst us. There was a time when the ancient Romans did\nnot think that there existed such a crime as patricide; and hence it is.\nthat there was no law against it. There was actually no punishment known\nto their laws for the commission of such a crime; and why, reader? Did\nthe ancient Romans encourage their children to kill their parents, or\nto commit patricide? No. Far from it. No people in the world venerated\ntheir parents more than the Roman children of the day to which I allude.\nThey had no law against the crime, because they did not believe it\npossible that such a crime could be committed. Nor is it to be wondered\nnow, that many Americans should consider it almost impossible that\nsuch deeds as I have laid to the charge of Jesuits and nuns, should be\nperpetrated amongst us. But time, that exponent of all things, will\nsoon satisfy our people--as it did the Romans before us--that there is\nnothing impossible, or even beyond the range of Jesuitical iniquity. The\narchives of Jesuitical intrigue are now in a measure being thrown open\nto the world. The diffusion of literature is so general, and human\ncuriosity, at the present period, so great, that nothing can escape its\nsearching inquiries. It is therefore to be hoped that our people will\nnot be much longer in ignorance of the iniquities of Jesuits. Americans\ncan now learn from historical evidence, which admits of no doubt, that\nJesuits have been expelled, successively, from thirty-nine different\ngovernments; they can also learn, that by intrigue, deception, perjury\nand poison, they have survived each and every one of those expulsions.\nThey may see,--if they can see anything but money,--that the Jesuits are\nnow making a final struggle for a settlement in this country; and if\nthey are not so stupid as not to see that similar causes must produce\nsimilar events, they will infer that Jesuits, who have successively\nand effectually introduced disunion, discord, and disorganization into\nthirty-nine governments, cannot fail to do the same in ours. If by\npoison and assassination they have dethroned the rulers of other\ncountries; if by debauchery and superstition in the confessional, they\nhave seduced their wives and daughters, can it be supposed that\nour rulers shall escape, our government be secure, or our wives and\ndaughters safe from the daggers or subtle poisons of these notorious\nfiends?\n\nLet any American take the \"Wandering Jew,\"--let him read it attentively,\nand reflect that the writer, Eugene Sue, is a Roman Catholic now living\nin France,--and say whether there is any crime too daring for a Romish\npriest or Jesuit. If he doubts what I relate of a young lady in the\nbeginning of this book, who was debauched by a Romish priest, and\npoisoned by a nun, the mother abbess of a Jesuit seminary of learning,\nto get rid of her illicit offspring; let him see the history of\nCharlotte De Cordoville, in the Wandering Jew. He will see in the\nhistory of that young lady, distinguished though she was for fortune,\nbeauty and charity, how she was reduced to misery and unhappiness, by\nthe intrigues of Jesuits. You will see how her own aunt was made the\ninstrument of all her misfortunes; but the aunt was first made a Jesuit,\nand in that capacity she disregarded honor, truth, the relationship of\nblood, and all the alliances of natural friendship. She caused her to be\nimprisoned and maltreated. She and her associate Jesuits caused herself\nand her lover to be poisoned or drugged into an insane stupor;--all for\nthe glory of the infallible church, and with a view of adding to its\nill-gotten treasures. For a full account of this transaction, see Eugene\nSue.\n\nBut Romish priests will not permit their people to read Eugene Sue; it\nis a forbidden book; his royal holiness, the Pope, has cursed the book\nand all who read it. He has cursed all who presume to discuss fairly the\nmerits of Popery; but even this will scarcely be believed by Americans.\nStrange infatuation! Will Americans read a report made to the French\nChambers in Paris, by the Duke de Broglie, on the subject of public\ninstruction and Jesuitism? Will they further read a small work written\nby Messrs. Michelet and Quinet, professors in the French national\ncollege? If they do, it may open their eyes to consequences which may be\napprehended from even tolerating Jesuits amongst us. They will see that\nJesuits are the avowed enemies of liberal education, and that they are\nsustained in their opposition to it by the curses of the Pope.\n\nProfessors Michelet and Quinet, in 1843, were discussing, in public, the\ninfluence of the different religious orders. They had, as we are told,\ncommented upon that of the Templars, and were speaking of the society\nof Jesuits, its origin and its interference in political affairs; and\nthough the professors themselves were Roman Catholics, though they\nlectured in a Roman Catholic country and to Roman Catholic people, under\nthe sanction of a law of the land, yet Jesuits attempted to disturb\nthose lectures, by creating an uproar among the audience; just what\nthey are doing in this country. But what renders their conduct on this\noccasion more strange, is the fact, that the very existence of Jesuits,\nas a society is illegal in France. There is a law in France against\nsecret associations, and under this law they cannot exist. How pregnant\nwith instructions to Americans is this single historical fact! A few\nyears ago, Charles X. and his family had to fly from France, because,\nunder the influence of Jesuitism he violated his faith, he broke his\nroyal word and oath to the people. The people of France hunted him and\nthe Jesuits out of that country, as they would so many wild beasts. Such\nthen was the indignation of Popish France against that infernal\nsociety, the Jesuits, that not one of them dared ta show his face in\nthe streets of Paris, without trembling for his life. Like dastardly\ncowards, as all dishonorable and bad men are,--I never knew an\nexception,--these wretches moved about like beasts of chase, \"stealing\nfrom one cover to another;\" the representatives of all that was base\nand dishonorable; the embodiment of all that was vile, false and\ntreacherous; the incarnation, the sentiment and the sediment of all that\nwas odious in fallen humanity. But see them now, in 1843 and '44, and\nsee the conduct of these very French people towards them. Though the\nlaw forbids their existence, they have the hardihood to interrupt the\nlegitimate professors of the college of France, in their inquiries\ninto the spirit and influence of Jesuitism; and they are supported by a\nportion of the very people, who, but a few years ago, pelted them\nwith rotten eggs and dead cats, through the streets of Paris. And what\neffected this extraordinary change in popular sentiment? It is accounted\nfor in various ways; but I contend that the only fair solution of the\nproblem is to be found in the fact, that republican, democratic North\nAmerica hats opened her hospitable doors, and without suspicion, or\nwithout dreaming that she was entertaining her deadliest foe, has spread\nher tables to feed, and opened her purse to build asylums for these\nscapegoats of the human family.\n\nIn 1830, Jesuits were crushed in France; they fled to the United States,\ncollected together their broken phalanxes, told brother Jonathan they\nwere a persecuted people, prevailed on him to build colleges for them,\nand they have risen again, not only in this land of the brave, but even\nin France, under the present king, Louis Philippe.\n\nBut notwithstanding these truths, the inquiry is sometimes made,--the\nquestion has often been put even to myself,--\"Are there really any\nJesuits in the United States?\" \"Do you believe that females are seduced\ninto nunneries?\" \"Do you believe they attempt to tamper with our\nchildren or our wives?\" I allude to the subject of privately tampering\nwith the wives and daughters of Americans thus frequently, because I\nthink it is all-important that they should thoroughly understand the\ndangers to be apprehended from having any intercourse whatever with\nJesuits and nuns. Many a man asks this question, who accompanies it with\nsaying, the nunnery to which my daughter goes to school is not a Jesuit\nnunnery. The priest to whom my wife confesses is not a Jesuit. The\npriest to whom my daughter and servants go to confession is not, and\nnever was, a Jesuit; and consequently there is no danger from this\nsource. Many a man asks this question, and states these circumstances\nin good faith, and feels secure that all is right, as nothing in his\nopinion is to be feared but from Jesuits. This is a delusion. This\nman's wife is already-governed by Jesuits through her confessor. It even\nhappens sometimes that the confessor himself is unconscious of the\npart he is acting. The confessor acts under the immediate advice of his\nbishop, to whom alone, in most cases, the Jesuits will entrust their\nplans, unless the confessor is personally known to them; and unless the\nconfessor professes and solemnly swears to observe,--I use the words\nof the oath,--\"obedience, courage, secrecy, patience, craft, audacity,\nperfect union among ourselves, having for our country, the world; for\nour family, our order; for our queen, Rome.\"\n\nFew of the confessors in this country, except the bishops, are entrusted\nwith the plans of the Jesuits; perhaps not ten, except they are of the\nJesuit order. It is through those confessors, that many of our American\nyouth, both male and female, are seduced into Popish schools, where\nthey become, with few exceptions, spiritless, false, slaves of abject\nsuperstition, and the victims of a superficial education. No time is\ngiven, no room left, as a modern writer expresses it, for the energies\nof the mind to develop themselves. No sustenance is provided to nourish\nthe finer feelings of the heart. The intellect is checked, the flow of\nimagination is stemmed, and all the warm and generous affections of the\nsoul are poisoned in their very bud.\n\nFor an instance of the fatal consequence of such an education as this, I\nwould call the attention of Americans, once more, to the Wandering Jew.\nSee the effects of a Jesuitical education upon the noble and generous\nmind of Gabriel, the adopted son of the honest Dagoberth. What could be\nmore lovely than the disposition of this young man. His sentiments were\nas upright and as chaste as fallen humanity would permit. But the Jesuit\nsociety laid its impure hands upon him at an early period of life; they\npersuaded his guileless adopted mother to go to confession,--not to a\nJesuit,--but to a _Cure_ of another order of priests; and the bishop of\nthis Cure gave him his instructions how to manage the mother of Gabriel.\nThe bishop knew that this adopted son of the virtuous and craftless wife\nof Dagoberth, was one among other heirs of an immense estate, and he\ndirected the Cure to prevail upon this simple woman, while at confession\nwith him, to send Gabriel to a Jesuit school, and have him become a\nJesuit priest. Americans, read the sequel, and in that you will find a\nwarning, stronger and louder than I can give you, never to send a\nchild of yours to a Jesuit seminary. Let mothers read the history of\nDagoberth's wife, and if, after careful and honest perusal of it, they\nwill again commit their daughters to the care of a nurse who goes to\nconfession, I must only conclude that they are either infidels or\nmad, or both. \"_Quem Deus vult perdere prius dementat_.\" Gabriel,--the\nvirtuous and good Gabriel,--was nursed by Dagoberth's wife. From his\ninfancy, it seems he had no inclination to become a Jesuit; he appeared\nto have an innate aversion to the order of Jesuits; he struggled against\nuniting himself with them, as far as a sense of gratitude and a feeling\nof affection for his adopted mother, the nurse of his childhood, would\npermit. But all to no purpose; the mother was the dupe of her confessor.\nHe was instructed to win over the youth by any and every means; and,\nwith the advice and cooperation of Jesuits, the confessor of this really\nhonest, but deluded woman, succeeded, by perseverance and increased\nfondness for her adopted child, in neutralizing his aversion towards\nJesuit priests.\n\nIn an evil hour he joined them; their traps were too well laid, and\nwithout being seen in the business themselves, they accomplished their\niniquitous purposes through the instrumentality of this affectionate\nand charitable woman. All was done through the confessional. How many\nsimilar cases have I witnessed myself, in the course of my life, but\nparticularly while acting as a Romish priest in the confessional! How\noften have I known some of the best of women, belonging to the Roman\nCatholic church, unconsciously made the dupes of priests! How often have\nI seen women, who, had they been properly educated, and under different\ncircumstances, would be an honor to any religious denomination, made the\ninstruments of all that was vile and flagitious, by Popish confessors!\nHow often have I seen Roman Catholic servant-maids in Protestant\nfamilies, inveigled by their _ghostly fathers_, in the confessional,\ninto treachery, deception and ingratitude, towards their employers and\nbenefactors! How often, as I have stated in my book on Popery, have\nthese Roman Catholic servants stolen the infants from their Protestant\nmothers, and brought them to myself to be baptized!\n\nThere is now, in the state of Massachusetts, a young Protestant\nclergyman, distinguished for his talents and piety, an honor to\nhis profession as a minister of the gospel, and to the state of\nMassachusetts as a republican citizen, who was baptized by myself in\nPhiladelphia, when acting as a Roman Catholic priest. The name of the\ngentleman and the date of his baptism were duly registered by me; but\nthe clerical Goths and Vandals, who succeeded me in St. Mary's church in\nthat city, _expunged_ the register which I kept, not deeming it safe to\nleave in existence, if possible, any records of the iniquities taught or\npractised in the Romish church.\n\nThere are in all bodies and in all denominations of clergymen, certain\nindividuals by whom it becomes fashionable to get married and baptized;\nand during my residence in Philadelphia, I held rather a conspicuous\nplace among them. The congregation of St. Mary's church was a large\none. Notwithstanding my _schismatic_ doctrines,--I was not then deemed\na heretic,--crowds attended the church, and I believe,--though I cannot\ntell the exact number,--that I baptized more children than any\nclergyman in the city. Among these there were hundreds of Presbyterians,\nEpiscopalians, Methodists and Baptists, brought to me for that purpose,\nby their Roman Catholic nurses, without the knowledge or consent of\ntheir Protestant mothers.\n\nThis has ever been the treacherous practice of the Romish church, from\nthe days of Hildebrand down to the present moment. Dagoberth's wife is\nnot a solitary instance of the undue influence which Romish priests have\nover those women who go to confession to them. Show me the house of a\nProtestant family in the United States where there is a Roman Catholic,\nmale or female, who goes to confession and communion in the Romish\nchurch, and I will show you a watch, a spy upon every act and deed and\nmovement of that family. There is not a letter that comes into such a\nfamily, that is not watched by Popish servants. They soon know from whom\nit comes, or whether anything is to be gained by intercepting it. The\nconfessor is immediately consulted, and it is ascertained, from some\nservant in the house where it was written or where it was received, what\nwas its purport, or what it contained.\n\nThis practice of domestic _espionage_, we all know, is common in every\ncountry where auricular confession is taught and practised; but it is\ncarried on more generally here, in proportion to the number of Roman\nCatholics, than in any other country in the world; and the reason\nis obvious. It is said that Jews never cheat each other; this is not\nbecause they will not cheat as well as others. The reason is, they will\nnot trust each other. They are always on the watch, or, as Yankees would\nexpress it, on the \"look-out\" for each other. Neither is it because\nother countries or other people are less disposed to indulge in this\nspecies of espionage than we are, that they have less of it: it is\nbecause Catholic countries and Catholics will not trust each other. They\nare on the _qui vive_ in all matters of intrigue, whether in domestic or\nnational affairs, whether in morals or politics. But poor Jonathan, with\nall his smartness and all his cleverness, is probably the most gullible\nbiped that crawls upon this earth. I have known some poor servant-maids\nand servant-men, who did not seem to have an idea beyond a Hottentot,\nwho, after one month's proper training in the confessional by a Romish\npriest, could wheedle them out of all they possessed, except their\nmoney; and never have I known a Romish confessor, not even the simplest\nReverend Yahoo from the bogs of Ireland or flats of Holland, who could\nnot filch from them whatever money he wanted for any given purpose.\n\nThe cunning of Americans, their knowledge of human nature and of things\nin general, cannot be mentioned in the same category with the craft and\nknowledge of man which Jesuit priests and confessors possess. This is\nexemplified even in the case of American missionaries. Send an American\nmissionary to France, to Spain, or to any Catholic country, and without\naid from home he will starve. He has no Roman Catholic to come to\nconfession to him, to give him money to build a church for him; he has\nno servant-maid or servant-man, through whom he can persuade, to give\nhim ten or twelve dollars for saying mass; no dying man or woman will\nsend for him, and pay him well for taking out of his pockets a set of\n_oil stocks_, for the purpose of greasing them over, commencing on the\nforehead, the tip of the nose, eyelids, the lips, the breast, the loins\nand the soles of the feet. He has no one to send for him and pay highly,\nfor putting his hand in his breeches pocket and pulling out a box full\nof _gods_, viz., wafers made of flower and water, and giving him one of\nthem. No. He has none, of these resources; he starves amongst them\nuntil bread is sent to him from home. Talk of Yankee cunning! He is a\nsimpleton compared with a Jesuit. A Jesuit comes amongst us, or he\ngoes to any Protestant country, without a dollar, but he never travels\nwithout his jackals, male and female. He brings with him his lay sisters\nand his lay brothers; they soon scent out prey for him; they hire\nthemselves, as servant men and women, to Protestant Yankees, and the\nfirst intimation we have of a Jesuit missionary amongst us, is the alarm\nof some rich-toned bell, which we hear from the steeple of a church\nbuilt for him by Protestant Yankees. In place of sending home for\nmoney to support him, as the American missionary has to do, a Jesuit\nis sending home money to pay the passage of others to come out and\nhelp him. He is purchasing some of the most valuable real estate that\nProtestant Yankees own, with Yankee money, and writes home to his\nroyal holiness, the Pope, that Americans are a simple, gullible people.\n\"Persevere,\" says the Jesuit in America to his Pope; \"already have\nyou three millions of faithful troops from your own faithful allies of\nFrance and Spain and other Roman Catholic friendly governments, among\nthem. Besides this, holy father, your holiness will bear in mind that\nmany of those American heretics, are deserting their own churches and\njoining us; and above all, most holy father, you will remember,--and\nI pray you will graciously condescend to take note of it,--that these\nAmericans are all politicians, all fond of offices and would kiss\nyour----!!!!! as well as your toe, if your subjects will only aid them\nin keeping their offices, which, I am happy to inform your holiness, we\nare very willing to do, until we have numerical strength enough to\nturn all the heretical wretches out, and fill up their places with your\nfaithful subjects. This, with the aid of the blessed Virgin Mary, we\nshall be able to accomplish in a very few years. Press on, most holy\nfather; your subjects are coming in thousands per day. Send dispatches\nto your royal brothers of Austria, Prussia and Spain; urge upon them to\nsend us help, and the glorious cause of your holy spouse, the infallible\nchurch, the Queen of heaven, will triumph.\n\n\"Write to the greatest layman living, Daniel O'Connell, whom your\nholiness intends shall receive from your hands a crown as king of\nIreland; urge upon him the necessity of sending over to the United\nStates all the repealers he can spare. Let him persuade the Irish, that\nthe union was the cause of all their grievances,--that they would\nhave nothing to complain of, if the union were repealed. Let not your\nfaithful son, D. O'Connell, ever allude to the fact,--the poor Irish\nwould never dream of it,--that the union is not quite fifty years old,\nand that, for seven hundred years before its existence, the Irish were\nmuch more quarrelsome, clamorous, litigious than they are now. It won't\ndo to let them know this; repeal would lose all its charms, and the\ngreatest layman living, would become,--between you and myself and the\nholy Virgin Mary,--what he really is, the greatest scoundrel and the\nbiggest poltroon living. These heretical Americans are trying to cause\na division between your son Daniel O'Connell and your subjects. Poor\ndolts! How little they know about us. We know what we are about Your\nson need only go regularly to confession, and attend mass in some public\nplace, such as at a mass meeting of repealers, and nothing can separate\nyour subjects from him. I trust the move which we made the other day in\nNew York, through your faithful subject Lord Bishop Hughs, was highly\nsatisfactory to your holiness. Your royal holiness will be graciously\npleased to remember, that the first murmurings of repeal thunder,\nproceeded from the city of New York, through that humble, pious and\nzealous servant of the infallible church, the Lord Bishop Hughs. He\nwas among the first to call the people together, and, under pretence\nof desiring repeal in Ireland, he told them to organize, to weigh well\ntheir own power and influence in the political balance. He advised them\nto give their support to no man but a repealer, and very judiciously\ninstructed his confessors in private, that it should be given only to\nthose who were most favorable to your holiness' spouse, the infallible\nchurch. He succeeded well. The American heretics swallowed the bait;\nthe President of the United States for the time being, was the first\npolitical gudgeon he caught. Next followed two young spawns of his. They\nshouted repeal throughout the country. Your subjects promised to\nelect the three of them presidents in succession; but when the hour of\nelection came, as in duty and by oath of allegiance to your holiness\nbound, we acted as we thought would best serve the interest of our holy\nchurch.\"\n\nThis may all seem like romance; but is it so? Do not facts within the\nknowledge and almost view of my readers, prove that it is the very\nreverse? Who is there that does not know, that does not recollect, or\nthat can forget the events and circumstances of the last election for\nPresident of the United States? Who is there that does not recollect the\npart, which repealers played in that election? Can any man who has paid\nthe least attention to passing events, forget the conduct of Bishop\nHughs of New York or of Bishop Fenwick of Boston, or of any other\nbishop (Romish bishops) of the United States, during the last political\neventful year? Who ordered the Irish Catholics to turn out with a banner\nbearing upon it the treasonable inscription, \"Americans shan't rule\nus\"? Bishop Hughs of New York. Did not a band of traitorous repealers,\ncalling themselves democrats, parade the streets of New York, Buffalo\nand other cities, under the jurisdiction of the Lord Bishop Hughs,\nshaking this banner in the very faces of American citizens, hurraing\nfor Daniel O'Connell and repeal? Did not this bishop Hughs order several\nhundred stands of fire-arms to be placed in the Roman Catholic churches\nof New York, with a view of firing upon the citizens should they even\ndare to show any dissatisfaction, at these traitorous proceedings? Has\nnot this Bishop Hughs been in close correspondence with the traitor\nO'Connell, ever since he sounded the first note of repeal? And is\nnot this demagogue Hughs at this very moment corresponding with the\nconfessors of Daniel O'Connell, and the other leaders of repeal in\nIreland? Yes, I assert it,--he is. There is a continuous line of\ncorrespondence, as I have stated in my recent book on Popery, between\nthe Propaganda in Rome, the Romish bishops of Ireland, Daniel O'Connell,\nand the Romish bishops of the United States. The Propaganda of Rome is\nthe muddy and polluted source from which the various streams of treason,\nwhich are inundating our country, have proceeded. Their course is a\nsinuous one; their gyrations are intricate in the extreme. It takes\nin France, Austria, Russia, Switzerland, the Netherlands; in fact all\ncivilized Europe, besides South America and Mexico; its fountain in\nRome, and emptying itself in the United States. Yet we now hear\nthis Lord Bishop Hughs telling his subjects in New York and\nelsewhere,--telling what, my readers?--will you believe it, should I\ninform you? Or will you not think me trifling with you, and sporting\nwith a grave subject? He tells his subjects now, after doing all the\nmischief he could, after exciting family against family, after\ncreating disunion, dissension and discord, after exciting peaceable\nfellow-citizens to imbrue their hands in each other's blood, that\nhe entirely disapproves of Daniel O'Connell; that he believes him\na _monarchist_, and that it is the duty of Papists to stand by the\ngovernment that protected them. This is unquestionably the boldest\npiece of impudence, and the most clumsy attempt at imposition upon the\ncredulity of Americans, that has ever been attempted in this country.\nIt has no parallel in the history of Popery in the United States; and\nif ever there was a time or an occasion which calls upon Americans\nto vindicate their honor, and fling from them with indignation the\nimputation of being credulous dupes, now is the day and now is the hour.\nWhat is this insolent upstart Hughs,--who but the other day as\nanother expresses it, \"was pitchforked from the potato-field into a\npalace,\"--that he dares thus insult the common sense of the free-born\ncitizens of America? He, a foreigner, a foundling for aught we know,\nnursed and fed by Jesuits into manhood, their slave and their tool, how\ndare he insult the very country that gives him an asylum? how dare he\noutrage the feelings of the very people that give him bread to eat, and\nclothes to his back? I will give you, Americans, some idea of who he is,\nand who his brethren of the Popish mitre are. They are individuals--and\nthe Lord Bishop Hughs is preeminently conspicuous among them,--who,\nstript of the false splendor which circumstances and place throw around\nthem; who, if deprived of the drapery and mimic glories of Popery, in\nwhich holy mother, the church, has enveloped them, would appear among\nthe meanest and most despicable members of society. Such men may be\nborne with, while they abstain from insulting the common sense of\nthe people; but when their arrogance, insolence and vanity presume to\ntrample upon the rights of the people, and ridicule the understanding of\nthe community, they deserve something more than commiseration.\n\nWhen, in the plenitude of their vanity, they cease to be content with\nthe profits of office and the free exercise of their religion, and dare\ninsinuate aught disrespectful to the understanding of their benefactors,\nthey cease to be objects even of toleration. In ages of ignorance, the\ntrappings of Popery may strike with awe. Those ages are gone by; and\nif Americans are true to themselves, they will never revive in this\ncountry, notwithstanding the insolent efforts of this Lord Bishop Hughs.\nThis reverend bully has long bid defiance to the unarmed arguments of\nAmericans. He will not condescend to listen to the American theologian,\nwho brings into the arena of religious controversy, truth without a\nsword, and fair argument unbacked by bowie-knives and clubs; he will\nnot stoop to such a mode of warfare. No. This clerical rake would, if\nhe could, Gothicize this nation of freemen. He would extinguish, if he\ncould, among Americans, the light of learning and philosophy. Nay,\nhe would, and he has been trying to, raise from the putrid pools of\nignorance and superstition, fogs and evaporations, and clouds and mists,\nsufficiently thick to hide from the eyes of Americans the pure, the\nbrilliant, and the glorious light even of the Bible itself. It is not\nenough for him that his subjects should consider him their official\nsuperior; it is not enough that some poor foreigners,--and I blush to\nown it,--even Americans, should look upon him and his brethren as their\nsuperiors in the church, but they are required also to consider them\ntheir superiors in wisdom and virtue, though they know them to be\nJesuits. Papists, whether foreigners or Americans, are, even in the\nUnited States, little better than living automatons and self-acting\ntools, for the corrupt agents of his royal holiness, the Pope.\n\nCan this be? the reader will say. Can it be, that man, created a free\nagent, living in a free country, and governed by equal laws,---can he\nbe made to obey the word of command given by ja Popish bishop, as a wild\nbeast would the lash or the whip of the keeper of a menagerie? It is\nso, reader; and particularly with every human being, male or female, who\ngoes to confession. I care not how intelligent he may appear to be, or\nwhat his acquirements or accomplishments may be; if he is weak enough,\nfool enough, or hypocrite enough and mean enough to go to confession to\na Romish priest, he deserves not the name of a freeman. He who bends the\nknee to a Romish priest, and asks him to forgive his sins, submitting to\nsuch restrictions or discipline as the priests may be pleased to impose\nupon him, becomes a degenerate being. Take, for instance, a bird, one of\nthe feathered citizens of the open air; take a lion, a proud denizen of\nthe boundless forest; compare him with one of those tamed, broken-down\nand whipped into obedience, by the keeper of a menagerie, and how\nstrongly, how painfully marked is the contrast. Their very looks bespeak\ntheir degradation. How great is the contrast between those who have\nbroken loose from obedience to nature's laws, to the degrading servitude\nof obedience to man. But the contrast is not greater nor their fall more\nhumiliating, than that of the man or woman, who exchanges that obedience\nwhich he or she owes to reason, to pure religion, and the divine law\nof the gospel, for the degraded servitude required from them by Popish\npriests and confessors.\n\nLet us suppose a whole people thus tamed, thus broken, thus snaffled,\nbitted and bridled by skilful Popish riders and Jesuit jockeys, will\nthey not soon lose all ideas of liberty, morals and individual man\nliness? Will they not soon be ready to exclaim, in the language of\ninspiration, \"Why died I not from the womb?\"\n\nBut let us return to the Lord Bishop Hughs, of New York, and his sudden\nconversion from repeal and O'Connellism. As I have stated before, it is\nthe boldest stroke that ever has been made to deceive a whole nation.\nNothing equal to it, that I know of, in modern history, except perhaps,\nit may be that of the Jesuit Rodin, which we find related in the\nWandering Jew. The only difference between the Jesuit Hughs and the\nJesuit Rodin, is this,--that Rodin's audacity, hypocrisy and treachery,\nwere practised on a small scale, when compared with that of this modern\nJesuit, Lord Bishop of New York.\n\nThere is, however, a strong similitude between these two illustrious\nindividuals. I need not inform my readers,--as I believe they have all\nread the Wandering Jew,--that Rodin was a Jesuit, commissioned by the\nsociety of Jesuits in Rome, to act as its agent, ES with full powers\nto secure for the society of Jesus, it is nicknamed by them, an immense\nestate, belonging, in law and in justice, to a French family of the name\nof Rennepont. He was empowered to secure this property to the society,\nbut he must use no violence. It must be done solely by the play of\naction, hypocrisy and deception. The reader will remember, as we are\ninformed in the Wandering Jew, that the Rennepont family had to fly from\nFrance, after the king of that country, at the instigation of the Pope,\nand by a violation of the most solemn compact, had broken the edict of\nNantz, which secured to the Protestants the quiet possession of their\nproperty. After fighting their way through blood and Popish butcheries,\nthis noble family, with thousands of others, had to fly from their\nhomes, friendless and pennyless. Only a few escaped the bloodhounds of\nPopery. Their wives and daughters were dishonored, and, as we were told\nupon good authority, their helpless infants were dashed against the\ncorners of houses, and their brains scattered upon the pavements.\nNothing was left them. They had to seek refuge in distant lands; they\nwent east and west, north and south. Many of their descendants are now\nliving in some of the Southern States of this confederacy.\n\nThe general of the Jesuit order in Rome discovered that some of the\ndescendants of the Rennepont family had survived the disasters of the\ntimes, and held in their possession proofs sufficient to establish\nclaims to their patrimonial rights. The Jesuits determined to defeat\nthem, and if the reader's curiosity induces him to learn by what means\nthey endeavored to do so, and what agents they employed to effect it,\nlet him read the account given of the whole transaction in the Wandering\nJew, by that inimitable writer, Eugene Sue. They will find in that\nwork proofs of the wickedness of Jesuits. They will find that auricular\nconfession is something even worse than I have described it. I have not\ntalent to give a sufficiently accurate picture of this diabolical Popish\ninvention.\n\nLord Bishop Hughs has been for several years lecturing through the State\nof New York, as every man who has read the leading newspapers of the\ncountry must know; he has represented O'Connell as one of the greatest\nand best men of the day, and one of the most persecuted of men by the\nBritish government. O'Connell and genuine Popery are almost synonymous\nterms with this lord bishop. As I have stated above, he tried to\nenlist,--and has actually succeeded,--all foreign Papists, and a vast\nnumber even of Americans, in the cause of O'Connell and Irish repeal.\nWherever this lord bishop went, dissension and anarchy followed in his\ntrain; but mark him now. Mark the course of this Bishop Hughs for the\nlast few years, and you will be struck with the exact similitude which\nin every feature exists between itself and that of Rodin. The readers\nof the Wandering Jew will recollect that Rodin established a press in\nParis, for the ostensible purpose of inculcating truth, and advancing\nthe public good. The title of this press was, \"Love your neighbor.\"\nThe editor was one Nini-Moulin, a notorious drunkard, ignorant and\nprofligate in the extreme, and, personally, irresponsible, either in\na pecuniary or moral point of view. If sued for any libellous matter\ncontained in this press, nothing could be recovered from him, because he\nhad nothing. If thrown into jail for the immorality of the act, he\ncould not suffer in his reputation, because he had none to lose; he may\ncontinue editor still, and all that was necessary, was that Rodin should\nsupply him with something to eat and drink. For the amusement of my\nreaders, I beg to give a brief description of the editor of Rodin's\npaper. 1 take it from that given by one who knew him, who was the\nmistress kept by this editor of Rodin's paper, one Rose-Pompon. She thus\ndescribes the editor--\"A face as red as a glass of red wine, and a nose\nall covered with pimples, like a strawberry.\" Rodin, describing him,\ngives a different character altogether. He says that \"Nini-Moulin is a\nvery worthy man, though, perhaps, a little fond of pleasure\" Here is\na precious specimen of Jesuitism and Popish morality; a man living\nnotoriously with a woman of the town, bearing upon his face the marks\nof drunkenness and profligacy, is pronounced by a Romish priest to be a\nvery worthy man, though perhaps a little fond of pleasure.\n\nSuppose Rodin and Nini-Moulin were amongst us here, in the city of\nBoston, or in the city of New York,--who is there that would not shrink\nfrom a contact with either? The Jesuit Bishop Hughs, of New York, and\nhis brother Fenwick, of Boston, have presses in each of those cities,\nand the wretches who ostensibly conduct them, are, in point of fact, of\nno higher or more worthy character than Rodin's editor, Nini-Moulin. No\nman, who opposed Jesuitism in Paris, or who was even suspected of\nbeing inimical to it, escaped the abuse of Rodin's journal. The fairest\ncharacters were blasted by it; it defamed and bespattered with its\nscurrility, some of the most honorable and high-minded citizens, while\nthe artful and cowardly hypocrite himself was hidden from observation.\nIs it not so with Hughs, of New York, Fenwick, of Boston, and the whole\ntribe of Popish bishops throughout the United States'? No man is safe,\nno character is spared from the virulence of the presses which they own.\nWitness the Truth Teller, of New York, owned by Bishop Hughs,--though,\nlike Rodin, he denies the ownership of it,--what can be more vile than\nthe language of that press? It declares that \"Americans shan't rule\nus--Papists\" It has for years been spewing forth its malicious tirades\nagainst Protestant Americans, while the real author of this scurrility,\nBishop Hughs, is skulking behind the bush.\n\nBut I will tear off that masquerade dress which nides the moral\ndeformities of this man; and I trust that all Protestants will sustain\nand pardon me, in holding him, and not the Nini-Moulins who conduct\nhis press, responsible for its contents. Let no Protestant notice the\nmiserable beings who are the reputed editors of the Truth Teller, Bishop\nHughs' organ; let the bishop himself be held responsible.\n\nThe Jesuit bishop of Boston, Fenwick, another Rodin, has also a\npress called the _Pilot_, apparently edited by a silly-looking, Irish\njackanape. Let not Bostonians notice the abuse which this paper has\nheaped upon them for years; or if they do, let them hold Bishop Fenwick\nresponsible for it; he is the real author of its contents, and not the\nlittle brainless gander, its reputed editor.\n\nI might quote a thousand instances of the similarity of thought and\ndeeds which governed, and which now govern, the whole body of Romish\npriests. But enough. It is time that Americans should vindicate their\nhonor.\n\nHaving done all the mischief he could, having inflicted upon the peace\nof our country a wound, which, in all probability, can never be healed,\nhe adroitly turns round,--just as the hypocritical villain Rodin,\nthe Jesuit, did,--and tells Americans that he was wrong in supporting\nO'Connell; that he can support him no longer, because the said O'Connell\nis a monarchist Let us try and reconcile this with the solemn oath of\nthis vaporing Jesuit and canting patriot, Hughs. The following is an\nextract from the oath which, as a Popish bishop and a Jesuit, he took at\nhis ordination and consecration:\n\n\"Therefore, to the utmost of my power, I shall and will defend this\ndoctrine, and his holiness' rights and customs, against all usurpers of\nheretical or Protestant authority whatsoever; especially against the now\npretended authority and Church of England, and all adherents, in regard\nthat they and she be usurpal and heretical, opposing the sacred mother\nchurch of Rome. I do renounce and disown any allegiance as due to any\nheretical king, prince, or state named Protestant, or obedience to any\nof their inferior magistrates or officers, I do further declare the\ndoctrine of the Church of England, and of the Calvinists, Huguenots, and\nof other of the name Protestants, to be damnable, and they themselves\nare damned, and to be damned, that will not forsake the same. I do\nfurther declare, that I will help, assist, and advise all, or any of his\nholiness' agents in any place, wherever I shall be, in England, Scotland\nand Ireland, or in any other territory or kingdom, I shall come to; and\ndo my utmost to extirpate the heretical _Protestants' doctrine, and to\ndestroy all their pretending powers, regal or otherwise_. I do further\npromise and declare, that notwithstanding; I am dispensed with to\nassume any religion heretical for the propagation of the mother church's\ninterest, to keep secret and private all her agents' counsels from time\nto time, as they intrust me, and not to divulge, directly or indirectly,\nby word, writing, or circumstance whatsoever, but to execute all that\nshall be proposed, given in charge, or discovered unto me, by you my\nghostly father, or by any of his sacred convent. All which, I, A. B., do\nswear by the blessed Trinity, and blessed Sacrament, which I am now to\nreceive, to perform, and on my part to keep inviolably; and do call\nall the heavenly and glorious host of heaven to witness these my real\nintentions to keep this my oath.\"\n\nNow, Mr. Bishop, suppose you and I reason together for a moment. Either\nthis oath is binding upon your lordship or it is not. If the former,\nassuredly you can have no reasonable objection to supporting O'Connell,\neither as a monarchist, or as, your ally in defending the rights and\nprerogatives of his royal holiness the Pope. If the latter, that is, if\nit is not binding on you,--if you will not defend the Pope's power, his\nthrone and his prerogatives,--say so like an honest man. Until you do\nthis, we must look upon your denunciations against O'Connell, as the\nveriest farce that ever was enacted by the veriest mountebank scoundrel\nthat ever filched a dollar from the pockets of Americans. Will you dare\nstand before me, and tell me that the Pope of Rome it not himself a\nmonarch? Will you dare look me in the face, and say that you would not\nsupport him? Will you dare look me in the eye, and say that you would\nnot support his government? Recollect that I understand the mysteries\nof Popery as well as you do; remember that I have studied its doctrines\nmore deeply than ever you had an opportunity of doing; and I experience\nnot the least emotion of vanity, when 1 assure your Jesuit lordship that\nI am a much better general scholar than you are. You will therefore\nbe cautious in future; I will watch you in your ecclesiastical and\npolitical gyrations, and whenever you assert what is false in morals, or\ndangerous to the institutions of my adopted country, I will check\nyou, and that with no gentle hand; though I shall do unto you and your\nbrethren, but that which you and your brethren have done unto me. The\ntruth is, Mr. Bishop, you are an overrated man, an inflated humbug, and\nprobably you would have passed for a learned one, had you not, without\nprovocation, interfered with me. You, a Popish bishop, tell Americans,\nthat you cannot support a monarchist! Have you ever read the works of\nSalmeron, a Jesuit like yourself, but a theologian of learning, which\nyou are not? Either he was a liar, or you are one. Listen to what he\nsays of his monarch, the Pope. \"The Pope has supreme power over all the\nearth; over all kings and governments, and if they resist he must punish\nthem.\" Salmeron was a native of Toledo, and was so thoroughly orthodox\nin Popish belief, that he wrote several commentaries on the Scriptures,\nwhich were approved of by the infallible church. He died only about\ntwo hundred years ago. Can you blush, my Lord Bishop? Either you think\nAmericans an extremely ignorant people, and unable to discern between\nflippancy, repeal gab, and solid historical information, or you\nmust blush at your attempt to impose upon them. The veriest child in\nknowledge of ecclesiastical history, knows that the Pope is king and\nmonarch of Rome, and that you are sworn, by the most fearful oath, to\nsupport him and his government in opposition to all others; and yet,\nforsooth, you cannot support O'Connell because he is a monarchist.\n\nHave you, my Lord Bishop Hughs, ever read the life of Pope Adrian?\nWas he not a monarch? Was he not, to use his holiness' own words, the\nmonarch \"of all the islands upon which the sun hath shone?\" Are you\nignorant of this fact, Mr. Bishop? I beg leave to instruct you upon the\nsubject, by submitting to your lordship and to the poor, unfortunate\nIrish Catholics, whom you are leading blindly by the nose in every\nspecies of mischief and error, the following bull sent by the\naforesaid Pope Adrian, to Henry the II., in the year eleven hundred and\nfifty-four. You will see from this bull, that Pope Adrian was a monarch,\nand I believe it is not usual with you or your brother bishops, to\nadmit that there was ever any change in the power or prerogatives of the\nPopes, from the days of St. Peter down to the present moment.\n\n\"Adrian, bishop, servant of the servants of God, to his dearest son\nin Christ, the illustrious king of England, health and apostolical\nbenediction. Full laudably and profitably hath your magnificence\nconceived the desire of propagating your glorious renown on earth and\ncompleting your reward of eternal happiness in heaven, while, as a\nCatholic prince, you are intent on enlarging the borders of the church,\ninstructing the rude and ignorant in the truth of the Christian faith,\nexterminating vice from the vineyard of the Lord; and for the more\nconvenient execution of this purpose, requiring the counsel and favor of\nthe apostolic See.\n\n\"There is indeed no doubt, as your highness also doth acknowledge, that\nIreland and all the islands upon which Christ, the sun of righteousness,\nhath shone, do belong to the patrimony of St. Peter and the holy Roman\nchurch. Therefore are we the more solicitous to propagate in that land\nthe godly scion of faith.\n\n\"You, then, most dear son in Christ, have signified to us your desire to\nenter that land of Ireland, in order to reduce the people to obedience\nunto laws and extirpate the seeds of vice. You have also declared that\nyou are willing to pay for each house a yearly pension of one penny to\nSt. Peter.\n\n\"We, therefore, with that grace and acceptance suited to your pious and\npraiseworthy design, and favorable assenting to your petition, do hold\nit right and good, that, for the extension of the borders of the church,\nthe restraining of vice, the correction of manners, the planting of\nvirtue and increase of religion, you enter the said island and execute\ntherein whatever shall pertain to the honor of God and the welfare of\nthe land; and that the people of said land receive you honorably and\nreverence you as their lord.\n\n\"If, then, you be resolved to carry this design into effectual\nexecution, study to form the nation to virtuous manners; and labor, by\nyourself and by others whom you may judge meet for the work, in faith,\nword and action, that the church may be there exalted, the Christian\nfaith planted, and all things so ordered for the honor of God and the\nsalvation of souls, that you may be entitled to a fulness of reward in\nheaven, and on earth to a glorious renown throughout all ages.\"\n\nDoes it not appear, Mr. Bishop, from the above bull, that Pope Adrian\nwas a monarch? And do you dare condemn your predecessors in office for\nsupporting him as such, or for being themselves monarchists? I opine you\nwould not.\n\nPope Adrian was an Englishman, and the only one who ever filled the\noffice of Pope. The successor of Adrian in the popedom was a native of\nSienna, and a temporal monarch as well as Adrian. He gave away kingdoms\nand crowns, as did all preceding and successive popes; and yet your\nlordship will not pretend to say that they did wrong. You dare not do\nit. It would cost you your mitre, and the other paraphernalia with which\nthe holy church has befooled and bedizened your sacred person. Let me\ngive you an instance of the manner in which some of the holy popes\nhave disposed of whole kingdoms. I might give many, but I shall content\nmyself with one for your special edification, and that of your deluded\nfollowers, the Irish in particular. The following is the bull of Pope\nAlexander, the successor of Adrian, confirming his transfer of the\nkingdom and people of Ireland to Henry the 'second, king of England, in\nthe year 1555.\n\n\"Alexander, bishop, servant of the servants of God, to his dearly\nbeloved son, the noble king of England, health, grace and apostolical\nbenediction. Forasmuch as things given and granted upon good reason by\nour predecessors are to be well allowed of, ratified and confirmed,\nwe, well pondering and considering the grant and privilege for and\nconcerning the dominion of the land of Ireland to us appertaining and\nlately given by our predecessor, Adrian, do in like manner confirm,\nratify and allow the same; provided there be reserved and paid to St.\nPeter, and to the church of Rome, the yearly pension of one penny out\nof every house both in England and in Ireland; provided, also, that _the\nbarbarous people of Ireland_ be by your means reformed from their\nfilthy life and abominable manners, that, as in name so in conduct and\nconversation, they may become Chris-' tians; provided, further, that\nthat rude and disordered church being by you reformed, the whole nation\nmay, together with the profession of the laith, be in act and deed\nfollowers of the same.\"\n\nThe above bulls are recorded in the archives of the Roman Church,1 in\nIreland. They were publicly read at a Roman Catholic Synod held in the\nCathedral of Cashal, in Ireland, Anno Domini 1171, and are now to be\nfound in almost every history of Ireland, that has ever been written\nsince. But notwithstanding these historical facts, the poor Irish\nare told that they are indebted to the church of Rome, even for their\nnationality. We have in this very city of Boston, a poor moonstricken\nchangeling, and would-be philosopher, who has recently been hired by\nthe Jesuit Bishop Fenwick, to make such an assertion, and the Irish\nCatholics to a man believe him. Unfortunate people! How long will you\nremain the dupes of popes, bishops, priests and their agents?\n\nCome out from among them; fly from the darkness of Popery; \"come out of\nthat deadly shade, and seat yourselves with us in God's own sunlight.\"\n\nThe Lord Bishop Hughs of New York, finding that it would not answer his\npurpose to support O'Con-nell any longer, and feeling that he made his\nspring too violently and too soon; knowing that he fell far short of his\nleap, he turns round, like the Jesuit Rodin, and tells Americans that he\nwas altogether mistaken in the course he pursued, and that he was truly\ntheir friend; that they should rule, and by right ought to rule, and\nthat he and his subjects would be the first to aid them against England,\nor O'Connell. Well done, Mr. Bishop. Impudent and barefaced as your\nassertion is, more treacherous and false than even the Jesuit Rodin as\nyou are, I have not the least doubt but you will succeed.\n\nIt is curious to observe the similarity of sentiment and action\nwhich govern Jesuits, however far apart they may be. We know from the\nWandering Jew, that the Jesuit Rodin, for several years, never ceased to\npursue and persecute the orphan descendants of the Rennepont family.\nHe commenced his persecution of them in Siberia; he scented their track\nwith the keenness of a bloodhound, from that to Dresden. In Dresden,\nas we are told, he had a fresh pack of bloodhounds, who fell upon the\ninnocent twin orphans of an exiled father, and protected only by a\nfaithful French trooper. It is impossible to read the account given\nby Sue, of the ill-treatment which these children and their protector\nreceived from a ferocious brute, named Morok, a lay Jesuit brother\nduring the time they remained at the \"White Falcon Inn,\" without strong\nemotions of pity and commiseration. From this they were pursued by the\nJesuit Rodin, by different agents and by different means, which the\nreader will find beautifully delineated in the Wandering Jew, until\ntheir arrival in Paris.\n\nHere, it will be seen, that new plots were formed, and new schemes\ndevised, to defeat their just claims to their paternal inheritance,\nby keeping them in total ignorance that any such claims were ever in\nexistence. Unfeeling, indeed, and cold as the marble slab which covers\nthe house of the dead, must be the heart of that man or woman, who\ncould unmoved witness the sufferings of these helpless orphans and the\nfaithful servant, Dagoberth, while in the city of Paris; all brought\nupon them by Jesuit priests and Jesuit nuns,--fiends, vipers, vampires\nin human shape, All their movements were watched and betrayed, through\nthe confessional. But the eye of the Lord seemed to rest upon them in\na most extraordinary manner. It would be wrong to diminish, by\nanticipation, the pleasure which my readers may find in reading for\nthemselves this part of the Wandering Jew. Let us, therefore, pass on to\nRodin, the Jesuit, and prototype of the Lord Bishop Hughs of New York.\nRodin, finding that all his plans and schemes, in trying to possess the\nvast estates of the Rennepont family, were likely to fail, and would\ninevitably be frustrated, unless some new scheme were devised, retired\nwithin his own room, deliberated on what was best to be done, and\nsuddenly springing from his chair, thus soliloquized with himself:\n\n\"Never have I had better hopes of success, than at this moment;\nthe stronger reason for neglecting nothing. A new thought struck me\nyesterday. We will act here in concert. I have it,--an ultra Catholic\njournal, called 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' It will be deemed\nthe organ of Rome. 'I will originate the question of the liberty of\nteaching. The common liberals will support us,--the idiots. They admit\nus to common rights, when our privileges, our immunities, our influence\nthrough the confessional, our obedience to Rome,--all put us beyond\nthe pale of common rights, of the very advantage which we enjoy. Double\nidiots! They fancy us disarmed, because they know themselves to be\ndisarmed towards us. That is as I would have it?'\"\n\nThis is precisely the course which the Jesuit Hughs, of New York, has\npursued towards Americans. Rodin immediately acted upon the new idea\nwhich occurred to him; he wrote to the general of the Jesuit order in\nRome, who immediately advised him to cease apparently from further\npersecuting the heirs of the Rennepont inheritance; to avow himself\ntheir warmest friend, and to denounce all those who attempted to injure\nthem in any way, as plotters against their rights and their happiness.\nHaving a previous understanding with his co-laborers in iniquity, he\ndenounced every one of them, and by this act of apparent friendship and\njustice, he wormed himself into the undivided confidence of all who\nheretofore looked upon him with fearful suspicion. Just so is Bishop\nHughs trying to worm himself into the confidence of Americans, by\nassuring them that he disapproves of the treachery of O'Connell, and by\nrecommending to his subjects and his dupes, in New York and elsewhere,\nto assemble in public, and declare that they are opposed to O'Connell's\nmovements in Ireland, and that they are the friends, of the United\nStates; and accordingly we find that on Monday, the 16th of the present\nmonth, June, 1845, a meeting was called by the tools of the aforesaid\nBishop Hughs, for the ostensible purpose of expressing their\ndisapprobation of O'Connell, the Pope's tool, in Ireland. The bishop,\nknowing that the bitterest feelings have been aroused in the bosoms of\nAmericans, at seeing Papists forming associations throughout the length\nand breadth of this land, and collecting vast sums of money, to be\ntransmitted to Ireland, not for the purpose of feeding the half-starved\npopulation of that unfortunate country; not to clothe the almost naked\npeasantry of that unhappy land; not to relieve from bondage and worse\nthan Siberian slavery, a people naturally brave and generous, but to\npamper and to forward the plans of a roaring, brawling demagogue and\ncoward, Daniel O'Connell.\n\nThe least observant among us, is aware that the scenes of bloodshed,\nwhich have been witnessed in this country, may be traced to those\nassociations, which that Irish Jesuit, Bishop Hughs, has fanned into\nexistence, by his inflammatory appeals to the worst passions in\nthe hearts of his people, and now, alas! too late,--even if he were\nserious,--he attempts to extinguish the flame which he has kindled.\nBut I tell you, Americans, he is not serious. If you depend upon His\nprofessions, you will be deceived. He is sworn, on the most fearful\noath, to support the power, the kingdom and the jurisdiction of the Pope\nof Rome, over all kings, potentates, states and magistrates. Neither\nare his subjects in this country sincere; and that very Bishop Hughs,--I\naccuse him of it in the face of the world,--I accuse him of it on the\nauthority of the Roman Catholic church, of which I have been a priest\nmyself,--teaches those very people, that any oath of allegiance which\nthey have sworn to this government, is null, void and of no effect. When\nI was a Roman Catholic priest, it was my duty to absolve from their oath\nof allegiance, all those who came to confession to me. While a priest, I\ninstructed the Irish to swear allegiance to the heretical government\nof the United States; but with a mental reservation, that the first\nallegiance was due to the Pope of Rome. Every Roman Catholic, who goes\nto confession to a Romish priest, is a mere political automaton, not\nto be trusted by a Protestant, or Protestant government, further than\neither would trust the priest to whom he con-fosses; and how far a\nRomish priest merits the confidence of an American Protestant, time will\ntell.\n\nThe tools of Bishop Hughs, of New York, at Tammany Hall, June 16th,\n1845, passed the following resolution:\n\n\"Resolved, That there are thousands in this country, (meaning Papists,)\nwho would bare their breasts to any power, (meaning English,) that may\ninvade this country.\" It was also resolved, at the same meeting, \"that\nthey would defend the American claims to Oregon and to Texas.\" It was\nfurther resolved by these self-same repealers, the sworn subjects of\nBishop Hughs and the Pope, \"that the American eagle shall not be impeded\nby natives of Ireland in this country.\"\n\nIf there was not something diabolically treacherous beneath the surface\nof those resolutions; if a viper were not hidden and concealed under the\nfair and verdant foliage of these words, they would be to me, as well as\nothers, a source of pleasure. But let us remove the leaves and brambles,\nthe blossoms and roses, which conceal the subtle and fatal poison, and\nthey are calculated to chill and to freeze those sympathies which,\nunder other circumstances, Americans would feel for those people.\nIrish Papists bare their breasts in defence of the rights of Protestant\nAmericans,--and that by the advice and with the consent of a Popish\nJesuit bishop! Monstrous insolence, to impose thus upon hospitable and\ngenerous Americans. The resolution, in truth, amounts to this: Resolved,\nThat as our Bishop Hughs is permitted by the infallible church, to act\nthe hypocrite, we, as professors of the same creed, are entitled to do\nthe same. Resolved, That, as our bishops and priests are permitted\nto keep no faith with Protestant Americans, we shall pursue the same\ncourse, until we gain entire possession of this Protestant land.\n\nThe idea of foreign Papists \"baring their breasts to English bayonets,\nin defence of the rights of Protestant Americans,\" to Oregon or Texas,\nis laughable; it is farcical. Ireland contains nearly ten millions of\nsouls,--I should have said slaves,--and they will not bare their breasts\nto the trifling number of sixteen thousand troops, which England deems\nfully sufficient to keep them in perfect subjection. But I will tell\nyou, Americans, what those Popish heroes will do, and have been doing,\never since the year sixteen hundred and forty-nine, when the ruling\nPope sent Monsignor Gio. Batista Rinuccini, Archbishop of Fermo, as his\nnuncio and minister plenipotentiary to Ireland, almost two hundred years\nago. They will bare their------to be kicked, whenever John Bull may take\na fancy to exercise his clumsy feet in that favorite amusement of\nhis. Such slaves as these talk of \"baring their breasts\" in defence of\nAmerican rights; who, numbering ten millions, still permit themselves\nto be kicked, cuffed, buffeted and spit upon by sixteen thousand British\nsoldiers! Pshaw! Where is the American, who will not indignantly say,\nin the language of a Roman writer, \"_Non tali auxilio nec defensoribtis\nistis_.\" Bishop Hughs and his myrmidons, talk of defending the rights\nof Texas! Poor priest-ridden, pope-ridden dupes! The Texans would spurn\nyour aid; they do not want you; they would not have your aid. The Texans\nhad not a thousand effective men when they declared their independence\nof Mexico, which was then able to raise an army of two hundred thousand\nmen. But that army was an army of priest-ridden slaves, like yourselves,\nand the gallant little band of Protestant Texas, composed chiefly of\nAmericans, defied their power; declared themselves independent, banished\nfrom among them the treacherous Spanish priests, who were in Texas; they\nfought for their freedom and they won it.\n\nIrish repealers, the slaves of O'Connell and the scheming Jesuit Hughs\nof New York, resolve to defend the rights of Texas! The thing is too\nludicrous. I shall not dwell upon it.\n\nLet it not be inferred, from what I have stated above, that I believe\nthe Irish Papists to be naturally cowards. I will not do them this or\nany other injustice. They are naturally a brave people. Unsubdued and\nuntampered with by their profligate priests and Popish superstition,\nthere is not a braver or more generous people in the world, and the\nchains which now bind them to British slavery, would be snapped in six\nmonths,--ay, I repeat it, Ireland would be free in six months, were it\nnot for the ulterior designs of the Pope and his agents, in urging upon\nthem abject submission to a power which, by a single effort of their\nnative strength, they could crush never to rise again. Well does the\nPope know, well do Jesuits and priests understand that if the Irish\nnation freed itself from English rule, by its native arm, as the United\nStates did, they would also free themselves from the dominion of his\nroyal holiness the Pope, and the trammels of Jesuitism and priestcraft;\nand hence arise the scruples of O'Connell, about violating the\nBritish constitution. Hence the exhortation of Irish priests to their\ndowntrodden Irish slaves, to do everything constitutionally\\ which means\nnothing more or less than this:--let us priests, bishops and pope, act\nfor you; we are afraid to risk our own precious necks; we will negotiate\nmatters for you. You must feel indebted to us for everything you\npossess; in the mean time come to confession to us regularly, bring us\nevery dollar you earn, and we will take care of your political as well\nas your spiritual interest. Your bodies and souls shall be taken care\nof by us.--I can assure the Irish Papists in this country and elsewhere,\nthat Daniel O'Connell and the Jesuit Bishops Hughs, Fenwick, and their\nbrethren in this country, have no more idea of emancipating them, than\nthey have of renouncing the Pope, unless with the view of making them\nstill greater slaves to the Pope and the infallible church; and it is\nwith this view they are now forbidding the use of the Bible, knowing\nfull well that the free perusal of its sacred pages would enlighten them\nnot only on the subject of their everlasting, but also on that of their\ncivil rights. Well indeed may we apply to the Pope, and to the Lord\nBishop Hughs, and each of his brethern the words of the poet,\n\n     \"Loyal his heart, and church and Pope his past;\n     He for religion might not warmly feel;\n     But for the church he had abounding zeal.\"\n\nWe might well fancy these right reverend gentlemen addressing us in the\nfollowing words of the same poet. They do so, in fact, every day.\n\n     \"Why send you Bibles all the world about;\n     That men may read amiss and learn to doubt?\n     Why teach the children of the poor to read;\n     That a new race of doubters may succeed?\n     Now can you scarcely lull the stubborn crew;\n     And what if they should know as much as you?\"\n\nThere is not in history one solitary instance to be found, where the\ncourt of Rome, or Romish priests as a body, afforded aid to any people\nstruggling for freedom, unless with the ulterior view of subjecting them\nto their own dominion,--a dominion far more despotic in its principles\nand tyrannic in its exactions, than any that has before been devised by\nhuman ingenuity; because that, and that alone, enslaves the soul as well\nas the body.\n\nMany instances might be quoted of the truth of this, but I shall only\nrefer to one of a recent date. While Poland was struggling for her\nliberty, as we are told by a modern and beautiful French writer,\nLamennais, (Affaires de Rome, p. 110. Paguerre, 1844,) and the success\nof the Russians remained a doubt, the official Journal of Rome, did not\ncontain a word which could offend the victorious in so many combats;\nbut scarcely had they, the Poles, fallen,--scarcely had the atrocious\nvengeance of the Czar begun the long punishment of a nation devoted to\nthe sword, to exile and to slavery,--when the same journal could find no\nterms sufficiently injurious, wherewith to stigmatize those, the noble\nPoles, who had fallen victims to fortune. Cowardly Rome trembled before\nthe Czar. He said to Rome, would you live yet, place yourself beside the\nscaffold to which I have consigned those rebellious Poles, who had the\naudacity to attempt to free themselves from my government, and while\nthey pass on their way to the gallows, curse you the victims;--and Rome\ndid curse the Poles.\n\nAtrocious, revolting as the conduct of the Czar has been towards the\nsuffering Poles, yet there is something noble, something majestic in\nhis treatment of Rome. He pays no regard to the insolent ecclesiastic\nof Rome, who would be lord of the universe. The Czar does not comprehend\nthe meaning of those cabalistic words, spiritual supremacy. Let us\ncontrast the conduct of this sovereign of Russia, with that of the\nsovereigns or executives of the United States, and the contrast cannot\nfail to make a forcible impression upon our minds. That of the Autocrat\nof all the Russians is so far truly independent; while that of one\nof our executives, in relation to the Pope, is truly spiritless and\nsycophantic. Witness the following letter of Mr. Van Buren, to the\nAmerican consul at Rome, dated, Department of State, Washington, July\nthe 20th, 1830.\n\n\n\"Your letters of the 11th of April and 5th of May, the first\nanticipating the favorable sentiments of his holiness the Pope, towards\nthe government and people of the United States, and the last confirming\nyour anticipations, have been received at this department, and submitted\nto the president; by whom I am directed to tender his holiness, through\nthe same channel, an assurance of the satisfaction which he derives from\nthis communication of the frank and liberal opinions entertained by the\napostolic see towards the government and the people, and of the policy\nwhich you likewise state his holiness has adopted, and which is so\nworthy of the head of a great and Christian church, assiduously to\ncultivate, in his intercourse with foreign nations, the relations of\namity and good will, and sedulously to abstain from all interference in\ntheir occasional difficulties with each other, except with the benign\nview of effecting reconciliations between them.\n\n\"You will accordingly seek an early opportunity to make known to the\nPope, in terms and manner best suited to the occasion, the light in\nwhich the president views the communication referred to, and likewise\nyou will assure him that the president reciprocates, in their full\nextent and spirit, the friendly and liberal sentiments entertained by\nhis holiness towards the government of the apostolic see, and the people\nof the states of the church; and it is the president's wish that you\nshould, upon the same occasion, offer his congratulations to the holy\nfather, upon his recent succession to the Tiara, not from any hereditary\nclaim on his part, but from a preponderating influence, which a just\nestimation of his talents and private virtues naturally had upon the\nenlightened councils by which that high distinction was conferred;\nand which affords the pledge that his pontificate will be a wise and\nbeneficent one.\n\n\"You will take care, likewise, to assure his holiness, in reference\nto the paternal solicitude which he expresses in behalf of the Roman\nCatholics of the United States, that all our citizens professing that\nreligion, stand upon the same elevated ground which citizens of all\nother religious denominations occupy, in regard to the rights\nof conscience, that of perfect liberty, contradistinguished from\ntoleration; that they enjoy an entire exemption from coercion in every\npossible shape, upon the score of religious faith, and that they are\nfree, in common with their fellow-citizens of all other sects, to adhere\nto, or adopt the creeds and practise the worship best adapted to their\nreason, or prejudices; and that there exists a perfect unity of faith\nin the United States amongst religionists of all professions, as to the\nwisdom and policy of that cardinal feature of all our constitutions and\nforms of government, those of the United States and separate states of\nthe union, by which this inestimable right is formally recognized, and\nthe enjoyment of it inviolably secured.\n\n\"M. Van Buren.\"\n\n\nI would especially invite the attention of my readers to the above\nletter. A proper understanding of this correspondence between the\nexecutive of this country and the Pope, through their representatives,\nwill set at rest a question long mooted in every section of the United\nStates, viz., whether the Pope is a temporal or spiritual potentate. If\nthe former, Mr. Van Buren and the President of the United States did but\ntheir duty in giving the assurances contained in the above letter. This\nwas due to him as an independent sovereign. As king of Rome, he was as\nwell entitled to it as any of the sovereigns of Europe; and so far from\nblaming Mr. Van Buren, for the respectful and courteous manner in which\nlie addressed his royal holiness, I should be among the first to\naward him just praise. The numerical weakness of a foreign potentate's\nsubjects, the paucity of their numbers, or their intellectual\ndegradation, is, now-a-days, no argument against the legitimacy of their\nindependent sovereignty. But if the latter,--if the Pope of Rome, is\nnot an independent and sovereign potentate,--if his sovereignty is only\nspiritual, as the Jesuit Hughs and all Romish priests and bishops in the\nUnited States would persuade us, then I contend, that Mr. Van Buren, the\nPresident of the United States, or any other man who with his sanction,\nwrites such a letter as the above is a conspirator against this\ngovernment, and should be prosecuted as such.\n\nAmong the foreign powers known to this government, no such power as\na spiritual one is enumerated. The constitution of the United States\nrecognizes no spiritual power, either at home or abroad; and if Mr. Van\nBuren, as the representative of this government, has corresponded with a\nforeign spiritual potentate, he did that which he was not authorized\nto do by our national charter, and which the executive of the United\nStates, had no more right to order him to do, than I had. If the cabinet\nof his holiness, the king of Rome, have half the intelligence, tact and\nmanagement for which they get credit, they must have felt highly amused\nat the simplicity and sycophancy of Mr. Van Buren's letter. If the power\nof the Pope, in these United States, be only spiritual, what has he to\ndo with this government, or this government with him? The constitution\nof the United States, and the various constitutions of the respective\nStates, recognize no spiritual power whatever. No court of law nor\nequity, from one end of this country to the other, understands what\na spiritual power is; nor have they made any provision to maintain or\nenforce it What, then, is it? Where is it to be found? Is it visible? Is\nthere any record of it? Is it tangible? In whom is it centred? No trace\nof it can be found among us, and yet we are told it exists; and three\nmillions of Papists in the United States, are bound to obey this\ninvisible and intangible thing, or whatever it is.\n\nWe are told by Bishop Hughs, that the Pope claims only spiritual\njurisdiction over this country. I explained, in my recent work on\nPopery, what Papists mean by spiritual jurisdiction and spiritual power.\nIt would be a loss of time to refer to it again. The legerdemain and\nhumbuggery of the whole affair are too transparent to deceive any eye\nbut that of a credulous American. Without this doctrine of spiritual\nallegiance to the Pope of Rome, Popish priests could raise no money for\nhis holiness, in the United States, and they dare not openly claim for\nhim any civil allegiance. Without it, repealers could raise no money for\nthat champion of Popery, Daniel O'Connell.\n\nHad the Romanists of the present day the spirit of the ancient Romans,\nthey would spurn this shameful exaction upon their credulity, but\nespecially upon their purse. It is base to submit to it; even a Pagan\nRomanist would spurn at it. He did so once before, and if his Pagan\nspirit was not broken by worse than Paganism,--Popery,--he would do\nso again. \"For I,\" said Brutus \"Can raise no money by vile means: By\nheavens, I had rather coin my heart And drop my blood for drachmas,\nthan to wring From the hard hands of peasants their vile trash By any\nindirection!\"\n\nYes, even a Pagan would spurn and scorn the deception, cupidity and\nhypocrisy of Popish Jesuits and priests.\n\nWas there ever upon the Papal throne, since the days of Hildebrand,\na Pope who did not claim sovereign and temporal jurisdiction over the\nkingdoms of the earth? Do the annals of mankind record so dispassionate\nand so solemn an act of treachery, or so glaring an evidence of temporal\npower and despotism, as that of Hildebrand, known as Gregory, over the\nEmperor of Germany? The universal monarchy and sovereign power, which he\nand Rome wrung from a bleeding world, was never more absolute than that\nwhich the Popes of Rome wrung from the superstitions of mankind, in\nalmost every age of the world; and now, in the nineteenth century,\nin 1845, the present Pope has the unparalleled insolence, through his\nagents in New York, Boston, and elsewhere, to fasten upon our necks a\nyoke more galling than that which heathenism imposed upon the Romans.\n\nThis they cannot do by argument, because, to use argument with effect,\nman must be in the right; but to make the best possible use of bad\narguments, may be, nevertheless, the privilege of genius, craft, and\nintrigue. Hence the introduction of auricular confession. Hence it\nis, that Romish bishops and priests persuade their people to go to\nconfession, where they have the complete mastery over then feelings,\npassions, and judgment. They know if they can debauch and seduce one\nfemale in a family, the whole of the household is at their mercy. It is\nin that accursed tribunal that they persuade the people, first, \"that it\nis abominable to maintain that men can work out their salvation, under\nany form of creed whatever, provided their morals are pure.\" Second,\n\"that it is odious and absurd, to grant to the people liberty of\nconscience.\" Third, \"that it is impossible to hold the liberty of\nthe press in too great detestation.\" Every Papist is compelled in the\nconfessional, to subscribe to these degrading concessions. He must\nswear solemnly, that these propositions are orthodox, and that every\ngovernment should be compelled to acknowledge them as such. No man can\ndie in the faith of the Romish church, until he acknowledges that these\npropositions are true. No individual can be confirmed as a member of the\nRomish church, at least in Catholic countries, until he assents to them.\nNo one can be ordained a Roman Catholic priest, until he solemnly swears\nto maintain them.\n\nThey familiarize the human mind to these infamous axioms of theirs, from\ntheir very infancy; and thus when they arrive at the age at which they\nare permitted to go to confession, which is generally from eight to\ntwelve, there is no difficulty in confirming their people in the belief\nof these horrid principles.\n\nThe following passage may be found in the _encyclic letter_, addressed\nby the actual Pope, to all the bishops of France, in 1832, in order\nthat they might conform, they and their flocks, to these instructions,\nalthough they are in direct opposition to the laws of the country, and\nthe rights of its citizens. Is it necessary to say that M. Lamennais\nprotested, with all the powers of his great soul, against such odious\nmaxims as these, stated in all their ultramontane candor?\n\n\"We now come,\" says the holy father, \"to another cause by which we\nlament to see the church afflicted at this moment. To wit: to that\nindifference or perverse opinion, which has spread itself abroad on all\nsides, by the artifices of evil men, and in accordance to which, men may\nattain everlasting SALVATION BY THE PROFESSION OF ANY CREED, PROVIDED\nTHAT THEIR MORALS ARE PURE. It will not be difficult for you, in a\nmatter so clear and evident, to repel an error, so fatal as this for the\npeople.\"\n\nIs this clear enough? A word to those of our number, who are intrusted\nto the care of these pastors. So here is an Italian monk, the\nultramontane head of our bishops, who annuls, at a single dash of his\npen, one of our most sacred rights, a right, the maintenance of which\nhas cost the country torrents of bloodshed in the religious wars, like\nwater.\n\n\"From this corrupt course of indifference,\" proceeds the holy father,\n\"originates that absurd and erroneous opinion, or madness rather, which\nasserts that the liberty of conscience must be secured and guarantied\nto every one, whomsoever. The way is being cleared for this pernicious\nerror by the liberty of opinions, full and unbounded, which spreads\nitself fai and wide, to the ruin of civil and religious society.\"\n\nIt is evident, that the holy father commands our bishops to inspire\ntheir flocks with a horror of one of the fundamental laws of our\nsociety. Let us conclude with an attack by the same holy father, by no\nmeans less violent, or less conclusive, against the dragon of the press.\n\n\"With this is connected that fatal liberty, of which we cannot but stand\nin awe, the liberty of libraries to publish any writing whatsoever; a\nliberty which some persons still dare to solicit and extend with as much\nnoise as ardor.\"\n\n\"Pope Gregory the XVIth, had scarcely ascended the pontifical throne,\nwhen he heard of the revolt of Bologna. His first movement was to summon\nthe Austrians, and excite the _Sanfedistes_. The Cardinal Albani beat\nthe liberals at Cesena; his soldiers pillaged the churches, sacked the\ntown, ravished the women. At Forli, the bands committed assassinations\nin cold blood. In 1832, the Sanfedisles showed themselves in broad day,\nwearing medals, with effigies of the Duke of Modena, and of the holy\nfather, letters patent, in the name of the apostolical congregation,\nprivileges and indulgences: The Sanfedistes took the following oath\nliberally: '_I swear to elevate the altar and the throne upon the bones\nof the infamous liberals, and to exterminate them without pity for the\ncries of their children, the tears of their old men and women._' The\ndisorders committed by these brigands, passed all bounds; the court\nof Rome made anarchy regular, organized the Sanfedistes into bands of\nvolunteers, and granted to these bands extraordinary privileges.\"--The\nRevolution and Revolutionists of Italy. Review of the Two Worlds,\nNovember 15, 1844.\n\nThis is a specimen of the spiritual supremacy of the Pope, as taught\nin this country; and thus, Americans, would they erect altars upon\nyour bones, \"heedless of the cries of your old men and your old women,\"\nshould the Pope's spiritual power ever gain the ascendancy over your\nstrong arms,--or should his priests, by intrigue and by a play of\npassions, (as Rodin expresses it,) and excitement, obtain the control of\nyour hitherto clear intellects. Pause, Americans. Hesitate for a\nmoment, you young men and young ladies, who, under the influence of some\nmomentary excitement, may be tempted to unite yourselves with the Romish\nchurch, or to go into their nunneries.\n\nThe first advance you make, the very first step you take to effect this,\nis in itself utterly degrading to you. It is the abandonment of your\nwhole selves, bodies and souls, judgment, intellect, understanding,\nmind, liberty and all, to the guidance of a body of men whose political\nintrigues, and public and private immoralities, have blackened the pages\nof history for the last sixteen hundred years.\n\nThe Roman Catholic Bishop of Strasburg, in a letter to the Paris\nConstitutionnel, has denied that such doctrines as those contained in\nthe three propositions which I have quoted above, are taught in Popish\ncolleges. He pledges his honor in support of this assertion. I have\nquoted from the _Casuists_, a work written by the fathers of the Jesuit\nSociety. The bishop does not deny the doctrines positively, but says\nthat the work from which the quotations are made, was written, not by\nJesuits, but by a Rev. Dr. Moulet, a secular priest. If any other proof\nwere necessary, to show the iniquity of Jesuit doctrines, and the truth\nof every word I have said, and others before me have said, against\nJesuit intrigue and tergiversation, this admission of the Bishop of\nStrasburg, would be sufficient.\n\nWhat is the difference between a Jesuit father, and a secular priest?\nIt is simply this. Jesuits are limited in the sphere of their duties, by\nthe general of their order; and whenever a Jesuit makes his appearance\nin the diocese of any Popish bishop, he is subject, while there, to the\nsaid bishop.\n\nThe Strasburg professor may succeed in imposing upon those who know not\nthe difference between a secular priest and a Jesuit. The matter is\nnot mended, or the difficulty removed, by having the book written by\na secular priest; it is so much the worse. An evil deed, for instance\ntreason, when committed by a servant, is bad enough; but it is much\nworse when committed by his master. An act of perfidy or immorality\ncommitted by a priest, under the jurisdiction of a bishop, merits\nexecration, and should receive it; but if committed by the bishop\nhimself, would become still more execrable.\n\nI presume that when the Bishop of Strasburg pledged his honor that the\ncrimes imputed by others, as well as myself, to him and his tools, were\nnot sanctioned in his college, or by the writings of Jesuits, he had\nBrother Jonathan in view. His letter to the Paris Constitutionnel was\nintended exclusively for Americans, whom Jesuits know by the name of\n\"_dolts, double dolts_.\"\n\nLet us now see how far the word and honor of this Jesuit Strasburg\nbishop are entitled to credit. It is proper to do so, as his letter has\nfound its way into several of our presses in the western country.\n\nI pronounce the Bishop of Strasburg's assertion an unqualified,\ndeliberate, and unmitigated falsehood. An issue is now made between\nmyself and the bishop. The question is one of veracity, between us; and\nI am willing to leave the decision to a jury of the public. The bishop\nis a Jesuit, and bound, by his oath of allegiance to the Pope, to\nsupport him and the doctrines of his church, at the expense of all\nProtestant governments. He is bound by his oath to \"hold no faith with\nheretics.\" He is bound by his oath \"to destroy them.\" He is no citizen\nof this country. He has nothing in common with Americans, but the\nexternal configurations of humanity. He is not personally known to any\nAmerican, as far as I am acquainted; and under these circumstances, he\ncomes before the American public with the naked, unsupported assertion,\nthat what history has handed down, and I, a fellow-citizen of their own,\nhave confirmed and declared to be true, is false. Is he to be believed\nin preference to me, even if history was silent?\n\nI have lived in this country more than twenty-five years, and though a\nforeigner by birth, I will venture the assertion, that no Roman Catholic\npriest ever came to America with higher recommendations than I did. Some\nof them are from Roman Catholic bishops, and are now in my possession;\nbut I will not ask Americans to give them any credit, because a Romish\nbishop or Jesuit would recommend the devil himself, who takes the\nnecessary oath of allegiance to Rome, and swears to overthrow, by all\npossible means, the heretical government of the United States, which\nsanctions,--I use the very words of the Pope,--\"that _fatal liberty of\nthe press of which we cannot but stand in awe, the liberty of\nlibraries to publish any writing whatsoever; a liberty which\nsome--Americans--dare_ to solicit with noise and ardor.\"\n\nI will not insult Americans by asking them to give me credit for\nveracity on the strength of recommendations from Popish bishops in\nEurope, men who are the sworn enemies of everything dear to freemen.\nI brought with me, from other sources, testimonials of the highest\nrespectability, not as a Popish priest, but as a man. Among them were\nintroductions to that eminent patriot, De Witt Clinton of New York, who\nimmediately, on my arrival at his hospitable residence in Albany, and\nduring the session of the Legis-ture, had me appointed chaplain to the\nsenate. But I will not ask Americans to give me credit for veracity on\naccount of any connections or acquaintances which I formed while I was\na Popish priest The very fact of my being a priest was in itself\ncontamination. It should disqualify a man from being considered anything\nthat was candid, frank or virtuous. But I will ask Americans to credit\nme, in preference to the Bishop of Strasburg, or any other Jesuit\npriest, upon the testimony of American citizens, men known to\nthemselves, men of honor, probity and patriotism.\n\nI have been a member of the bar of the States of South Carolina and\nGeorgia, for nearly twenty years, until ill health obliged me to change\nmy residence temporarily; and I value the following letter which has\nbeen sent to me by William Law, Esq., then judge of the superior\ncourt of Georgia, more highly than all the documents, testimonials and\nrecommendations, which the Pope of Rome, or the whole college of his\ncardinals and Jesuits, could furnish.\n\n\"Savannah, 25th June, 1832.\n\n\"Dear Sir,--Understanding from you that it is your intention to leave\nthe State, with a view to the practice of law elsewhere, it will I\napprehend be necessary that the certificate of admission to our bar\nfurnished you by the clerk, should be accompanied with a certificate\nfrom myself, as the presiding judge of the court in which you were\nadmitted. This is necessary to give it authenticity in another State. It\nwill afford me pleasure to append that verification to it, if you will be\npleased to send me the certificate.\n\n\"Permit me, as you are about to leave us, to offer you my humble\ntestimony to your correct, upright deportment as an advocate at the bar\nof the superior courts of the eastern district of Georgia, since your\nadmission to the practice of law in the same.\n\n\"Wishing you success and prosperity wherever you may settle, I am, dear\nsir, very respectfully,\n\n\"Your obedient servant,\n\n\"William Law.\"\n\nJudge Law resides now in Savannah. He has retired from the bench, and\npractises law in copartnership with senator Berrien, of Georgia. I need\nnot say who Judge Law is. He is well known, as one of the most eloquent\nand learned advocates of the American bar; nor is he more distinguished\nfor his legal knowledge, than for his Christian virtues and exemplary\nlife. He is at present, and has been for many years, an elder of the\nPresbyterian church, in that city. I believe that I have the honor\nand the friendship of this worthy man, up to the moment I write. Every\nearthly interest I have is in this country. Its prosperity will advance\nmine. The overthrow of its government would bury in its ruins all I\nhave to support me. Who then is to be believed by Americans,--the Jesuit\nbishop of Strasburg, whose country is the world, whose queen is the\nPopish church, and whose kindred are monks and Romish priests? Am I\nunreasonable, under these circumstances, in asking a jury of Americans\nfor a verdict in favor of my veracity, my word and my honor, in\npreference to the honor of a foreign Jesuit bishop of Strasburg, or any\nother Popish priest or bishop in the United States? You, Americans, are\nthe best judges. In addition to these facts and circumstances, I will\ntake the liberty of stating that nearly the whole delegation to Congress\nfrom the State of Georgia, where I have so long resided, have borne\ntestimony to my correct conduct, by recommending me to high and\nlucrative offices under this government. Among these were the names of\nthe Hon. J. M'Pherson Berrien, then a next door neighbor of mine, the\nHon. Thomas Butler King, William C. Dawson, and the lamented Richard W.\nHabersham, of Savannah. This last named gentleman is no more, but he has\nnot left behind him one whose confidence and friendship I valued more.\nHe was, indeed, the noblest work of God, an honest man. His name is\nnow revered in Georgia, and will be there venerated as long as she has\nrecords to preserve it. I have in my possession the most friendly and\naffectionate letters from this Christian patriot up to within a few\nweeks of his death, which occurred about two years since. I may further\nadd to these distinguished names, that of the Hon. Wm. C. Preston, of\nSouth Carolina, the Hon. Isaac Holmes, of the same State, and the Hon.\nJudge Wayne, of Savannah, one of the judges of the Supreme Court of the\nUnited States. I have evidence in my possession, up to a few weeks ago,\nof the personal friendship of that elegant and accomplished gentleman\nJudge Wayne. I have studied law more than twenty years ago with the\nHon. Mr. Holmes, and never since has his friendship towards me been\ninterrupted. As a literary man and finished classical scholar Mr. Holmes\nhas scarcely a superior in the country. With such testimonials as these\nof my Americanism, honor and veracity, I dread not the verdict of an\nAmerican jury in the case now pending between me and the Jesuit bishop\nof Strasburg.\n\nBut before you make up your verdict, I beg to submit to you the\nfollowing sketch of a debate, which took place the 5th of last March,\nin the Swiss Diet in Switzerland, on the subject of Jesuits in\nthat country. It is taken from a speech of the Hon. Mr. Neuhaus, a\nrepresentative from Berne. The debate commenced by the chancellor laying\nbefore the assembly petitions from the people of Switzerland, signed by\n120,000 persons, praying that the Jesuits might be expelled from that\ncountry.\n\nNeuhaus said that the question of the Jesuits, which was raised last\nyear, had made great progress since that time, and its importance might\nbe estimated by the impression which it had produced on the population,\nthe anxiety with which the result of the deliberations of the diet was\nlooked forward to, and the care taken by all the great councils of the\ncantons to have their opinions duly represented. * * According to the\neighth article of the federal compact, the diet took all the measures\nnecessary for the internal and external safety of Switzerland. That\nright on the part of the diet was incontestable, and had been put in\nforce on former occasions within memory. The question, therefore, was\nnot whether the diet had a right to take steps against the Jesuits, but\nwhether the Jesuits had compromised and were compromising the safety of\nSwitzerland. It was therefore the question of fact only that he would\napproach. Were the Jesuits dangerous or not? Were they particularly\ndangerous as respected Switzerland? Yes, the Jesuits were dangerous.\n\n1. Because of their morality. They taught the people to commit, without\nremorse of conscience, the most culpable actions. Their morality\nnecessarily exercised on those exposed to their influence a deleterious\neffect; and a writer of the eighteenth century had said, with great\ntruth, that he detested the Jesuits because they were an order\n_aboutissant_. But in republics morality was wanted above all things.\n\n2. The Jesuits were dangerous because they made use of the\necclesiastical character to carry disorder into families, and to divide\nthe members of them, in order the more easily to govern them. Examples\nabounded, and, if necessary, he could cite many.\n\n3. They were dangerous because the order required of all its members\na blind obedience, an absolute submission. He who was a member of the\nsociety, whether he were a Jesuit properly so called, or merely belonged\nto the order under another denomination, could no longer have either\nopinions or will. As soon as the leaders gave orders, those who were\nenrolled in that militia were obliged to obey, without examination; and\nif the chief ordered the members and their associates to work in secret\nto subvert republican governments, they were obliged to obey, without\nexamination, whether they thought it right or wrong. But what was\nnecessary to the people of Switzerland, if they wished to maintain their\nindependence, was the sentiment of liberty and moral force, and that\nsentiment the Jesuits annihilated.\n\n4. The Jesuits were dangerous because they had neither family nor\ncountry. As soon as a Swiss citizen entered the order of the Jesuits,\nhe only belonged to that body. On this account the governments of the\ncantons would do well to make a law that any one entering the order of\nthe Jesuits should lose his natural rights. When a man was obliged to\nlay aside his feelings of family, to disown his cantonal as well as\nfederal country, he was no longer a Swiss; he as nothing but a Jesuit\nand a stranger to every country. 5. The Jesuits were dangerous because\nthey endeavored everywhere to seize upon power. In despotic and\nmonarchical governments, where the head was invested with extended\nauthority, they might be tempted to make use of the Jesuits as\nauxiliaries. As long as the Jesuits did not dominate, they would consent\nto serve a master; but when they had attained their end, they took\nadvantage of services which they had rendered to establish then\ndomination over those who had recourse to them. This was what made\nall the governments of Europe banish them from their states. They\nwere dangerous to monarchies, and still more to republics, where the\nauthorities did not possess the elements necessary to counterbalance\ntheir pernicious influence. 6. They were especially dangerous to\nSwitzerland, because one of the principal ends of the order was to\nextirpate Protestantism. Without doubt, the Swiss Catholics had a\nright that their Protestant brethren should respect their religious\nconvictions; but the Protestants had also rights which should be\nrespected by the Catholics; and the deputies of the canton of Berne\nwould demand, if those Catholic cantons which tolerated, and even\ninvited into their bosoms an order, the object of which is the\nextirpation of Protestantism, conducted themselves like good\nconfederates towards the reformed cantons; if they fulfilled the federal\nduties, and if those states had not the right to say to the states which\nreceived the Jesuits, 'We have no congregation which labors for\nthe extirpation of Catholicism, and we ask of you not to tolerate a\ncorporation so hostile to us as the Society of Jesus.' These were the\nprincipal reasons which made the canton of Berne consider the Jesuits\nas dangerous; but there were many others which he could state, and among\nothers, the recent events in the country were a strong proof of the\ndanger of the Jesuits. The only legal way to settle the question was,\nby taking the opinions of the cantons in the diet, and if twelve of the\ncantons voted that the Jesuits were dangerous, the others must submit.\nM. Neuhaus concluded by reading his instructions from his canton, which\nwere to demand a decree for the expulsion of the Jesuits from every part\nof Switzerland.\n\n\"The action of the diet is already known.\" The reader may see from the\nabove, proofs almost positive of the truth of every crime with which I\nhave charged Popish Jesuits. The Hon. M. Neuhaus, a representative from\na people proverbially generous, distinguished as a nation for honesty\nand simply integrity. Switzerland and chivalry are almost synonymous\nsince the days of William Tell. Switzerland, honesty, virtue and\npiety are understood to be almost one and the same thing. Even among\nourselves, in the United States, a Swiss Protestant emigrant needs\nno recommendation but a certificate of his nativity. We trust him; we\nconfide in him, because he is honest; we believe him because he is truth\nhimself. All the finer qualities of uncorrupted humanity seem to be his\nby birthright. One hundred and twenty thousand of these honorable men\npetitioned their Legislature to pass a law for the expulsion of Jesuits\nfrom their country, and their representative, M. Neuhaus, the embodiment\nof their virtue and integrity, supports the prayer of their petition,\ncharging those Jesuits to their teeth, proving from the history of their\npast and present lives, that they are collectively and individually\nimmoral and treacherous men, the sworn enemies of freedom and disturbers\nof the peace. He accuses them of being leagued together, and bound by\nthe most awful oaths, to overthrow the government and exterminate\nthe Protestants of Germany. He accuses them of maintaining spies in\nProtestant families, of tampering with their children, and introducing\ndisobedience and disorder amongst them.\n\nI regret extremely that I have not his whole speech, but if there is a\nfile of the Swiss papers in the city, it will be found in those of last\nMarch.\n\nI am ready now, fellow-citizens, for your verdict. I submit the case\nbetween the Jesuit Bishop of Strasburg and myself, to you without\nfurther argument.\n\nIf I am correct in my charges against Jesuits; if the various crimes,\nwith which Eugene Sue charges them, be well founded,--and I declare, on\nthe honor of an American citizen and a member of the American bar, that\nthey are,--I ask my fellow-citizens of the United States for a verdict\nin my favor.\n\nBut it will be said, for the hundreth time, that the constitution of\nthis country protects our people against dangers from Jesuits, or any\nother foreign source; and that our representatives will never betray the\ntrust which the people repose in them; or even if they did betray it,\nthe constitution provides for such a contingency. True, it does. But let\nme observe, that our constitution never supposed nor made any provision\nfor such a contingency as that the people would betray themselves;\nand still this case is as plain to me as the noon-day. It is not only\npossible that the people of this country could betray themselves, but\nthey are actually doing it at the present moment.\n\nI will admit that a courageous people, such as our citizens are, can be\nneither cozened nor bullied out of their liberty; but it must be also\nadmitted, that an intelligent and generous people may cease to be\nsuch; they may abet and admit amongst them the sworn enemies of their\nconstitution, under false ideas of toleration and liberty; they may want\nthe wisdom and judgment necessary to discern their danger in time;\nand in the necessarily downward progress of degeneracy, it is not even\nimpossible,--such things have been before now,--that they may want\ncourage to ward off the evil when it stares them in the face.\n\nLook back, Americans, to the history of by-gone days. The Tarquins were\nexpelled, and Rome resumed her liberty. Caesar was murdered, and his\nwhole race exterminated; but Rome remained in bondage. In the days of\nTarquin, the Roman people were not entirely corrupt; in the days of\nCaesar, they were thoroughly so. You, Americans, may be betrayed, though\nperhaps you may never betray yourselves voluntarily. But take heed, I\nentreat you, of Jesuits. Our constitution makes it difficult, if not\nimpossible, to destroy our liberty by any sudden outbreak of popular\nfury, or even by the treachery of a few. But if you, as a people, or\nthe majority of you, will concur with the few; if you will deliberately\nsuffer them to acquire a majority, your constitution is nothing better\nthan \"a piece of parchment, with a bit of red sealing-wax dangling from\nit.\" It ceases to be yours; it becomes the constitution of foreigners;\nit is the property of Jesuits and Popish priests, the moment they get\nthe majority of voters; you, Americans, have nothing to do with it It\nsecures no rights for you, nor should it be longer called the American\nconstitution. Recollect that ten or fifteen years will give Papists a\nmajority of voters in the United States, nor should I be surprised if,\nwithin half a century, the Pope of Rome was seen in New York or the city\nof Boston, as he is now in Rome, on Palm Sunday, mounted upon an ass, in\nblasphemous imitation of the Saviour entering Jerusalem, with thousands\nand tens of thousands of Papists spreading palms upon the streets, and\nshouting Hosanna to \"our Lord God, the Pope.\"\n\nThis subject, Americans, is worthy of your serious consideration, to say\nthe least of it. You are jealous of your charters and your privileges;\nperhaps sufficiently so. But you seem indifferent to the peril with\nwhich your liberty is threatened by Romish priests, inculcating treason\nin their confessionals, up to your very beards. What avail your laws\nagainst treason, implied treason and constructive treason? What avail\nyour bills of rights, either national or state, when a priest, at your\nvery door, aye, under your very roofs, is insidiously instilling\ninto the ears of his penitents at the confessional, treachery to your\ngovernment, to your laws, to your religion, and even to each other? What\navails your trial by jury, when oaths lose their sanctity, and a Jesuit\nteaches his penitent that no faith is to be held with Protestants; while\nthere are amongst you nearly three millions of people, who are taught\nto disregard your laws, whose rulers,--the priests,--connive at its\ninfringement, and refuse themselves to be amenable to your civil or\ncriminal courts? Do not be startled at my telling you that they refuse\nto be amenable to your courts. This is probably new to many of you; but\nas I make no statement which I cannot prove, I refer you to the case of\nthe Romish priest, Carbury, in New York. It occurred some years ago, and\nis duly reported.\n\nThis priest, Carbury, peremptorily refused answering, while on the stand\nas a witness, any questions put to him by the court, in a case of great\nimportance affecting the government of the State of New York. He defied\nthe judge on the bench, the sheriff, and all other officers of the court\nHe contended that the constitution of the United States guarantied to\nhim the free exercise of his religion, and, by implication, the right\nof hearing confession, and giving and receiving in the confessional such\ncounsel and advice as his church required of him to give. And such was\nthe sway which foreign Papists had in New York at that time, that the\ncourt did not and dare not commit him to prison for contempt; though,\nunder similar circumstances, the officers of the court would drag an\nAmerican citizen to jail, as they would a common felon. But the priest\nCarbury did no more than he was ordered to do by his church.\n\nThe Popish council of Lateran declares \"it unlawful for a civil\nmagistrate to require any oath from a Roman Catholic priest.\" A work,\ncalled the _Corpus Juris Canonici_, containing all the revised statutes\nof the Council of Trent, the last held in the Popish church, has issued\nthe following proclamation to all monks, priests, bishops, and Jesuits:\n\"We declare it unlawful for civil magistrates to require any oath of\nthe clergy, and we forbid all priests from taking any such oath.\" The\nCouncil of Lat-eran declares and announces to the Popish priesthood, as\nwell as to the whole world, \"that all magistrates, who interpose against\npriests in any criminal cause, whether it be for murder or high treason,\nshall be excommunicated; and if he condemn any priest for murder, or any\nother crime, he shall be excommunicated.\"\n\nThus we see that in our very midst, a Romish priest has but to go into\nhis confessional, and there he may become accessory before or after the\nfact, to treason, arson, murder, or other crimes, and hold our laws and\nour magistrates in utter contempt and utter defiance. This they have\ndone before, in the neighboring city of New York, and this they will do\nagain, whenever it suits their plans and purposes.\n\nPour in amongst us a few more millions of a people who believe and\nsanction this doctrine; flood our country with a population subject to\na priesthood maintaining such doctrine as this, and what must be the\nconsequence? Vice, ignorance and laziness; just what it is in every\ncountry where Romish priests are permitted to exist and exercise their\npernicious principles. There is a defect of moral principle and moral\nhonesty wherever the Popish confessional is to be found. I know the\nreverse of this is believed by Americans, and not without some apparent\nreason. Here I do not blame them. They are deceived, and often have\nI wished, often and often have I resolved to undeceive them in this\nparticular.\n\nMany and many a time have I resolved to be no longer a party to this\nshameful imposition upon Americans. Many and many a time, have I\ndetermined shake off from my soul any participation, directly or\nindirectly, in fastening upon the minds of American Protestants that the\nRomish confessional was the means of making Roman Catholic laborers\nand servants more honest than they otherwise would be. It is not\nso. Protestants know not the plans or schemes of Popish priests, in\nanything. Fraud and imposition are reduced to a science in the Romish\nchurch. Let me explain how the impression has got among Protestants,\nthat confessing sins to the priests is a very good thing \"for the\nignorant Irish.\" \"It keeps them honest.\" I can scarcely refrain from\nlaughing, when I hear this observation. It has been made to me by some\nof the most amiable, benevolent, and charitable ladies and gentlemen\nin this city of Boston, and elsewhere; and though I understood the\ndeception played upon them, I felt almost unwilling to remove so\ncharitable but delusive a dream. There is an old proverb, \"it is better\nlate than never.\" Let me do so now. Justice to Protestants, and even to\nthe Roman Catholic laborers and domestics themselves, requires this at\nmy hands.\n\nThe _modus operandi_ of Romish priests is as follows: When a Popish\nor Jesuit priest settles in a city or town, he looks about him and\nascertains what the character, circumstances, politics and religion\nof the different families are. If he discovers that any particular\nProtestant family is wealthy, entirely unacquainted with Popery, and\nliberally disposed, he takes a note of the fact, and determines, by some\nmeans, to form an acquaintance with the head of that family. This\nis sometimes not easily done. It is not often that men of wealth are\ndesirous of the personal acquaintance of clergymen of any denomination.\nThey know that, pretty generally speaking, there is little to be gained,\nso far as worldly goods are concerned, from a personal intimacy with\nthem. Of this Romish priests are well aware, and act accordingly.\nWhen one of them desires an acquaintance with the head of a family,\nhe unceremoniously calls upon him, hands him some money,--more or less\naccording to circumstances,--and without any explanation tells him it is\nhis, and seems no way desirous of further conversation. The gentleman or\nlady, who receives the money, of course, detains the priest or Jesuit,\nand asks what he wishes him or her to do with this money; whether he\ndeposited it for safe-keeping, or whether he wished it paid over to some\none. The answer of the Jesuit is, sir, or madam, \"the money is yours. I\nreceived it in the discharge of my duty as a priest,\" and he departs.\n\nThe result of this piece of Jesuit acting is obvious. The gentleman\nmentions the circumstance to his family, the merchant to his neighboring\nmerchants, the mother mentions it to her children, and to every mother\non her list of visitors, and all finally come to the conclusion that\nthe money has been received in the _confessional_; that some poor Roman\nCatholic in their employment had stolen it, and that the priest in the\nconfessional caused restitution to be made; that, after all, this \"going\nto confessional was a good thing,--it kept the Catholic servants honest;\nand if it were not for it, there would be no safety in giving them\nemployment.\" The husband tells his wife to throw no obstacles in the way\nof her domestics going to confession, as he believed it was a check upon\ntheir dishonesty, and makes up his mind that it is at least good policy\nto sustain Popery and Popish priests. He calls upon the Jesuit bishop\nor priest, touches his hat for him should he meet him upon the streets,\ntells him he would be happy to see him at his house; and thus, by this\ntedious, though sure process, does a reverend Jesuit priest gain his\nend. The family is now at his mercy; and the best recommendation a\ndomestic can bring to this family, or any of their acquaintances, is\nthat of a scheming deceitful Popish priest or bishop, with whom, if\nproperly known, no respectable man would be seen walking the streets.\nOften have I done this while a Romish priest.\n\nThis process, by which Popish priests and Jesuits often insinuate\nthemselves into the confidence of some of our most respectable\nProtestant families, has in it something ineffably mean, contemptible\nand wicked. There is something worm-like and vampire-like in the whole\nprocess. The bold robber is an honorable man, compared with a skulking\nJesuit priest. The robber runs some risk in gaining possession of his\nbooty; he has, at least, the redeeming quality of personal bravery. The\neagle, which takes his prey to the very pinnacle of the loftiest rock,\nthough that prey should be the infant of the fondest mother, and there\ndevours it before the eyes of its agonized parent, must claim more or\nless admiration for its boldness. There is a majesty in its flight which\ndiminishes the atrocity of the act: by one bound the noble bird gains\nhis point But the Jesuit, like the worm, like the loathsome reptile,\ngains his by beginning at the root, at the base of domestic happiness\nand virtue, and creeps and gnaws his way until he reaches its summit,\nand then laughs as he sees it mouldering under his feet. But this is not\nall. The Protestant family with whom he forms an acquaintance by these\ndishonorable means, are not the only sufferers. Injustice is done to\nthe Catholic domestics in Protestant families. A palpable imputation of\ndishonesty is thrown upon the whole body of them. An implied impression\nis left upon the minds of Protestants that they are all dishonest,--that\nthey would all rob, pilfer and steal, if they were not forbidden and\ncompelled to make restitution in the confessional. But what signifies it\nto a Jesuit priest, what Protestants think of poor Roman Catholics? If\nthey only believe that priests and Jesuits are saints, that is all they\ncare for. If priests can only manage to cause Protestants to attribute\nthe honesty of Papists to themselves, and can cause the Catholics to\nhate and despise Protestants for suspecting them of dishonesty, their\npoint is gained, though at the expense of injustice both to Protestant\nand Catholic. It is peculiarly unjust towards Catholic domestics, who\nare really as honest as other people, if their priests will let them be,\nand who might be as good citizens as others, were it not for priests\nand Jesuits. Do away with the supremacy of the Pope and auricular\nconfession, and the foreigners who come among us from Ireland and other\nCatholic countries, would be as peaceable, as industrious and as\nworthy citizens as any we have, but never can these poor people enjoy the\nblessings of freedom here or elsewhere, while they have any connection\nwith priests, confessionals, or popes. Americans are not inimical to\nforeigners who conduct themselves with propriety, and pay a due respect\nto the laws of their country; but they are inimical,--and it is their\nduty to be so,--to all who traitorously interfere with their civil\nrights; and it is not a little jugular, that among the millions of\nforeigners which have fled to this land of freedom, none but Papists\nhave interfered with their laws, their institutions, or their customs.\nI have resided in the United States for thirty years or thereabouts,\nand never have 1 heard a Protestant say that he has been ill-treated or\nunkindly dealt with by Americans, on account of his foreign birth; and\nI can declare, with equal sincerity, that I have never known a Roman\nCatholic satisfied with our republican form of government, and who did\nnot avow,--when he could do so without being heard by Protestants,--that\nhe wished a Raman Catholic government established in its place. It is\na strange circumstance, but nevertheless true, that Americans have no\ndifficulties with any foreigners amongst them except the Roman Catholics\nThere are various denominations of foreigners in the United States,\nbut all others enjoy the blessings of liberty, quietly and thankfully.\nPapists alone are dissatisfied; they alone refuse to hear to reason,\nand seem inclined to govern by force. No Protestant priest in the United\nStates has ever been known to be controlled in the discharge of his duty\nby a foreign potentate. None of them were ever known to harangue their\nflocks and march them through American cities, with banners bearing the\ntreasonable motto, written in conspicuous letters, \"Americans shan't\nrule us\" Popish bishops and Papists alone, have dared to do this.\n\nI have always been, and I trust I am now, the advocate of peace; but I\nwill confess, that I am at a loss to know whether there is to be found\nin any code of political, or even moral ethics, a single passage which\ncan justify Americans in permitting this outrage upon their laws and\nupon their national character. It may be a salutary inconsistency, a\nlaudable apostasy, on the part of Americans, to permit this insult to\ntheir country and to the memory of their noble and patriotic ancestors;\nbut if these ancestors, who now sleep in their graves, were living, and\nsaw this Popish flag with this Popish motto, paraded by foreign Papists\nover their graves, I will only say, the insult should never be repeated;\nthere would be no one left to bear the standard.\n\nI do not believe, that, from the days of Cain to the days of Bishop\nHughs, of New York, there has ever been witnessed so insolent, or so\ninflated a condensation of treason, as was contained in that solitary\nPopish motto, \"Americans shan't rule us;\" and it Americans were not a\npeople of singular forbearance, they would have levelled to the ground\nevery Popish church, and put to the sword every Popish priest and bishop\nin the country.\n\nThe poor Irish Papists who marched through our cities, waving in the\nvery face of Americans, the flag which bore this treasonable motto to\nwhich I have alluded, are not so much to be blamed; a majority of them\nare but the children of impulse, whose passions are played upon by\ndesigning priests. I repeat it,--and again and again I have repeated\nit,--the Irish are naturally a well-disposed people. They would be true\nto this country, and faithful to its laws and constitution, if their\npriests and church would let them. This is evident in the contrast which\nis visible between the Papists and Protestants of Ireland. There are\nnot in this country better men or more faithful citizens than the\nProtestants of Ireland. Where can we find a man who values character\nmore highly than an Irish Protestant? Where is there to be found a man,\nwho contributes more, by his own example and that of his family, to the\npreservation of virtue and morality, than a Protestant Irishman, in the\nUnited States? I can say from my own knowledge of Protestant Irishmen\nin particular, that they are temperate, frugal, industrious, and\neminently sincere in their professions and attachments. I mean not any\ninvidious comparison when I say there is no finer character than a\nProtestant Irishman. He is in earnest in everything, in his words and in\nhis actions.\n\nAmericans, give him the hand of friendship; give him your confidence; he\nwill not betray you. In the hour of danger, he will stand by yourselves,\nyour laws, and your constitution. He will defend them with his strong\narm and brave heart; his religion teaches him to do so. But not so the\nIrish Papist. Trust him not at least until he renounces his religion,\nwhich tells him that you are heretics, and should be extirpated, and\nthat your constitution shall not rule him.\n\nI am little inclined to moralize, but it is to me a sad reflection, to\nsee this contrast between the Protestant and Roman Catholic Irish; all\noccasioned by that accursed thing called Popery.\n\nEven the Christian League, so grossly abused by Papists, seem to\nentertain no other feelings than those of hospitality towards them; but\nin truth nothing is to be feared by Papists from that association. As\nfar as I know them by reputation, they are men of zeal, piety, and fine\ntalents; but they are no match for the trained bands of the Popish army.\nThey want discipline. It is true I know-nothing of them but through\ntheir speeches, some of which have been published in our leading\nreligious journals. These I have read, and the League itself could\nnot give me credit for taste or judgment, did 1 not pronounce them\npointless, pithless, powerless, almost useless. They evidently overrate\nthemselves or undervalue the force of their opponents. The latter I have\nreason to know is the fact.\n\nIt is true his holiness has condescended to curse them. He sent recently\na bull formally excommunicating them as a set of damned heretics. I am\nglad of this. It may arouse them to a greater concert of action.\n\nBut what if this League should succeed in that which seems to be after\nall their leading object, the circulation of the Bible in Italy? Suppose\nthey even succeeded in suppressing Jesuitism altogether in that country,\nwhat then? Would Popery cease to exist? Or has the _Christian League_\ncounted the cost at which this may be done? Have they reflected that\nwhile they are mowing down the withered weeds of Popery in the morally\nbarren fields of Italy, that Jesuits are carefully collecting its seeds\nand roots, and planting them in the new and rich fields of their own\ncountry, where, in the homely but expressive language of our farmers,\none acre will produce more than ten in Italy? The whole course of this\nLeague, as far as I am able to judge, is injudicious, and for the one\nmoral good that will be the consequence, fifty evil ones must follow.\nNot a single member of this learned association would apply their rule\nof action, in relation to Italy, to the management of any other\ntransaction in life. What farmer, for instance, would waste his time in\ncultivating a sandy barren field on his farm, and leave uncultivated a\nrich, loamy and productive one? Or would he try to cultivate both\nwithout sufficient hands to do either well? Assuredly, no judicious man\nwould do so; or if he did, a failure and poverty would be the necessary\nconsequence. If the League desire success, they must strike at the root\nof the evil of which they complain. Who, for instance, that had a tree\nin his garden, whose fruit and blossoms were poisonous, would spend his\ntime, every spring and autumn, in plucking off those blossoms and\ngathering up this fruit, with a view of getting rid of this troublesome\nand destructive tree? Would you, gentlemen of the Christian League, not\nsmile at the individual whom you saw thus employed? Would you not, in\ncharity, say to him,--sir, you should root out that tree altogether from\nyour garden; but especially should you take care that if any of its\nseeds has found its way into a richer garden or more valuable soil of\nyours, to extirpate the latter first, as the poison which that will emit\nwill be much more rank, subtle and to greater quantity.\n\nIf Jesuitism were now confined to Italy alone, the members of the\n_Christian alliance_ may, perhaps, be right. If there was but one tree in\nthe farmer's garden, and its seeds had not taken root in any of his\nmore valuable domains, he might take his own time in removing the tree,\neither by cutting it down, or by gathering up its fruits and blossoms\nto suit his taste, fancy or eccentricity. But when the seed of this tree\nhas taken root and begins to flourish luxuriantly, in the only spot\nof land from which he expected support for himself and family, he is a\nthriftless farmer that would not extirpate this tree root and branch,\nfruit and blossom, from this valuable spot on which his own support and\nthat of a numerous family depended.\n\nLet this rule be applied to the individual members of the Christian\nalliance, or rather let each member apply it to himself. He cannot but\nsee that the poisonous seed of Popery has found its way to this country,\nand taken deep root in some of its most verdant fields. I am aware that\nthese gentlemen will pay but little attention to my remonstrances or\nwarnings. Men entrenched behind the pride of opinion will seldom yield\nto the summons of reason. For more than twenty years I have warned\nProtestants, but to no effect, of an approaching foundation of Popish\npriests and Jesuit principles. Suppose a fire should rage through one\nof our most populous cities; suppose it should have extended to the\nvery middle of its lengthiest streets; would it be wise to go and try\nto check its progress by seeking for the spot where it began? The whole\nforce of the fire companies and citizens should be concentrate it the\nextreme point at which it extended; every effort should be made to\nprevent its progressing together. Palaces, houses, hovels, goods, all\nshould be pulled down at every risk of individual property to stop the\nconflagration. Suppose a prairie were on fire; suppose that prairie\nbelonged to the _Christian alliance_; suppose the loss of it involved\ntheir own ruin and the ruin of their posterity,--would they, or any one\nof them, go to look for the spot where the fire originated? Not they.\nIt would be madness to do so. Each and every one of them would turn up\ntheir sleeves and never cease to labor until they cut a ditch deep and\nwide enough to prevent the progress of the flames.\n\nWhy do they not pursue the same course in relation to Popery? They see\nPopery burning, blazing, whizzing, and devastating this whole land, and\nin place of cutting a ditch, or throwing up such a barrier as will check\nits further advance, they go by a sort of retro-progressive movement,\nback to Italy, to begin this work. Pardon me, fellow-citizens. Though\nI disapprove of the course of your proceedings in trying to prevent the\nfurther spread of Popery, I am willing to acknowledge that in talents,\nzeal, piety, and general learning, you infinitely excel me; but I\nbelieve I am not vain in saying that in the knowledge of Popery and\nJesuit intrigue, I am not inferior to you. You are evidently in the dark\nin practical acquaintance with Popery, and I hesitate not to tell\nyou now, that until you unite with me heart and hand in my efforts to\nextirpate it from this country, you will be laughed at by every Romish\npriest and Bishop in the United States; well knowing, as they do,\nthat while you are converting one Italian to Protestantism, they are\nconverting five hundred Americans to Popery; and that while you are\ndistributing one little tract, which one Italian in a thousand,--even\nif he could, would not read,--they are building one hundred colleges,\nnunneries, and monk houses, in your very midst, and at your very doors.\nYou will find, by-and-by, that this very country of yours, this very\nland of freedom, will supply even Italy with Jesuits and priests enough\nto drive you, your Bibles and tracts, beyond their boundaries. Stand\nupon your own soil; let Americans never engage in any foreign religious\nor political war. You have not now the moral power to wage an offensive\nreligious war; that day is gone by. I warned you of it twenty-five years\nago, but you heeded me not; you were deaf. You have quite enough to do\nnow to defend your own soil, and much more, I fear, than you will be\nable to accomplish, with all your zeal and talents.\n\nOne of the members of the Christian League, at its late convention in\nBoston, has stated, if I am not mistaken, that the Pope read one of its\ntracts, and looked very sad. For the word sad, should be substituted\nglad. If he read the tract at all, which I doubt, it must have been\nextremely gratifying to him. It showed him clearly that he had succeeded\nin humbugging Americans even farther than he expected; and with due\ndeference to each and every member of the League, I must say, that this\nis the only inference which any man, versed in a knowledge of Popery, or\neven of human nature, would or could draw from that circumstance.\n\nThe Romish church has a vast interest in this country; an interest so\ndeep that no line can sound it; an interest of such magnitude, that the\npower of numbers can scarcely calculate it, and of such altitude, that it\nscarcely admits of a measurement; and the Pope's object is to divert the\nattention of the Christian League, and all other American Protestants,\nfrom this country to Italy, which, if given to us with all its relics,\nJesuits, monks and nuns, would not enrich us much in a pecuniary point\nof view, and would be only the means of flooding us with infidelity and\nimmorality.\n\nIt is sound policy in the Pope, to attract the attention of American\nProtestants to Italy. He knows well, that the citadel of our liberties\ncan never be taken, without this or some other similar plot. Let him\nbut succeed in turning the eyes of Americans from the altar of our own\nliberty, on which the God of freedom sits enthroned, to Italy, and\npour in upon us his vassals at the rate of two thousand in forty-eight\nhours,--we are told was done in New York, last week,--and freedom's God\nwill soon be dishonored, and the image of some Popish vagabond, called\nsaint, will be seated in its place.\n\nThe whole country must form itself into one Protestant alliance, and\nswear upon the altar of freedom, that no man shall be admitted to\nthe rights of an American citizen, until he forswears all allegiance,\nspiritual and temporal, civil and religious, without mental reservation\nor equivocation, to the Pope of Rome Every appeal to the Pope of Rome,\nfrom the citizens of this country, or from any man living within its\nlimits, for the purpose of settling any difficulties between them about\nchurch rights, civil rights, or any other rights whatever, should be\nconsidered treason; and the individual or individuals who shall make\nsuch appeals, whether a Popish archbishop, bishop, priests, Jesuits,\nor laymen, should be prosecuted as felons, and subjected to the most\nignominious punishment known to our laws.\n\nThis, and this alone, can effectually arrest the progress of Popery in\nthese United States. No Papists can complain of this, and no honest man\nwill object to it. Such a law is not at variance with our constitution;\nit prevents no man from worshipping God according to the dictates of his\nown conscience. On the contrary, it only guaranties even to the Papist,\nin still stronger terms than our constitution now does, the right of\nworshipping God as he pleases, and relieves him from the degrading\nobligation of being obliged to worship him according to the dictates of\nthe conscience of a foreign tyrant, the Pope of Rome, and his insolent\nminions in this country.\n\nI believe there is not even an Irish Catholic in this country who will\nnot support such a law. A little reflection will satisfy them that\nnearly all the evils they suffer, and have borne patiently for centuries\nback, have been brought upon them by the Church of Rome. They will soon\nperceive, if they only take the trouble of examining the question, that\nthere is not, and never was, such a system of general, permanent, and\nunlimited slavery, as that to which the Romish church has reduced them.\nIt is irreconcilable with happiness, good order, public and private\ntranquillity; and there cannot possibly exist a more singular anomaly,\nthan to see a whole people willing to Submit to such a system, and\npreferring it to the rational freedom which they enjoy in this country.\n\nFar be it from me, and foreign indeed is it from ray thoughts, to say,\nor do, or write anything that may injure the true welfare of the\npoor Irish Catholics. I would serve them, and, in the full flow of my\naffection for them, I would beg of them to pause and look seriously into\ntheir condition. The year before last, 1843, the Irish people paid to\nO'Connell twenty-eight thousand pounds. This was called the O'Connell\ntribute. In the same year, they paid _repeal rent_, amounting to the\nenormous sum of seventy-eight thousand five hundred pounds sterling;\namounting in all, to one hundred and six thousand five hundred pounds\nBritish money. The above, I take from the accounts and estimates of the\nrepeal journals. Let us add to the above sum the amount which the Irish\nin the United States have sent over to Ireland, and some idea may be\nformed of the grinding tyranny which the Romish church and her agents\nexercise over their deluded victims here and elsewhere.\n\nUnder these circumstances, is it not my duty, is it not the duty of\nevery friend of humanity, to appeal to the good sense of the Irish,\nto their \"sober second thought,\" and ask them, why submit to such\nimposition as this? Why not resist these tyrannical exactions of the\nChurch of Rome? For they know well, that it is not _Irish repeal_ or\nAmerican repeal, that the Pope and his priests have in view; but church\nrepeal. What have the Irish received in exchange for the vast sums which\nthey have given, and the blood which they have shed, to effect this\nIrish, or rather church repeal, and the loss of that confidence and\nesteem, which they might otherwise have from Americans? Nothing.\nEmphatically nothing. Suppose they succeeded in overthrowing the\nconstitution; suppose they reduced to sad reality the words of their\ndaring and treasonable motto, \"Americans shan't rule us\" and the\nAmerican constitution were trampled under their feet; suppose the\n\"Protestant heretics of the United States\" were extirpated and\nexterminated, _qui bono_, whose advantage would it be? Would it be\nyours, poor, warm-hearted, but deluded Irish Catholics? Would your new\nPopish rulers give you a better constitution? Would your new Popish\nsigners to your constitution be men of more piety, liberality, or\npatriotism, than the signers of the Declaration of the Independence\nof these United States? Let the civilized world answer the question. I\nshall not record it. It should be registered only in heaven.\n\nPoor Papists! You are not only slaves, but you are denied the privilege\nof choosing your own master. Your task-master, the Pope, and his\noverseers the bishops, will not even allow you to choose your own\nteachers, or have priests of your choice. They will not even give you\na voice in the choice of your pastors. Do you call this freedom of\nconscience? A bishop, some insolent tool of the pope, tells you to build\na church; puts his hand in your pockets, takes out the last dollar some\nof you have, builds a magnificent chapel, and when you want a priest,\nwhom you believe most competent to instruct yourselves and your\nchildren, you cannot have him; and if you insist upon your just right\nto choose him, you are told by your tyrant overseer, the bishop, to\nbe silent, or he will lock up the church, and curse you, and every one\nbelonging to you. Call you this freedom of conscience? Call you this\nthe right of worshipping God according to the dictates of your own\nconscience? Yes. Such is your infatuation. I ask you, Irish Papists,\nwhether I am exaggerating or even discoloring the truth, in what I here\nstate?\n\nAbout the year 1818, the Roman Catholics of Norfolk, Virginia, had for\ntheir priest a man supposed by them to be among the best of the order.\nThey wished him continued among them; but their bishop would not allow\nit; and when they murmured, he threatened to curse them; they sent a\nremonstrance to the Pope of Rome, but he did not deign to notice it;\nthey had to submit. Here was liberty of conscience with a vengeance! The\nRoman Catholics of Philadelphia, New Orleans, Charleston, and New York,\nsent similar remonstrances to his royal holiness, the Pope; but in place\nof redress, he reprimanded them for their insolence, and threatened to\ncurse them, if they exhibited any further symptoms of contumacy; and\nthey crouched like so many whipped spaniels, perfectly content with the\nprivilege of paying out their money and building magnificent churches\nfor the Pope's agents.\n\nA similar case occurred in this city of Boston, if I am correctly\ninformed, only a short time ago. A large majority of one of the most\nrespectable Roman Catholic congregations in this city, wished to have\nx for their pastor, a priest whom they believed to be a man of talents;\nbut their Bishop, Fenwick,--a practical Jesuit, with talents below\nmediocrity, but possessing all the craft, cunning and intrigue of his\norder,--had the unparalleled assurance to tell them that _they should\nnot have the pastor of their choice; that they had no voice in the\nmatter_; that he was the church within the limits of his diocese;\nthat they who did not hear the church \"were worse than heathens and\npublicans;\" and that if they did not shut up their mouths, he would shut\nup their church at once, and curse them if they became contumacious. Is\nthis freedom of conscience? And yet we hear this very majority,--this\ninsulted, downtrodden majority,--talk of the right of worshipping God\naccording to the dictates of their own conscience. Shameful proceedings\nthese, in a free country! Base tyranny over a generous people! Why not\nsay to this would-be despot, Fenwick, we acknowledge you our bishop; we\nwill hear to any objections which you have to make against the pastor of\nour choice; but if you have none to make, we shall have him; the church\nis our property; and you and your interdicts, curses and all such\n\"raw-heads and bloody-bones,\" may go to Rome; we want you not in a\nfree-country. No longer shall we submit in blind obedience to you, or to\na foreign Pope.\n\nThe great mass, of Irish Catholics, on whom the arts of delusion and\nchicanery are chiefly practised, do not understand the meaning of the\nword freedom. They are taught by priest and Jesuits in the confessional,\nto misapply that term altogether. Freedom or liberty means in its\ntrue sense, a faithful and conscientious adherence to law and the\nconstitution of the country in which we live, and of which we are\nmembers. It is the obedience of duty, and anticipates compulsion. It is\nnot a blind obedience, such as that taught by Popish priests, and which\nfavors the extension of their power. Priests and bishops would, if they\ncould, limit the comprehensive term, liberty, to the privilege of\nbowing to his holiness the Pope, and building churches for him. But even\nPapists are beginning to doubt the legitimacy of this application of the\nterm, and I am much mistaken if there are not, even now, thousands of\nthem in the city of Boston, New York, and elsewhere, who will unite with\nAmericans in petitioning Congress to pass a law, making it treason, in\nany man in the United States, whether native or foreigner, to hold any\ncorrespondence, or to avow any allegiance of any kind or under any name\nor title, spiritual or temporal, with the Pope of Rome, knowing as they\ndo that he is a temporal potentate. Let the whole people, Christian\nLeague, Natives, Odd-fellows, Freemasons, Whigs, Democrats,\nConservatives, and all unite in one great, national petition to the\nCongress of the United States, and in one fervent and loud prayer to the\nGod of mercy, that he may give the said Congress a correct view of\ntheir duty, and cause them to hear and grant our prayer. This, with such\nimprovements as wiser heads may suggest, is the course I would advise to\nbe pursued in the present posture of our national and moral condition.\nThe time seems propitious; our executive is said to be a Christian. God\nsend he may prove so, and that the blandishments of office may not blind\nhim to a sense of his duty to God and his country!\n\n\n\n\nDESTRUCTION OF THE INQUISITION IN SPAIN.\n\nIn 1809, Col. Lehmanowsky was attached to the part of Napoleon's army\nwhich was stationed in Madrid. And while in that city, said Col. L., I\nused to speak freely among the people what I thought of the Priests\nand Jesuits, and of the Inquisition. It had been decreed by the Emperor\nNapoleon that the Inquisition and Monasteries should be suppressed, but\nthe decree, he said, like some of the laws enacted in this country, was\nnot executed. Months had passed away, and the prisons of the Inquisition\nhad not been opened. One night, about 10 or 11 o'clock, as he was\nwalking one of the streets of Madrid, two armed men sprang upon him from\nan alley, and made a furious attack. He instantly drew his sword, put\nhimself in a posture of defence, and while struggling with them, he saw\nat a distance, the lights of the patroles,--French soldiers mounted, who\ncarried lanterns, and who rode through the streets of the city at all\nhours of the night, to preserve order. He called to them in French, and,\nas they hastened to his assistance, the assailants took to their heels\nand escaped, not however before he saw by their dress that they belonged\nto the guards of the Inquisition.\n\nHe went immediately to Marshal Soult, then Governor of Madrid, told him\nwhat had taken place, and reminded him of the decree to suppress this\ninstitution. Marshal Soult replied that he might go and destroy it. Col.\nL. told him that his regiment (the 9th of the Polish Lancers) was not\nsufficient for such a service, but if he would give him two additional\nregiments,--the 117th, and another, which he named, he would undertake\nthe work. The 117th regiment was under the command of Col. De Lile,\nwho is now, like Col. L., a minister of the gospel, and pastor of an\nevangelical church in Marseilles, France. The troops required were\ngranted, and I proceeded (said Col. L.) to the Inquisition, which was\nsituated about five miles from the city. It was surrounded with a\nwall of great strength, and defended by a company of soldiers. When we\narrived at the walls, I addressed one of the sentinels, and summoned the\nholy fathers to surrender to the imperial army, and open the gates of\nthe Inquisition. The sentinel, who was standing on the wall, appeared to\nenter into conversation for a moment with some one within, at the close\nof which he presented his musket, and shot one of my men. This was\nthe signal of attack, and I ordered my troops to fire upon those who\nappeared on the walls.\n\nIt was soon obvious that it was an unequal warfare. The walls of the\nInquisition were covered with the soldiers of the holy office; there was\nalso a breast work upon the wall, behind which they partially exposed\nthemselves as they discharged their muskets. Our troops were in the open\nplain, and exposed to a destructive fire. We had no cannon, nor could\nwe scale the walls, and the gates successfully resisted all attempts at\nforcing them. I could not retire and send for cannon to break through\nthe walls without giving them time to lay a train for blowing us up.\nI saw that it was necessary to change the mode of attack, and directed\nsome trees to be cut down and trimmed, to be used as battering rams. Two\nof these were taken up by detachments of men, as numerous as could work\nto advantage, and brought to bear upon the walls with all the power\nwhich they could exert, while the troops kept up a fire to protect them\nfrom the fire poured upon them from the walls. Presently the walls began\nto tremble, a breach was made, and the imperial troops rushed into the\nInquisition. Here we met with an incident, which nothing but Jesuitical\neffrontery is equal to. The inquisitor general, followed by the father\nconfessors in their priestly robes, all came out of their rooms, as we\nwere making our way into the interior of the Inquisition, and with long\nfaces, and their arms crossed over their breasts, their fingers resting\non their shoulders, as though they had been deaf to all the noise of\nthe attack and defence, and had just learned what was going on, they\naddressed themselves in the language of rebuke to their own soldiers,\nsaying, \"_Why do you fight our friends, the French?_\"\n\nTheir intention, no doubt, was to make us think that this defence was\nwholly unauthorized by them, hoping, if they could make us believe\nthat they were friendly, they should have a better opportunity, in the\nconfusion of the moment, to escape. Their artifice was too shallow, and\ndid not succeed. I caused them to be placed under guard, and all\nthe soldiers of the Inquisition to be secured as prisoners. We then\nproceeded to examine all the rooms of the stately edifice. We passed\nthrough room after room; found all perfectly in order, richly furnished,\nwith altars and crucifixes, and wax candles in abundance, but could\ndiscover no evidences of iniquity being practised there, nothing of\nthose peculiar features which we expected to find in an Inquisition.\nWe found splendid paintings, and a rich and extensive library. Here was\nbeauty and splendor, and the most perfect order on which my eyes had\never rested. The architecture, the proportions were perfect. The ceiling\nand floors of wood were scoured and highly polished. The marble floors\nwere arranged with a strict regard to order. There was everything to\nplease the eye and gratify a cultivated taste; but where were those\nhorrid instruments of torture of which we had been told, and where those\ndungeons in which human beings were said to be buried alive? We searched\nin vain. The holy father assured us that they had been belied; that we\nhad seen all; and I was prepared to give up the search, convinced that\nthis Inquisition was different from others of which I had heard.\n\nBut Col. De Lile was not so ready as myself to give up the search, and\nsaid to me, \"Colonel, you are commander to-day, and as you say, so it\nmust be; but if you will be advised by me, let this marble floor be\nexamined. Let water be brought and poured upon it, and we will watch\nand see if there is any place through which it passes more freely than\nothers.\" I replied to him, \"Do as you please, colonel,\" and ordered\nwater to be brought accordingly. The slabs of marble were large and\nbeautifully polished. When the water had been poured over the floor,\nmuch to the dissatisfaction of the inquisitors, a careful examination\nwas made of every seam in the floor, to see if the water passed through.\nPresently Col. De Lile exclaimed that he had found it. By the side of\none of these marble slabs the water passed through fast, as though\nthere was an opening beneath. All hands were now at work for further\ndiscovery; the officers with their swords, and the soldiers with their\nbayonets, seeking to clear out the seam and pry up the slab; others with\nthe butts of their muskets striking the slab with all their might to\nbreak it, while the priests remonstrated against our desecrating\ntheir holy and beautiful house. While thus engaged, a soldier, who was\nstriking with the butt of his musket, struck a spring, and the marble\nslab flew up. Then the faces of the inquisitors grew pale as Belshazzar,\nwhen the handwriting appeared on the wall; they trembled all over.\nBeneath the marble slab, now partly up, there was a stair-case. I\nstepped to the altar, and took from the candlestick one of the candles\nfour feet in length, which was burning, that I might explore the room\nbelow. As I was doing this, I was arrested by one of the inquisitors,\nwho laid his hand gently on my arm, and with a very demure and holy look\nsaid, \"My son, you must not take those lights with your bloody hands,\nthey are holy.\"--\"Well,\" I said, \"I will take a holy thing to shed light\non iniquity; I will bear the responsibility!\" I took the candle, and\nproceeded down the staircase. As we reached the foot of the stairs we\nentered a large square room, which was called the Hall of Judgment. In\nthe centre of it was a large block, and a chain fastened to it. On this\nthey had been accustomed to place the accused, chained to his seat.\nOn one side of the room was one elevated seat called the Throne of\nJudgment. This the Inquisitor General occupied, and on either side were\nseats less elevated, for the holy fathers when engaged in the solemn\nbusiness of the Holy Inquisition.\n\nFrom this room we proceeded to the right, and obtained access to small\ncells, extending the entire length of the edifice; and here such sights\nwere presented as we hoped never to see again.\n\nThese cells were places of solitary confinement, where the wretched\nobjects of inquisitorial hate were confined year after year, till\ndeath released them from their sufferings, and there their bodies were\nsuffered to remain until they were entirely decayed, and the rooms had\nbecome fit for others to occupy. To prevent this being offensive to\nthose who occupied the inquisition, there were flues or tubes extending\nto the open air, sufficiently capacious to carry off the odor. In these\ncells we found the remains of some who had paid the debt of nature;\nsome of them had been dead apparently but a short time, while of others\nnothing remained but their bones, still chained to the floor of their\ndungeon.\n\nIn other cells we found living sufferers of both sexes and of every age,\nfrom three score years and ten down to fourteen or fifteen years--all\nnaked as when born into the world! and all in chains! Here were old men\nand aged women, who had been shut up for many years. Here, too, were the\nmiddle aged, and the young man and the maiden of fourteen years old. The\nsoldiers immediately went to work to release these captives from\ntheir chains, and took from their knapsacks their overcoats and\nother clothing, which they gave to cover their nakedness. They were\nexceedingly anxious to bring them out to the light of day; but Col.\nL., aware of the danger, had food given them, and then brought them\ngradually to the light, as they were able to bear it.\n\nWe then proceeded, said Col. L., to explore another room on the left.\nHere we found the instruments of torture, of every kind which the\ningenuity of men or devils could invent. Col. L. here described four of\nthese horrid instruments. The first was a machine by which the victim\nwas confined, and then, beginning with the fingers, every joint in the\nhands, arms, and body, were broken or drawn one after another, until\nthe victim died. The second was a box, in which the head and neck of the\nvictim were so closely confined by a screw that he could not move in any\nway. Over the box was a vessel, from which one drop of water a second\nfell upon the head of the victim--every successive drop falling upon\nprecisely the same place on the head, suspended the circulation in a few\nmoments, and put the sufferer in the most excruciating agony. The third\nwas an infernal machine, laid horizontally, to which the victim was\nbound; the machine then being placed between two beams, in which were\nscores of knives so fixed that, by turning the machine with a crank, the\nflesh of the sufferer was torn from his limbs all in small pieces. The\nfourth surpassed the others in fiendish ingenuity. Its exterior was\na beautiful woman, or large doll, richly dressed, with arms extended,\nready to embrace its victim. Around her feet a semi-circle was drawn.\nThe victim who passed over this fatal mark, touched a spring, which\ncaused the diabolical engine to open; its arms clasped him, and a\nthousand knives cut him into as many pieces in the deadly embrace.\n\nCol. L. said that the sight of these engines of infernal cruelty kindled\nthe rage of the soldiers to fury. They declared that every inquisitor\nand soldier of the inquisition should be put to the torture. Their rage\nwas ungovernable. Col. L. did not oppose them; they might have turned\ntheir arms against him, if he had attempted to arrest their work. They\nbegan with the holy fathers. The first they put to death in the machine\nfor breaking joints. The torture of the inquisitor put to death by the\ndropping of water on his head was most excruciating. The poor man cried\nout in agony to be taken from the fatal machine. The inquisitor general\nwas brought before the infernal engine called \"The Virgin.\" He begs to\nbe excused. \"No,\" said they \"you have caused others to kiss her, and\nnow you must do it.\" They interlocked their bayonets so as to form large\nforks, and with these pushed him over the deadly circle. The beautiful\nimage instantly prepared for the embrace, clasped him in its arms, and\nhe was cut into innumerable pieces. Col. L. said, that he witnessed the\ntorture of four of them--his heart sickened at the awful scene--and he\nleft the soldiers to wreak their vengeance on the last guilty inmate of\nthat prison-house of hell.\n\nIn the mean time it was reported through Madrid that the prisons of the\nInquisition were broken open, and multitudes hastened to the fatal spot.\nAnd oh, what a meeting was there! It was like a resurrection! About a\nhundred who had been buried for many years were now restored to life.\nThere were fathers who found their long lost daughters; wives were\nrestored to their husbands, sisters to their brothers, and parents to\ntheir children; and there were some who could recognize no friend among\nthe multitude. The scene was such as no tongue can describe.\n\nWhen the multitude had retired, Col. L. caused the library, paintings,\nfurniture, &c., to be removed, and having sent to the city for a wagon\nload of powder, he deposited a large quantity in the vaults beneath\nthe building, and placed a slow match in connection with it. All had\nwithdrawn at a distance, and in a few moments there was a most joyful\nsight to thousands. The walls and turrets of the massive structure rose\nmajestically towards the heavens, impelled by the tremendous explosion,\nand fell back to the earth an immense heap of ruins. The Inquisition was\nno more!--_Phil Christ. Obs_.\n\n\n\n\n\n\nAURICULAR CONFESSION and POPISH NUNNERIES, Volume II.\n\nBy William Hogan\n\n1854.\n\n\n\n\nPREFACE TO THE SECOND VOLUME.\n\nA close observer of the past and present religious and political\ncondition of this country, cannot fail to see an evident and manifest\nchange in both, especially during the last ten or twenty years. It may\nnot appear as plain to those who have always resided upon the soil,\nas it does to others, who have only been naturalized or incorporated\namongst them. This is not to be wondered at It is almost natural that\nit should be so. A parent, who is accustomed to see his child every day,\nand perhaps every hour in the day, cannot always perceive how fast\nhe grows in height and size. A stranger, who only sees him at distant\nintervals, will perceive the change much sooner. The child will grow,\nand acquire almost the attitudes and proportions of manhood, before the\nparents can realize the fact that he is no longer a child, but a full\ngrown man. It is undoubtedly upon some similar principle, we can\naccount for the fact that Americans do not see, as soon as others among\nthem, the fatal change which is progressively, but steadily and surely,\ntaking place in the political and religious condition of this country.\n\nIf I am correct in my own observations upon events as they whirl past\nme with almost dazzling rapidity, there is something wrong amongst\nus,--something is \"rotten in Denmark,\"--some cogs are out of place, or\nout of proportion, in the machinery of our moral and political systems.\nSome foreign elements must have been surreptitiously thrown in and mixed\nup with them, which have deranged all their operations.\n\nIt is, in my apprehension, the duty of every man who values freedom\nof thought, freedom of speech, and the free exercise of religion, to\nexamine and see what is the cause of this derangement, which retards and\ndisturbs our happiness, as Christians and as citizens. What has swelled\nand rendered turgent and muddy those sweet and gently-flowing streams of\npeace and brotherly love, on the banks of which, the early settlers\nof this country used to sit for days undisturbed, singing praises and\nhallelujahs to Jehovah, who delivered them, in his great mercy, from\nlands of bondage, tyranny, and idolatry.\n\nI have looked into the subject; I have examined, with all the care and\ndiligence in my power, the reasons and causes why free-born Americans\nwere not advancing more rapidly both in political science and practical\npiety; and the result of my most anxious, diligent, and impartial\ninquiry is, that it is attributable solely to the introduction of Popery\namong them, and the consequent direct and indirect interference of the\nCourt of Rome with our government The royal Pope of Rome, (as I have\nheretofore demonstrated to the satisfaction of every man whose eyes and\nears were not closed against truth,) claims jurisdiction, spiritual\nand temporal, over the kingdoms of this world; and his untiring and\nobstinate efforts to obtain an universal acknowledgment of this mad and\npresumptuous claim, has occasioned, and is now producing, (even in this\ncountry,) more strife, and contributes more to the decay of religious\nand even political ethics, than any other circumstance recorded in the\nhistory of the human race.\n\nThere have been but few, if any, on the long list of Popes and\nAnti-Popes, who were not themselves dabblers and traffickers in\npolitics; and there is scarcely one among them whose private history\ndoes not show him to be an abettor and an accomplice in the vilest\ncrimes and immoralities; so much and so deeply so, that we are astounded\nat the single inquiry how such characters could ever have obtained\ninfluence over any portion of their fellow-beings. This, however, is\nnot a matter of surprise to me, nor does such an inquiry form any\nconsiderable portion of the following pages; but what more than astounds\nme, is, how Romish Popes and priests could, by any species of jugglery\nor legerdemain, deceive and impose upon the cool, reflecting, and\ncalculating citizens of the United States: but reflection might have\ntaught me better.\n\nSo expert and versed in moral and political jugglery are Popes, bishops,\nand priests, that they must be closely watched, otherwise their artful\npractices will deceive the most intelligent spectators; unless there may\nbe amongst them, perchance, some individual who has been trained himself\nto a knowledge of their arts. A Popish juggler cannot deceive me. I\nunderstand the whole of his operations, as well as he does himself.\nHe may astonish the natives by his \"wonderful feats,\" but with all his\nlegerdemain he cannot deceive me in any of his movements.\n\nUnder these circumstances, I felt it my duty to raise the curtain behind\nwhich I knew were concealed those secret springs by which the machinery\nof Popery is moved in these United States. The most complicated part of\nthe whole machine,--and the part most difficult to be understood,--is\nthat which is called _Auricular Confession_. His Royal Holiness of Rome\nhas obtained a patent, or something like it, for this particular wheel\nwithin a wheel of the machine. In almost all Catholic countries, no one\ndare examine or take a model from it. If he does, he incurs the penalty\nof being cursed by the Pope. An awful excommunication is immediately\nissued against him. Every thing the Pope does is awful If he gives\nhis blessing, it is awful; his curse is awful; his person is awful;\nhe cannot be approached unless with profound reverence. His big toe\nis awful; no one can kiss it, unless on bended knees, and after the\nperformance of sundry puerilities, as Bishop Eastburn, of Boston, very\nproperly calls all such fooleries.\n\nIt does not appear as yet, that his Holiness has taken out any patent\nfor _Auricular Confession_ in this country; and as I know not how soon\nhe may gull American heretics to grant him one, I have taken the liberty\nof exhibiting a model of it, for public inspection. There are parts of\nthis model which may appear revolting to the delicate sensibilities of\nmy readers; but let them reflect that the original is formed and put\ntogether by the sacred hands of His Holiness the Pope and his pious\npriests. I act only in the capacity of an artist, or a sculptor, who\nis permitted, event by the rules of good taste and delicacy, to give\nlikenesses, in painting and statuary, of the most deformed and unsightly\nobjects. They are only required to be true and faithful to nature and\nthe originals from which the likenesses are taken. I have done no more\nthan this, in the model or picture which I have drawn of Auricular\nConfession; and those who do not choose to examine it, are, of course,\nat perfect liberty to pass it by unnoticed. The day is not far distant\nwhen it will be found in every family in the United States.\n\nI have the honor to remain the public's humble servant,\n\nWILLIAM HOGAN.\n\n\n\n\nAURICULAR CONFESSION AND POPISH NUNNERIES.\n\nIt has been observed by an eminent writer, that \"book-making is\nsomething like pouring water from one vessel into another, and then\npouring it back again.\" There is much truth in the observation; this is\nobvious to every general reader. There is scarcely a work issued from\nthe press, which is not substantially a copy of something that has been\nwritten before upon the same subject The old water-casks, which have\nbeen as it were fixtures for centuries, are now being dug out of their\nplaces, and the waters contained in them are changed into new casks,\nhaving a more sightly appearance, and a more polished exterior. This,\nhowever, is more apt to be the case in the writings of theologians, than\nin those of any other body of men. Limited as my own reading has been, I\ndo not recollect ever having perused a volume upon theology, especially\nfrom the pen of an American theologian, which I had not seen or read\n(at least in part) before. How to account for this I know not. Assuredly\nthis land of freedom has among its theologians and controversialists men\nof the finest minds--minds like their own rivers, overflowing with the\ndeepest, the clearest, most limpid and purest streams of thought--minds\nin which the ever-rolling ocean of time has had, as yet, scarcely an\nopportunity of depositing much of its accumulated impurities--minds\nwhich, if their great powers were evolved and brought to bear on the\nmoral and civil condition of our fellow citizens, would give us a new\nera or a new world of thought and morals--strong, permanent, diffusive,\nprogressive--and as different from those of olden times, as our new\nand beautiful republic is from some of the aged, faded, sickly and\nconsumptive governments of former days.\n\nIt is difficult; I own, to form a new system of any kind, especially\na new system of thought or morals; but still such a thing is not\nimpossible. There never was, and never will be, a system constructed\nwithout having to encounter great and almost insuperable obstacles;\nfirst, in its formation, and secondly, in its application and various\nbearings.\n\nIt was difficult, for instance, to form our own system of civil\ngovernment. Its very conception was for some time looked upon as a\nwild theory. Such a thing was not dreamed of in any work upon political\nethics taught in our seminaries or schools, in the days of its founders,\nyet the system was established, and has hitherto fully answered all the\nexpectations of its friends; but even if our comparatively new form or\nsystem of government did not entirely succeed--if it even failed and\ntumbled to atoms, that would not be a sufficient argument against making\nthe experiment, for even in its ruins, fragments may be found which may\nbe useful to posterity. Yes, as the poet beautifully expresses it,\n\n     \"You may break--you may ruin the vase, if you will,\n     But the scent of the roses will hang round it still.\"\n\nThe failure of any system, as I have observed, is not a sufficient\nargument against its practicability, or its ultimate usefulness; and\nhence it appears to me strange that American minds, so fertile in all\nexpedients to advance the temporal interests of man, should be so barren\nand unproductive of any system of thought or morals exclusively their\nown, and entirely independent of the corrupt and vitiated systems which\nhave bewildered Europe and its moral philosophers for so many centuries.\nIt is passing strange that the theologians and professors of moral\ntheology in this New World of ours--if they can do no better--do not\nunite upon some plan to exclude from among them institutions which all\nadmit to be calculated to demoralize the rising generation.\n\nI am happy to find that there is now a system of thought and morals, or\nsomething like it, to be found amongst us, which is peculiarly\nAmerican; it is denominated or called the _Christian League_. Let me be\nunderstood, when I use the term system. By system I mean an arrangement\nof objects or purposes so as to make them agree and unite. The Christian\nLeague I believe may be called a system; its members are united in the\naccomplishment of given objects. But if not strictly speaking a system\nitself, it has within it materials out of which a noble one of thought\nand morals can be formed. It is yet in its chrysalis, but the sun of\nrighteousness, which I trust the dark clouds of superstition that now\nportentously hang over us shall never be permitted to hide from our\nview, will soon warm it into maturity, and give it wings to fly and\ncarry with it wherever it goeth, glad tidings of salvation. I do not\nagree with the leading members of the Christian League, in their modus\noperandi. I have taken the liberty of suggesting to them a different\ncourse of action from that which they have been pleased to adopt; but I\nam with them, heart and soul. I shall support their measures, as far\nas I find them calculated to check the progress of Popery in the United\nStates. If I cannot agree with them in their plan to effect this, I\nshall only say--and I say it with the utmost respect to each and every\nmember of the Christian League!!!!!\n\n     \"If a better system thine,\n     Impart it frankly, or make use of mine.\"\n\nI have suggested to the members of the Christian League, to throw away\nfrom amongst them all appearance of sectarianism; but I know not that\nthey have done so; the name or the society would indicate that they had;\nbut do facts warrant such an inference? The very reverse is the case.\nTheir prominent speakers all belong to one denomination; there may be\na few exceptions, but there are not many; the public presses which\nadvocate the proceedings of the League, are generally supported by those\nof a particular creed. What is the inference? It is this: either other\npresses and other denominations of Christians are indifferent about the\nsuccess of the League, or the members of the League are unwilling to\nhold any communion with them. The former cannot be the case; the latter\nmust be, of course. This is not right, and if persevered in, must\nultimately neutralize all the measures of an association which, if\nproperly conducted, might evolve and mature one of the finest systems\nof thought and moral government that has ever been discovered. I have\nsuggested to the members of the Christian League, that they should have\nbut one base, or one great moral trunk. I have advised them to partition\nthis trunk; and divide it into branches, to be spread equally among all\nthe followers of the law of God, and all the friends of civil rights.\nThen let every man do his duty; let no man fancy that because of\nhis elevation in the Church, or higher salary, his nature has been\nmetamorphosed, or refined by any chemical process; let him not suppose\nhimself sublimated by the sunshine of personal popularity, which is\nfleeting as the wind; let each individual suppose--and history, as well\nas my own personal experience, enables me to assure him that he may do\nso without injustice--that the cause of morals and civil rights has one\ncommon enemy in the United States, which must be not only defeated,\nbut annihilated--yes, annihilated. While that enemy lives, the cause\nof morality cannot flourish, and the civil rights of man are in danger.\nNeed I tell the reader who or what that enemy is? It is Popery. A\nhealthy state of morals, and Popery cannot exist in any country, any\nkingdom, or any clime; the air which gives vitality to Popery, and\nsustains its existence, is death to morality--aye, that very morality\nwhich, as Americans, we boast of, and consider to be the very\nincarnation even of our civil rights. It is true, that under the\nguidance of reason, several forms of government have been established,\nbut all have been imperfect and unsatisfactory to man in the various\nstages and mutations of the social system. If we look back and examine\nthe history, the nature and character of those improvements which have\nbeen made in society ever since its genesis, we shall find that the\nfinger of religion, ever true to its purpose, invariably pointed and\ninvited the attention of man to them; we shall find also that whenever\nor wherever this has not been the case, the people have not prospered;\nwe find in every thing truly valuable to man, whether in his social or\nindividual capacity, the hand of religion, and the almost omnipotency of\nmoral principle. This is eminently conspicuous at the present day, and\nperhaps as much so in this as any country in the world, and hence it\nis that we should be peculiarly grateful and vigilant in removing from\namong us any and every cause which may directly or indirectly have a\ntendency to injure the morals of our people; for amid the ruin of our\nmorals shall surely be found the elements of our national downfall.\n\nI have alluded to this subject heretofore, in my books on Popery. I did\nnot expect that all would approve of those books. I was aware that many,\neven among Protestants, would find fault with several of the expressions\nused in the small volume which I have recently written, entitled\n_Auricular Confession_ to which these pages are a sequel. That Papists\nshould find fault with all that I have written, does not at all surprise\nme; but that Protestants should find any--though I am happy to find that\nvery few have found any--is a matter of some surprise to me. It must be\nowing to the fact that they know not and understand not what auricular\nconfession is, or how it is made. That Americans in general should know\nnothing upon this subject, and be horrified at the bare relation of\nits iniquitous details, is a fact which can be easily understood and\nexplained. They have never made auricular confession the subject of\ntheir study, and hence the horror they feel at its iniquitous and\nprivate abominations. I must frankly confess, however, that it is a\nmatter of surprise that American theologians should be so entirely\nunacquainted with the writings of popish doctors and popish priests, as\nnot to find all the apparently objectionable expressions in my books in\ncommon use among them. There is not to be found a single volume\namong the writers of the Popish Church, on the subject of auricular\nconfession, in which my statements are not corroborated, and that\nin language far more objectionable than mine--language so gross and\nindelicate that I could not in justice to public taste and delicacy\nintroduce it into my books. Those who have read my book on auricular\nconfession, may recollect the questions which I have accused Popish\nbishops and priests of putting to their young female penitents, and\nwhich some liberal Protestants say could not have been the case. I\nnow assert, without any qualification whatever, and without any mental\nreservation or equivocation, that there is not in the United States a\npriest nor bishop, who has heard the confessions of married or single\nwomen, without asking them such questions as I have given in my book. I\nask Bishop Fenwick of this city, or any other Roman Catholic priest or\nbishop living, to contradict me if he can. I challenge those females,\nyoung or old, who have ever been in the habit of confessing their sins\nto priests, to come forward and say, We have been at confession, and\nsuch questions as those contained in Hogan's book have never been put to\nus.\n\nThe charges I have made against Romish priests are of a serious\ncharacter. If false they can be refuted. I am alone; there are nearly\nthree millions of Roman Catholics in the United States, and if there\nis among this vast multitude, an individual who can say and give such\nevidence of the truth of his statement, as will satisfy any Court of\nEquity, that I have done injustice to popes, priests or bishops,\nin charging them with tampering with their female penitents in the\nconfessional, in order the more easily to debauch them, I will publicly\nacknowledge that I am guilty of slander, and have wronged them. I trust\nthat after this, Protestant theologians will take more pains in reading\nthe works of Popish moralists, with which, as far as I have the honor\nof their acquaintance, they are lamentably unacquainted. I saw a strong\ninstance of this the other evening. I chanced to meet at the house of a\nmutual friend, with one of the most learned and pious theologians of the\nPresbyterian Church in this or any other country in the world. He very\ncourteously observed that he did not question my veracity, but that it\nappeared incredible to him that Popish priests or bishops, would put\nsuch questions to married or single women while confessing to them as I\nhave accused them of. I listened in silent wonder to this great and good\nman; for the moment I knew not what to say.\n\nHere was a venerable American theologian--himself a living, moving\ntheological library--the embodiment of American Protestant theology,\ndoubting, or at least hesitating to credit the fact, that Romish\nbishops and priests put to their female penitents the gross, licentious,\nlibidinous questions contained in my book on confession. The past,\nthe present and the future, seemed to rise and rush before me in\nimagination, and I could not help exclaiming in my own mind, woe be to\nthis land of my adoption, woe be to its generous and hospitable people,\nif even its patriarchs and wise men, such as he who now stands before\nme, and whose life has been a beautiful comment upon the purity and\nsimplicity of the Christian religion, cannot fully understand, even\nat this late period, the corruptions which the drag nets of Popery are\nbringing amongst us and strewing on the paths of our hitherto virtuous\nmothers and chaste daughters.\n\nIt is impossible to find a work on confession written by a Popish priest\nin full communion with his church, which does not contain almost the\nvery language I have used. I finally satisfied my learned friend that I\nwas correct in all my statements; I explained to him the position of a\nRomish priest in the confessional, and that of a young lady confessing\nto him, and never shall I forget the remarks of the venerable gentleman\non that occasion. \"If,\" said he, \"my wife or daughter were dressed in\nthe finest silk, and then put into a hogshead of mud and rolled down a\nhill, I should as soon expect to find their dresses without a stain, as\nfind their minds and morals pure and chaste, after going any length of\ntime to confession to a Romish priest.\" And he was right; the principles\nof popery, as taught in Romish confessional, and those of purity, are\nantagonist principles.\n\nWe are supposed to have about thirty-six millions of papists--as I have\nheretofore stated--in the world. Look, American Protestants, at the\ncondition of these your brethren, and tremble lest their present\ncondition be yours at some future period; look over the world, boundless\nalmost as it is, and great, and glorious, and moral as its inhabitants\nmight be; what is it now, when it seems to be undergoing, as it were,\na process of self regeneration,--when its hitherto hidden treasures,\nalmost impatient of restraint, seem to leap and bound into existence,\nto offer themselves to the uses and purposes of man, at the mere bid and\nbeck of science? What is the condition of man in this glorious world or\nours, under the influence of popery? The largest, the widest, and most\nfertile portion of the globe is under Popish influence; the soil of\nthese countries which Papists inhabit is rich, their fields are fair,\nand their valleys beautiful; all the products of nature thrive in them;\nthe sun of heaven shines over them in all its luminous magnificence;\nevery thing seems to be sent from heaven, for man's use; every thing\nseems to aspire to heaven and to be happy. Man alone decays in these\nPopish countries; man alone is unhappy; the longings and heavenward\naspirations of his immortal soul are checked, and he withers and\ndegenerates into a being less happy than the beast of the field, and far\nmore degraded, because acquired and superinduced inferiority, is\nmuch more degrading than that which is native and original The moral\ndegeneracy which we see in those countries where Popery, with its\nconfessions, extreme unctions, and other debasing fooleries, prevail,\nis not to be attributed to any decay in the natural vigor of the human\nmind. We have no reason to suppose that the mind was created in a less\nvigorous state in countries where Popery prevails, than in others where\nit does not I have frequently conversed with anatomists of distinguished\neminence, who have visited all the countries inhabited by Catholics, as\nwell as those inhabited by Protestants, and I have learned from all that\nthere is no difference in the anatomical construction of their hearts\nand brains; still, it is evident to all, at least to every man of\nscience and observation, that there is a difference in the mental\nfaculties of those who are born and live under Popish domination, and\nthose who are born and live under a free government of civil rights. Let\nus, for instance, take a Papist fresh from Italy, Spain, Mexico, or\neven Ireland; place him in the same condition with a free-born American\nProtestant, and see the difference between them; the latter is active,\nquick, intelligent, full of thought, full of life and enterprise; the\nformer in nine cases out of ten, is inactive, of sluggish mind, and\nrarely aspires to excellence in any thing really useful. See, for\ninstance, a Papist when he lands upon our shores; so tame and so\naccustomed to Popish tyranny has he been, that he crouches beneath the\nnod or frown of a priest the moment he sees him. Fear, of course, must\nbecome the predominant passion of all people and countries where Popery\nprevails, and yet, unaccountable as it may appear, this new world of\nours is not only admitting but inviting Popery and its adherents into\nit, and offers them the rights of freemen, with a full knowledge of the\nfact that they are the subjects of a foreign king,--the Pope of Rome.\nPopery--that sink of the universe, as an elegant writer, who is himself\na Roman Catholic, expresses it,--is invited into the United States, and\nits votaries cherished by a free, generous, but unsuspecting people. I\nhave often conversed with American Protestants of distinction upon this\nsubject, and regret finding that many of them--especially those of the\nUnitarian creed--are strong advocates of Popery, and in favor of its\nintroduction among our people. Their arguments are plausible, and no\ndoubt appear to the superficial reader worthy of all consideration.\nWhatever, say Unitarians, or liberal Christians, have been the vices,\nprofligacies, or ambition, of Popes and Papists in former ages, they\nshould be overlooked, in consideration of the great and grand objects\nwhich they had in view, and the vast and mighty interests which were\nthen at stake. Religion--the Christian religion--say the liberals of the\npresent day, was then in its infancy, without any other protection save\nthat which its own god-like purity threw around it; it was committed to\nthe care of early fathers or papas--from which the word Pope takes its\norigin--of the church; the struggle between them and the priests of\nPaganism was fierce; it was terrible; and well did the former do their\nduty--nobly and faithfully did they struggle for the ascendancy of\nChristianity, and its establishment among the nations of the north. To\ndo this effectually, and to establish a hierarchy exclusively their own,\nindependent of any other, was indispensable. To effect this, was one of\nthe most momentous and grandest projects that ever entered the mind\nof man at that early period of society. We all know from history, the\ndifficulties which the early Papas or Popes--not of the Romish church,\nbut of the Christian church--had to encounter, in their contest with\nPaganism. We also know--and no man who believes in the Christian\nreligion doubts it--that great credit is due to them, for what they have\ndone against the Turks. They have left on record many evidences of their\nardent zeal, sincere piety, and deep humility. But does it follow,\nthat because the fathers of the Christian church have done so much for\nChristianity, by being the depositories of its principles, and active\ndefenders of its faith---does it follow, I say, that Romish Popes\nor Romish Papas, are equally entitled to our respect, support, and\nconfidence?\n\nDo these liberal Christians know that there is as wide a difference\nbetween the Papas of the early Christian church, and those of the modern\nRomish church, as there is between the notorious Himes, of the Millerite\nchurch, and the learned Dr. Gannett, of the Unitarian society? Is it\nsound logic to infer that because the fathers of the Christian church\nwere good men, and should be welcomed wherever they went, that the\npresent fathers of the Romish Church are also good men and must be\nreceived into this country, with their interminable retinue of monks,\nnuns, friars, and other mock reverend and semi-reverend male and female\nvagabonds, who precede and follow them?\n\nLiberal Christians will pardon me when I say, that nothing but a total\nunacquaintance with history, with man's nature, with man's rights, and\nunacquaintance with all that tends to promote human happiness, and\nto elevate man in the scale of creation, could force them to such a\nconclusion.\n\nThe inference is not to be found in the premises; It is bad logic; it is\nnot warranted by facts, or by history, sacred or profane; indeed, I much\nfear, that he who knows any thing of the history of Popery in ancient\nor modern times, and yet encourages its growth in this country, might\nwithout uncharitable-ness, or any sectarian prejudice, be classed with\ninfidels and traitors. The man who, with the pages of history open\nbefore him, can encourage a system nicknamed religion, and embodying\nwithin its fundamental articles of faith, the duty of auricular\nconfession as essential to salvation, has no claim to the name of\nChristian; nor can he who would cheer on the mad followers of Popery\nto rend this union to pieces, and substitute in its stead a Popish\nmonarchy, be a true patriot. He is a traitor, in the broadest, fullest,\nand most unqualified sense of the word.\n\nI have shown, in the first volume of this book, that Popery does those\nthings to which I have just alluded; the accusations which I have\nbrought against Popery, have been of such serious magnitude and\ntraitorous character, that Americans could scarcely credit them,\nand some have looked upon them as only ebullitions of anger, which\nreflection would mitigate; and that reason, the legitimate monarch of\nall the intellectual faculties, would in due time restrain them within\nproper bounds; but I again reiterate the charges, and assure my readers\nthat all I have said against Popery, as a corrupt system of policy and\nmorals, is not only true, as we see in history, but falls short of what\nI know of my own knowledge, and which I believe with the certainty of\nfaith.\n\nI have patiently, laboriously, and diligently, examined the doctrines\nand practices of the Popish Church, especially since the days of\nHildebrand, and the result of my serious inquiries has been, that the\nchurch and its bishops have been, up to this day, abusing the credulity\nof mankind, and trying how they could best play upon the passions and\ndegrade the human intellect.\n\nHistory hands down to us the names of about three hundred popes and\nanti-popes, and I would challenge even that morbid liberalism, which\nseems to be gaining ground, and is now ycleped philosophy, whether\nPaganism in its darkest days, or its history in its vilest pages, ever\nexhibited to its followers any system of religion or morals so revolting\nas that which each of those Popes has in succession endeavored to\nenforce and impose upon mankind. It will be said by some of those\nphilosophers to whom I allude, that I have gone too far in my writings\nagainst the Popish church and Popish priests---that I proved too much,\nand, according to that well received action---\"quod nimis probat nihil\nprobat?\"--proved nothing; that I have colored my landscape too highly,\n&c. The reverse is the case; I have not seen Popery at a distance, as\nthese liberalists have, nor as a traveller might see a landscape. The\nlatter may be deceived, he may see or fancy that he sees a brilliant\nhue upon the summit of a distant mountain, just as the liberalists see\nPopery at a distance; but upon a nearer approach and closer examination,\nhe will find that no such thing exists, but that it is produced perhaps\nby the reflection of the sun, which gives it some unreal appearance.\nThat mountain top, which at a distance may seem to the traveller so\nsublimely beautiful, often on examination is found to be but a vast\ncrater, frightful to look at, emitting nothing but some disgusting\nsubstance which carries with it death, destruction, and sorrow, wherever\nit goes. Will the liberalists, philosophers,--or whatever else they must\nbe called--please to recollect, in their comments upon my books, that I\nhave not viewed Popery at a distance; I have seen It in its roseate as\nwell as in its darkest colors; the former I found unreal and transient\nas that with which a beautiful setting sun invests the mountain's cold\nsnow-top; the latter I found to be true in every color, even to the\nminute touch. Will these philosophers examine Popery as I have done:\nlet them stand upon its summit as I have done, and then look into that\nunfathomable crater, the court of Rome, from which it vomits and spews\nforth its corruptions, its confessions, its indulgences, its penances,\nits masses, its purgatories, its pilgrimages, its transubstantiations,\nits beads, its Jesuits, its treasons, its poisons, its recipes for\ncompounding the best and most subtle poisons, its modes of procuring\nabortion and checking female fecundity--let him keep a close watch on\nthe movements of Popish bishops in this country, especially Hughes of\nNew York, and Fen-wick of Boston, and others, as I have done for years,\nand they shall find that, frightful as is the picture which I have given\nof Popery, it falls short--far short of the reality. I have scarcely\ntouched upon those features of Romanism, which are most abhorrent to the\nmorals, and dangerous to the civil rights of our citizens; but it is not\ntoo late; it can be done yet; I owe them much, and if God spares me I\nwill pay them by instalments; I have enlisted without bounty or service\nmoney into the ranks of the Christian opponents of Popery--not for any\ngiven time, but during the war, or for life. While I live, Popery has in\nme an opponent, who can neither be bribed nor intimidated; but I regret\nto see that there are many who call themselves Protestant Christians,\nexhibiting a wavering and craven spirit, in this general war against\nPopery which has at length commenced--afraid to come out openly against\nPopish doctrines, and yet feeling it their duty to do so. I pity such\nmen--from my soul I pity them; church honors and church distinctions\nseem to be more sought for now, than those of heaven. Hundreds of\nProtestant clergymen are daily bedizening themselves with D. D.'s and\nother such fooleries, while the great enemy of religion and civil rights\nis surrounding them, and ready, when the Pope of Rome gives the word of\ncommand, to fall upon them with destructive slaughter.\n\nAlready I find myself (sicut meus est mos) imperceptibly drifting from\nthe point I set sail for, nor have I the least doubt that I shall find\nmyself out of my reckoning frequently, before I arrive at the end of my\nvoyage. This, however, will only have the effect of rendering it more\ntedious, but I trust it will add some value to my observations and\ndiscoveries during my voyage.\n\nI commenced this second volume with the single view of defining more\nclearly, the iniquities practised in the Romish church, under cover of\nauricular confession, and within the walls of Popish nunneries. I would\nnow resume the subject, and show my fellow citizens, that the crimes and\nprofligacies which 1 have imputed to the Romish church, have not been\npeculiar to any epoch or age of its existence--that it has been always\ncorrupt--is now while I write corrupt, that its very elements are\nfounded on corruption, and that any contact with it, or between itself\nand our citizens, cannot fail to be ruinous to the morals and interests\nof our people. I have a double object in pursuing this course. The first\nis this: Papists admit that there have been corruptions in the Romish\nchurch, but say that they were only local, and never sanctioned by the\nchurch authoritatively; secondly, they assert that my books on Popery\nare all old lies, culled from ancient heretical writers, and that\nsuch deeds as I have imputed to their holy and infallible church, and\nimmaculate bishops and priests in this country, have never taken place.\n\nI will here show, in a few words, that the evil deeds and corruptions,\nwith which I have charged the Popish church, were not local, but\ngeneral; and secondly, I propose to show that they were not peculiar\nto any age in the church, but have always existed and do exist at the\npresent moment, not only in Europe and elsewhere, but in these United\nStates.\n\nThat Papists and myself may understand each other clearly, and that the\npublic may understand both of us, I propose to the Papist to name any\nage of the Church he pleases, or any Pope he pleases, and I will show\nhim that in that very age, and under that very Pope, nearly all the\niniquities of which I have accused his Church, were justly charged,\nand sanctioned _authoritatively_ by her then ruling _executive_, or\ninfallible head, just as she pleased to call it, whether that infallible\nhead was a Pope or a General Council I say Pope, or General Council,\nbecause the question is not yet settled between Popish theologians,\nwhether their boasted infallibility be invested in the Pope, speaking\n_ex cathedra_, or in a General Council legitimately--according to their\nunderstanding of the term--convened.\n\nCome on, Mr. Popish Bishop or Priest; advance, Mr. Bishop Hughes, of\nJesuit and intrigue notoriety; hold up your head, thou demure, plotting\ndunce, Bishop Fenwick, of Boston. Let us select the latter end of the\neleventh, and beginning of the twelfth centuries. This is as favorable\nan epoch in the Infallible Church as you can possibly choose, to\nshow the purity, loveliness, morality, and chastity, of her Popes and\nbishops.\n\nYou recollect, right reverend and immaculate gentlemen, that Lothair\nConti, afterwards called Innocent III., was then Pope; now, gentlemen, I\nask you, and I pray you may answer me fairly and honestly, whether your\ninfallible church was, even in that age, exempt from the abominations\nof which I have accused her? Be honest, for once in your life; let me be\nable to record, in my future writings, one instance of truth being found\namong Jesuits and Popish priests, when speaking upon church affairs.\n\nAre you prepared to deny the fact that your church was then filled with\nthe grossest abominations, and that every one of those abominations were\nsanctioned by Pope Innocent III.? If you are prepared to deny this fact,\nI am prepared to brand upon the forehead of each of you, in letters\nwhich can never be erased, the words wilful and deliberate liar. You\nboth, right reverend gentlemen, already know that I do nothing by\nhalves; and if I convict you of falsehood, you may rely upon it, that\nthe iron with which I will brand you with the above letters, shall be\nheated to the very point of fusion, so that you shall be known as the\nsworn enemies of truth, religion, and the rights of man. Innocent III.\nis looked upon in the Roman Church, and by you, of course, as a perfect\nmodel of what a Popish bishop or priest ought to be; any deviation from\nthe faith which he professed, or example which he gave, in morals or\npolitics, would be, and is now considered, by every true son of the\nInfallible Church, as heresy and treason against Popery. Let us now see\nwhat the faith of this inimitable model was; we can best judge of it by\nhis works; \"the tree is known by its fruits.\" A very beautiful modern\nwriter gives us the true character of Innocent III. It is fair to judge\nof all the Popes as this man has been judged; he is a correct model of\nthe whole, and I doubt not but, taking him all and all, he is the best\nmodel that has been given of a Romish Pope. His greatest admirers admit\nits correctness; the picture is true to the life, and if that ancient\naxiom, \"_ex ano disce omnes\"_ be true, that is, if we can judge of all\nby one, a precious model of morals and policy is this Pope Innocent III.\n\nI call the attention of my readers to the character of this man, or if\nPapists will have it so, of this god Pope, as given by an elegant writer\nof the present age:\n\n\"In his actions, principles, and the effects produced by both, we\nscarcely recognize a human being. He takes a stand wholly above that\nclass of figures which form the ordinary pattern of history. The\ncircumstances of his time, and the faculties of his nature, make us seek\nrather for his resemblance in one of those wanderers from some higher\nstar, or spirit dropped by accident among us, and in the garb of a man\nallowed to follow his original propensities, and to do evil which throws\nhuman malignity into the shade, by some power which in all cases exceeds\nthe dimensions of human nature. _Without charging the Pope with being\naltogether a devil_, it must be acknowledged, that in many of his\nactions he nearly resembles that character.\"\n\nThe pontificate of Innocent III., which we can find, upon examination,,\nclosely resembles that of all other Popes, is worthy the serious\nattention of statesmen of this country. Here our presidents, cabinets,\nsenators, representatives, and governors, may learn how temporal power\nand Popish functions may be united together; they will see the nature,\nand understand better what is meant by that spiritual allegiance which\nPapists, even in this country, swear to the Pope of Rome, and which for\ntwenty odd years I have been appealing to Americans to crush; or deprive\nof the rights of citizenship, or punish as traitors every man who\navowed such allegiance to a foreign king, which the Pope of Rome is\nacknowledged to be. Will Americans hear to the definition which Pope\nInnocent III. gives of a Romish Pope? It is admitted to be a correct\ndefinition, by every Roman Catholic, whether bishop, priest, or\nlayman, in the United States. Hear you, then, Americans! listen, you\nrepublicans--whigs, democrats, and all--and know ye henceforth, that a\nPope is defined to be the _vicegerent of Christ_. If less than God, he\nis greater than man; the luminary of day; the civil authority being only\nthe pale orb of night How would you, Americans, like to have such a man\nat your head? Take heed--there are three millions now of his subjects\namongst you, and about thirty-three millions besides all over the world.\nAsk yourselves whether it is not at least possible that they may gain an\nascendency in these United States, and wrest from you and your posterity\nthe inheritance which your forefathers left you? Do not forget--I\nentreat of you never to forget--the alarming fact that during the last\nsixteen years, 731,380 foreigners have arrived at the port of New York\nalone. Three-fourths of these may be presumed to be Papists, and sworn\nto maintain the supremacy of their king, the Pope.\n\nLet it not be forgotten by American statesmen, that Papists have been at\nthe bottom of every crusade that has ever been formed against the civil\nrights of men. Was it not a Pope, and that Pope no less a personage than\nInnocent III., that tried to dethrone King John of England? Was it not\na Pope that fomented a crusade against the Hungarians, and endeavored to\noverthrow the King of Norway? And finally, was it not a Pope, and that\nPope the infallible Innocent III.--whom Bishops Hughes, Fenwick, and\nmyself, have agreed upon as a fair sample from about three hundred\nPopes, who preceded and succeeded him--that waged a war of extermination\nagainst the unoffending and blameless Waldenses? Was it not a Pope,\nand that Pope Innocent III., who in one year, by virtue of his divine\nauthority, gave away three royal crowns? This Innocent III. employed\nthe infernal inquisition against the Albigenses. Will Americans take\nall these historical truths into consideration. Let them read my books\nagain, and then say whether I have done the Pope, bishops, and priests\nof the Romish Church any injustice. I declare, in the language of\nanother, that there is not to be found in the whole range of history,\nany body of men, who have inflicted upon humanity a greater amount of\nevil, than the Popes of Rome and their allies: and the grand instrument\nwhich enabled them to accomplish all this with impunity, and without\ndetection, was the infamous and diabolical practice of auricular\nconfession. \"To rivet the chains of slavery,\" as another expresses it,\n\"on souls as well as the bodied of men, too firmly to be thrown off,\nprivate, or as it is called, auricular confession of sins to a priest,\nwas made an imperative duty of all Papists, at certain seasons of\nthe year.\" \"Of all the practices of the Romish Church,\" says the same\nwriter, \"this is the one which has proved most injurious; and if it be\nregarded in connection with the celibacy of the clergy, will explain\nwhy the cause of morals is always worse in Popish than in Protestant\ncountries. The uses of conscience were at an end, when given for safe\nkeeping to a Romish confessor; actions were no longer measured by the\nstandard of right and wrong, but by a casuistry and a pernicious process\nof reasoning, by which it was intended to make man satisfied with\nhimself. The result of this has been, and is at the present moment, even\nin these United States, that law is the only restraint upon a Papist; he\nis taught to believe that by confessing his crimes to a Romish priest,\nhe can obtain pardon. The blackest murderer, if he can escape the\nhangman or the penitentiary, is no farther concerned about the deed; he\nbelieves his priest can forgive him, and all is at rest.\"\n\nThis was a doctrine which Pope Innocent tried with all his might to\nenforce upon his people. The reader has now a fair specimen of a Romish\nPope. \"Voila Rome.\" Look, Americans, and examine this faultless\npicture of a Pope, and perfect model of a Romish priest! Do you desire\nthat an engraving should be made of it, and scattered through the land?\nDo you desire to establish in your midst, colleges and schools for the\npurpose of bringing up your children in the faith and practices of Pope\nInnocent? I tell you, if you do, the rising generation will be without\nreligion or morals, and this glorious republic will die in the arms of\ndespotism. I am aware that Americans will say--at least it will be said\nby a portion of them, who are not Christians indeed--that such a man as\nInnocent III. could not live in this country; that he would be plunged\ninto the next river, if he dared to interfere in the administration of\nour laws. Facts do not warrant Americans in jumping at this conclusion.\nWho, at least in Boston, forgets the destruction of the Ursuline\nConvent? Did not Bishop Fenwick and his nuns publicly boast that they\nhad \"twenty thousand stout Papists ready at their beck, to reek their\nvengeance on the peaceable citizens of Boston?\" Might not the Pope's\nagent--had he not crouched before a superior force--have said to this\ntwenty thousand madmen, as Innocent III. said to his French followers,\nwhen they landed in England, \"Sword, sword, leap from thy scabbard!\nsword, whet thyself for vengeance!\" and would not those men have obeyed\nhim, had he not had the prudence to see their comparative weakness, and\nadvise them to keep the peace, under pain of being cursed by him? Had\nthere been force enough upon the spot to have put to the torture and to\ndeath every Protestant in Boston, it would have been done. And why,\nor for what? Merely because the people thought proper to pull down a\nlegalized house of prostitution, surreptitiously erected in their midst!\nWill it be said that I am also incorrect in my charges against the\nUrsuline nuns of Charlestown, Massachusetts?\n\nBishop Fenwick represents them as models of purity and chastity, and\nrecently assures his Holiness the Pope, that he is making converts from\nthe first families of Boston to the religion and pure faith of these\nnuns. I have something to say of two, at least, of those nuns, who were\nin that convent when an indignant people leveled it to the ground. I\nknew two of those nuns personally, and I knew them both far advanced\nin the family way, in their own country, when I left it. They were both\nseduced, and their _seducer was their confessor_,--a Roman Catholic\npriest of the order of St. Augustine. That priest is now living, and\nthose ladies whom he seduced, and who fled from their native country\nto the Ursuline Convent in Charlestown, are now living, I believe, in\nQuebec Do those sympathizing ladies in Boston, some of whom have been\neducated by these two sisters--not of charity, but of crime--wilful,\nconstant, persevering crimes--wish to hear their names? I am tempted to\ngive them, and I would do so, if I thought it might have the effect of\nopening the eyes of Protestant mothers, and prove a warning to them not\nto send their daughters, in future, to be educated in a Popish nunnery,\nor to confession to a Popish priest But to return: Protestants have no\nmercy to expect from Papists. A true Catholic is not allowed to hold any\ncommunion with a Protestant, nor will his bishop or priest permit him to\nbe buried in the same ground with a Protestant He is not allowed to\ngo to the funeral of a Protestant: and if he does go, he commits a\nsin which the priest is not allowed to forgive him, without a special\nlicense from the Church. In the technical language of the Romish Church,\nthe case of a man who attends a Protestant funeral is a reserved case;\nthat is, a case or a crime which no ordinary priest can forgive, without\na particular license to do so. Going into a Protestant church, and\nhearing a Protestant minister preach, is another reserved case. Saluting\nor speaking to a Protestant, or heretic, is also among the reserved\ncases. Speaking, for instance, to Eugene Sue, the author of the\nWandering Jew, whom--\"_horribile dictu_\"--the Roman Catholic Bishop of\nLyons, in France, has excommunicated, is another reserved case, which\nno one except the aforesaid Bishop of Lyons, or some person delegated\nby him, can pardon or forgive. Speaking to any member of the Christian\nLeague--that arch heretic, Rev. Mr. Kirk, for instance--is a reserved\ncase, which no priest in Boston, except Bishop Fenwick, or some one\ndelegated by him, can pardon or forgive; for be it known to all the\ninhabitants of the world, that he, and his brother colleagues of the\nChristian League, have been excommunicated by the present Pope. It is\na reserved case to speak to me. Speaking to me is a crime of peculiar\natrocity, and can be forgiven by no power, save the Pope of the\nInfallible Church. I have accused the Pope of sin, of folly, and\ndepravity. This is altogether inadmissible, and deserves eternal\ndamnation; the idea that a Pope of Rome can commit sin, or can do\nwrong, is inconsistent and incompatible with true religion, as Papists\nunderstand that term.\n\nThe Pope of Rome, according to Papists, cannot sin; he is not\nonly _infallible_, as the most eminent Popish writers assert, but\n_impeccable_; see Belarmine, a standard writer in the Popish Church.\nBut I will no longer detain the reader on this particular subject of\nreserved cases, and Popish follies of ancient times. Bishop Fenwick, and\nthe rest of the right reverend brethren: of the Popish Church, will\nsay that my statements are all \"old lies;\" that the holy Roman Catholic\nChurch never did, nor does it now, prevent her subjects from speaking to\nheretics, or those who differ from her in their belief. I will venture\nthe assertion, that if any Protestant theologian call upon any Roman\nCatholic bishop in the United States, he will deny this fact, or give\nan equivocal answer, though there is not to be found a solitary work on\nPopery in any library in the United States, or elsewhere, which does not\nsustain me in the assertions I have made. But we will not go to ancient\ntimes for authority. I will state to the reader a case to the point,\nwhich occurred about the year 1822, and to the truth of which thousands\nof our fellow citizens in Philadelphia can bear testimony. When I first\nopposed Popery in that city, by recommending that the Bible should be\ncirculated among the people, and that the children of the poor Catholic\nIrish should be sent to school to be educated in its pure and unsullied\ndoctrines, the Roman Catholic Bishop of that city, a poor, little,\nirritable Irishman, by the name of Conwell, prohibited his people, or\nhis subjects, as he called them, from speaking to me, the heretic Hogan,\nor his followers, Hoganites; and the most amusing part of it was, that\nby way of giving his subjects good example, whenever we passed each\nother, even on opposite sides of the street, his lordship took off his\nhat and crossed himself, repeating the AVE MARIA! This he never failed\nto do, wherever we passed, much to the amusement of the Protestant\ninhabitants of that city, and to the great edification of the Papists.\nIt may appear exceedingly strange or amusing to Bostonians, should\nI tell them that a similar belief in the criminality of speaking to\nheretics is taught in Boston, the capital of New England; but this is a\nfact, and if Papists term it a new \"lie,\" it cannot be helped, for what\nI am about to state occurred only the other day. I chanced to meet, in\na book store in Washington street, a convert to Popery, just fresh from\nthe hand of Bishop Fenwick. I had never seen the gentleman but once\nbefore, and he was then, as well as during most of his previous life,\none of those men in whose faith I had not the least confidence. I did\nnot know that he was present when I entered the store, and was in the\nact of inquiring for a vile thing, called Brownson's Quarterly Review,\nwhich he published in the month of July, 1840. During my inquiries for\nthis Review, the author, Brownson, addressed me, as nearly as I can\nrecollect, in the following words: \"I know you, sir; you once owned a\nwhig press in Savannah; you criticized my Review. I marked you--but I am\nnot allowed by my Church to speak to a heretic.\" I looked around me in\nsome astonishment I did not expect to hear such language on the land of\nthe Puritans; but sure enough, there stood Brownson, a Roman Catholic,\nfresh from the anvil of Popery! There he stood, _totus teres adque\nrotundus_, full-blooded and fully developed; the very Brownson himself,\nwho has been consistent in nothing but infidelity and unbelief, now a\ngood Roman Catholic; the very Brownson who has never been true to either\nhis Maker or to his church, now a good Roman Catholic, whose church\nand whose conscience would not allow him to speak to a heretic! I never\nnoticed the man much before, but now I fixed my eye upon him, and I\nshall not easily forget his countenance. On first intuition, I could\nscarcely imagine it was the Rev. Mr. Brownson who stood before me. My\nimagination presented to me a different character. I could not suppose\nthat one who was once a clergyman would entertain the sentiments which\nI had the misfortune of subsequently hearing him utter. I was, however,\nmistaken. It was the Rev. gentleman. He strongly reminded me of\ncharacters between whom and himself there existed a strange similitude;\nbut comparisons might offend the delicate sensibilities of some of my\nreaders.\n\nI looked at him a second time, and I could not restrain the involuntary\nexclamation--Popery, thou child of sin, treachery, and intrigue, bad as\nthou art, is it come to this--that thou must take by the hand as thine\nadvocate and supporter this wretched being, who for thirty years\nhas been sporting with the attributes of the great God, alternately\nextolling and ridiculing them, as best suited the ungovernable bent of\nhis unstable mind, which thou mightest read in the demoniac-looking\nface of this man? But this is one of the secrets by which Popery spreads\nitself all over the United States. The Popish Church will admit any men\nor women, be they saints or devils, into full communion with them, if\nthey swear allegiance to the Pope of Rome. This is one of the grand\ncauses of the success of Jesuitism in this country. How different is\nit in some of the Protestant Churches! It requires some tact and church\ngeneralship in any man who has not been brought up a Protestant,\nto obtain admission into them upon any terms. Far be it from me to\ninsinuate that Protestants should follow the example of the Papists, in\nadmitting such things as Brownson into communion with their Churches:\nNor should I mention the fact of the admission of Brownson at all,\ninto the Romish Church, if I did not look upon this circumstance as a\nprominent instance of the corrupt evils of its infamous practices, and\nan irrefragable argument against its alleged good. But Brownson has been\npurified from all his sins by some Popish chemical process; he has gone\nto confession, is no longer a sinner, and therefore he is too pure, too\nimmaculate, and too strong in the faith of the Popish Church, to render\nit otherwise than sinful in him to speak to a heretic! It is said\nthat the Pope has recently given his subjects in the United States\na dispensation, by which they are allowed to transact business\nwith heretics, and speak to them in case of necessity. Wonderful\ncondescension this!\n\nSuch statements as I here make, must appear incredible to American\nProtestants. Many will suppose that I am dealing in fables--that such\nrigmarole and such silly pretences as I have charged the Papists with,\nhave never been countenanced in any age or among any people, much less\nAmerican freemen; but let us see what are the facts in the case. I would\nnot ask the reader to take my word for it. In 1555, Pope Paul IV, in his\nfamous bull against heretics, supports me in every assertion I make;\ncharging Papists with deeming it unlawful and criminal, to hold any\nintercourse with Protestants. Will the reader be pleased to attend to\nwhat this infallible Pope says, and that, only between three and four\nhundred years ago? I call upon our civil authorities to ponder and weigh\nwell the import of his words, and never to forget, that there is no\nCatholic in this country or elsewhere, who will dare to say that the\ndecretals and commands of Paul IV., are of less force or less\nbinding upon them than those of the present Pope. \"All heretics, viz.\nProtestants, be they kings or subjects, are accursed.\" Mind that, Mr.\nPolk, President of the United States! attend to it, you Governors and\nMagistrates! you are each and every one of you accursed, and none of our\ncitizens are allowed to speak to you 21 without a dispensation from the\npresent Pope. That identical Pope, Innocent III.,--of whom I have just\nbeen speaking, and who has, without any objection from either party,\nbeen selected, by Bishops Hughes, and Fenwick, and myself, out of about\nthree hundred Popes, as a fair sample of a good Pope,--has declared\nit to be unlawful for any Protestant Executive, | whether King or\nPresident, to require any allegiance from a Roman Catholic. Take heed,\nMr. President Polk! it is said you are a Presbyterian; ask no allegiance\nfrom a Roman Catholic; he is not allowed by the present Pope,--who of\ncourse follows in the footsteps of his illustrious predecessors, Paul\nIV. and Innocent III.,--even to speak to you without a dispensation. It\nis utterly useless to multiply cases of this kind. No article of the\nRomish faith is better established, than that which teaches them to hold\nno communion with heretics, and try by every means in their power to\noverthrow all Protestant governments. Will this statement too be called\nan old lie? If it is a lie, it is assuredly a very old one, and a very\nnew one too. Will the reader go back with me, to the history of ancient\ntimes? It will afford me pleasure if he does. The source of truth is as\nopen and accessible to him as to me, and if he thirsts for it sincerely\nand honestly, he can slake it to his heart's content at its very\nfountain.\n\nThe general reader knows that at a very early period of Christianity, a\nconsiderable number of native Christians was found in the Peninsula of\nIndia; I believe they were first discovered by the Portuguese. They have\nbeen represented as harmless, guileless, and gentle in the extreme.\nThey professed the pure doctrines of the bible. Even the Portuguese who\ndiscovered them, admitted that their lives were blameless, and that they\nwere true Christians in every respect, except that they did not believe\nin the infallibility of the Pope and the supremacy of the Romish church.\nHere was an opportunity for the Romish church, of showing her charity,\nif she or her pioneers had any. These native Indians never did them\nany harm; they never before heard of a Pope or a Romish church; they\nbelieved in the Lord Jesus Christ and in the all-sufficiency of his\natonement for the sins of man, but never heard of a Pope; such a word\nwas not found in their simple, native vocabulary; this was a crime not\nto be forgiven by their ignorant Popish discoverers; and how were these\nsimple people treated by them? I refer the reader to that admirable\nwork, written by Lacroze, for a full account of the manner in which they\nwere treated by these jackals who discovered them. Suffice it to say\nthat they were at once reduced to obedience to the Pope of Rome, to\nacknowledge the Pope's church as infallible, and compelled to worship\nthe images of a set of vagabonds called saints and virgins, who if\nliving now-a-days amongst us, should be considered fit subjects for our\npenitentiaries and work houses. The reader will also see an account of\nthe condition and character of this people in Buchanan's Researches.\n\nI refer to the case of those primitive Christians as corroborative of\nmy charges against Popery, and to show that her corrupt and persecuting\nspirit has always been the same, and that nothing better could be\nexpected from the great changelings Brownson, or any other convert to\nher dogmas, than a compliance with all her injunctions. Unfortunate\nBrownson! while you tried to support yourself and family, by alternately\nlecturing and publishing your sceptical and unintelligible theories, the\ncommunity in which you lived, and who knew your circumstances, felt a\nkind and deep sympathy for you. They knew--and every man knows--that\ntheoretical scepticism, and some sentiments of honor, are not always\nincompatible. A man may be a sceptic and not entirely destitute of\nhonor. A man may be a sceptic and yet an honest man. Your fellow\ncitizens imagined that you might have been among that class of people;\nbut now they know you. They know that for twenty or thirty years, you\nhave not only been a sceptic in theory, but a practical doubter, saying\nyes to one thing, and again yes to the contrary. You must not, of\ncourse, be surprised at seeing yourself sink in morals and principles,\nuntil you lose all claims to the sympathies of society. If any\nindividual should think it an object worth his notice or time, to\nsatirize or lampoon you, the best and bitterest way would be, to bind up\ninto one volume, all the twattle you have written upon religion, morals\nand metaphysics, and send it to you. I could with sincerity reproach\nmyself for having thus deviated from the subject of these pages, to\nnotice this unhappy individual, Brownson, for I believe there is not\na well-informed gentleman in the United States, who does not know that\nthere never was a period in the history of Popery, when the Pope and\nPapists were not the implacable enemies of Protestants. Even Papists\nthemselves offer no defence against this charge, but that\nStale and hackneyed falsehood, Popery is not now what it was in old\ntimes; this seems plausible to Americans, but let us see what are the\nfacts in the case. Let us inquire whether Popery is, at all different\nnow, from what it was in the days of Paul IV. and Innocent III. Is its\npersecuting spirit the same? Are its tenets more liberal, its doctrines\nmore mild, and its Popes, from the last century up to the present\nmoment, less ambitious and more tolerant? Papists say they are; Bishop\nHughes of New York, and Bishop Fen-wick of Boston, say they are; and\ntheir Corporal Trim, Brownson of Boston, touches his hat and nods his\nhead. I say they are not We are now at issue. The question between us\nis one of veracity. The Bishops and Trim are liars, or I am one, in\nthis matter. How are the public to know which? There is but one mode of\nascertaining this. Let us appeal to history, and to facts. One of the\nbest and I believe the most recent authorities to which we both can\nappeal, is a work recently written by Wm. S. Gilli, D. D., and published\nin London. I call it one of the best authorities, because many of the\ntruths which he gives us, confirm my assertion, and are matters of\nprofane history, and connected, indirectly, with national treaties,\nwith which we are all more or less acquainted. This connexion throws\nan additional light on, and gives more force to the statements of Dr.\nGilli; besides, it gives a strength and momentum to my charges against\nPopery, which no Popish casuistry can check. The work which I allude to,\nis entitled \"The _Waldensian Researches._\" This excellent work\ncommands great and deserved popularity among all parties, religious and\npolitical, in Europe. It is a matter of historical truth, that as early\nas 1690, and on the 20th of October of that year, a treaty was made\nbetween Holland and England,--then the two-great Protestant powers of\nEurope,--securing to the Vaudois, or Waldenses, the free exercise of\ntheir religion and safe enjoyment of their property, This treaty was\nassented to by all the powers of Europe. The Vaudois were a small\ncommunity of Christians, living in the valleys at the foot of the Alps,\nwhose origin is involved in some obscurity. They give us, themselves, no\nrecord of their antiquity, prior to the ninth century, but are supposed\nby antiquarians to have been the descendants of a band of Apostolic\nChristians, who fled from Italy to escape the fury of barbarians, which\nhad overrun that country during the decline of the Roman empire, and who\nsought for shelter in the secluded valleys of the Alps, in the western\npart of Piedmont; though, as far as we know, they have in a measure\nescaped the mad and bloody fury of the northern barbarian, in their\nlonely valleys, they had not been able to escape that of a still more\nbloody barbarian, the Pope of Rome. All Europe, who had any knowledge of\nthis people in their lonely valleys, felt great sympathy for them. They\nwere comparatively few in number, their wants few and easily supplied\nby their own industry; their valleys were to them a second paradise, but\nthey were not long so, when the great serpent of Rome entered it, and\nbrought upon them such an amount of misery, hardships and persecutions,\nas probably never were heard of before in the annals of history. I will\nrefer to this hereafter. Let us first see what becomes of the treaty to\nwhich I have alluded. It was solemnly made and formally sanctioned;\nthey were promised full protection, by his royal holiness the Pope, only\nabout one hundred and forty years ago. How did the Pope act? How did he\nkeep his faith with this poor harmless people? History tells the tale.\nHe summoned the Inquisition, and threatened Victor Amadeus, a good Roman\nCatholic, with excommunication, if he did not violate his treaty in\nfavor of the Vaudois, and renounce all treaties which he had ever made\nwith the heretics; and he called upon his subjects, that is, upon all\nCatholics, Bishops and Inquisitors, to proceed against heretics, and\nlook upon all compacts and treaties made with heretics as null and void.\nPassing over, for the present, the sufferings of the Waldenses in former\ntimes, let us see what their condition is now. This will satisfy the\nreader that the church still persecutes heretics, and refuses to hold\nany communion with them. It proves also that Popish bishops, who assert\nthat Popery is different now from what it was formerly, and that Hughes\nand Fenwick, of New York and Boston, together with their Corporal Trim,\nBrownson, have deliberately misstated facts. Hear to what Mr. Gilli says\nof the spirit of Popery as it existed the other day.\n\n\"The son of a Waldenesean soldier, who served under the conscription\nof Napoleon, being born in a garrison where there was no Protestant\nminister, was baptized by a Roman Catholic Priest. He was shortly\nafterwards brought home to the valleys, was educated as a Protestant,\nin the communion of his forefathers, attended Protestant worship and\nreceived the sacrament in a Waldensean Church. He was married to a\nWaldensean woman, by a Waldensean pastor, but this marriage is now\ncalled a mixed marriage, under the allegation that he is an apostate\nRoman Catholic, and a process with all its penalties hangs over the\nfamily.\" (Grievances, p. 13.) Now Messrs. Bishops Hughes and Fenwick, do\nyou approve of the manner in which your Popish church has treated this\nWaldensean soldier? Do you see any difference manifested here towards\nheretics, and that which the Popes have always shown towards them? Would\nyou not, if you could, persecute every heretic in the United States? Do\nyou not believe that every marriage between Catholics and Protestants in\nthe United States and elsewhere, is invalid and not binding in the sight\nof God? Does not your Pope, your church, and do you not, yourselves,\nteach that the parties in such marriages are living in a state of\nadultery? Do you not teach that if a Catholic lady marries a Protestant,\nwithout a dispensation from your church, she is an adulteress and ought\nto be treated accordingly by your church, which, in the plenitude of her\nmildness, consigns her body to the holy inquisition, to be broken on\nthe rack, and her soul to hell to perish everlastingly. Do I state the\ntruth, reverend gentlemen? Will either of you contradict me? If you do,\nI will lay before you Antoine's Moral Theology, _De Matrimonio_, which\nsome of your priests and myself studied in the same class, in the\ncollege of Maynooth, Ireland. Is this persecuting heretics or not? Did\nPaul IV., or Innocent III., ever show an instance of greater intolerance\nthan you do, under your present Pope, even in these United States? But\nwhat would you do had you the power? The past history of your\npredecessors can best answer this question. Look at yourselves, you\nimpostors of the present day; view yourselves in the mirror of truth,\nand if you are not too far gone in falsehood and hypocrisy, you must\nblush at the deceptions and impositions which you are trying to practise\nupon the citizens and government in this country. You will perhaps say\nthat in 1794, all the edicts in force against the Vaudois, or Waldenses,\nwere repealed by the king of Sardinia. It is more than probable that the\nsoft-headed and brainless minister now at that court from the United\nStates, may inform you, if you have not the fact from any other source,\nthat the Vaudois have full liberty of conscience in the full exercise of\ntheir religion and the education of their children.\n\nOur present minister, Wm. H. Stiles, Georgia, at that court, who is\nnothing better than a living libel upon diplomacy, was elected to\nCongress by the votes of Irish Papists. He had just tact enough--no\nfool is without more or less of it--to ingratiate himself with President\nPolk, and obtain the appointment of Charge to Sardinia, In him you have\na pliant tool, who will tell you the king of Sardinia has issued orders\nto prevent the taking away children, with a view of obliging them to\nembrace the Catholic religion, and requiring also, that those children\nwhich have been taken away, shall be restored. This proves two important\nfacts which cannot be doubted, as the King of Sardinia cannot even be\nsuspected of any want of allegiance or respect for his royal brother,\nthe Pope of Rome. It proves, in the first place, that the Roman church\nhas authorized its members to go into the Alpine valleys, and steal\nfrom their Protestant brethren their beloved children, with a view of\nproselytizing them to the infamous-doctrines of Popery. It shows, in\nthe second place, that the cries of their bereaved parents for their\nrestoration, have been disregarded by those Popish robbers, otherwise\nthe royal order for their restoration need not have been issued.\n\nIn spite of these edicts, children are now taken away, as Gilli informs\nus, under pretence of their being illegitimate. Two lamentable and\nheart-rending cases occurred in the year, 1828. Mind, take notice,\nMessrs. Bishops, of the date. This is not an old lie, as you have been\npleased to call many of the statements in my books. If it be a lie\nat all, it is a new one. The case I refer to is this. A Popish priest\ndemanded from a poor Protestant woman, her infant child, in order\nthat it might be brought up in the faith of the infallible church. She\nrefused, of course, to do so, but clung to it the more closely, pressing\nit to her bosom with a fondness such as a mother only can feel or\ndescribe, and fled to the mountains, preferring to perish with it there,\nrather than to have it brought up in the idolatries of Popery. And what\nwas the consequence? I blush to relate it, for the honor of humanity.\nThis Popish priest, in obedience to the commands of his holy church,\ndid precisely what any Popish priest in the United States would do under\nsimilar circumstances. He ordered a small guard of carabineers to pursue\nher, and bring her, that she might be dealt with according to Popish\nlaws. For many weeks she lived a miserable life, flying from place to\nplace, until the sufferings of the mother and child excited the pity of\nthe Popish monsters who issued the order for her apprehension. The order\nwas withdrawn, but not revoked, and the woman's fears and anxieties\ncontinue, while she remains exposed to the same severity. Will you,\nMessrs. Bishops, after this, presume to say that the Popish church does\nnot sanction the persecution of heretics? will you dare assert that she\ndoes not sanction their total extirpation? You cannot do so, and I risk\nnothing in saying, that you, Messrs. Fenwick and Hughes, would be the\nfirst to strike the blow, should a favorable opportunity offer.\n\nIn 1840, as Gilli tells us, a fraternity of eight missionaries, of the\norder of St. Morris and St Lazare, was instituted at Latorre, one of the\nlargest towns of the Vaudois. The object of this institution is to go\nabout making proselytes. To this, as the London Review very properly\nremarks, there can be no objection. We admit missionaries into the\nUnited States. The Popish jackals are among our own valleys, as well as\non the tops of our mountains. No American citizen can go many miles from\nhis home, without finding himself in the vicinity of one of those\nPopish dens called monk-houses, or nunneries. This we cannot, nor are we\ndisposed to prevent; our Constitution allows it; we recognize the right\nof Papists to send missionaries among us; but it might be questioned\nstill, whether we ourselves are right, or whether the framers of our\nConstitution have not committed a great error, In the mode of wording\nthat part of our Constitution, granting any right or privilege to any\nnation, or people, or government, or religion, which was not founded on\nstrict reciprocity. Did it ever occur to Jefferson, Washington, Madison,\nor the other eminent men who framed our Constitution, that in giving\nto a Roman Catholic sovereign, king, or potentate, the right of sending\nmissionaries into the United States, they forgot the securing to the\nUnited States a reciprocal right? The Papist is allowed to invade our\ncountry; but are we allowed to invade Papal States, and build churches\nthere for divine worship, as the Papists are in the United States? The\nCatholic priest can come here from Rome and build a church, teach a\nschool, and preach whatever and whenever he pleases; but if an American\ncitizen and Protestant freeman go to the city of Rome, or any strictly\nCatholic country, he is under a legal disability to build his church, or\nteach or preach. Is this fair? Is there any thing reciprocal in this? Is\nit not rather a disgrace, and a lasting lampoon upon American freedom,\nto tolerate this violation of the first principles of reciprocal rights?\nLet our people take this matter into their own hands; let them call upon\ntheir representatives, and demand from them an immediate redress for\nthis national humiliation, which has been entailed upon us by some\nunaccountable want of foresight on the part of the framers of our\nConstitution. But, say the Popish bishops in this country, our church\nnever persecutes, she never disturbs heretics, she loves Protestants\nas brethren, and is willing to pay the most implicit obedience to their\nlaws and institutions. This is the language of that notorious demagogue\nand disturber of the peace, Bishop Hughes of New York; this is the\nlanguage of Bishop Fenwick, of Boston, to which Brownson, his Corporal\nTrim, invariably says yes. These are the men whom I have accused of\nfalsehood--wilful and deliberate falsehood. Have I satisfied my readers\nthat I have stated the truth, and, though not the whole truth,--nothing\nbut the truth? Have I satisfied them that the Popish Church and Papists\nhave ever been the sworn enemies of Protestants? They admit themselves,\nthat great cruelties have, in ancient times, been inflicted by Roman\nCatholics upon Protestants; but in order to deceive Americans, they very\nblandly assert that those times have gone by, and that such cruelties do\nnot now exist. Is the reader satisfied yet that this is not correct,\nand that the only object of these men is further deceit and deeper\ntreachery? Let me again call the reader's attention to another passage\nfrom Gilli; it will show more clearly, if possible, than it has hitherto\nbeen done, that the malignant hatred of Popery towards Protestants burns\nnow as brightly as it did at any period of Christian history. \"They\nare,\" says Gilli, speaking of the Protestant Waldenses, \"absolutely\nforbidden by Roman Catholics to exert their parental authority over\ntheir own children, if these children, (girls above ten, and boys above\ntwelve years,) are tempted to forsake their faith. In 1836, a child was\ntaken from a family at Lucerne, and in 1842, another from a family\nat St. Germain, upon the pretext of an inclination expressed by those\nchildren to turn Roman Catholics, there being no difficulty in tempting\na poor, half-starved boy of twelve, or a girl of ten, to receive\ninstruction offered with a crucifix in one hand, and a loaf or a fish\nin the other. Thus the parent's heart is to be doubly pierced; first, by\nencouraging a pretended exercise of judgment on the part of his child,\nbefore the understanding is matured; and secondly, by a legalized\nabduction of the child so tampered with. On the 2d of May, 1839, the\nchild of Jaques Dalmais de David, and Margarite his wife, having been\ntorn from them on the pretence of being illegitimate, was sent to the\nfoundling hospital at Pignerol, although the parents were both natives\nof Vaudois, born in the commune and parish of Villar Bobi, and lawfully\nmarried in that parish, by the pastor thereof. Upon the first abduction,\nthe father took away the infant from the nurse to whose charge it had\nbeen committed previously to its being carried to the hospital; and for\nhis refusal to attend the summons of the commandant of the province, he\nand his wife were thrown into prison, and there remained several days.\nThe child, however, was restored to its parents, after an investigation\nwhich lasted many months; the legitimacy of its birth having been fully\nproved.\n\nIn the month of August, 1842, the Prefect of Pignerol ordered a Bible\nlecture and prayer meeting which was held in a school room at Latour, on\nSunday afternoon, to be discontinued.\n\nOn the 18th of January, of the following year, a similar order had\nbeen issued by the Intendent of the province. The order appeared in the\nfollowing words: 'The Royal Secretary of State for the Interior, having\nbeen informed that every Sunday some Waldenses, Protestants, held\ncongregations in a school house, and that many persons of every age and\nsex met together to sing psalms aloud, the said Royal Secretary of\nState has communicated to me that the places being appointed wherein the\nWaldenses shall worship, no innovation, or increase of the number of the\nsame, can be admitted, and they must be enjoined to discontinue those\nmeetings, or in case of contumacy, the government will adopt measures to\nprevent them.' Accordingly the Sunday services were discontinued. This\nis a cruel state of things; and it may well be asked, whether Protestant\ncommunities were, or ought to be, considered the friends of civil\nrights? Ought they not to interfere in correcting such a state of\nthings? And is it not the duty of this country in particular, to be\nthe very first to do so? Shall it be said by any future historian, that\nrepublican America shall be outdone in philanthropy and sympathy for the\noppressed, by the despots of Europe? Shall it be said that England, in\nalmost every reign, has done more for the advancement of free principles\nand religious toleration, than republican America? Even Cromwell,\ndespot as he is represented to have been, interfered in behalf of the\npersecuted Protestants of Vaudois. George I. of England also interfered\nin their behalf. Cromwell told the Pope, through his ambassador at\nRome, that if he did not silence his canons in the valleys of Piedmont,\nagainst the Protestant inhabitants thereof, he would silence them\nhimself by his own brass cannons at the gates of the Vatican. And shall\nit be said that the freemen of America shall witness the oppressions of\ntheir Protestant brethren without a word or a threat in their behalf?\nThe following petition or memorial, in behalf of the Protestants, the\nVaudois, was sent, in 1842, by a committee appointed in London, for\ntheir relief. The Archbishop of Canterbury has immortalized his name by\nbeing at the head of this committee. It reads in the following words:\n\nTo the Earl of Aberdeen, Her Majesty's principal Secretary of State for\nForeign Affairs.\n\nWinchester House, St. James Square,\n\nApril 9th, 1842. My Lord,\n\nWe the undersigned, members of the London Committee, instituted in\n1825, for the relief of the Vaudois of Piedmont, earnestly entreat your\nLordship to submit to Her Majesty the Queen our humble entreaty that\nHer Majesty will be graciously pleased to intercede in behalf of that\nancient community, with their sovereign, the King of Sardinia. The\nsufferings of Vaudois have often excited the sympathy of this nation,\nand our sovereigns have, from time to time, been pleased to exercise\ntheir beneficent offices in the privileges and rights of the Vaudois\nChurch, which have been threatened; and this they have done out of\ncompassion for the afflicted.\n\nAmong other aggrievances, it has been represented to us that the Vaudois\nhave now to complain that children are taken from their parents by the\npriests and local authorities, when one of the parents is said to be a\nRoman Catholic, under pretence of their being illegitimate; that their\nreligious services are interrupted; that their intercourse and traffic\nwith their fellow countrymen, beyond certain limits, are placed under\ngrievous restrictions; that some of them are deprived of the means of\ntheir subsistence, being forbidden to purchase, to farm, or to cultivate\nlands, except within boundaries too narrow for their population; and\nthat others, to their great disadvantage and detriment, have been\nordered to sell property which they have legally acquired beyond the\nterritories to which they are confined.\n\nIf these alleged severities were inflicted on the Vaudois for acts of\nturbulence or dangerous fanaticism, we should not presume to entreat Her\nMajesty's gracious interposition. But it does not appear that any\nthing can be laid to their charge, _except the profession of religion\ndiffering from that of the Roman Catholic Church_, and similar, in many\nparticulars of faith and discipline, to the reformed churches in Europe,\n&c.\n\nThis petition has been signed by the following gentlemen: W. Cantuar, W.\nR. Hamilton, C. T. London, Wm. Cotton, C. R. Winton, T. D. Acland, Geo.\nH. Rose, W. S. Gilly. R. H. Inglis.\n\nEngland, as a Christian nation and a Christian people, has done well on\nthis occasion. She has given the world evidence that whatever may have\nbeen the crimes or errors of her former rulers, she still retains within\nthe breasts of her people some sense of that great commandment, \"Love\nthy neighbor as thyself.\" What have we, American citizens, done for our\nProtestant brethren in the Alpine valleys? We see and know them to\nbe oppressed and ground to the dust--for what? Because they are\nProtestants. Is there any things else laid to their charge! Nothing. Was\nthere _ever_ any thing else laid to their charge, in justification of\nthe cruelties which, century after century, the Pope of Rome and the\nblood-hounds of his church have inflicted upon them! I have diligently\nexamined the history of this people. I was induced to do so at an\nearly age, believing it almost impossible that humanity was capable of\nenduring such sufferings as history informs us were inflicted upon them\nby the Romish Church; and I am compelled to say, in truth and honesty,\nthat I cannot discover any reason or any cause for their persecution by\nRoman Catholics, except that they did not believe in the supremacy of\nthe Pope, and the abominations of the Romish Church. And why, under\nthese circumstances, are not Protestant Americans doing something for\nthese their brethren? It is in the power of this country to do much in\nany just cause. Such an advocate as this government might prove itself\nto be against the spirit of Popery, even in the Piedmont valleys, would\ncarry gladness to the hearts of many an oppressed brother among them. We\nhave money, which we are throwing away in charity to those who have but\nfew claims upon us; we have genius, which we are scattering all over\nthe country in ranting and ravings and metaphysical discussions,\nunproductive of any thing useful to man. Why not employ this in\nespousing the cause of liberty and of our oppressed brethren\nthe Vaudois,--a poor people, who have no standing armies, no\ntreasury,--nothing but their Protestant religion and a good cause to\nsupport them. Why is not the genius of our people--why have not their\nfine minds and fine talents been employed in holding up before the broad\nlight of heaven the villainies, iniquities, abominations and corruptions\nof the Romish Church? Why are not such imposors and deceivers of the\npublic as the Roman Catholic Bishops of New York and Boston, together\nwith their man Trim Brownson--singled out from among our people? Why\ndoes not public opinion write in italics on the countenance-of each of\nthese men, the words deceiver and traitor, that our children may avoid\nthem when they see them in the streets? Why do we not teach even our\nlittle ones to pray that the Lord may rescue our brethren the Vaudois\nfrom the cruelties of Popery? Why does not every Christian teach his\nchild to exclaim, in the beautiful language of the immortal poet of\nEngland, who was himself a true friend of the Vaudois,\n\n     \"Avenge, O Lord, thy slaughtered saints, whose bones\n     Lie scattered on the Alpine mountains cold;--\n     Even them who kept thy truth so pure, of old,\n     When all our fathers worshipped stocks and stones, Forget not.\"\n\nWhy do Americans allow their children to go to the schools, kept\nprofessedly for the propagation of such doctrines as those taught and\npractised by the Romish church? I myself tremble lest there may\nbe something wrong in the construction of the social system in our\nrepublican government. Assuredly, nothing else could induce us to\nviolate the first law of nature, which is self-preservation. Our\nnatural affections, and sympathy with each other, are the sweetest\ningredients---and perhaps the only sweet ones which Providence has\nthrown into the cup of life, undoubtedly for the holy purpose of\nrendering it at all palate-able. Take them away and life would be bitter\nindeed.\n\nA state of society, such as the Popish church, through her agents\nin this country, desires to introduce amongst us, tends to no better\npurpose, than to divest man of humanity itself. It would harden his\nheart and swell him with the morbid humors of vanity, ambition, bigotry,\nand persecution. It would increase i our natural misery, and leave us no\nanodyne, but that | filthy and abominable one, auricular confession and\nI Popish pardons. Does not this deserve the execration of the virtuous\nand pious of all denominations? And are you prepared, fellow citizens,\nfor such a state of things? I am aware that there are some amongst us,\nready to tear from their bosoms, for base and selfish purposes, every\nthing good, which the God of glory through the merits of his Son, has\nplanted there. There is nothing so absurd that pride and selfishness\nwill not adopt and maintain it. It is said that Alexander did really\nbelieve himself to be a god. The vilest and most profligate of the\nCaesars demanded Divine honors. Some of the Popes of the Romish church,\neven when rotting and dropping to pieces, from the effects of disease,\nbrought upon them by licentiousness and dissipation, would have the\nworld believe that they were infallible, and even impeccable; so says\nBalarmine, an authority not to be disregarded by Papists.\n\nBishop Hughes tells us that in this country, we cannot prosper as a\npeople, unless we adopt the religion of the Pope, and encourage the\nPope's subjects to overthrow this government, and not to be ruled by\nits laws or its people. _Americans shant rule us_, is a Popish motto now\nborne aloft by Papists through the streets of New York, and other cities\nin the Union. Such language as the above resembles rather the ravings of\nsome poor lunatic, than that of a sober, honest republican, and appears\nto be more like that of a maniac, sitting in some desolate cell, with\na crown of straw, swaying a sceptre of the same material, and fancying\nhimself an Emperor, than any thing else; but to me there is nothing\ninconsistent and strange in such language or such conduct; I know\nthe pride of a Popish Bishop. I have been too long among them, not to\nunderstand well their vanity and arrogant pretensions; and though their\nconduct may not be such as to fit them for a lunatic asylum, still it\nnever fails to unfit them for all the uses and purposes of civil life,\nand renders them dangerous citizens. There is nothing extraordinary\nin this; it seems to be the natural consequence even of the physical\norganization of man. Inordinate ambition and false pride, are said by\nanatomists to have a powerful effect in turning the brains of man; but\nit is truly strange that, shocking as madness is in itself, and terrible\nas are its consequences, it sometimes affects people in such a manner as\nto turn our pity into laughter. We have an instance of this,--and a very\nprominent one,--in the case of the unfortunate changeling, Brownson,\nwho, but the other day, was admitted by Bishop Fenwick into full\ncommunion with the Popish church. But nothing else could be expected by\nthose who understand Popery, and see the broad difference between its\nsystem of morality, and that of pure Christianity. Modern Popery is made\nup from the philosophy of the ancient Pagans, and some German writers.\nIt has man attractions in the eyes of superficial Christians; has many\naspects, and some of them of an attractive character. Unsophisticated\npeople, such as many American theologians are, see, in the morality of\nPopery, apparently, much philanthropy and practical Christianity, and\nthese so judiciously blended together by Popish cunning and Jesuitical\ncraft, that its true character--nay even the deeds themselves--are\nentirely forgotten, in their admiration of the brilliant though false\nlight, in which they appear.\n\nFor instance, to take that miserable man, Brownson, by the hand, and\nraise him from a state of utter destitution, to which his own follies\nand imprudence reduced him, had in it much apparent philanthropy and\npractical Christianity; the Popish Fenwick found him in great want,\nevery religious society shunned him, as if the brand of Cain were upon\nhim. There was not even to be found a political party that would\nhave any thing to do with him; he betrayed and left them all in rapid\nsuccession, and they in turn left him alone and unaided All the powers\nof his mind (it is said that he once possessed some) were broken and\ncrushed; there was no peace, no resting place for him. Both theologians\nand politicians raised their hands and pointed at him the finger of\nscorn--the former, as a rebel against the King of Glory--the latter, as\na traitor to the puny king of their respective parties.\n\nSuch was the condition in which the Jesuit Bishop, Fenwick, found\nhim here in Boston; and what, to all appearance, could be more\nphilanthropic, what more practically Christian--what more benevolent\ndeed could the Pope's agent do, _for effect_--than take this man by the\nhand and supply him with the necessaries of life. And what, under these\ncircumstances, could be expected from the changeling, Brownson, than\nthat he would devote all his mind to the justification of any falsehood\nor any errors, which his benefactors might desire to propagate. I\nfind no fault with Bishop Fen-wick for relieving the temporal wants of\nBrownson; on the contrary, I freely admit, that the act is, in itself,\nand abstractedly considered, an act of benevolence and charity. We are\nbound to recognize in every human creature and every human face, the\nfeatures of a brother and a neighbor. I would not, willingly, even\nquestion the motives of the Bishop; they are known only to his God.\nIt would not be fair nor judicious in a physician, to take a body\napparently sound and in health, and dissect it, for the purpose of\nascertaining whether there were any hidden disease in it He should take\nit for granted--as a general rule--that when all appearances were good\nand healthy, there existed no physical defect; and I think and believe\nit the duty of Christians to take it for granted, that, generally\nspeaking, the motives of a brother are good, when his actions bear upon\ntheir face no indication of being otherwise. But when any man or any\nchurch, holds up to the view of a whole people or nation, one who has\nbeen for years and years an advocate of moral evil, as an object not\nonly of pity and pardon, but of admiration--as Bishop Fenwick does the\ninfidel, Brownson--every true Christian must tremble, and every true\nlover of civil rights must shudder, lest each sound that he hears should\nprove to be the death-knell of our religion and the civil rights of man.\nUnfortunate Brownson! why prostitute thyself to the base purposes\nof Popery? Thou mightest have been in want; Protestants might have\nneglected thee; but what of that? What of the sufferings of this\ntransitory and fleeting world? Let me tell you, and let the sound of my\nwords ring forever in your ears, that,\n\n     \"Life can but little more supply\n     Than just to look about us and to die.\"\n\nThe above beautiful sentiment of the poet, has, I fear, but seldom\noccurred to you; assuredly it has made no lasting impression on your\nmind. It is probable that the following stanza, part of a famous monkish\nditty, has in it beauties and substantial sentiments, far more congenial\nto your tastes and thoughts:\n\n     \"Hang up sorrow, banish care;\n     The Pope is bound to find me.\"\n\nBut a truce with poor Brownson, for a moment; his days will soon be\nover. Like the great Mr. Shandy, he has been so long \"dancing his white\nbear forward, that he must soon commence dancing him back again.\" He has\nalready professed all the religious creeds in this country, and it is\nfairly to be presumed that he will profess all of them back again; and\nthus afford himself fresh and full room, for displaying, in connection\nwith them, any additional political or religious vagaries which may\nspring up in his moonstricken imagination. He may address himself to his\npatron, parson Fenwick, as Mr. Shandy did Parson Yorrick. \"Yorrick, said\nMr. Shandy, you see that by this means--that is by going backwards\nand forwards--every thesis and hypothesis have an offspring of\npropositions--and each proposition has its consequences and conclusions;\nevery one of which leads the mind back again, into fresh tracks of\ninquiries and doubtings. The force of this engine--observed Mr. Shandy,\nin great triumph--is incredible, in opening heads. Brother Shandy, said\nmy Uncle Toby, it is enough to burst them into splinters.\"\n\nHad Brownson, in the Jesuit parson, Fenwick, a guide, simple, sinless,\nand guileless, as Parson Yorrick or my uncle Toby, there might be some\nhopes that he could yet be brought to see and feel the full force of\ntruth. But Brownson will stick to the Jesuit as long as he gives him\nbread, and the Jesuit appreciates his value too highly not to supply\nhim plentifully. The Jesuit knows well, that the little smattering of\ntheology, which Brownson possesses, can be made useful to him. It is of\nthe German School. The Germans are wild in their theories upon morals\nand theology, and yet they carry with them the appearance of much honest\nand persevering research, and never fail--unless in very unskilful\nhands--to make a strong and terrible impression wherever they are\npreached or inculcated. Brownson, though, in truth and reality, no\nscholar, knows enough of this theology, and of Popish Quietism, such\nas was taught by raving monks and nuns in the sixteenth century, to see\nthat by working them up together, and declaiming this undigested and\n22 acrid mass, before an audience unprepared to analyze it, that he\ncan produce just such an effect upon the public mind as Popish priests\ndesire. It helps to create infidelity, and, of course, adds to the\nnumber of Papists in our country.\n\nThere is a great similitude between the modern German, and the Popish\nmoral philosophy. A popular writer very truly and very beautifully says,\n\"in each we find the same senseless, useless, and aimless encouragement\nof the mixed produce of the natural mind--the same indiscriminate\nworship of the good and bad it may please to throw up--every lawless\nthought, every idle dream, every dangerous imagination suffered to run\ntheir unhealthy course, to end in folly and in impurity--piety professed\nwithout religion, and virtue without principle--the dictates of their\nrespective creeds, their theory; and the dictates of their hearts, their\npractice; and wild work between them.\"\n\nBrownson has some vague notion of this compound philosophy; he has,\nbeside, taken great pains to make himself acquainted with those\n_sesquipidalia_, or long-legged words--if I may use such a term--which\nmost mixed audiences mistake for learning. The Jesuit, Hughes, soon\nmeasured Brownson; he looked into his past life and soon found him\ntreacherous to every party and to every principle. This is the man for\nme, says the Jesuit--the Holy Church must have him, though we should be\nobliged to feed and clothe him for life. The infidel soon closed with\nthe Jesuit,--a bargain was instantly made; but my observations upon\nhuman nature have been very unprofitable to me, if the Jesuit does not\nsoon find that he has made a bad trade, as a Yankee would express it;\nthat Brownson is not the man he took him for, nor the scholar he\ntook him for; that he is but an unprincipled infidel, and a kind of\nmonomaniac rhapsodist on subjects which he does not understand himself;\nin a word, he will find out in time that he can make nothing of him. Can\nthe Jesuit, Hughes, \"make any thing else than what it is?\" can he \"make\nthe lily a rose, or the rose a lily?\" can he \"make the oak a vine, or\nthe vine an oak?\" When he can do those things, and not a second before,\ncan he make a hardened infidel an humble Christian, or a treacherous\npolitician a safe citizen.\n\nI find myself, once more, not only drifting from my destined port,\nbut, it would seem, that I had turned from it altogether. I intended\nto devote these pages, almost exclusively, to giving an expose of the\nabominations of auricular confessions and Popish nunneries, but\nhaving by some accident or another, come athwart the great changeling,\nBrownson, who now acts as trumpeter to Bishop Fenwick of Boston, and\nis recognized by him and the Popish Church of the United States, as an\nauthorized expounder of their sentiments and doctrines, I felt it my\nduty to notice him briefly. This man, Brownson, is now sent as a Popish\nmissionary or lecturer throughout the United States; and speaks upon all\nsubjects connected with Popery, _ex authoritate_.\n\nI find in the January number of Brownson's Review, of the present year,\nthe following effusion, which, for effrontery and shameless falsehood,\nequals any thing I have ever seen. \"We dare affirm,\" says Brownson, in\nhis Review, January, 1845, page 12, \"that no period in the history of\nour race, of equal length, can be pointed out, so remarkable for its\nintellectual and literary activity, as the thousand years, dating from\nthe beginning of the sixth century, and extending to the commencement of\nthe sixteenth. Now,\" continues Brownson, \"in order to judge fairly,\nwhat the church has done for the human race; whether in reference to\nreligion, morals, literature, or science, we must ascertain what it\nactually effected. She (that is the church) at the beginning of the\nsixth century, sets to work to establish schools, the great monasterial\nschools, cathedral or episcopal schools. In the beginning of the sixth\ncentury, arose the cathedral schools, in Spain. All the great, renowned\nuniversities, were founded prior to the Reformation. Nearly all the\nmonasteries were graced and enriched by valuable libraries. In each\nmonastery was a _scriptorium_, and a number of monks employed in copying\nand binding manuscripts.\" There is much plausibility in the language of\nBrownson, now the jackal of Popery in the United States. I am willing\nto admit that a vast number of colleges and renowned universities, were\nestablished before the Reformation, in Rome, Italy and even England.\nI would also admit that there were scriptoriums and that monks\nwere employed in copying manuscripts and binding books; but has the\nillustrious changeling, Brownson, told us for what purposes these great\nuniversities were established, prior to the Reformation? Far be it from\nme to deny their existence, that would indeed show that I was but a poor\nhistorian, and that I knew but very little of the corruptions of\nthe Romish Church. Sixtus IV., one of the infallible Popes of Rome,\nestablished whole colleges at once, and much as I have said against\nPopery and its corruptions, I have not, as yet, exhibited so flagrant an\ninstance of Popish turpitude, baseness and avarice, as Pope Sixtus IV.\nleaves on record, by the single act of building these universities. He\nestablished offices and titles in each college, which were put up for\nsale by him, and were sold for sums, varying from one hundred, to\none thousand and twenty thousand ducats. It was this illustrious and\ninfallible Pope, Sixtus IV.,--and I pray you will bear it in mind, thou\ngreat changeling,--that established a college of a hundred janizaries,\nand nominated these janizaries for the trifling sum of one hundred\nthousand ducats. And how, think you, reader, did he pay them their\nsalaries? Was it out of the bonus of a hundred thousand ducats, which he\nreceived for chartering or sanctioning the college? Far from it. He paid\nthem some trifling compensation, derived from the proceeds of the\nsales of bulls. These janizaries were subsequently suppressed. Innocent\nIII.,--and you will recollect, Mr. Brownson, that he was Pope of Rome\nbetween the sixth and sixteenth centuries,--founded a university for a\nbonus of sixty thousand scudi; (a scudi, I believe, is a fraction less\nthan a dollar.) The reader may form some idea of the magnitude and\nsplendor of this university, when I inform him, that this college had\ntwenty-six secretaries, and a proportionable number of other officers;\nevery one of whom paid in proportion to his means, for the office he\nheld.\n\nPope Alexander VI., who, as you know, was born between the sixth and\nsixteenth centuries, and whom the changeling's friend Daniel O'Connell,\nwould call a _broth of a boy_, established a university, and to showed\nhis zeal for the great cause of learning and advancement of morals, he\nnominated eighty writers of Popish briefs, each of whom had to pay eight\nhundred and fifty scudi for his appointment. This very Pope, Alexander\nVI., was one of the greatest debauchees of his age, and died by poison\nadministered by the hand of his own son. Pope Julius II., who also lived\nbetween the sixth and sixteenth centuries, added to these offices one\nhundred writers or copyists of archives, each of whom had also to pay\nseven hundred and fifty scudi. I have taken Brownson at his word. He\naffirms that no period in the history of our race, of equal length, can\nbe pointed out, so remarkable for intellectual activity, as that which\noccurred between the sixth and sixteenth centuries. I have and do hereby\naffirm, that there has been no period, in the history of Christianity,\nso remarkable for intellectual depravity and Popish ignorance, as\nthat very self-same period. I have appealed to history and proved\nmy assertion by facts, not taken from prejudiced writers, but facts\nrecorded and gloried in by Popes themselves and Popish writers.\n\nIt is said by Papists and authoritatively asserted by their mouth-piece\nin the United States, that the colleges and universities built by\nPapists, in the interval between the sixth and sixteenth centuries, were\npulled down by the Protestants, Goths and Vandals, who have lived since\nthat period. Admitting that they have been, what then, Mr. Brownson?\nWhat man or what people, in their sober senses, would tolerate the\ncolleges established by Pope Sixtus in 1482, where offices were put up\nat auction, and that under the sacred name of religion; where nothing\nwas taught but the grossest idolatry, and nothing practised but simony\nand immorality, almost as bad as that of the heathens. Would any man\nat the present day, with the fear of God before his eyes, or who duly\nappreciated the blessings of civil liberty, tolerate amongst ourselves,\na university such as one of those over which Popes Paul and Sixtus\npresided, even in the palmiest days of Christianity? According to\nBrownson, himself, assuredly not. We should pull it down were it amongst\nus; we should scatter to the winds these Popish brief s, decretals and\nbulk, which thousands of monks were employed in copying and binding. We\nshould vest in some factory, those thousands and hundreds of thousands\nof scudi, which were given to Popes for chartering universities\nof learning--don't laugh, reader--yes, reader, they were called\nuniversities of learning--and we would send the lazy, crazy monks, who\nwere by thousands employed in them, to work on our fields or in our\nfactories.\n\nIt was between the sixth and sixteenth centuries, that Alexander III.,\npresiding in his official capacity over a synod held at Tours, in 1167,\npronounced the Protestant religion of the Vaudois \"_a damnable heresy\nof long standing_.\" Do you call this any evidence of the _great mental\nactivity_ which the Popish Church displayed, and for which she and her\nmembers were so remarkable, prior to the sixteenth century? There was\nanother synod at Lavoux, in the same year, where the Pope gives another\ninstance of the remarkable intellectual and literary activity of the\nthousand years between the sixth and sixteenth centuries. The Popish\nSenate at Lavoux sent a memorial to the reigning Pope, to exterminate\nthe Vaudois, \"_an heretical pest, generated in olden times, of enormous\ngrowth and great antiquity_.\" I believe it was in 1536--recollect,\nMr. Brownson, it is within your period of that thousand years, when,\naccording to yourself, Popery flourished in the full blaze of her glory\nand love of literature--that the poor Protestants, the Vaudois, sent a\nnumber of petitions to Francis I., praying that he would tolerate them,\nand allow them to worship God as they pleased. Francis I. consulted the\nPope's legate, who was then at his court, and immediately returned for\nanswer to these poor Protestants, \"I am not burning heretics in France,\nto foster them among the Alps.\" Remarkable instance of the literary\nactivity of the Popish Church! We have another strong instance of that\nintellectual and literary activity of which Brownson speaks, in\nPhilip II. of Spain, who, to show his zeal for the holy Catholic faith,\ndetermined--with a view, I presume, of leaving some evidence of his\nPopish literary activity of mind--to despatch an army, under the command\nof one D'Oppede, with instructions to put to the sword every Protestant\nman, woman and child whom he might find in the Vaudois valley; and\nfaithfully did he discharge his duty. He has left us, as the changeling\nBrownson would term it a remarkable instance of Popish intellectual\nactivity* Not a man, woman, or child, was spared by this Popish army.\nAnquetil, a Roman Catholic himself and in full communion with the\nPopish Church, gives us a vivid picture of the remarkable intellectual\nactivity of this D'Oppede, and his Popish army. The reader will pardon\nme for quoting the passage in the writings of Anquetil, containing\nthis picture; it certainly shows a remarkable intellectual and literary\nactivity of Popish minds, during Brownson's thousand years of their\nunsullied fame as scholars. \"After the King of France granted permission\nto his Roman Catholic General D'Oppede, and his soldiers, to take arms\nagainst the Vaudois,\" says Anquetil, \"twenty-two towns and villages were\nburned or pillaged, with an inhumanity of which the history of the most\nbarbarous nations scarcely affords an example. The wretched inhabitants,\nsurprised in the night, and hunted from rock to rock by the light of the\nflames which were consuming their habitations, frequently escaped one\nsnare only to fall into another. The pitiful cries of the aged, the\nwomen and the children, instead of softening the hearts of the\nsoldiers,--maddened with rage, like their leaders,--only served to guide\nthem in the pursuit of the fugitives, and to indicate the points against\nwhich to direct their fury. Voluntary surrender did not exempt the men\nfrom slaughter, nor the women from brutal outrages at which nature\nrevolts.\"\n\nIt was forbidden under pain of death to afford them harbor or succor.\nIn one town alone, more than seven hundred men were butchered in cold\nblood; and the women who had remained in their houses, were shut up in\na barn containing a great quantity of straw, which was set on fire, and\nthose who endeavored to escape from the windows, were driven back\nby swords and pikes. According to orders, these specimens of Popish\nintellectual literary activity demolished all the houses, cut down the\nwood, uprooted the fruit-trees, and left nothing behind them but an\nuninhabited waste. The war-cry of the Papists, as this Roman Catholic\nwriter, whose authority no Papist will question, asserts, was, \"Kill!\nkill!\" Dr. Gilli relates an instance of great heroism in one of those\npoor Protestants, who was among the persecuted. One Aymond De La Voye\nwent through the villages, exhorting his brethren to stand firm in the\nfaith of their forefathers. He was soon discovered by the members of\nthe Inquisition. The first question put to him was, \"Who are your\nassociates?\" \"My associates,\" he answered, \"are those who know and\ndo the will of my Heavenly Father, whether they be nobles, merchants,\npeasants, or in any other condition.\" Let it not be forgotten, that this\noccurred before the sixteenth century, and before the Goths and Vandals\nof the Reformation, as Brownson calls them, had any existence. One of\nthe Councillors of the Holy Inquisition asked this intrepid man\nand pious Christian Protestant, \"Who is the head of the Church?\" He\nanswered, \"Jesus Christ\" \"Is not the Pope the head of the church?\"\ninquired the inquisitor. \"No,\" was the answer. \"Is not the Pope the\nsuccessor of St. Peter?\" \"Yes,\" answered La Voye, \"if he is like St.\nPeter, but not else.\" But such was the remarkable intellectual activity\nof the infallible Church, that no other questions were deemed necessary,\nand he was immediately consigned to a tormenting death. But the\npersecutions of these Protestant Christians did not stop here. So\nremarkable was the intellectual and literary activity of Papists,\nbetween the sixth and sixteenth centuries,--that golden age of\nPopery,--in dispensing its blessing all over the world, that while\nenormities like those I have related were being perpetrated on the\nwestern side of the Alps, a fresh storm was brewing over their brethren\nof Piedmont.\n\nWill the reader think me tedious, if I give him a more explicit account,\ntaken from Moreland's history of those people, than I myself can give? I\ntake it from Gilli's appendix.\n\n\"There is a certain valley in the county of Piedmont, within five or six\nmiles of Mount Vesulo, which, from the town of Lucerna, is called\nthe valley of Lucerna; and in it there is a little valley, which, from\nAngrogna, a small river running through it, is called the valley\nAngrogna. Next adjoining to this are two other valleys; that is to say,\nthe valley of Perosa, so called from the town of that name, and the\nvalley of S. Martino. In these there lie divers little towns and\nvillages, whose inhabitants, assisted by the ministers of God's word, do\nmake open profession of the gospel.\n\n\"Moreover, I suppose that there are near eight thousand faithful souls\ninhabiting in this place. But among the men, who are bred up to endure\nlabor, seeing they have from their childhood been inured to husbandry,\nyou will find very few who know how to engage in combat. From hence it\ncomes to pass that very few of them are ready upon any urgent occasion\nto defend themselves against public injuries. Yea, and the valleys\nthemselves lie so remote from each other, that they cannot help one\nanother till it be too late. And although these towns and villages have\ntheir counts or lords, yet the Duke of Savoy is lord over them all.\n\n\"This duke, before he came from Nice into Piedmont, diligently took\norder with those counts and lords of places, that they should admonish\nthe inhabitants to submit to him and the Pope; that is, that, casting\noff their ministers, they should admit Popish preachers and the\nabominable mass. Whereupon our people sent petitions unto the prince,\nbeseeching him that he would take it in good part if they were resolved\nrather to die than to lose the true religion of Jesus Christ.... but\nthey shall be ready to amend their errors, if any there were, in case it\nshould be manifested to them out of the word of God, to which alone\nthey are to submit in this business; and as to what concerneth them in\nmatters of behavior and tributes, and other things due both to him and\ntheir other lords, that he would send and make diligent inquiry whether\nthey have at any time committed any offence, that so due punishment may\nbe inflicted on them, because he should assuredly know they are willing\nto approve themselves with due reverence most obedient to him in all\nthings.\n\n\"These petitions came to the hand of the prince, but availed nothing\nwith him, who was become a sworn enemy with Antichrist against Christ.\nThereupon he sent forth edicts, declaring that those who should be\npresent at the sermons of the ministers of the valley?, if but once,\nshould be fined at one hundred crowns, and if a second time, then they\nshould be condemned to the galleys forever. Orders also were given to\na certain judge to ride circuit up and down to put the penalties in\nexecution, and to bind Christians and imprison them. The lords also and\nmagistrates of places had the same power given them, and at length the\ngodly were by this most impotent prince utterly given up to be plundered\nby all sorts of villains, and afflicted with most grievous calamities.\n\n\"He sent also a certain collateral judge of his own, first to Carignan,\nthere to act inhuman butchery upon the faithful ones of Christ;\nwhereupon he caused one Marcellinus, and Joan his wife, he being a\nFrenchman, but she a woman of Carignan, to be burnt alive with fire,\nfour days after they had been apprehended. But in this woman God was\npleased to manifest an admirable example of constancy; for, as she\nwas led to execution, she exhorted her husband, saying, 'Well done, my\nbrother, be of good courage; this day doubtless we shall enter\ntogether into the joys of heaven.' Some few days after this, there was\napprehended also one John Carthignan, an honest, plain man, and truly\nreligious, who, after three days of imprisonment, endured the torments\nof fire with very great constancy. Who is able to reckon up the several\nincursions, slaughters, plunders and innumerable miseries, wherewith\nthis most savage generation of men did daily afflict all pious men,\nbecause, being exhorted by their ministers to patience, they took no\ncourse to defend themselves against injuries! Not long after also they\napprehended one John, a Frenchman, and a minister, at a town called St.\nGermano, and, carrying him to a certain abbey near Pinerolo, there burnt\nhim alive, who left a noble example of Christian constancy. The like was\ndone also to the minister of the town of Maine, who was put to death at\nSusa by a slow fire, while he in the mean time stood as it were\nimmovable, and not being touched with any sense of so incredible a\ncruelty, having his eyes fixed upon heaven, breathed out his happy soul.\n\n\"Therefore, when things were come to this pass, and these miseries were\nincreased every day more and more, and seeing that the patience and\nextreme misery of our people could not in any measure allay the fury and\nrage of these most merciless brutes, they at length resolved by force,\nas well as they could, to free themselves and their wives and children\nfrom that barbarous usage. And although some of our ministers declared\nit was not well done, yet no admonitions could keep the people from\nresolving to defend themselves by arms. Hereupon it came to pass that,\nseveral encounters falling out, there fell within a few days about\nsixty of the plunderers. When news hereof was brought to the tyrant, he\ncommanded his men to forbear, and sent two of his noblemen that so they\nmight bring matters to an accommodation with our people; but when it was\nperceived that all their drift was that our ministers might be cast\nout and the Pope received, the people would by no means yield to it\nWherefore, when the prince came into Piedmont, and resided at Versello,\nabout the kalends of November, 1660, with intent to destroy all in the\nvalleys by fire and sword, he sent an army of about four thousand foot\nand two hundred horse, under the command of the duke [count] de la\nTrinite.\"\n\nThe writer then relates the submissions made by certain deputies whom\nthe Vaudois sent to the duke.\n\n\"These false brethren, in design to serve their own private ends,\npersuaded the people, though almost all the ministers cried out against\nit, that too easily giving credit to the most false promises of their\nenemies, laying down their arms, and sending deputies to the prince to\npromise obedience, they might, for sixteen thousand crowns, redeem both\nthemselves and their religion. As soon as all these things were yielded\nto and promised by the too credulous people, through a vain hope of\nobtaining peace and religion, and when our deputies arrived at Versello,\nthey were thence carried by the Lord de la Trinite to a certain\ncloister, there to abide for two months' space, (to the end there might\nbe time for collecting the moneys,) and at length, casting themselves\ndown at the feet of the prince and of the Pope's legate, (who were both\nthere, attended by a great number of the nobility, and men of inferior\nrank,) they were constrained to supplicate the prince first, then the\nPope's legate, that they would take pity on the people from whom they\nwere sent, and to promise them, by an oath, that they would be ready to\ndo all things that should be commanded by them.\n\n\"The prince therefore growing confident upon this most solemn promise,\nimmediately sent persons to command our people to receive and embrace\nthat horrid idol of the mass; whereupon, considering the inconstancy of\ntheir deputies, and the deceit or rather extreme perfidiousness of\nthe tyrants being discovered, they plainly refused to yield that\nthose things should be ratified which their deputies had unadvisedly\ntransacted, through their own levity, not with the consent of people....\nThen the tyrant, as soon as he came to understand this, was much more\ninflamed than ever before with anger, or rather outrageous fury, against\nour people; and, collecting a rabble of an army, he gave command to the\nLord de la Trinite to waste and destroy all by fire and sword, without\nany regard of sex or age. Hereupon houses were every where set on fire,\nnor is there any kind of mischief which was not acted by those most\nwretched villains; by which means they forced our people, with their\nwives and children, to have recourse to the more craggy places of the\nmountains; a thing very lamentable to be seen. For, at the very first\nassault, they were in a manner astonished, because, being spoiled both\nof their arms and goods, living in extreme want of all things, they\ndid not see by what means they might be able to undergo so great and\ntroublesome a war.\n\n\"But at length, taking heart and trusting in the mercy and help of God,\nof the goodness of their cause, and being confident, because of the\nimpiety and treachery of their adversaries, they resolved once again\nto defend themselves. To this end they appointed their guards and\ngarrisons, fortified several places, blocked up passages, and were\nwholly resolute upon this point, to die rather than they would in any\nmeasure obey a perfidious and wicked prince in so abominable a matter.\nBut what need many words? Things were come to such a pass, that in\nseveral fights above nine hundred of the enemy were slain, whereas, on\nour side, hardly fifteen were wanting.\"\n\nSuch was the spirit of Popery during Brownson's thousand years of\nremarkable intellectual and literary activity! Do you, Americans, wish\nthat the next thousand years of your existence as a nation should be\ndistinguished by a similar intellectual preeminence in mental activity\nand Christian literature? But, continues Brownson, in his Review of\nJanuary, 1845, all these things were altered. What things does Brownson\nmean? The universities? or the remarkable activity of Popish minds\nbetween the sixth and sixteenth centuries? Who denies the former? No\none who is acquainted with history, or who knows that the world, a large\nportion of which was then under Popish dominion, needed to be purified\nfrom the idolatrous and disastrous doctrines of Popery. The insolence\nof Brownson is assuredly unequalled. Either that, or his ignorance of\nhistory, is unpardonable. \"At the period of the English Revolution,\"\nsays this consummate hypocrite, Brownson, \"_the mass of the English\npeople were buried in the grossest ignorance. Even long after, when the\nWesleys first started, they talked of the ignorance even of the people\nof London, as they would of the South Sea Islanders_.\" This, as we say\nup here in New Hampshire, beats all. Was it not about this very period\nthat the world gave birth to the illustrious Milton? Was it not at\nthis period that Dryden was born? Was it not at this period that the\nbrightest lights of literature that ever illumined the world were\nshining in all their glory? I might here give as many names of\nillustrious men and illustrious minds as ever adorned humanity; men\nwhose lives were an honor, not only to science, but to religion, to\nChristianity, and true piety. Did not Erasmus live before the English\nReformation? Was he grossly ignorant? Did not Luther live before\nthe Reformation? Neither of those were Papists, but they knew Papist\ndoctrines so well as to break loose from them and appeal to the\nChristian world to rise as one man and pull down and raze to the ground\nPopish universities and colleges, as calculated only to cover the world\nwith darkness, by substituting the legends of monks for true science,\nand the decretals of Popes for the Word of God.\n\n\"From the eleventh century,\" says Brownson, \"down to the sixteenth,\nliterature and science received no check.\" Review of 1845, Jan. No. p.\n17. Hear, reader, to this modern Esau, According to him, literature\nreceived no check from the years 1100 to 1600. This assertion is made\nwithout any qualification or exception. Does this Brownson believe that\nhis readers are all a parcel of ignoramuses? It cannot be so; he must\nbe aware that he states an untruth, and no man who has ever read history\ncan think otherwise. It would be difficult, I apprehend, to meet a\nschool boy in the United States--I may venture the assertion, that it\nwould be impossible to find a child in America, over the age of ten or\ntwelve years,--who does not know that the illustrious Galileo was born\nduring that very period, and who could not tell, that his glorious\ndiscovery of the motion of the earth, not only met with opposition\nfrom the Church of Rome, but, that the ruling Pope countenaced his\nincarceration in the dungeons of the inquisition. Did not the Romish\nChurch claim and enjoy the exclusive honor of striking the first blow at\na man and a mind such as the world never saw before? Did not Pope Urban\nVIII., in 1623, declare and pronounce the motion of the earth to be\nperverse in the highest degree? It was about this time, as a living\nwriter observes, that the whole Catholic Church looked upon all the\nearth as a condemned world. This absurdity was rejected by Galileo. He\nestablished an equality between heaven and earth. He showed that the\nlatter is subject to the same laws and floats in the same splendor as\nthe former; he put serenity and life in the place of mystical theory.\nFor this he was opposed by Popish priests, the sworn enemies of science\nand literature. See, as the same writer observes, this venerable man,\nGalileo,--this good man, seventy years old, on his knees, barefooted and\nstripped to his shirt, before the officers of the holy inquisition;\nand for what? He tells you himself, in a letter to one of his friends.\n\"They--the inquisitors--look upon my book as more abominable and\npernicious to the Church than the writings of Luther.\" Look at him! you\nBrownson, thou contemptible cat's-paw of Popery, and say--if your heart\nhas not been seared against the truth with something hotter than the\nhottest iron--whether literature and science did not receive a check, in\nthe persecutions which your infallible church inflicted upon this great\nman? \"The four hundred years which preceded the Reformation,\" says\nBrown-son, \"were ages of prodigious activity. In them we meet with\nthe great name of Abelard, under whom Heloisa studied philosophy.\" Mr.\nBrownson forgot, I presume, to inform us that he also taught Heloisa\nmoral philosophy. In this latter science she was eminently skilful,\nand left the world some evidence, at least, of her not being an inapt\nscholar in the doctrines of genuine Popery. The great changeling,\nBrownson, could not give more illustrative examples of the beauties of\nPopery and of the advantages to be derived from a course of education\nat their schools, than that of Abelard and Heloisa; but he need not have\ngone so far from home for examples of this kind. There are hundreds of\nthem to be found in the United States. We have schools, such as that\nwhich Abelard kept, and to which, Brownson tells us, \"great flocks fled\nfor education.\" One of these schools, my readers may recollect, recently\nflourished on Mount Benedict, Charlestown, Mass. Abelard, as every\nreader must recollect, lived in the twelfth century--at the very period,\nwhen, according to the great changeling--the Popish Church displayed\nher remarkable activity of mind in science and literature. Abelard was a\nlearned doctor in the Church of Rome. He was, of course, a confessor; he\nboarded in the house of a Popish canon in Paris, whose name was Fulbert.\nThis canon had a niece called Heloisa, whom he was anxious to send to\na fashionable school and bring up in the doctrines of the infallible\nChurch of Rome. Accordingly he sent Heloisa to attend the lectures of\nthe pious and God-like Abelard, just as many of our American mothers,\nwith the advice and consent of their lords and masters, send their\nchildren in this country to be educated, to Popish seminaries, kept\nby pious priests and saint-like nuns. Heloisa had not gone long to\nconfession, when Abelard, her confessor, seduced her and prevailed upon\nthe poor unthinking girl to become his mistress. In order to conceal\nthis atrocious conduct and finding his dupe likely to become a mother,\nhe sent her to a sister of his who lived at a considerable distance,\nwhere she was delivered of a son. It is said, that to appease Fulbert,\nthe uncle of this victim of seduction and priestcraft, Abelard consented\nto marry his victim privately; but no sooner was he married and the\nanger of the uncle partially appeased, than he sent her to a monastery\nor nunnery and compelled her to take a religious habit; thus adding\ntreachery to crime and requiting a pure and simple-minded girl's love,\nby additional ingratitude and villany. But the poor girl had many\nfriends besides the uncle, who, seeing the cruel manner in which Abelard\ntreated her, determined upon revenge, and they had it They surrounded\nhis chamber at night, and took from his bed this man whom Brownson\nwould hold up to Americans as a model teacher of morality, and had him\nemasculated. All this was done in the twelfth century. This was one\nof the great men whom the church produced in Brownson's golden age of\nPopery.\n\nBut what else could be expected of this Brownson? What else could be\nexpected from any man who would hold and profess such sentiments as the\nfollowing, which we find in his Review of 1840. \"For our part,\" says\nthe great changeling, Brownson, \"we yield to none, in our reverence\nfor science and religion; but we confess that we look not for the\nregeneration of the race from priests and pedagogues.\" Very respectful\nlanguage, especially from one who has been a priest and pedagogue\nhimself! \"They,--the priests,\" continues Brownson--\"have had a fair\ntrial. They,--the priests--cannot construct the temple of God. They--the\npriests--cannot conceive its plan. They--the priests--know not how to\nbuild it They--the priests--daub with untempered mortar, and the walls\nthey erect tumble down if so much as a fox attempt to go up thereon. We\nhave no faith in priests and pedagogues,\" says Brownson; \"they merely\ncry peace, when there is no peace and there can be none.\" Again the same\ntraitor to God and religion, thus spews forth his Popish hatred to pure\nChristianity. \"One might as well undertake to dip the ocean dry with\na clam shell, as to undertake to cure the evils of the social state by\nconverting men to Christianity.\" \"For our part,\" continues Brownson, in\nanother page of his Review, \"we are disposed to seek the cause of the\ninequality of the conditions of which we speak, in religion, and to\ncharge it to the priesthood. Rarely do we find, in any age or country, a\nman feeling himself commissioned to labor for a social reform, who does\nnot feel that he must begin it by making war upon the priesthood. Indeed\nit is felt at once, that no reform can be effected without resisting\nthe priests and emancipating the people from their power. Historical\nresearch, we apprehend, will be found to justify this instinct, and\nto authorize eternal hostility to the priesthood. Again, when once the\nclass--that is, the class of priests--has become somewhat numerous, it\nlabors to secure to itself distinction, and increases them. Hence the\nestablishment of priesthoods or sacerdotal corporations, such as the\nEgyptian, the Braminical, the Ethiopian, the Jewish, the Scandinavian,\nthe Druidical, the Mexican and Peruvian.\" Fie! fie! Mr. Brownson, the\nMexicans belong to the Infallible Church, and like yourself, are strict\nmembers thereof. \"These sacerdotal corporations,\" continues Brownson,\n\"are variously organized, but everywhere organized for the purpose of\nmonopolizing power and profit. The real idea at the bottom of these\ninstitutions, is only to enslave the mass of the people to the priests,\nwho, by pretending, honestly or not, to possess the secret of rendering\nthe gods propitious, are able to reduce the people to the most wretched\nsubjection, and keep them there, at least for a time.\" At page 384,\nof Brownson's Review, of July, 1840, we find the following sweeping\nanathema against the Christian priesthood--not in the United States\nalone, but all over the world--and I would defy the most learned\nhistorian or impatient infidel upon earth, to produce any thing more\nblasphemous or more calculated to disturb the peace of man or the good\norder of society. \"But, having traced the inequality we complain of, to\nits origin, we proceed to ask again, what is the remedy? The remedy is\nfirst to be sought in the destruction of the priest. The bad must be\nremoved before the good can be introduced--conviction and repentance\nprecede regeneration; Christianity is the sublimest protest against the\npriesthood ever uttered, either by God or man. In the person of Jesus,\nboth God and man protest against the priesthood. What was the mission\nof Jesus but a solemn summons to judgment, and of the human race\nto freedom. He--Jesus--instituted himself no priesthood, no form\nof religions worship. He recognized no priest but a holy life, and\ncommanded the construction of no temple but that of a pure heart.\" Take\ncare, Brownson! don't let the Pope hear you. \"He---Jesus--preached no\nform of religion.\" Take heed again! Did he not preach the religion of\nthe Romish Church, think you? Have a care! you will commit yourself, unless\nI occasionally caution you. \"He--Jesus--enjoined no creed.\" What, sir!\nnot even that of the Pope of Rome? \"He--Jesus--set apart no day for\nreligious worship.\" Not a single one of those numerous holy days which\nthe Infallible Church sanctions? \"The priest is universally a tyrant,\nuniversally the enslaver of his brethren, and therefore it is that\nChristianity condemns them. Christianity could not prevent the\nestablishment of a hierarchy, but it prepared for its ultimate\ndestruction by insisting on the celibacy of the clergy.\" Really, friend\nBrownson, I am beginning to tremble for your safety in the Popish\nChurch. \"Again,\" says Brownson, in his Review of the same year, page\n336, \"we insist upon it\"--remember, reader, that Brownson is the\nmouth-piece to Popery in the United States,--\"that the complete and\nfinal destruction of the priestly order in every practical sense of\nthe word priest, is the first step to be taken towards elevating 'the\nlaboring' classes\" Pray, Mr. Brownson, what shall we do with the ten\nthousand Romish priests which are to be found at the present time in the\ncity of Mexico alone? Has the infallible Church concluded to ship them\nto our western States? \"Priests,\" says Brownson, \"are necessary enemies\nto freedom; all reason demonstrates this, and all history proves it.\"\nLook out, sir! you 're committing yourself again. Where are all those\ncolleges you speak of as having been established between the sixth and\nsixteenth centuries, and in which you say was displayed a remarkable\nactivity in science and literature? Nothing better than asylums or\nschools, for the education of men in such sciences as were calculated to\noverthrow the freedom of man. I told you so a while ago, and proved it\ntoo. All reason demonstrates this and all history proves it.\n\nAgain, Brownson says, in the same page of his Review, \"There must be\nno class of men set apart and authorized, either by law or fashion, to\nspeak to us in the name of God, or to be the interpreters of the word of\nGod.\" Is it so, indeed, Mr. Brownson? I thought the Pope was authorized\nto do so, and that he and his church were especially empowered, to the\nexclusion of all, without distinction, to interpret the word of God. The\nword of God, you say again, \"never drops from the priest's lips.\" What!\ndo you mean to say that the word of God never drops from the Pope's\nlips? Rest assured, my worthy friend, that if you repeat that again to\nBishop Fenwick, he will put you on short allowance. \"The priests were\nalways a let and hindrance to the spread of truth.\" Assuredly you cannot\nmean the Romish priests. You tell us, in your Review of this year,\nthat the four hundred years which preceded the Reformation were ages\nof prodigious activity, and that during that time Abelard, St Bernard,\nAlbert the Great, and Thomas Aquinas, were remarkable men. All these\nwere priests; yet you say that priests have always been the enemies of\nfreedom, and a let and hindrance to the spread of truth. You thought,\nthe other day, that these were good men and learned men, especially\nAbelard. What do you think of them, now that you have become a Roman\nCatholic? You believe all of them to be saints, and you know many of\nthem have been canonized. We have not your opinion of them since July,\n1840. Let us hear what you thought of them then. We quote from page 387\nof your Quarterly of that year. You ask the following question yourself,\nand you also answer it. Here are your words, viz: \"What are the priests\nof Christendom, as they now are? Miserable panders to the prejudices\nof the age; loud in condemning sins nobody is guilty of, but miserable\ncowards when it is necessary to speak out for God. They are dumb dogs;\nas a body, they never preach a truth till there is no one whom it will\nindict; the imbecility of an organized priesthood, and its power to\ndemoralize the people, is beginning to be seen; we have had enough\nof Christianity\" Have you, indeed, Mr. Brown-son? Well, we have not;\ntherein you and I differ. \"Christianity,\" says Brownson, in the next\nline, \"is powerless for good, but by no means powerless for evil; it now\nunmans us, and hinders the growth of God's kingdom.\" It is high time,\nbrother Fenwick, that I should wish you joy. You have an acquisition to\nyour church, in the great changeling Brownson, and you show a depth of\nwisdom rarely to-be found now-a-days, except among Jesuits, in sending\nyour convert Brownson all over this country, to preach the pure and\nunsullied doctrines of your Infallible Church; your apostle Brownson is\nassuredly a fit man for your purposes. History does not inform us that\nthere is a solitary instance since the establishment of your church, of\nany government having escaped its machinations; and worse than purblind\nindeed must that mail be, who cannot see at a glance that the primary\nobject which Popish bishops have in commissioning this heartless,\nunprincipled infidel Brownson to go abroad lecturing among the happy\npeople of this country, is to disturb the present order of society, and\nfinally to overthrow this government, and erect upon its ruins the Papal\nthrone.\n\nThis Brownson is unquestionably an object of great pity, or well-merited\ncontempt I could turn from the bare mention of his name with nausea\nand disgust It is but a few months since that he represented the whole\nsystem of Christianity as a gross imposition upon mankind, and our holy\nreligion one of the blackest impositions that ever was practised upon\nour race. But now he has become a Roman Catholic. Now that he is in\nthe pay of the Pope and his Jesuits, like another Esau he turns round,\nbetraying everything that he ever professed, and pretends to discover\nthat in the Church of Rome are to be found all the elements of pure\nChristianity; that her priests are an exception to the great body of\nthose priests against whom he pronounced his anathema a while ago.\n\nHow many months is it, Mr. Brownson, since you became a Papist, and\nfound out that you had been all your life a victim of delusion and\nProtestant priestcraft? Ten, twelve, or eighteen, is it? Well, suppose\nit is. Is that enough to give you a thorough knowledge of Popery, and to\nsatisfy you that the Popish Church is composed of purer materials than\nany of those numerous churches in which you have believed successively\nand alternately for the last thirty years, and from each of which you\nhave been successively expelled and excommunicated? For, as you tell us\nyourself, in your Quarterly Review, so infamous and infidel were your\nprinciples, that even the Universalists could not tolerate you amongst\nthem, and excommunicated you from their communion without one dissenting\nvoice. So notoriously profligate and abandoned did they consider you,\nin mind, sentiment, thought, and language, that although their doctrine\nteaches them that Christ died for all, and that all are to be saved\nthrough him, they excepted you, and you alone, as far as I am aware.\nWide as the range of that belief is, all-comprehensive as their charity\nis, and all-sufficient for the salvation of man as they believe the\ndeath of Christ to be, yet they could not believe that you were entitled\nto any benefit from it, and accordingly they formally excommunicated\nyou. I can tell you, Mr. Brownson, that you have taken a false step,\nin your last move; you have plunged thoughtlessly into the labyrinth\nof Popery, without knowing any thing of its intricacies, certainly\nnot enough to say much for or against. As yet you have scarcely been\nadmitted behind the curtain of this vast theatre in which you have\nengaged to play a character. And believe me when I assure you that if\nyou have undertaken any other part than that of a buffoon, you will be\nhissed off the boards before long. You may, perhaps, soon be let into\nthe green room of the vast Popish theatre where you have made a short\nengagement, and there some of the machinery of Popery may be opened\nto your view. But mind what I tell you; when you see the hidden and\nconcealed springs, the wheel within wheel, and the dirty workmen who\nset them in motion, you will behold sights and experience a stench which\nwill strike you with an offensiveness as loathing and disgusting as if\nyou had put your head into a common sewer. Nothing will you see there\nbut covetous-ness, the weakest vanity, and the most unrestrained\nindulgence of the vilest passions--one general system of artifice and\nintrigue for power and opportunities for debauching females. Never\nbefore could I realize the belief that man was so entirely and totally\ncorrupt as he is, until I was admitted as a Popish priest into the\ntheatre and great machine-shop of Popery.\n\nI have already given to the public some of those scenes which were\nwitnessed by me in the Romish Church. They were new to some, and--as\nI expected--incredible to many Americans: but Americans--at least the\nwell-informed amongst them--ought to know that I have related nothing\nnew, or at least very little. My revelations have had, in point of fact\nand substantially, full publicity many years before my birth. The\nvery facts I have stated had long been registered in the archives of\nliterature, and might have been found on the shelves of the libraries\nof our own country. Some of them have been published by me with the sole\nview of scattering them amid our people in such form and at such a price\nas may be acceptable and accessible to all. Many of my statements might\nhave seemed dark and cloudy, but truth and justice compel me to say that\nthey were nothing in comparison with those which are to come. They\nbear no more likeness to what I shall give hereafter, than the fleeting\nclouds which we see floating here and there, denoting the approach of a\nstorm, bear to the storm itself. But alas! I fear that it is perfectly\nuseless for me to attempt to awaken the American mind to a due sense of\nthe dangers to be apprehended from the introduction of Popery among us.\nThe general answer which I receive to all my warnings is, \"We care not\nfor what Papists can do; we are a free people.\" It would be useless to\nreply to such childish argument as this, nor shall I attempt it; but I\nfeel really humiliated at seeing such a people as the free citizens of\nthe United States permitting themselves to be deluded, and the minds of\ntheir children poisoned by such doctrines as are preached by the infidel\nBrownson, now employed by the Pope of Rome, as the apostle of Popery\nin this country. It is also a source of deep regret to me to see Roman\nCatholics, especially the poor Irish, who owe this country more than any\nother people in the world, become its deadliest foes, and ready at\nthe beck of their tyrant priests and bishops to trample under foot its\nglorious constitution, which guarantees to them what they never had\nbefore, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and equal rights.\n\"_Americans shant rule us_,\" say this poor, misguided people, the Irish.\nThis drives me, _nolens volens_, to a farther exposure of some of the\ndeceptions practised upon them and upon mankind in general, by faithless\nRomish priests, trusting, in the mercy of Providence, that if I can show\nthem that they are deceived in one way by their priests, it may put them\non their guard in future against further deception.\n\nI will now return to, or rather resume the consideration of, the\ndoctrine of _auricular confession_, which formed in part the subject of\nthe first volume of this work.\n\nBefore I enter on the disgusting subject of auricular confession, let me\ngive the reader an idea of how it is made. And lest it may be questioned\nwhether the form I herein give is correct, I shall give it first in\nLatin, and then in English, and appeal to any Roman Catholic priest or\nbishop in the world, whether so far I misstate or misrepresent facts.\nThe following is the form:\n\n\"Confiteor Deo omnipotenti beatas Marias semper Virgini, beato Michaeli\nArchangelo, beato Johanni Baptistae, Sanctis Apostolis Petro et Paulo,\nomnibus Sanctis et (tibi Pater) quia peccavi nimis cogitatione verbo\net opere (pectus) mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa. Ideo precor\nbeatam Mariam semper Virginem, beatum Michaelum Archangelum, beatum\nJohannem Baptistam, sanctos Apostolos Petrum et Paulum, omnes sanctos et\n(Pater) orane pro me ad Dominum Deum nostrum.\"\n\nTranslation of the Above:\n\n\"I confess to Almighty God, to blessed Mary ever virgin, to blessed\nMichael the Archangel, to blessed John the Baptist, to the holy Apostles\nPeter and Paul, to all the saints, and to you, father, that I have\nsinned exceedingly, both in thought, in word, and deed, through my\nfault, through my fault, through my most grievous fault. Therefore I\nbeseech the blessed Mary ever virgin, blessed Michael the Archangel,\nblessed John the Baptist, the holy Apostles Peter and Paul, and all the\nsaints, and you father, to pray to our Lord God for me.\"\n\nSuch is the form of confession made by every Roman Catholic who goes\ninto a confessional box, or who in any other place confesses to a\npriest.\n\nIt is not my intention here, to show that no such form of confession\nas the above was ever used in the Christian Church for more than half a\ncentury after its establishment. The whole prayer of this confession is\nan innovation unknown to the early Christians. It is an impure deposit\nin the sacred fountains of Christianity, thrown into them and mixed up\nwith them, by the unclean hands of the Romish Popes and priests. Who\nor which of the primitive Christians, was ever known to pray to saints?\nName him, Papists, and I will give you credit for the discovery. You\ncontradict yourselves and some of your most fundamental doctrines\nin praying to saints. Even the Council of Trent, which you consider\ninfallible, goes no farther than to say,--\"It is good and profitable\nto invoke the prayers of the saints.\" And how do you, Popish priests,\njustify yourselves in imposing on your deluded people, the idolatrous\npractice of praying to saints? Answer the question yourselves. As I\nstated before, it is not my intention here, to enter into the merits\nor demerits of your form of confession. I shall confine myself, almost\nexclusively, to pointing out some of the fatal consequences to society,\nof introducing such a practice as that of auricular confession,\namongst any people. The reader will pardon me, if I quote largely from\nMichellet, an admirable writer of the present day, and which cannot fail\nto be very satisfactory to the reader, from the fact, that he is a Roman\nCatholic and, of course, entitled to credit, as it is not to be presumed\nthat any man will bear witness against himself or against the doctrines\nwhich he avowedly professes. The language of Michellet is beautiful,\nas the Protestant Quarterly Review expresses it He gives a graphic\nportraiture of a French wife. The reader will keep in mind that\nMichellet is a Frenchman, that he looks upon France as the world and\nthat therefore his portraiture of a French wife, is a portraiture of any\nwoman in the same position. The fact that Michellet's work is approved\nof by the Quarterly Review, of the American Protestant Association, is\nthe highest encomium that can be passed upon it. The Review is edited by\nthe Rev. Rufus Griswold, one of the most elegant, chaste and beautiful\nwriters of the day, and whose commendation Michellet's work could not\nhave, were it not eminently entitled to it We have few such writers\namong our American controversialists as the Rev. Mr. Griswold, and I\nknow not that I am hazarding truth, when I say, that we have not a more\npatriotic citizen, a more accomplished scholar, nor a more humble and\ndevoted Christian. I shall here quote from Mr. Griswold's translation of\nMichellet, page 287 of the Quarterly Review of the American Protestant\nAssociation.\n\n\"When I think of all that is contained in the words _confession,\ndirection_,--those little words, that great power, the most complete in\nthe world,--when I essay to analyze all that is in it,--I am alarmed.\nIt appears to me that I am descending by an infinite spiral line, a deep\nand dark mine. I have had pity heretofore for the priest; now, I dread\nhim. We must not be alarmed, we must look it in the face. Let us frame\nwith simplicity the language of the confessor.\" The reader must suppose\nhere, a priest sitting in the confessional with a young lady kneeling\nby his side, 2 whose lips almost press his. I know by experience, having\noften myself heard confessions, that this is the exact position of\nthe parties. The lady is supposed, by Michelet--and he supposes so\ncorrectly--to be addressed by the priest in the following words. 'God\nhears thee; hears thee through me; by me God will reply to thee; but\nthou tremblest, thou darest not tell to this terrible God thy weak and\nchildish acts.' (The reader will not forget here, that the young lady\npenitent and the priest are both young.) 'Well, then, tell them to\nthy father, a father has a right to know the secrets of his child,--an\nindulgent father who wishes to know them in order to absolve them. He is\na sinner, like thyself; has he the right then to be severe? Come then,\nchild, come and speak. That which thou hast never dared to whisper in\nthy mother's ear, tell me; who will ever know it?' Then, among sighs\nfrom the swelling, throbbing breast, the fatal word mounts the lips;\nit escapes and is concealed. He who has heard it has acquired a great\nadvantage, which he will preserve. God grant that he does not abuse it\nHe who has heard it--be careful--is not wood, the black oak of the old\nconfessional; he is a man of flesh and blood. And this man now knows of\nthis woman what the husband has never known in the long outpouring\nof the heart by night and day. That which a mother does not know--who\nbelieves that she knows her entirely, having held her so often naked on\nher knees--this man knows; he will know. Do not fear that he forgets; if\nthe avowal is in good hands so much the better, for it is forever. She\nalso knows well that she has a master over her inmost thoughts. She will\nnever pass before that man without lowering her eyes. The day on\nwhich this mystery was made common, he was very near her; she felt\nhis presence. Seated above her, he weighed her down by an invisible\nascendancy. A magnetic force conquered her, for she did not wish to\nspeak, and yet she spoke in spite of herself. She was fascinated, like\nthe bird before the serpent.\n\nUp to this point there was, perhaps, no art on the side of the priest.\nThe force of things did all; that of the religious institution and that\nof nature. As a priest he received her at his knees, at the listening\nbox. Then, master of her secret, of her thought,--of the thought of\na woman,--he was discovered himself to be a man; and without wishing\nit--without perhaps knowing it--he has placed on her, feeble and\ndisarmed, the heavy hand of a man. And the family now! the husband! who\nwill dare to say that his situation is the same as before? Every one who\nreflects, knows very well, that thought is, in a person, that which\nmost controls him. The master of the thoughts is he to whom the person\nbelongs. The priest holds the soul as soon as he has the dangerous gauge\nof the first secrets, and he will hold it faster and firmer. An entire\ndivision is made between the husband and wife, for now there are two;\nthe one has the soul, the other the body. Note, that in this division,\none of the two has everything; the other, if he keeps anything, keeps\nit by grace. Thought, from its very nature, is dominant, absorbing. The\nmaster of the thought, in the natural progress of his sway, will go on\nconstantly subjecting the part which remains to the other.\n\nIt will be already much, if the husband, widowed of the soul, reserves\nthe involuntary, inert, and dead possession.\n\nHumiliating thing, only to obtain your own but by permission and\nindulgence! to be seen, followed into the most intimate intimacy, by an\ninvisible witness, who regulates you, and assigns to you your part--to\nmeet in the street a man who knows better than yourself your most secret\nacts and weakness,--who humbly salutes you, turns aside and laughs.\n\nWho can read the above extract from Michelet on auricular confession,\nwithout fancying that it is nothing more than one of those effusions\nwith which rich fancies like his frequently abound? Men unacquainted\nwith anything but the ordinary business of life, cannot fancy, much less\nrealize, truth in the above. Is there even a Roman Catholic to be found,\nwho can realize or believe the fact, that while he supposes himself the\nonly possessor of his wife,--that she is his own--heart and soul--whole\nand undivided, yet is not so? It is well perhaps for those who have the\nmisfortune to be Roman Catholics themselves, or equally unfortunate in\nhaving Roman Catholic wives, that they have no idea of the influence\nwhich a Roman Catholic Confessor has over woman. Could any man live in\nhappiness or enjoy the pure blessings of matrimony, if he knew that\nall the intimacies and secrets, which existed between him and his wife,\nwere far better known to the priest to whom the wife confesses, than to\nhimself? It is well then perhaps, after all, that while such reptiles\nas Popish confessors are allowed a place in society, that the secrets of\nthe confessional should be confined to themselves alone.\n\nBut there is no untruth in the beautiful extract which I have taken\nfrom Michelet The picture which he gives is neither over-drawn or\nover-colored. The wife who goes to confession, is, in reality, more the\nwife of the priest than the wife of her married husband. Her soul is the\npriest's, her thoughts are the priest's, and the priest controls all\nher actions. How beautifully has Michelet expressed the priest's control\nover her \"He has placed on her, feeble and disarmed, the heavy hand of a\nman.\"\n\nMany instances of the influence which the priest exercises over married\nwomen in the confessional have come to my own knowledge, while I was\na Popish confessor. The reader will bear with me while I relate one or\ntwo, from hundreds, which I have witnessed in the course of my life.\n\nIn the year 1822, and in the city of Philadelphia, an elegant carriage,\nwith servants in livery, drove up to my door, in Fourth street, between\nWalnut and Spruce, where I then lived; and a lady, dressed in the\nextreme of fashion, unceremoniously stepped up to my door and opened it\nwithout rapping, announcing herself a stranger who wished to see me on\nparticular business. I knew, almost by intuition, what this particular\nbusiness was. I asked no questions and of course received no answers.\nThe lady, however, said she wanted to confess and get absolution. My\nduty was plain, I was a Popish priest But you have not the worst of\nit yet, reader; so far, there was nothing evil in the matter save the\ninfatuation of the lady in believing that a man could forgive her sins,\nand my worse than infatuation and weakness in believing that\nI had such power. The substance of this confession was the following,\nwhich fully verifies the truth of Michelet's statement This lady had\nbeen in the habit of going to confession to a Popish bishop, who lived\nin a neighboring state, and frequently had criminal intercourse with\nhim, going to his room whenever he directed her, under pretence of going\nto confession, though at the time she was a married woman. It will be\nasked why she came to me. The reason was this: her paramour being a\nbishop, was unwilling to have his crimes known to any priest in his\nown diocese, and directed her to come to another; and believing, as all\nCatholics do, that one priest can forgive sins as well as another, she\nselected me, as I was then comparatively a stranger in the country.\nBut the worst of the tale is not told yet. That part of it which\ncorroborates the statement of Michelet remains still to be heard.\n\nSoon after the departure of this lady from my house, an English\ngentleman, with whom I had the pleasure of an acquaintance some years\npreviously in London, and with whom I occasionally dined at a well-known\nand fashionable boarding-house, not far from my own house, called on\nme and insisted that I should dine with him that day, holding out as\na particular inducement the pleasure of introducing me to a lady and\ngentleman of the highest respectability, whom I should meet at dinner.\nI accordingly went to dine; and the reader may imagine my surprise at\nfinding the very identical lady who had been at confession with me a\nfew hours before, and her husband--the respectable lady and gentleman to\nwhom my friend promised an introduction. Respectable they truly Were, as\nfar as this world is capable of appreciating respectability; and happy\nthey were also, to all appearance; but was not Michelet right in saying\nof a woman who goes to confession to a priest, \"_She will never pass\nbefore that man without lowering' her eyes?_\" Could that lady pass\nbefore me without lowering her eyes? or could I, if hardened in the\niniquitous practice of hearing confession much longer than I was then,\npass that lady without lowering mine? Did I not, as Michelet expresses\nit, \"hold the soul\" of that lady? Did I not, were I iniquitously\ndisposed, as her bishop was, hold her body also? But when I looked at\nthe husband of this lady--the elegant, accomplished, and gentlemanly\nhusband--when I reflected on his humiliating position--when I reflected\nthat this elegant man was widowed, not only of the soul, but partly of\nthe body, of his beautiful, and as I can easily fancy, once innocent and\nvirtuous wife, by a Popish bishop in the confessional, I could almost\nhave cursed the hour that gave me birth in a land of Popery. My very\nsoul froze within me, and I almost regretted that God in his mercy had\nnot made me something else than a being who could have broken the cords\nof that pure and unmingled love between that elegant man who sat before\nme, and his once elegant and virtuous wife. Humiliating indeed, as\nMichelet said, must be the condition of that man whose wife goes to the\nconfessional. When he walks the streets, he is met by the confessor of\nhis wife, who, as Michelet properly says again, \"salutes him humbly,\nturns aside, and laughs.\" O, how true this is! and would to God I could\nbrand it upon the heart of every man whose wife goes to confession. Is\nit true that God lives? is it true that the earth moves? is it true that\nman has a soul? is it true that mind is not matter? is it true that the\nsun rises and sets? O! it is still more true, if possible, that there\nare such things as Popish priests--saints in appearance, but demons in\npractice,--who laugh at the ruin and division they have made between man\nand wife. I do not know that I was ever so lost to every feeling of\nhonor, when a Romish priest, as, when I passed through the streets, to\nlaugh at the husband whose wife was persuaded and fascinated away from\nhim in the confessional; but I have often walked the streets with Romish\npriests, in Europe especially, where Popery predominates, and there is\nno sort of amusement upon those occasions which they enjoy more than\ncalling each other's attention to some of their neighbors, as they pass\nalong, and whispering into each other's ears, \"Look at that gentleman;\nhow fond he seems, of his wife. It was yesterday she was at the\nconfessional with me; poor fool!\" This chit-chat terminates in a hearty\nlaugh, all at the expense of the husband. The reader, I trust, will not\nthink me tedious, if I give him another instance of the evils of Popish\nconfession. It will be borne in mind that the fact which I am about to\nstate is not taken from history, though history abounds with similar\ncases. It is one within my own knowledge.\n\nA short time previous to my coming to this country, and soon after my\nbeing installed as confessor in the Romish Church, I became intimately\nacquainted with a Popish family of great respectability. This family\nconsisted of a widowed father and two daughters and never in my life\nhave I met two more interesting young ladies than the daughters were.\nThese ladies lived not far from the church where I officiated, and were\nfrequently in the habit of going to mass to my church, and calling upon\nme when service was over, to take breakfast with them at their father's\nhouse. This custom of having young ladies call upon Roman Catholic\nclergymen to accompany them home to breakfast after mass is over, is\nvery prevalent in Europe, among the most fashionable members of the\nPopish Church; it is particularly so in the city of------, where I then\nofficiated, and where the melancholy circumstance which I am about to\nrelate took place. The father of the two young ladies to whom I have\nalluded, was a gentleman of about the age of fifty-five, distinguished\nfor his charity and benevolence. He was wealthy; and whenever any object\nwhich might advance the good of his fellow beings was suggested or\nproposed, he was among the first to advocate and support it. His\ninfluence and his money were never wanting, when either could promote\nthe happiness of his fellow beings. It may easily be imagined that the\ndaughters of such a gentleman were well educated and accomplished.\nIt may also be supposed that their home, being a home of plenty and\nabundance, was one of peace, happiness, charity, and domestic love. It\nwas truly so, when I had the honor of first knowing the family. But the\nserpent found its way into this little garden of happiness.\n\nIn less than two months after my first visit to this family, at their\npeaceful and hospitable breakfast table, I observed the chair which had\nbeen usually occupied by the elder of the two sisters, occupied by the\nyounger, and that of the latter vacant I inquired the cause, and was\ninformed by the father that he had just accompanied her to the coach\nwhich left that morning for Dublin, and that she went on a visit to the\nsister of the Rev. B. K. I, of course, made no further observations,\nbut I suspected that something was wrong; I also knew full well, that\nwhatever the cause was, I should learn the particulars of it in my\ncapacity as confessor. As time advanced, I made the usual inquiries for\nthis young lady, who was then only about eighteen years old. The\nanswers were such as any one acquainted with the world might expect,\nand entirely satisfactory to all who knew nothing of the iniquitous\npractices encouraged and fostered in the Romish confessional.\n\nI will here pass over an interval of about three months. A detail of\nthe private occurrences in any particular family can have no general\ninterest. At or about the expiration of that period, the younger sister\ncomplained of indisposition, and it was found necessary to send her also\non a visit to Dublin.\n\nNow the whole truth broke upon me at once. I knew there was foul play\nsomewhere, and soon enough did the fact in all its particulars come to\nmy ear. It seems that both the daughters of whom I have spoken, went to\na school attached to the Ursuline Nunnery in the city of--------. The\nconfessor, whose duty it was to hear the confessions of the pupils of\nthis institution, was one Rev. Mr. B. K., a friar of the Franciscan\norder, who, as soon as his plans were properly laid, and circumstances\nrendered matters ripe for execution, seduced the elder lady; and finding\nthat the fact could no longer be concealed, arranged matters with a\nfriend in Dublin, so that the victim of his iniquity might be concealed\nand privately supplied with all the usual attendants which her situation\nrequired.\n\nShe was confined at the house of his friend, and her illicit offspring\ngiven to the managers of the Foundling Hospital in Dublin.\n\nBut the most horrible part of the story remains yet to be told. No\nsooner was this elder lady provided for, than this incarnate demon,\nB. K., commenced the seduction of the younger lady. He succeeded, and\nruined her, too. But there was no difficulty in providing for them; both\nbecame nuns. And here, you people of Massachusetts in particular, be it\nknown to you, fathers and mothers, who have sent your daughters to be\neducated in the Ursuline Convent, Charlestown, Massachusetts--I mean\nthat which you felt it your duty to pull down, a few years ago, and\nwhich was situated upon Mount Benedict--that both these nuns held high\nstations in the convent which you pulled down, and that at the very\nperiod of its destruction. Pools, \"dolts, double dolts,\" as the Jesuit\nRodin calls all who contribute to the support of Popish nunneries, are\nyou not ashamed of yourselves? Are females who have been the prostitutes\nof priests in foreign countries, and who in nine cases out of ten\ncontinue to be so here, the only teachers competent to instruct your\ndaughters? Are there no American ladies--no Protestant ladies--capable\nof teaching your children? Must American parents go to Europe, and\ntake from the 546 purlieus of Popish convents, instructors for their\nchildren? A poor compliment to American Protestant ladies, and a sad\ncommentary it is upon the total ignorance of American theologians\nrespecting Popish morals in Europe.\n\nHere we have a case in point This is not an old lie, as Popish priests\nand their supporters call all accusations against them; it is a new one,\nif a lie at all; it is one which I know myself, and can prove. I\nknew these nuns personally, before they came to this country. I was\nacquainted with them before they became nuns. I saw them in the convent\nat Mount Benedict. They were great favorites of Bishop Fenwick.\n\nThey were spoken of by some of the first families in the city of\nBoston, as models of piety; and to my own knowledge, two or three\nyoung ladies--and these the daughters of New England Protestants--were\ncounselled by their mothers to take particular notice of the manners of\nthose two nuns in particular, and imitate them, as nearly as possible.\nNor can any one be surprised or scandalized, if I acknowledge my\nweakness in stating that I could not resist an involuntary impulse to\nlaugh at them \"in my sleeve.\" Does Bishop Fenwick desire the names of\nthese two nuns? It is true, they might be Magdalens, but \"_credat Judeas\nApella, sed non ego_.\"\n\nWhen these things are permitted in the very centre of New England--when\nthey are permitted to exist in the enlightened city of Boston--the\ncapitol of a State whose people, as a body, I may venture to say,\nare not equalled in the world, for intelligence and general\ninformation--what can save the people of the United States from\ncorruption, and from gradually declining into its very depth? When the\nimpure waters of Popery are permitted to flow into our lakes and fresh\nstreams, must not all be contaminated, in time? Must not the atmosphere\nof our freedom be impregnated with immorality, disease, and final death?\nWhat, under these circumstances, can save us? God alone may do it\nHe alone can do it, and he will do it; but we must ask him for his\ninterposition; we must humbly pray that he would save us, for he has\npromised us nothing without asking for it And so sure as we ask him in\na proper spirit, we shall receive. He has himself made us this\npromise--the word of the Great I AM is pledged--He will redeem it.\n\nIt is with great reluctance that I dwell any longer on these impure\nsubjects, but a sense of duty compels me to do so. It is useless to\ndo otherwise; \"the impurities of Popery must be known;\" they have been\ncomparatively hidden in this country--they have been long buried in the\n_cells, pits, and caves_, of the Romish Church--they must be dug up,\neven if the whole superstructure of the nation should be undermined\nthereby; for what is a nation without morals? Who, if he had a house\npartly built, and only then discovered that the foundation was not a\nsecure one,--who, I say, under these circumstances, would not arrest the\nprogress of the workmen thereon, and order them to undo what they had\nalready done? No prudent man would hesitate in such a case, even at the\nexpense of levelling to the ground what he had already accomplished.\nAnd why should a nation act differently from an individual, in many\ncircumstances, at least?\n\nAn eminent philosopher of olden times exclaimed, and not without much\nindignation, \"_Quid leges sine moribus?_\" and might we not say with\nequal propriety, _Quid republica sine moribus?_ If our Republic, or any\npart of it, is based upon a hollow or unsafe foundation, or if there\nbe any part of that foundation defective, or likely to give way, to\nthe imminent danger of the superstructure, should not that defect be\nentirely removed? Undoubtedly; prudence and economy would require it;\nand when worldly prudence and all temporal concerns require such a\ncourse, should not the great moral interests of the country require it\nat the hands of the people as a duty, to lay their foundation on nothing\nbut what is sound, and to allow no substance to be introduced into any\nportion of the superstructure, which may be in any way defective, or in\nany way endanger its permanency?\n\nPopery now seems to form an ingredient, if not a part of our national\nstructure of morals, and until that rotten and defective part is\nremoved, the superstructure can never be raised with safety to its\nproper and legitimate height. This is the only consideration which\ninduces me to dwell longer, or even so long as I have done, upon the\nobscene subject of auricular confession. All I have said on the subject\nmight have been comprised within a more narrow space than I have\nallotted to it, and thus many disgusting sights might have been hidden\nfrom the eye of the reader. There are some, I am aware, who wish to hear\nthe truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth; but even among\nthose, I find many who, though they admit the truth of my statements,\nstill contend that the cases I have stated are isolated, and endeavor\nto show that I draw general conclusions from particular premises. Even\nPopish priests admit--because they cannot do otherwise--that many of my\nstatements cannot be questioned, but contend that though these may be\ntrue, it does not follow that Popish priests or nuns can, as a body, be\naccused of immorality. \"_A particalari ad generate non valit conclusion_\"\nsay these profound logicians. But suppose I admit that thus far they are\nright, and that there are exceptions to the sweeping accusations which I\nhave made against them as a body; does this prove any thing for them?\nIs the general rule or general principle to be denied because there are\nexceptions to either? Surely not; were there a thousand exceptions to\na general rule; were there a million of exceptions, to one single and\ngeneral principle, it would not falsify the rule itself, or invalidate\nthe principle. Papists are doing much to justify their doctrines. That\nunfortunate Brownson, to whom I have alluded heretofore, is recognized\nby them as their apostle and the expounder of their faith in the United\nStates; but the crowd of words which he uses in his discourses and\nlectures, in justification of Popery and on the morality of its priests\nand nuns, is too thick and too dense for a single idea, much less a\nsingle fact, to be dragged from it, and it so happens that he does\nmore harm than good. Nor can it be otherwise; a net woven too thick\nis useless to the fishermen; a tree with too many leaves and blossoms\nseldom has any fruit, and is unproductive to the husbandman; so it is\nwith the lectures and teachings of Papists and their apostle. They are\nmade up of words meaning nothing, proving nothing, and in reality aiming\nat nothing but deception, which ultimately must fail, for we are told\nupon high authority, and every man's experience adds force to the\nsaying, \"truth must prevail.\"\n\nIt is therefore my duty to state facts generally true, no matter how\nnumerous the exceptions may be. I therefore hesitate not to reiterate\nthe general charge, that Popish priests and nuns are corrupt and immoral\nalmost beyond conception.\n\nI must ask the reader's indulgence once more. He will, I trust, not\nfeel fatigued or impatient, while I relate to him another instance of\nimmorality perpetrated by a Popish priest, and sanctioned, at least, by\nthree of the most respectable Popish bishops in the United States,\nand by the whole body of an order of nuns in the United States, called\n_sisters of charity_. The case which I am about to relate is one which\nI give not upon hearsay, nor even upon the positive testimony of others;\nit is one within my own knowledge; I know the parties to this whole\ntransaction; I have known them for years back; they are now living, and\nif Bishop Hughes or Fenwick has the least curiosity upon the subject, I\nwill furnish him with the names of the principal actors in this tragedy.\n\nWould that I could write so that what I write should become visible to\nthe eye, and musical to the ear! O! that I could only leave behind me\na correct picture of what I have known of Popery! Could I scatter it\nbefore me, dash it around me, and fling it behind me--would Protestants\naid me, so as to place it where no one could miss seeing it--Americans\nwould shrink from it as they would from a frozen corpse.\n\nBut as I cannot do all that I should wish to do, and as Americans seem\nso wrapped up in their present wants as to care but little for their\nposterity, I must only do what I can under existing circumstances, and\nleave the event in the hands of Providence.\n\nSoon after my arrival in Philadelphia, and just about the time that\nPapists disapproved of my endeavors to circulate the Bible among the\npoor, a Roman Catholic priest of the name of O. S. called on me,\nand showed me letters of recommendation which he had from Bishop T.\nof--------, Ireland, and countersigned by the Roman. Catholic Bishop of\nNew York, to Bishop England, of South Carolina, He stated to me that\nhe was in want of money and clothing, and asked me to lend him fifty\ndollars and pay his passage to Charleston, South Carolina, assuring me\nthat he would immediately remit me any amount that I might expend on his\naccount, by the first opportunity. I took him with me to my tailor's and\ngave him an order for such clothes as he might want, amounting, cloak\nand all, to one hundred and ten dollars. From that I took him down to\none of the packets which then ran betwixt Philadelphia and Charleston,\nand commanded, I think, by Captain Crofts; paid fifty dollars for his\npassage, and bespoke the kind attentions of the worthy Captain, who,\nI understood afterwards, left nothing undone to render the voyage as\ncomfortable as possible. He arrived in Charleston in due time, and was\nwell received by Bishop England, who, to do him justice, possessed many\nof the kindest feelings of the human heart, and exhibited through life\none of the strangest mixtures of religion and infidelity, of charity and\nbigotry, of republicanism and toryism, of Christianity and idolatry,\nand of humility and intolerance, that perhaps ever existed in the Popish\nChurch in this country. But, \"_nihil de mortuis nisi bonum_\" he and I\nhave had some severe sparring at each other; we were friends in\nprivate, but enemies in public; he knew I was right, but was afraid to\nacknowledge it; he wished me well, but dared not avow it; he loved his\nmitre, but I despised it, and though I would cherish the head that wore\nit, I would kick in the dust the Popish gewgaw itself. But, \"_adrem_\"\nBishop England, soon after the arrival of the priest O. S., advised him\nto enter on a _retreat_, in order to prepare himself for the mission\non which he was about to send him. He did so; and after a due course\nof instruction upon the arduous and delicate duties of a confessor, he\nappointed him parish priest of--------, in one of the Stales over which\nhe, as he modestly termed it, had spiritual jurisdiction.\n\nThere lived in the parish to which this now Rev. confessor was\nappointed, a gentleman of respectability and wealth. Bishop England\nsupplied this new missionary with strong letters of introduction to\nthis gentleman, advising him to place his children under his charge, and\nassuring him that they should be brought up in the fear of God and love\nof religion. The family was large,--there were several daughters, some\npartly grown up, and others quite young. Those alone who know the joyous\nand happy life of a planter's family, in good circumstances, can form\nany adequate idea of the bliss and happiness that reigned among these\nchildren.\n\n------ MISSING PAGES ---- 553-554 ------\n\nHis conscience would not permit him to call upon me. I had just\nrenounced the Pope of Rome as the beast spoken of in the scriptures. I\nwas a heretic, and no good Popish Christian was permitted even to pay\nme my just debts. He passed on, and what, think you, Americans, were\nthe fruits of his mission? He prevailed upon the eldest daughter of the\nrespectable gentleman to whom he was introduced, to go to confession to\nhim, and the next I heard of him was, that he had been seen passing\nat full speed, in a light sulky, through the village where I kept my\noffice; and what, think you, was the cause of this speed? what drove him\nin such haste from his parochial residence? Do you not know reader? can\nyou not anticipate? Has not the insight which I have given you into\nthe immorality of Popish priests, already suggested to you that this\nindividual was a fugitive from some crime, and that its avenger was in\npursuit of him? It was so, reader.\n\n[ILLUSTRATION: The Father in pursuit of the Priest p566]\n\nThis Reverend Popish wretch seduced the eldest daughter of his\nbenefactor, and the father, becoming aware of the fact, armed himself\nwith a case of pistols and determined to shoot the seducer. But there\nwas in the house a good Catholic servant, who advised the seducer to\nfly. He did so, in the manner I have stated, with the insulted father in\nfull pursuit of him; but the fugitive was in time to take steam and thus\neluded his pursuer. He soon arrived in Charleston, the Right Reverend\nBishop understood his case, advised him to go to _confession, absolved\nhim from his sin_, and having washed him white and immaculate as\na snow-drop, sent him on to New York to preach _morality_ to the\nGothamites, who enjoy the superlative beatitude of being under the\n_spiritual jurisdiction_ of Bishop Hughes.\n\nBut this is only the beginning of the tale, and distasteful as it\nmust be to you, Right Reverend guardians of the morality of the Popish\nChurch, you must sit still awhile. I am well aware of your impatience:\nyou dislike control of any kind; so do all people of rude manners,\nnarrow intellects, and sour tempers, such as all Popish bishops, with\nwhom I have been acquainted, possess. One single happy recollection of\nthe past, a single grateful feeling, has never elevated nor sweetened\nthe life of a Popish bishop, as far as I have ever known; and it is\nperhaps requiring too much of you, my beloved brethren,--brethren you\nknow we are, in spite of what heretics can do,--to ask you to sit down\npatiently and hear me out You will have to do it though, and I trust it\nmay be for your benefit hereafter.\n\nAs soon as your erring brother disgraced and debauched the daughter\nof an American citizen, and obtained remission for so doing from his\nghostly father, in the confessional, his victim, after a little time,\nhaving given birth to a fine boy, goes to confession herself and sends\nher child of sin to the Sisters of Charity residing in --------, to be\ntaken care of as '_nullius filius!_.' As soon as this child was able to\nwalk, a Roman Catholic lady, who knew the whole transaction, adopted\nthe child as her own; and states now, as she has done all along, to her\nacquaintances, that it was a poor unknown orphan whom she found in the\nstreets, without father or mother to claim it. But the very gist of the\nstory is to come yet. The real mother of the child soon after removed to\nthe city of--------, told the whole transaction in _confession_, to the\nRoman Catholic Bishop of--------, who, knowing that she had a handsome\nproperty, introduced her to a highly respectable Protestant gentleman,\nwho soon after married her. Nor is this all the kind Bishop has done.\nHe soon after introduced to this gentleman the sister of charity who\nhad provided for the illicit offspring of this priest, concealing its\nparentage and representing it as having no father nor mother living.\nThe gentleman was pleased with the boy,' and the holy Bishop finally\nprevailed upon him and his wife to adopt the child as their own. Here\nis a pretty specimen of Jesuitism! The boy is the child of a priest,\nthe wife is the mother of the child, and the husband is the dupe of the\nBishop, adopting as his own child that of a priest by his _own_ wife.\nHere is a pretty specimen of a Jesuit web. Would that I had the talent\nof a Eugene Sue to unravel it and stretch it from one end of this\ncountry to the other. Look at the affair yourselves, Americans; examine\nit in all its atrocious bearings, from beginning to end, and say if\nyou have ever heard or read of a more brutal outrage upon morality\nand domestic happiness. A Popish bishop sends one of his priests on a\nmission, with the ostensible view of converting American citizens from\nthe evil of their ways, and the errors of their Protestant doctrines.\nAmericans receive him hospitably; he selects from among them one of\ntheir most fascinating daughters; seduces her in the _confessional_,\nthe _Infallible Church_ makes provision for the illicit offspring of\nthe seduction; the crime and the consequence are both concealed by\nthe bishop. He induces a respectable man to marry this prostitute, and\ncontrives, by the secret machinery of Popery, to dupe him still farther,\nby prevailing on him to adopt the offspring of his prostituted wife as\nhis own son; and the whole of this is effected, at least so far as the\nadoption of the child is concerned, through the instrumentality of a\n_sister of charity_ now living and residing in the city of--------.\nThe mother knew at the time, that the child whom her deceived husband\nadopted as a destitute orphan was her own. The husband is now living, a\nworthy and respectable man, and the scoundrel priest, who brought sorrow\ninto the house of his father-in-law and sent him prematurely to his\ngrave, has been frequently a guest at his table.\n\nDo Bishops Hughes and Fenwick desire the names of the parties to this\ntragic and villanous outrage upon American credulity? They are known to\nme personally. The seduction took place about eighteen years ago, and\nthe Reverend Popish seducer has been, not long since, and perhaps is\nnow, located somewhere in the vicinity of Worcester, Mass.\n\n_Dolts, double dolts_, as the Jesuit Rodin, of Eugene Sue notoriety,\nobserved of all who are the dupes of Papists,--how long will you permit\nyourselves to be the dupes of Popish priests and Jesuits? You are now\nbuilding a college--aye, a _Jesuit college_--in the very centre of New\nEngland,--Worcester, Mass. You do not wish, I presume, that the race\nof Jesuits should be extinct amongst you; and if you cannot obtain them\notherwise than by importation, you are naturally fearful that such may\nbe the case; hence it is, perhaps, that you are liberally contributing\nyour money to build colleges for the education of priests, and schools\nfor _sisters of Charity_. Your great anxiety for encouraging domestic\nmanufactures might have influenced you in this respect, and you may rest\nassured--or even take my word for it--that as long as you have Popish\ncolleges and Popish nunneries side by side, your semi-annual dividends\nof Jesuits and nuns, amongst the States of the Union, will be entirely\nsatisfactory to you. But, to be serious, if Popery be studied as it\nshould be by Americans, it will prove a useful lesson to the rising\ngeneration.\n\nFor twenty years this country has been more imposed upon than any other,\nfor the same length of time, by Popish priestcraft; so much so that the\npeople are now become accustomed to the repetition of their enormous\nfrauds, and are no longer surprised at them. I confess that it is\nthe gross impostures which I saw practised upon Americans, that first\nprompted me to expose them. I have tried, and am now trying, to give\nsome rational account of the extraordinary phemomenon that Popery should\npredominate among a people almost proverbial for their intelligence and\ninquiring disposition. I thought, and do now think, that nothing can\nbe more acceptable and valuable to Americans, than a well-authenticated\nstatement of some of the practices adopted by Papists to impose upon the\nProtestants of this country; nor did I see any other manner of removing\nthe almost national insanity of our citizens, in relation to the Romish\nChurch, than by laying before them facts and acts, to many of which I\nhave been myself an eye-witness. How American Protestants could continue\nfor any length of time--even for a month or week--ignorant of the\nschemes of the Church of Rome, or her de* signs for the overthrow of\nthis republic, has often been to me a matter of no little surprise; it\ncan only be accounted for by a supposition almost as extravagant,\nviz., that Popery has never been properly studied by Americans. I have\nproposed all along, and I now repeat the proposal to Americans, to\naccompany me in the study of Popery. If the Romish Church be studied as\nit ought to be, by the young and the old of our citizens, it will prove\na useful lesson to the present and coming generations,--but that lesson\nmust be studied well. It must not be run over carelessly; its elements\nmust be examined in order to understand the whole machinery of Popery;\nthe whole plan of it must be remodelled; and in order to effect this,\nit must be taken to pieces, and every piece carefully and separately\nexamined. It has been long hidden from the public eye; it has been along\ntime considered a treasure exclusively belonging to the Popish priests.\nThey have buried it for safe keeping in the dark and dreary vaults of\ncorrupt Rome. These vaults must be opened, the gilded columns with which\nthey are surrounded must be torn down, and all must be laid bare to\nthe naked eye. The divine laws or systems of morality, intended for the\ngovernment of man, should be always open to his inspection, and nothing\nshort of the steady effort of our people can effect this or rescue\nourselves or our country from the evils with which we are now threatened\nby the machinations of the Popish Church. The crimes and immoralities of\nRomish priests have long been crying to heaven for vengeance; they now\ncry for it from every quarter of the globe. I have said that they have\nbeen crying for vengeance, for centuries back. I have proved the fact\nto the satisfaction of any man who is not wilfully blind to truth. But\nI shall not rest here; I will give you other proofs. Cardinal Campaggio,\nwho was sent to England to arrange the divorce of Queen Catharine,\ninforms us--every English historian knows this fact--\"that a priest, who\nmarries, commits a greater sin than if he kept many concubines.\" Here\nis a specimen of pure Popish morality, promulgated by a Cardinal, a man\nnext in office to the Pope himself with the full sanction of the said\nPope, and the whole conclave of Cardinals of which he was a member;\nand yet the religion of this man, and that of Bishop Hughes, and Bishop\nFenwick, is the very religion which Americans are now endeavoring to\nintroduce into this country, and fasten upon the souls and consciences\nof our people.\n\nLet us now see what St Bernard says,--and here I entreat the reader,\nto keep in mind the fact, that St Bernard lived between the sixth and\nsixteenth centuries; that very time, at which the Popish Church in the\nUnited States tells us, through its apostle Brownson, that it displayed\na remarkable degree of activity. St Bernard lived in the twelfth\ncentury, and as Bishop Hughes, Bishop Fenwick, and their mouthpiece, the\ninfidel Brownson, inform us, was one of the greatest and best men of the\nage. There was no appeal, in his day, from the opinion of St. Bernard;\nhe was looked up to by the whole Romish Church, as a model for the\nimitation of the Romish clergy, and it is not at all likely that he\nwould calumniate, traduce, or do any injustice to a body of men of which\nhe was himself a member. What does St Bernard say of the priests of his\nday? Hear it, Americans! hear it, you sympathisers! you who can scarcely\nread my accusations against the priests of the United States. Listen!\nall you who bow the knee, and kiss the hands, the rings, the robes and\nthe other gewgaws worn by these angels, Hughes and Fen wick; listen! all\nof you, to what St. Bernard says. \"Priests commit such acts of turpitude\nin secret as it would be scandalous to express.\" Chamancis, a Romish\npriest and an orthodox writer, well known to Bishops Hughes and\nFenwick--if they know any thing besides political intriguing--declares,\nand calls the attention of his readers to the fact, that the _adultery,\nimpiety, and obscenity of priests_ [Romish] is beyond description, \"They\ncrowd,\" says he, \"into houses of ill fame; in gambling and in dancing,\nthey are seen to pass from the company of infamous women, from the altar\nto the mass. To veil a woman in these convents,\" continues Chamancis,\n\"is synonymous with prostituting her,_\" This distinguished writer, and\nvirtuous reprover of the Popish priesthood, died about the middle of the\nfourteenth century, just at the period when, according to Popish writers\nin the United States, Popery flourished in all its glory. Mezerey, a\nFrench historian, and as good authority as Papists can desire, he being\na Papist himself, assures us, that before the English Reformation, the\nwhole body of the Romish priesthood were fornicators_.\n\nWhat say the sympathisers of Popery to this? Has Mezerey told an old\nlie? Has Chamancis told an old lie in telling us that it was a common\npractice in Popish countries, for Catholic bishops and priests to pass\nfrom houses of ill fame, and from the company of infamous women, to the\naltar and to the mass.\n\nThis will not be believed in the United States. \"There is not a word of\ntruth in it,\" says the professed infidel. \"I will not believe a word of\nit,\" says the busy Puseyite, Prude; \"it cannot be that the dear priests\nwould be guilty of such things.\" I will frankly confess that it is\ndifficult to believe statements so entirely abhorrent to human nature as\nthose given by Popish priests against their own brethren, and I will\nnot deny, that it took me a long time, before I could yield more than\na reluctant assent to many of them; nor did I ever fully give them\nsanction until I had made a personal examination into their truth. But,\nnow that I have made that examination, I declare most solemnly, upon the\nhonor of a man, that, as Chamancis expresses it, it is a common practice\nfor priests, in all the Roman Catholic countries in which I have been,\nto go direct from houses of ill fame to the altar and to the mass. This\nI have seen and witnessed myself.\n\nBut it will be asked, \"how do you know? you must have been in those\nplaces yourself.\" I plead guilty to the charge, if charge the enemy\nof morality will make of it. While in the cities of Mexico and Havana,\nabout two years ago, at considerable personal expense, I visited many\nof the dens frequented by Popish priests, especially in, the city of\nMexico. 1 went there for the benefit and better information of my fellow\nbeings. I did not then, neither do I now, accuse myself of any violation\nof the first principles of morality; I believe, on the contrary, that\nI am entitled to some degree of commendation from my Protestant fellow\ncitizens, for the efforts which I have made, in Mexico and Havana, to\nascertain the truth or falsehood of those complaints which we daily hear\nagainst the immoralities of Popish bishops, priests, and nuns. How many\nhave we seen plunging themselves into the midst of disease, contagion,\nand death, for the good of their fellow beings, and for the sole purpose\nof advancing the science of medicine! and is nothing to be done, or\nshall nothing be done for the science of morals? Must we stand and fold\nour arms while the malaria of Popery is stalking all over our land,\ncarrying death and disease with it wherever it goes? Paralyzed be that\narm which would fold itself in such a case!\n\nI have often seen men who were ornaments to society, who were the pride,\nthe comfort, and perhaps the sole support of their wives and children,\nwhom they loved and almost adored, plunging themselves into the midst of\nyellow fever, or perhaps Asiatic Cholera, for the benefit of mankind\nand almost at the certain peril of their own lives; and shall a man who\nloves religion and the cause of morals, do nothing to exalt, to glorify\nthe great cause of salvation? shall he not risk something, to confirm\nthe statements which are crowding upon us day after day, in relation to\nthe immorality of Popish priests?\n\nDuring my residence in Mexico, the following circumstance occurred, to\nmy own knowledge: an English gentleman, then, and I believe now residing\nin Mexico, met me by appointment, at my hotel, soon after dusk in the\nevening. The object of his calling upon me was to comply with a request,\nwhich I had previously made, that he would accompany me to one of the\nmost fashionable houses of ill fame and gambling, where he knew the\nhigher orders and dignitaries of the Roman Catholic Church were in the\nhabit of visiting, and making assignations, with the wives and daughters\nof the members of their respective congregations. He stated that an\nentrance to the house where he was going to carry me would cost me a\ndoubloon, and that if I wished to become thoroughly acquainted with the\nmysteries of the place and obtain access to it in future, I should spend\ntwo or three more doubloons at the game of Monte, a favorite game of\npriests and women of loose habits in Mexico. Chamancis immediately\noccurred to me; I recollected the account which he had given of the\npriests of the Romish Church. Here was an opportunity of testing the\naccuracy of his statements; here was a chance of knowing, from the\ntestimony of my own senses, whether Popish priests were or were not\nthe incarnate demons which he and others represented them to be; and\nI determined to avail myself of an opportunity which might never again\noccur. Accordingly I accompanied my friend, and, by his advice, took\nnotes of the transactions of that evening of my life. It will not be\nexpected, I presume, that I should give here, a transcript of those\nnotes; it would be improper to do so; delicacy forbids it; it probably\nmight do more harm than good. There is such a thing as driving a screw\ntoo far; it may be forced so as to split the timber it was designed to\nsecure. I shall avoid this, if possible, but there is a circumstance\nwhich it is my duty to mention, and which shows in a clearer light\nthan any other I could adduce, the utter degradation, and worse than\nidolatry, of those unfortunate beings who are strictly educated in the\npractices of Popery, but particularly in Popish confession.\n\nLet the reader fancy to himself one of the most splendid residences in\nthe city of Mexico; let him further place himself in imagination in a\ngorgeously furnished suit of rooms, occupied by a number of the most\nlascivious-looking females, most of them wearing veils. Let him further\nfancy a Romish priest entering those rooms, and one of those women\nadvancing to meet him, and then prostrating herself on her knees to ask\nhis blessing and kiss the hem of his garment Let him further fancy this\ndebased wretch of a priest imparting his blessing to this daughter\nof sin and error, and he will form a better idea of the immorality of\nPopish priests, and the incalculable evils which, under the mask of\nsanctity, they are capable of doing, than it is in my power to give him.\nLet the reader, if he will, fill up the space between the entrance\nof this solemn-looking villain into the synagogue of Satan, and his\ndeparture from it, and then say whether Chamancis exaggerated the\nenormities of those sins and hidden crimes committed and sanctioned by\nPopish priests. I kept my eye upon one of those priests, from the moment\nhe entered this house of ill fame until twelve o'clock at night. At the\nmoment the clock struck twelve, he and I were drinking champagne, and\nI sat with him from that until four o'clock in the morning, when I\naccompanied him to mass. He had no idea of my being a Protestant; and\nbelieving me to be a Roman Catholic, all restraint was laid aside, and\nthus I enjoyed the sorrowful pleasure, if I may so say, of witnessing\nPopery in \"_puris naturalibus_.\" Revolting and repugnant as the scene\nwhich I witnessed appeared to me, there was still something in it\nwhich struck at my heart a heavier blow than that which met my eye.\nIgnorance--Popish ignorance--was at the bottom of all this. What but\nignorance--ignorance of her rights--of nature's rights--ignorance of\nall that tends to elevate nature, could induce those women to go and\nprostrate themselves before a common partner in their guilt, and ask his\nblessing? Oh! the sceptre which Popish ignorance sways over mankind\nis an iron sceptre. Popery sways it over some of the finest regions\ninhabited by man. Witness-Mexico. Under its icy influence there can\narise no generous, no daring spirit of adventure in the cause of God;\nsubjection and fear soon become the predominant passions of humanity;\nall the noble faculties of man are chilled and frozen. Robe ignorance in\npurple, as it is in the Romish Church, and everything must wither before\nits march; there can be no contemplative delights or pleasures where\nPopery rules. There can be nothing pure, nothing intellectual, to raise\nman from the mire of sensuality to any degree of excellence, dignity, or\nhonor; all must be reduced to that state in which we now find the people\nand priests in Mexico. Without knowledge or the means of obtaining\nit, the mind of man necessarily falls into a state of weakness and\nimbecility. Education, and that the education of the Bible, is to the\nmind of man what food is to the body. Have you ever observed, reader,\nthat a mind destitute of a Bible education invariably acquires a sort of\nlow cunning? It is intent upon no higher purpose than something mean and\nselfish. Is it not so in the whole population of Mexico? and I ask the\ncandid historian if it is not so in every country where Popery prevails?\n\nA degradation of the understanding, and an ignorance like that which\nwe now see in Mexico, among the poor Irish, and among the poor of all\nCatholic countries, is in all cases accompanied by what is worse than\nignorance, if possible,--great wickedness and depravity of heart. They\nare not able in Mexico, or in those other countries under Popish sway,\nto occupy themselves in the energies of thought, in honorable action,\nin refined manners and conversation, in trade, in learning, in national\nimprovements, in navigation, manufactures, canals, and railroads.\nNo; the very reverse is the fact I appeal to history to sustain the\nassertion. The dupes of Popery in Mexico, Spain, Ireland, Italy, and\nelsewhere, are engaged in mischievous trifles, wanton habits, and\nwickedness, which render them the most useless and troublesome citizens\nin the whole circle of society.\n\nFallen indeed they are, from what they ought to be. Who can\nrecognize--notwithstanding their external configuration--in the Papists\nof the present day, their lineal descent from the Egyptians, Grecians,\nRomans, and Maletians,--the glory of their times, the instructors of the\nworld, and the benefactors of humanity. God stamped his image upon these\nmen. He stamped it upon every created being at the hour of his birth. He\ncreated man in little less than the angels; but the glorious image seems\nobliterated; the divine stamp seems to have been broken, and man can\nscarcely now be known by his resemblance to his Maker. Popery, that\ncurse of the earth, that scourge of mankind, that source of moral evil\nand fountain of death and sin, has been allowed to flow in upon us, and\nthus the great land-marks of humanity have been removed,--the divine\nstamp almost ceases to be visible.\n\nPopery has in its spirit something malignant, something hateful and\nhostile to all who profess a different creed. All acquainted with the\nhistory of Popery, can bear testimony to the fact that there is an\nundying hope and wish in the mind of all Catholics, that the Protestant\nreligion should be entirely extirpated. There may be, and there\nundoubtedly are, exceptions to this rule; so there are to every other\nrule; but there is no denying the general truth, that the extirpation of\nthe Protestant religion, and of the whole Protestant race, together\nwith the confiscation of Protestant property, and the overthrow of\nall Protestant governments, are among the fondest hopes of the Popish\nChurch. This cannot be disguised, at least from those who have been\neducated in the doctrines of the Popish church. Many Catholics there\nare, I admit, who would be glad, and who even endeavor to disguise\nthis from themselves; but they cannot do it; it is a truth as well\nestablished as any other; it is as plain as the sun in the heavens,\nhowever they may try to conceal it This, like other truths, will be\ndenied in the United States; but it is perfectly useless to conceal\nthe fact from our people. Watch the progress of Popery in a neighboring\ncountry; see the efforts which O'Connell is making in Ireland, under\nthe immediate sanction of the Pope of Rome, to overthrow the Protestant\ngovernment of England, and to reduce that country to obedience to the\ncourt of Rome; look at the proceedings of the bishops of the Romish\nChurch in this country, and ask yourselves what they are aiming at.\n\"Ireland for the Irish,\" says O'Connell, the Pope's agent at the other\nside of the Channel. \"Americans shant rule us,\" say the Pope's agents\nin the United States. Can language be plainer than this? Can treason be\nexpressed in stronger or more emphatic language? O'Connell means Ireland\nfor the Pope. Bishop Hughes of New York, and the other Popish agents in\nthis country, clearly mean, and wish to be understood so--the United\nStates for the Pope. I ask any man whether the language of O'Connell\nand the Pope's agents in this country, is even susceptible of any\nother interpretation? What meaning can we attach to the words of Bishop\nHughes, who is the Pope's organ in the Empire State of New York, except\nthat which is plain and obvious--Americans shant rule us. Who, then,\ndoes this Popish agent want to rule them? Obviously the Pope of Rome. I\ncan scarcely suppose him or his brother bishops subject to such lunacy\nas to fancy for a moment that he could bring this great nation into\nsubjection to the Pope of Rome; but must we not admit, at the same\ntime, that his language, and the entire political course of his Popish\nbrethren, during the last year or two, have looked very much like it.\nHave not Papists all over the world, during the last few years, assumed\na more daring and menacing attitude? Have not their language\nand measures, even in this country, become more turbulent and\ninsurrectional? Let Americans ponder well upon this. It is not long\nsince O'Connell, the Pope's mouth-piece for this country, as well as\nIreland, addressed the deluded Irish in the following language; and\nremember, Americans, that I tell you Bishop Hughes of New York, and\nevery other Popish bishop in the United States, will soon make use of\nsimilar words to their respective flocks in this country: \"Force and\nviolence are not to be used. If the time for using them were to come,\nthere is one here will tell you that the time has come.\" You will also\nrecollect, Americans, that I tell you that they will receive for answer\nthat which the Pope's agent received in Ireland--\"we will follow\"\nPopish bishops and priests will preach peace to their people, but let\nnot Americans forget that they have confessionals, where they can infuse\ninto their minds the poison of rebellion and treason. When a Popish\nbishop preaches peace, he means it not; he means war to the knife with\nheretics and heresy. Robespierre, shortly before the French Revolution,\ndelivered a series of lectures against capital punishment; and sooner\nshould I trust him for sincerity, than I would a Popish priest when he\ncries peace with heretics. That blood-thirsty and sanguinary villain,\nRobespierre, exhorted his followers not to confiscate the property of\nthose who might be found guilty of opposition to the people; but much\nsafer should I consider the property or estate of him who incurred the\ndispleasure of Robespierre, than I should that of an American Protestant\ncitizen who fell into the hands of the Pope's agent and executioner in\nthe United States.\n\nMurat, a character well known to the readers of the history of the\nFrench Revolution, lectured loudly against capital punishment; but what\nwas his conduct? He consigned more to the guillotine than any other man\nin France. His hands were stained with blood; but bloody as his hands\nwere, and thirsty for more blood as his heart was, much sooner would\nI have trusted myself to him, and much safer should a Protestant feel\nhimself in such hands, than in those of a Popish bishop or priest. But\nit is not my present purpose to expatiate upon the cruelties of Popery;\nI will only state incidentally that the Protestant citizens of this\ncountry have much to fear from the influx of Papists amongst them, not\nonly in a moral, but a political point of view. Nearly the whole body\nof Irish Roman Catholics have resolved to migrate to this country. They\nwill do so, if that treacherous disturber of their peace and happiness,\nDaniel O'Connell, does not succeed in overthrowing the Protestant\ngovernment in England. Extensive preparations are already being made in\nthis country for their reception, together with their leader, if they\ncan effect his escape from the gallows. The Catholic population of\nIreland is at present 6,620,000. This immense body are united, to a\nman, in that abominable belief. _Heretici destraindi sunt_. This is a\nfundamental article of Popish faith.\n\nNo faith is to be kept with heretics. It is firmly believed by the\nsix millions and upward of Irish Roman Catholics, that the Pope is the\nlawful head of their church. Disguise this as they may, entangle it as\nthey can, in Popish sophistry, the fact is not the less true. Assuming\nit to be so, Americans can easily fancy the inevitable danger of\nadmitting Catholics among them without strong and safe restrictions.\n\nMany there are, and those, too, men of great moral worth, who do not\ndeem it necessary or proper to impose any restrictions whatever on the\nadmission of Papists amongst us; they seem to think, and maintain their\nopinion with some show of reason, that Popery may now, as in former\ntimes, prove advantageous to society. These philanthropists evidently\nmistake Popery for Christianity. I have had occasionally many\ninteresting conversations with some of my fellow citizens, on the\nsubject, and have found that not a few of them have taken up the\nstrange idea, that because Popery, or rather Christianity, was greatly\ninstrumental in checking the first inroads of martial power and\nbarbarity upon civil society and Christian peace, its progress in this\ncountry, comparatively new, must be accompanied by similar blessings.\nPapists frequently and tauntingly ask Protestants \"Where would be your\nBible, were it not for our Church?\" and let it be understood, that they\ninvariably mean, by our Church, the Church of Christ. Many of the\npoor followers of the Pope are sincere in asking this question; and so\ntotally ignorant are they of the very elements of Christianity, that\nthey really believe the Bible could not exist, if their church were\noverthrown.\n\nIt is questioned by statesmen, and by many political philosophers,\nwhether it is good policy to disturb thia delusion. European statesmen\ncontend that it is not, and it is much to be regretted that many of\nour American statesmen seem to incline to the same opinion. The French\nphilosophers--at least their political philosophers--seem all of one\nmind upon the subject, and contend, with great plausibility, that\nopinions which have stood the test of time for a given number of years,\nhad better be left undisturbed.\n\nMany have gone even so far as to say that \"ignorance is bliss;\" but this\nsentiment, and such philosophy, is too stale for the present generation.\nIt has had its day; Popery lent to it its powerful aid in the middle\nages, and bitter indeed were its fruits. The Popish church, too, has had\nits day; so had the Jewish church, and much is due to both for the good\nwhich they have done. Many in both those churches, and during their\nrespective influence, could see no farther than that \"ignorance was\nbliss\" to the savage hordes who first formed the nucleus of social and\ncivil society. Did they know in their savage state the extent of their\nanimal power, without mind to direct its force and capability of evil,\nthe consequences would be, not social order or distributive justice,\nbut universal chaos and general confusion. Ignorance may be said to\nhave been bliss to these unlettered hordes and savages; science and\nliterature, had they blazed upon them in their full noon brilliancy,\nwould not have been appreciated by them, they would only have dazzled and\nconfounded them still more. It would be dangerous to place within the\nreach of a thirsty savage a bowl of Prussic acid; he might drain to the\ndregs the fatal poison, and thus that which, in the hands of science,\nmight have been useful and legitimate, would become the instrument of\ndeath.\n\nIt would be unsafe to place a lighted torch in the hand of a sportive\nchild, and send him to play with it in a powder magazine; the\nconsequence might be death to him and to all around him. It was probably\nso at one time with science and learning. It was perhaps, in a great\nmeasure, bliss to be without them, until the human mind was prepared\nto make a proper use of both; it is so even in the animal and vegetable\nworld, and why should it not be so in the world of mind and thought?\nWho, for instance, would place on a horse a harness which youth and want\nof exercise did not enable it to carry? Who would sow wheat in a soil\nunprepared to receive it? No prudent man would do either; and certainly\nmuch credit is due to those early Christians, and even to Jews and\nPapists, for what they have done, and for anything they have effected\nin preparing the minds, especially those of northern barbarians, for the\nreception of the sciences, but particularly the glorious science of the\nChristian religion, with all its saving truths and holy principles.\n\nInfinite indeed are the obligations under which our ancestors have\nplaced us, in opening our minds and preparing them for the reception\nof so many moral and scientific truths; and if the Popish church has\ncontributed in any measure to this, I am as willing to thank her and\ngive her full credit for all she has done, as the most hypocritical\nJesuit that ever lived, or the most liberal Christian that practically\ndenies human 25 depravity. But are there no more truths to be evolved,\nether in moral or civil science, than those which have seen open to our\nview in the infancy of the Romish church, and for which I, for one, am\nwilling to give her credit in all that she has done? Were there not many\nsources opened, even in the days of the glories of the Jewish Church,\nand Romish Church, too, which lave been closed up, and must remain\nclosed forever? Was not the Jewish religion, when it first dawned\nupon that devoted people, like the early beams of some fresh morning,\nfragrant and cheering to the captive in his cell? But that religion has\npassed away. It was glorious in its time; but does it follow, did it\nfollow, or can it follow, that we should now embrace it? Must we hug the\nshadow, when the substance ceases to exist?\n\nThe outward form of the Romish church was once attractive and beautiful\nin the extreme; its gorgeous ceremonies, its high masses, the vestments\nof its priests, its music, its processions, its indulgences, its\nsemi-pagan, or rather worse than pagan, idolatries, had in them much\nthat was imposing, and well suited to their times; they were calculated\nto overawe northern barbarians,--then the enemies of Christianity and of\ncivil rights. The Church of Rome did much to prevent the few among these\nbarbarians from trampling to the dust the rights of their serfs, who\nconstituted a vast majority of the people, and for this I am as willing\nas any other to give her credit; but the Church of Rome has done her\nwork long since; her days of glory are numbered--her sun has long since\nset-not in triumph, but in blood--not in victory, but in death.\n\nBut Popery seems now to be gathering up her energies--at least she is\nendeavoring to do so--and looks upon this new country as a proper field\nto make the experiment; and there are serious doubts upon the minds of\nsome, whether she will not succeed, at least in a measure, in partially\nre-establishing her ancient power in this new country. She is disposed\nto struggle hard for it Already has the tocsin of war been sounded along\nher lines--her recruiting officers are abroad--she has her depots\nhere and there and everywhere--her paymasters and spiritual recruiting\nsergeants are to be met with at all points. Go to the woods of\nOregon,--travel along its meandering and fertilizing streams,--and you\nwill find them there, preaching freedom, liberty of conscience, and\nequal rights. Go into the swamps of Texas, and you find them there, too,\nadvocating civil rights, liberty of conscience, and perpetual slavery.\nIn Oregon and New England we find Papists shouting O'Connell, the Pope,\nand the abolition of slavery. In the Southern States of the Union and in\nTexas, they hurrah for slavery--slavery not for a day, for a year, or\na term of years--but forever! In the Northern States they brand the\nslaveholders with the epithets--robbers, slave-breeders, and stealers\nof men. In the South and in Texas, they denounce the Northerners as\nfanatics, pirates, and sons of pirates. How long Americans will tolerate\nthese wolves in sheep's clothing among them, it is difficult to say;\nbut one thing I fear is certain, that as long as they have oats, and\nAmericans countenance among them Barn-burners, But-Enderst Repealers,\nand Empire Clubs, under the popular name of Democrats, the evil to which\nI allude will continue.\n\nIt is said that Popery is on the increase in the United States, and\nthere are not wanting some arguments to prove it. But though 1 have\ntaken some pains, and perhaps as much as any other man in the country,\nto ascertain the truth of this assertion, I am still unconvinced on the\nsubject It is also asserted that Popery is on the increase all over the\nworld, and must continue to increase. Upon this, too, I have doubts; I\neven believe that the contrary is the fact.\n\nIf by the increase of Popery is meant the number of square miles, or the\nextent of country which they own or occupy, it may be said, with some\npropriety, that if Popery is not advancing, it is not retrograding;\nbut if by the increase of Popery is meant that its creed and idolatrous\ndoctrines are gaining ground, I flatly deny the assertion. As another\nexpresses it, a system that degrades can never advance. And that the\ndoctrines of the Church of Rome do degrade, I think I have already\nproved. The Romish Church and its doctrines have crushed the spirit, and\ndeadened the life of every country, and every people, that ever believed\nor maintained it; and shall our free spirits and bold intellects, in\nthe nineteenth century, be broken and bowed down like those in Popish\ncountries? It can never be. But this is not the question, exactly. The\nquestion is, or ought to be, Is the Popish religion on the increase?\nDoes it gain upon the Protestant religion, or is it going ahead of it,\nas some even in these United States will have it? This question can\nbe easily answered; and for that answer, which I am about to give, I\nacknowledge myself much indebted to an anonymous but elegant writer in\nthe Protestant Quarterly Review for the month of January, 1846. \"Ask\nyourselves which religion,--Protestant or Popish,--will spread widest in\nan age of science and knowledge--which is best fitted to the growth of\nthe human mind? In all Protestant countries, wealth, intelligence, and\na high civilization! are everywhere seen; in all Catholic countries,\ndead-ness and decay rest upon everything which nature made beautiful.\nUnder Protestantism, every department of science has made rapid\nprogress. The very spirit of freedom breathes through the Newtonian and\nBaconian philosophy. Everywhere, from the harsh, barren soil of northern\nnations, sprang up life and light England, Scotland, Prussia, in men\nof strong intellect, are superior to any of the older nations, in any\npreceding age. Mathematics, natural philosophy, metaphysics, ethics,\ncommerce, agriculture, legislation--the whole extent of modern\ncivilization--date from the Reformation, and exist only in Protestant\ncountries. And those nations of Europe which caught but a glimmer of\nliberal opinions, but which in the Catholic or Popish reaction were\nagain subjected to Rome, are far in advance of those countries,\nbeautiful as they are, in the South of Europe, which never saw\nProtestantism. A single glance into the history of modern science,\nliterature, and politics, will fully convince any candid mind of this.\nThe entire spirit of northern institutions, their great progress, their\ngrowing intelligence, are all owing to Protestantism. They date their\nbirth from it, they are thoroughly imbued with its spirit, they must\nlive still in its spirit Firm governments and wise laws; just and\nliberal rulers; free and intelligent people; nobler views of man; nobler\nviews of God; more knowledge; more liberty; more faith;--these have the\ngenius of Protestantism imparted, and in their ever-growing life it\nwill live. How different from this is the condition of the old Catholic\nStates! The noble palaces of Italy are deserted; banditti infest the\nbeautiful shores of Campania. The Dantes, the Petrarchs, the Tassos, are\ngone forever. The poetry, the chivalry, the bright southern romance,\nthe fiery southern valor, have passed away; miserable want and beggary,\nvagabond recklessness, and sullen, obstinate, threadbare pride, are the\nremains of fair Italy. Ireland with her poetry and merriment is silent\nand desponding; her laughter has mournfully died away; her sweet\nmelodies, equally beautiful, whether sung sadly or gaily, are chanted by\nlips quivering with emotion and parched by hunger and thirst Popery has\ndegraded and saddened her very soul.\n\n\"Austria, tyrannous and bigoted,--an enemy to all freedom, whether\nof thought or action,--with her degrading institutions, and decaying\nprinciples, is rather worse than poor Ireland. It is better to die than\nto kill Spain, the birth-place of Loyola; the valiant opponent of the\ncrescent and turban, for near eight hundred years; the land of brave\nknights and fair ladies; of song and dance; of literature, refinement,\nand elegant culture,--is wretched indeed. Squalid, seditious, fiercely\nproud and cruel, it now excites little compassion, still less of hate or\nfear.\n\n\"How are we to account for this immeasurable difference between the\nrealms of Protestantism and those of Catholicism? Are the Italians\ninferior by nature to the Scotsmen, or the Spanish to the Danes? We\ncannot admit this; all history and philosophy disprove it. Yet now, in\ntheir degradation, they can scarcely appreciate their ancient grandeur;\nwhile the heavy nations of the north, have suddenly leaped far beyond\ntheir utmost limit The only cause which can be assigned for this, is\nthe vast difference in the genius of the two religious influences:\nCatholicism has blighted, Protestantism has advanced and strengthened.\nCan this ever be undone? Has all modern science been preaching a lie?\nHave the last three centuries been pushing forward in the face of\ntruth, and acting out the lie? Can the onward sweep of civilization be\nretarded? and must the work pause, and wait till the huge car of Rome\ncan rumble slowly up and bear it onward into the caves of night again?\nForbid it Heaven, I cannot believe it.\"\n\nBut the Papist will say, \"it is evident, from the recent course of\nevents in France, Spain, Italy, Ireland, nay, to some extent, in the\nUnited States, that Popery is gaining ground and making extraordinary\nefforts to insure ultimate success.\" Be it so. Even admitting that they\nare attempting and strenuously trying to advance, that does not insure\nvictory or final success, There are two broad and undeniable facts,\nwhich forbid this result. One is, that from the beginning of the\nworld to the present hour, man has steadily advanced in progressive\nintelligence; and the other is, that the roman mind has never been\nknown to run backwards. Papists will say, and it is now said from their\npulpits, in these United States, \"that Popery can accommodate, and will\nsuit itself to the advancing acquirements of man, and finally conform to\nour free institutions.\" Let us look at this question, and fairly examine\nits truth or falsehood. Upon a correct understanding of this subject,\nand upon it alone, can be founded a correct estimate or view of the\nultimate fate of Popery in the United States. I flatter myself that I\nhave proved, to the satisfaction of all Americans who have done me the\nhonor of reading my books, that Popery has not changed in its doctrine\nor discipline; or, that if any change has been effected in either, it\nis decidedly for the worse. A recent French writer, well known to the\nreaders of history--La Mennais--has tested the doctrines of Popery by\nthe principles of intellectual advancement. He proved that Popery and\ncivil rights were incompatible with each other, and could not co-exist\nunder any government nor under any form or state of society. No argument\ncould be more beautiful, more eloquent, or more convincing, than that\nby which he demonstrated to the world that human liberty and Christian\nliberty are antagonistic to Popery. He required no more from the Church\nof Rome than to conform to the simple principles of Christian freedom.\nHis works are now extant, and I believe are to be had in all well\nfurnished libraries in the United States. They can be seen and read by\nour fellow citizens, and they will find in perusing them that what I\nstate is correct The writings of La Mennais soon came to the ears of the\nPope and his Inquisitors, and they were not long in discovering that\nif the principles contended for by La Mennais were admitted, the Popish\nChurch must fall. There was no medium; either that, or every other\ndoctrine must be denied, and all arguments in favor of the civil rights\nof man had no foundation in fact. How did his Holiness, the Pope, act\non this occasion? I do not allude here, to any Pope of ancient times,\nI allude to the Pope who now lives, and presides over the Infallible\nChurch. He cursed La Mennais; he damned him and his writings. He\ninsisted that La Mennais should write no more on the subject, and I\nblush for the honor of humanity, of mind, of talents, of genius, and\nliberty of thought, to state that La Mennais submitted to this tyrant\nPope, and that only the other day, in 1833, though he declared to his\nfriends, that, while he bowed to the Pope's, supremacy, he felt that he\nwas putting his name to the blasphemous admission that the Pope was God.\n\nThe Popish bishops of this country have the hardihood to say, that\nPopery is the friend and advocate of pure democracy, and that miserable\ntool of theirs, Brownson, says amen. They depute him to lecture upon\nthis subject in almost all the large cities throughout the Union. He may\ndo some injury to the morals of our people, but his reign cannot be of\nlong duration; such is the character of the man, that whatever he says\ncannot fructify. He is, among our fellow citizens, what the ant is among\na heap of corn; it takes it to its winter store house to feed itself\nalone, but whoever will carefully examine the grain or corn which it\ntakes from others, will find that it has no bud; it destroys that, and\nthus selfishly and mischievously prevents 25* the grain from fructifying\nand enlarging. Brownson takes with him, and appropriates to himself,\nmany plausible arguments from the works of eminent men, but the\nslightest contact, on his part, with the purest characters, is\nsufficient to destroy their vitality. If he were even to carry with him\ninto the pulpit, the soundest principles of morality, his very presence,\nand past infidel life, would destroy their force; and a correct\nexamination of them would show the Christian who might examine them,\nthat they had no bud or vital principle within them and could produce no\nfruit It is said that some men come into this world with two left hands,\ntwo crooked eyes, a good deal of brains, and little or no organization\nof its faculties. Brown-son is one of those characters. He has two left\nhands, and was never known to do anything right; whatever he touches\nhe is sure to despoil and disfigure. Both his eyes are crooked; he has\nnever yet been known to see anything straight; so crooked are they, that\nhe sees things only through the eyes of others. Hence it is, perhaps,\nthat he never writes anything which is his own, but upon all subjects\ngives us the views of others, and as no two think alike, in general,\nBrown-son's writings invariably contradict themselves. Add to this that\ngreat defect of order in his brain, and we cannot apprehend that his\nlectures will do much permanent injury. This Brownson has appeared\nto me, during the short time I have been noticing his movements and\nopinions, to be, in reality, a shallow-pated bombastic pretender to\nscience and literature. He seems to know books just as some people know\ngreat men, they only learn their names, and then boast of an intimate\nacquaintance with them. He talks very fluently about his intimacy with\nTasso, Dante, Petrarch, Boccacio, and others. He and Boccacio seem to\nbe as intimate as pickpockets (to use a common though vulgar phrase.)\nI wonder if Mr. Brownson recollects any of those anecdotes related by\nBoccacio about certain nuns, who lived in the vicinity of his lather's\nresidence? Will the illustrious changeling permit me to bring one or\ntwo to his recollection? One probably will be enough, as my readers\nmay already have had sufficient information concerning the amusements\npractised by nuns and sisters of Charity in their convents.\n\nIt seems there was a large establishment of nuns in the neighborhood\nwere Boccacio resided. The mother Abbess was of noble descent, a fine\nfair-haired girl, young and beautiful. There happened to be, adjoining\nthe nunnery, a friary; among these friars, as Boccacio tells us, in a\nwork of his, which has since been suppressed by the Popes, was a young\nman of fine personal appearance, and who possessed, in a remarkable\ndegree, the power of assuming any character he pleased. He was, besides,\na ventriloquist, and could thus personate and imitate any character or\nany voice he chose. The mother Abbess took an extraordinary fancy to\nthis young friar, and tried by every means in her power to have him\nappointed confessor and spiritual guide to the nuns. But the Superior of\nthe friary was not easily deceived. He peremptorily refused to listen to\nthe most pious entreaties of the mother Abbess, and positively declined\ngiving the friar faculties to hear her confession.\n\nWhat was to be done in this case? The holy nun soon hit upon an\nexpedient. She sent for the friar, who always had admission to an iron\ngrating in the wall, which separated these holy nuns from this sinful\nworld! She told the friar that her establishment was much in want of\na gardener, and advised him to change his whole appearance, assume the\ncharacter of a very old and feeble man, imitate his voice, and come the\nnext day, with his spade on his shoulder, to apply for the situation\nof gardener to the nunnery. He accordingly came the next morning,\nthoroughly-metamorphosed, and in the most doleful and piteous tones of\ndistress and want, begged of the holy mother Abbess, for the love she\nbore the blessed virgin Mary, to give him employment, whereby he might\nsupport himself and his poor half-starved and bed-ridden wife. The\nholy nun moved by charity, and nothing else, of course, employed him as\ngardener; and moved by compassion for the weak and feeble old man, she\noccasionally sent for him to her cell to nourish him with some wine and\nwater. _Verbum sat_. The Protestant reader will not forget that Boccacio\nwas a Roman Catholic and is quoted by Brownson, in his Review, as one of\nthose luminaries which adorned the Popish Church between the sixth and\nsixteenth centuries.\n\nThere was another, among the luminaries who flourished \"betwixt the\nsixth and sixteenth centuries,\" named Rabalais. I am rather surprised\nthat Brownson has not quoted him, as a model of a Christian bishop. He\nwas a Roman Catholic bishop, and died in full communion with the Romish\nChurch. He was laid in his coffin dressed in his episcopal robes.\nThe works of Rabalais are very little read now-a-days, nor could I\nconscientiously recommend them to the attention of any Christian reader;\nI allude to him with the sole view of giving Popish advocates the full\nadvantage of the testimony and example of a Roman Catholic bishop in\ntheir favor.\n\nThere was not, perhaps, in all France, a more obscene writer than\nRabalais. He was remarkable however for the depth and keenness of his\nsatire. He felt the degradation of his position as a Popish bishop, but\nhe wanted moral courage enough to renounce so advantageous a position\nin society as that which the Romish Church assigned him. The only\nalternative left him, under these circumstances, was to try to effect\nsome reform in his Church and the morals of its priests. He turned\nagainst them the arrows of his ridicule, and though the wounds and\nscars, which they left behind them, were broad and painful, yet there\nwas so much justice in all his statements, that the Infallible Church\ndared not raise a finger against him. I refer Bishops Hughes, Fenwick,\nand their corporal, Brownson, to his writings. They may, in all\nprobability, find some similitude between themselves, their Popes, and\nother bishops, to those illustrious characters, Carragantua, Pantagruel,\nTrippet, and others so conspicuously alluded to in the works of\nRabalais. I expect nothing else than censure for the bare mention of\nsome of those writers to whom I have referred-It seems to have become\nquite fashionable now-a days with pulpit orators, to censure anything\nlike gen-real reading; at any rate, no fault must be found with the sins\nof the times. I have seldom heard a discourse or lecture, from infidels\nof the present day, where they have not found fault with all those\nwritings in which sin and immorality are denounced in plain scriptural\nlanguage. There are, among our modern Liberal Christians, many who seem\nshocked at the idea that Eugene Sue, for instance, should have dared to\nsatirize Popery, or that Guinet, or Michelet, should presume to denounce\nJesuitism or warn mankind against giving it any encouragement amongst\nthem. The argument used by these Liberal Christians or philosophers--for\nthey are all philosophers, every one of them--is this; if evangelical\nChristians should succeed in suppressing Popery, we philosophic, and\nLiberal Christians, shall be their next victims; _ergo_, Eugene\nSue, Michelet, Gui-net, and all who write against Popery, deserve no\nencouragement from us. Admirable logicians, these Liberal Christians!\nProfound and deep historians, these modern philosophers! Evangelical\nChristians have never persecuted Liberal Christians. I would challenge\nthem to produce an instance where they have ever acted upon the\noffensive. Let them analyze the creed of evangelical Christians; let\nthem dissect it; let them break it up, word by word, and cut each word\ninto the most minute fractions; and if they can show me, among those\nwords or fractions, a solitary particle, or an isolated idea, which\nteaches them to persecute any man on account of his religious opinions,\nI will acknowledge that Liberal Christians are right in preferring the\nascendancy of Popery to that of evangelical Christianity. But how is it\nin the Popish creed? Let these Liberal Christians turn back to the pages\nof history, and they will find that the creed and canons of Popery, as\nwell as the decretals of its Church, all teach that Liberal Christians\nare to be dealt with by civil law, and that by civil law is to be\nunderstood the Inquisitorial law, which consigns every one of them to\nthe sword, fire, and faggot. Do these gentlemen recollect the fate of\nArius and his followers? Do they forget thar the disciples of Arius\nwere all Liberal Christians, and numbered, at one time, a vast and large\nportion of those who professed any belief in the doctrines of Christ,\neither as God or man? Pause, gentlemen, I entreat of you,--recollect\nthat the reason why Papists are silent in relation to your doctrines,\nis simply this: they look upon you as damned, beyond a possibility of\nsalvation. They place you and the Jews on the same level, and consider\nboth as blasphemers of the name of Christ, and as altogether beneath\nthe notice of all men who profess the Christian religion in any form\nwhatever; and rely upon it, when I assure you, that I myself, who have\nbeen a Popish priest, have studied the doctrines of that Church to\nlittle purpose, if you are not the very first whom Papists will destroy,\nand whose property they will confiscate to the use of their Infallible\nChurch, should they ever have the power to do so.\n\nIt is a question with me, whether many of the lecturers of the present\nday, in their unqualified _anathemas_ against modern literature and\ngeneral reading, are not doing more harm than good. Assuredly they\nare injuring, more or less, the cause of liberty, and giving all the\nadvantages they possess, to arbitrary power; especially to the factious,\ndespotic, and violent power of the tyrant court of Rome. Those lecturers\nwho denounce the writings of Eugene Sue, Guinet, and others, against\nthe Popish Church, are bringing upon this country--unconsciously, I\nbelieve--all the evils of foreign tyranny, without any consolation. They\nare helping to destroy themselves, and must be destroyed in time by a\nsuperior power. Charity obliges me to suppose these lecturers sincere,\nand if they were equally discreet, might be useful auxiliaries in\npromoting the moral and political interests of our country. They are the\ninstruments of cool-headed, dispassionate politicians, who see nothing,\nand care to see nothing, but their own private interests.\n\nBesides all this, these declaimers against modern literature and general\nreading are injuring the cause of science. He who from his pulpit, or in\na lyceum hall, disapproves of the writings of Eugene Sue against Popish\ndomination, merely because he relates many facts and circumstances which\nare not proper to be seen or read by some of his hearers,--aims his\nblows at many of the noblest sciences which God has permitted man to\nstudy, and for reasons which could scarcely be satisfactory to a child,\nviz: because \"some passages in his writings are rather indelicate.\" This\nis certainly as strong a reason as Dr. Sangrado, of Quixotic notoriety,\ngave to his patient, when asked why he did not prescribe cold water; \"I\nhave,\" said the Doctor, \"already prescribed hot water.\" The reason given\nfor not reading Eugene Sue may apply with equal force against the study\nof surgery; and I should not be in the least surprised, if before long\nsome of those gentlemen denounced and forbade the study of the noble and\nalmost heavenly science of anatomy. Assuredly, beautiful, symmetrical,\nand lovely as the human frame is externally, it presents to the human\neye, when dissected and exposed, in its native and naked proportions, no\nvery pleasing object to contemplate. But does it follow that the science\nof anatomy should not be studied? Does it follow that works upon that\nscience should not be read? Certainly not; and he who would contend for\nthe contrary would be well suited by assigning to him an abode in some\nlunatic asylum.\n\nI admit that there are some passages in the writings of Eugene Sue,\nGuinet, and others, against Popery, that seem rather indelicate. But\nis that a reason why the moral anatomy and structure of the body Papal\nshould not be dissected? The external body of Popery, like the human\nbody, may be fair to the eye, lovely to the senses, and beautiful to the\nimagination; but like the human body, it has its deformities, and I\nsee no reason why its defects should not be anatomized, studied, and\nexposed, if necessary to the moral welfare of the human family. How can\nthe evils of Popery be known, unless they are exposed to public view,\nand seen by those who are competent to judge of their evil tendencies?\nAnd who are more competent to form a correct estimate of their nature\nand character, than such men as Eugene Sue, Guinet, and others, who have\nstudied Popery? Guinet and Michelet are now living. They are both Roman\nCatholics by birth and education. They understand the doctrines of\nPopery thoroughly. It is idle--it is worse than idle--for American\nProtestant writers to attempt to prevent the circulation of Michelet's\nworks, or those of Eugene Sue, in the United States. But it will be\nsaid, and it is said, that there is much romance about them, and that\nmany passages are to be found, in Guinet especially, savoring strongly\nof infidelity. Admitting even this to be the case, it does not follow,\nby any means, that the enemies of Popery, which some Protestant journals\nand lecturers pretend to be, should reject and censure the many and\nundeniable truths which they contain on the subject of Popery. The fact\nis--and I regret that it is so--many of the journals which come out\nwith flaming notices of their determination to stand by the Protestant\nreligion, and oppose the introduction of Popery into this country, are\nnot always sincere in their professions. Many of them are theorists.\nI may add here, _en passant_, that few of those \"heroes of discussion\nmeetings,\" and editors of newspapers, are at all qualified for the task\nwhich they undertake. It is, however, a source of consolation to\nme, that there axe some public lecturers and editors of Protestant\nnewspapers, who are sincere and disinterested in their opposition to\nPopery; who see its destructive fruits now springing up in the fairest\nfields of our Republic; who know that Popery is corrupt in itself, that\ncorruption of mind and morals is the natural result to be expected from\nits prevalence amongst our people These worthy men and well-informed\neditors of many of our presses, are determined, cost what it will, that\nPopery shall be fully understood in this country: that it shall no\nlonger be hid in a corner, and that those Jesuit wolves who profess it\nshall no longer be permitted to appear in sheep's clothing.\n\nAmong the presses which now boldly stand forth in defence of the\nProtestant religion and the civil rights of man, I am happy to enumerate\nthe Boston Recorder, the Olive Branch, and others, among the various\npresses in the city of Boston. There are also many among the political\npresses in our country, which are doing good service to the cause of\nProtestantism and the civil rights of man. J. T. Buckingham, of the\nBoston Courier, has generously and disinterestedly thrown himself and\nhis fine talents between the intrigues of Papists and their designs upon\nour institutions, and the civil rights of his countrymen. These presses\nhave not blushed to quote largely from Eugene Sue; they have not\ntried to hide from their readers, nor prevented them from reading, the\nfaithful _expose_ which Eugene Sue, Guinet, La Manais, Michelet, and\nothers, have given of the iniquities and treasonable designs of Popish\npriests and Jesuits against Protestant governments and the civil rights\nof man. These presses have not put their hands to the plow and looked\nback. They love their God and their country too well to crouch before\nthe _puerilities_--as the learned Bishop Eastburn of Boston expresses\nit--or the treasonable designs of Jesuits. The reader will here indulge\nme, and I trust the editors of the Boston Recorder will pardon me, for\nquoting largely from their paper of January 15th, 1846. \"M. Pascal, a\ndevoted member of the Romish Church, has set forth in his provincial\nletters the opinions of several distinguished Jesuits, as to the duty of\nloving God, and especially in answer to the question, 'When and at what\ntime is a man obliged to have an actual love or affection for God?' One\nJesuit, Saurez, says, 'It is enough if we love him a little before we\ndie, without fixing any time.' Another, Vasquez, says that 'it is enough\nto love him at the point of death.' We marvel at such answers. But this\nis Jesuitism seeking to relieve itself of the painful obligation of\nloving God. No order of men,--no society that ever existed, has been\nso universally execrated as that of the Jesuits. Everywhere intriguing,\nplotting, and dangerous, they have been everywhere dreaded, hated, and\nopposed. And not by Protestants alone. The society of Jesuits has been\nat different periods expelled from all the States of Europe; and last of\nall, France has denounced and rejected it The order, as every one knows,\nbegan with Loyola, in the beginning of the sixteenth century, and was\nintended as a spiritual crusade against heresy; the particular heresy\naimed at being the Reformation, under Luther, who was contemporary with\nLoyola. In 1773, the institution of the Jesuits was suppressed by a bull\nof Clement XIV. They were accused of 'too great avidity of terrestrial\ngoods,' of 'criminal plots,' of having in their favor only the exterior\nof regularity, disgraced in their maxims, and to render themselves more\npowerful, given up to commerce, stock-jobbing, and politics.'\n\n\"But the time came when Rome needed the arms of the Jesuits, and their\nsociety was re-established in 1814. The Romish Church still defends the\nJesuits, and stands before the world as their accomplice.\" The Recorder\ncontinues, and indirectly severely censures those presses and those\ntimid and irresolute editors who seem to think that they cannot\nconscientiously read, or permit their readers to receive into their\nhouses, the writings of Eugene Sue or Michelet, against the degrading\nand traitorous doctrines of Popery.\n\n\"The attempt of the Jesuits,\" continues the pious and talented editor of\nthe Recorder, \"to get the control of education in France, aroused some\npowerful spirits, among whom the most distinguished were Michelet and\nGuinet, Professors in the College of France. These men are Catholics,\nbut too excellent and conscientious to receive the appellation in\nits bad sense. They are high authority, and we quote a few of their\nopinions, publicly uttered in college lectures within the last year or\ntwo.\" What think you of the above language, you editors of the would-be\nevangelical Protestant presses?--you who have pledged your sacred honor\nand fortunes to stand by the Church and the Gospel of Christ, and still\ncensure Michelet, Guinet, and even my own humble efforts to oppose the\nspread of Popery among mankind. \"Michelet,\" continues the Recorder,\n\"calls the spirit of Jesuits the spirit of intrigue--of holy detraction.\nGod give us, he says, political tyranny, military tyranny, and all other\ntyrannies, ten times over, rather than that such a police--that of the\nJesuits--should sully our France.\" Will the reader permit me to add my\npetition to this, and will he join me in beseeching the Throne of Grace\nto receive it graciously? God give us, American citizens, political\ntyranny, military tyranny, and all other tyrannies, ten times over,\nrather than that Jesuitism should disfigure the fair face of our\nbeautiful Republic The Recorder continues his observations on the\nwritings of Michelet. \"He (Michelet) challenges men to study, and tells\nthem that at the end of ten years they will find in the history of\nJesuits but one meaning--_the death of liberty_.\" \"This bold lecturer,\"\n(Michelet) continues the Recorder still, \"bounds in passages like the\nfollowing: 'What is the nature of the Jesuit? He has none; he is fit for\neverything. The Jesuits are a formidable machine for war, invented for\nthe most vile combat in the sixteenth century. The simple and natural\nmeans which have generally succeeded with the Jesuits is to _catch\nwild birds by means of tame ones?_\" \"I speak,\" says Michelet, \"of\nJesuitesses, polished and gentle, adroit and charming, who always, going\nbefore the Jesuits, put everywhere oil and honey, smoothing the way.\"\nHow true this is; and is it not strange, beyond account, that Americans\ncannot see it? When Jesuits first came into Boston, they sent before\nthem Jesuitesses, young, polished, gentle, and charming. These tame\nPopish birds were not long amongst us, when they caught whole flocks of\nour wild Yankee birds, and are now catching them in almost every State\nin the Union. But the Yankee, with all his cuteness, cleverness, and\nsupposed cunning, will be caught He is no match for the Jesuit. \"The\nJesuits,\" says Michelet, again, \"have employed the instrument of which\nJerome speaks--poor little women, all covered with sins.\" He alludes\nto the Sisters of Charity, the Ladies of the Sacred Heart, the Mother\nAbbesses, &c., all which are directed and governed by the Jesuits.\n\nWas there ever a truer picture of the operations of Jesuits than this?\nAnd the Americans who cannot see its truth and fidelity, must be blinder\nthan the bats which flutter in the caves and caverns of their mountains.\nHad we not, the other day, on Mount Benedict, in the vicinity of Boston,\nthe capital of New England, some of those _poor little women, covered\nwith sins_--meek, and gentle, and angelic-looking little beings? Sweet\nlittle innocents! They had a nunnery there, too. They had a fashionable\nschool attached to it. And our Protestant Jonathans--poor dolts--sent\ntheir daughters to these poor little women--these Sisters of Charity--to\nbe educated in the principles of Christianity! True it is that none are\nso blind as those who will not see.\n\nThe reader will bear with me in quoting a few more passages, which the\nBoston Recorder selects from the writings of Guinet, on the subject of\nJesuitism. \"The nations which are sickest in Europe, those which have\nleast credit and authority, are those in which the society of Jesuits\nhas its hearth. The mission of Jesuitism, in the sixteenth century, was\nto destroy the Reformation; the mission of Jesuitism, in the nineteenth\ncentury, is to destroy the Revolution, which supposes, includes, and\nenvelopes, the Reformation. What cannot fail to strike you, is the\nrapidity with which this society has degenerated. Where shall we find\nany thing like it in any other order? The public voice has been raised\nagainst it from its very cradle. Already the society was driven out from\na part of Spain in 1565, from the Low Countries and Portugal in 1578,\nfrom all France in 1594, from Venice in 1606, from the Kingdom of Naples\nin 1622. I speak only of Catholic countries. We may add, that France\ncondemned the Jesuits in 1762, and actually drove them from the kingdom,\nand that she has since repeated her sentence of reprobation in 1845.\"\n\n\"Now let it be considered,\" says the Recorder--and I look upon that\nvenerable journal, and its editors, as high authority--\"that these very\nJesuits, dreaded and loathed, in the old countries, looked upon as the\noffscouring of all things, the dregs even of Catholic states, are coming\nto this country by hundreds, [The Recorder might have said by hundreds\nof thousands] seeking here a field for their horrid operations,\ndetermined to regain all and more than they have? lost at home. It is\nwell understood that the Catholic officials who profane our soil, are\nof the Jesuit order,--desperate men, 'fit for everything,' whose very\nbreath is the 'death of liberty.' Their mission is to deceive and\nvictimize the American people. The people, therefore, ought to be aware\nof their character and operations.\n\n\"Some will say,\" continues the Recorder, farther, \"it is not so,--there\nis no danger--these priests are a very harmless people. In this\nprovoking stupidity lies our danger. Before they get their eyes open,\nthe language of Michelet will be applicable. *Are these Jesuits? A man\nasks this question, whose wife they already govern by a confessor of\ntheir own--the wife the house, table, hearth, bed. To-morrow they will\nhave her child.' There is little reason to suppose that Jesuits will\nbe forcibly expelled from this country. So much the greater is the\nnecessity that they should be watched, exposed, and resisted. Their\nmovements here, are of special moment to Americans. We are called upon\nto watch around the 'altar of our liberty.' The Jesuits and the Pope,\nwould rejoice to see us directing our attention to Italy,--to draw\nour attention there, even while they are choosing and fortifying their\nposition here. Mr. Hogan may be right in suggesting that this is their\n'plot.' If so, while they are plotting, let the Americans be adopting\nvigorous means of self-protection--such means especially, as religion\nand education can best furnish.\" Thus speaks that truly evangelical and\nindependent press, the Boston Recorder, of Jesuitism, and the writings\nof Sue, Michelet, and Gurnet. And it is to me a source of consolation\nand cheering encouragement, to find that it does not disapprove of\nmy own humble efforts upon the same subject, nor of any of those\nauthorities which I have called to my aid.\n\nI fully agree with the Recorder, that education--biblical education--is\nthe best means and defence we can make against the intrigues of\nJesuitism in this country. Our sole and only hope of success against\nthem, is the general diffusion of education, and that education must be\nof a scriptural character. Until the people can read, they cannot\nthink; and until they can think, they cannot reason, nor consequently\ndistinguish between error and truth. A vast number of the citizens\nof this country are foreigners, from Popish countries, who have no\neducation but such as they received from their priests; and the history\nof the world informs us of the wretched character of that instruction\nwhich they have received from that source. We all can see the condition\nof the poor Irish, who for centuries back, have been walking by the\nlight of some 'magic lantern, held by their priests.' We can see how\nprevalent the influence of Popish priests has been, in the education--or\nrather want of education of the Irish,--by referring to a _Report of\nCommissioners appointed to take the census of Great Britain and Ireland\nin 1841_. I here quote from the London Quarterly Review for June, 1845.\n\"On the present state of Irish education, and its previous progress,\nthe Commissioners have taken great pains to collect and communicate\ninformation, of which the result is, that the diminution of ignorants,\nthat is, of persons unable to read and write, is, during the last fifty\nyears, from forty-eight to thirty-five per cent, of males, and from\nsixty to forty-five per cent, of females.\" What must have been the\ncondition of this poor people previous to the last fifty years, when\nthey were educated exclusively by bishops, priests, monks, and nuns? And\nhow grateful should they feel to the Protestants of Great Britain and\nelsewhere for the great diminution which has since taken place in the\nnumber of males and females who could then neither read nor write. It\nis creditable to government--the Protestant government of Great\nBritain--that out of the number of Irish, which are now in the military\nservice of Great Britain, sixty per cent, of those between the ages\nof sixteen and twenty-five can both read and write. How is this to be\naccounted for? Popish priests have nothing to do with the education of\nthe children of those who are in the service of Great Britain. They\nare indebted to Protestant teachers, and Protestant officers, for the\nblessings of education which they enjoy. How are the people educated in\nPopish France? We can learn from the lectures of Michelet, Professor of\nLiterature in the College of France; it is wretched in the extreme.\nBut some of our sympathizers and mawkish journalists may question the\nauthority of the gentleman. I would refer them to other authority M.\nBoulay tells us that more than half the population of France can\nneither read nor write. He assures us this is a fixed fact--and he is no\ncontemptible authority. What does Bishop Fenwick's Corporal Trim think\nof this? He assured us, the other day, on his honor and consistency,\nthat the inhabitants of Catholic countries were the best educated people\nin the world Ah! Corporal, thou shalt never die while imposture and\nPopery live in the United States. Let us compare the condition of the\nIrish, who are educated by Popish priests and Jesuits, with that of\nAmericans, who have received their education from Protestant teachers,\nand we shall see--as the London Quarterly Review expresses it--in\nstrong contrast, the effect of an almost total, and a very partial Papal\neclipse. Taking the whites--in America--as the analogous population, we\nfind that persons above the age of twenty years, who can neither read\nnor write, are not quite four per cent (3.87.) To make this, however,\na fair subject of comparison, we must consider that the numbers under\ntwenty are not half the whites, (1.38,) so that we must reckon the\nignorants to be eight pet cent, of the whole. How different this from\nthe forty per cent of the Irish Papists, and the fifty or sixty per cent\nof the French Papists, all of whom are educated by Jesuits and Papists!\nWhat becomes here, of Corporal Brownson's assertion, that \"the people\nare better educated, in general, in Popish than Protestant countries\"?\nThe fact is, my friend Brownson, you had better shut up shop; you are\na man of no bottom; you possess no solid and useful information;\nand easily humbugged, as you and your brethren the Jesuits think the\nAmerican people to be, no man can retain long among them, the character\nof a learned and honest man, if he have not some solid bottom of his own\nto stand upon. It is a bold attempt on the part of Jesuits, to try to\npersuade the American people, by means of their agent Brownson, that\nthe mass of Papists are better educated than Protestants. But, as the\nlearned Dr. South expresses it, \"there is, in the effort to do what is\nglaringly false, such a mixture of the fool, as quite spoils the project\nof the knave.\" And I am much mistaken if the knavish Jesuits who infest\nthis country, do not soon find that the observation of Dr. South is\ncorrect.\n\nJesuits and their agents in the United States, have taken and are now\ntaking, great pains to persuade our Protestant citizens, that Papists\nare not only better educated than Protestants, but better provided\nfor in every other respect They have always charged Protestants with\nneglecting the poor, and over-working them in every department of labor.\nSome of the _Puseyite philosophers_ of the present day, unite with\nJesuits in urging this charge against Protestants. This is peculiarly\nworthy of the attention of the Americans, and shows as clearly as any\nother circumstance can, the extent and depth of Jesuit intrigue amongst\nus. The great mass of the people, in every country, is composed of the\nlaboring classes, or, as we term them, operatives. And Jesuits know full\nwell that if they can persuade the great body of Americans, that Popery\ngives more encouragement to labor, and requires less of it for a given\nprice, than those who profess Protestantism, it is an important point\ngained; in truth, if this be admitted,--if the Popish Church gives more\nencouragement and better pay to laborers, than the Protestant Church,\nI, for one, would not and could not withhold from her my full and\nhearty commendation thus far. If it be true,--as that great Idealist and\nPuseyite, Mr. Ward, of England, contends,--that the poor and neglected\nand oppressed, in those countries where Protestant government prevails,\nare much better provided for under Popish governments, the fact ought\nto be well understood, and in place of wishing to overthrow these\ngovernments and prevent the farther growth of Popery, we should pause,\nand look seriously into the question.\n\nBut is it true that labor is more encouraged and better paid, under\nCatholic than Protestant governments? Is it true that operatives--say\nfor instance those who work in factories--are more humanely dealt with,\nbetter paid, and not required to work as many hours, under Popish\nas under Protestant governments? I call the attention of American\nProtestants to this question. It is one of vital importance.\n\nBoth Puseyites and Jesuits allege this as positive, We have them here\non the platform of unequivocal allegation of fact. \"We have them on the\nhip.\" I am now willing to grapple with Jesuits and Puseyites upon this\nquestion. It cannot be evaded by them. It must be yes or no. Jesuit\nsophistry can avail them nothing, and if I can show our operatives, and\nlaborers in our factories, that those Jesuits and Puseyites who are now\noverspreading our Republic, are trying to deceive them and reduce them\nto farther hardships, I trust they will rise as a body, men, women,\nchildren, and all, and hoot them from our shores. It is wrong to deceive\nany one; and no honest man or true Christian will do so; but it is cruel\nto deceive the poor laborer or operative, who lives by the sweat of his\nbrow.\n\nIf the reader will accompany me across the Atlantic, I will show him\nthe condition of the operatives in some of those countries where the\ngovernment is Popish, and where the religion of the people is that of\nJesuits and priests. Let us visit France, a Catholic country. Let us\nexamine a Report made by M. Delambre, the head of the department of\nManufactures, in the office of the Minister of Commerce, in 1838. From\nthat Report it appears, that the actual work of children, in factories,\nis never less than twelve hours, and extends from that minimum amount,\nto fourteen hours, in the twenty-four. It is also stated by him, that\nin the chief manufactories, it is not unusual with them to work all\nSaturday night and Sunday morning. So much for Popish clemency and\nJesuit lenity to the poor operative. Let us cross over the Channel to\nEngland, a Protestant government and a Protestant country. How is it\nwith operatives and children in factories there? I refer the reader, for\nan answer, to Horner on the Employment of Children in Factories, page\n28. \"In England, under a Protestant government, no child under thirteen\ncan be employed for more than eight hours a day; nor can any young\nperson, just emerged from childhood, be employed more than twelve hours\na day.\" On Saturday the hours of work were only nine, when Mr. Horner\nwrote, and I am informed by the London Quarterly Review, of January,\n1845, to which I am indebted for much of the information which I here\ngive on the subject of factory laborers,--that a new Act of Parliament,\nfixing the maximum of labor, for children, at six and a half hours per\nday, has recently been passed. What becomes, now, of the assertions of\nPuseyites and Jesuits on the subject of Popish charity and humanity to\nthe poor? The truth is, that I may challenge them to show me mankind, in\nany condition or any situation, or any clime or country, under Catholic\nor Protestant government, where they are not more oppressed, more\ndegraded, more abused, and more ignorant under Catholic than Protestant\ngovernments. How then can it be, with this fact before their eyes, that\nAmericans--Protestant Americans--give any countenance to Popery and\nJesuits in the United States? or how can we account for the still more\nextraordinary fact, that one of the most learned Christian Associations\nthat ever have been established in this country--_The Christian\nLeague_---does not devote its whole and undivided energies to the\nremoval of Jesuits and Jesuitism from amongst us. I cannot account for\nthe fact I have conversed with a learned member of this Association, a\ngentleman of distinguished talents and deserved popularity. I asked him\nwhy the Association did not spread its forces, extend its lines, and\ndevote its funds of intellect, as well as of money, exclusively to the\nremoval of Jesuitism from our happy country. His answer was, \"we do not\ndeem it prudent to do so; we cannot fail to kill Jesuitism in Italy, and\nthere will be an end of it.\"\n\nGendemen of the Christian League! I once before entreated you to\nwithdraw your troops from Italy. You can do no good in that country. But\nsuppose you did kill Popery in Italy--suppose that Jesuitism was dead\nand buried in that ill-fated country--I tell you that it will rise in\nthis, and that in the shape of a tremendous, unformed spectre, in a far\nmore terrific guise than ever before overpowered the imagination of man.\nI may not live to see it; many of you may not live to witness it; but\nthat does not alter the truth of my prediction.\n\nI have deviated far and wide from the point for which I set out at the\ncommencement of this book. As usual, I have paid no attention to order,\nliterary style, or argumentative consecutiveness. Let this, however,\nnot be attributed to any want, on my part, of due respect for the good\nopinion of my readers. My sole object in writing this book was to state\nfacts, a knowledge of which I deemed necessary and useful to my fellow\ncitizens; and as I knew full well that it was perfectly immaterial to\nthe majority of them, how or in what manner these facts were stated,\nprovided they were true, I have given them at random, just as they\noccurred to me--_currente calamo_. Besides this, I am pretty much of the\nopinion of Swift, and value not the rules of art as high as others do:\n\n\"Nature, I thought, performed too mean a part, Forming her movements to\nthe rules of art.\"\n\nI will now return to the subject of auricular confession, and the gross\nimmorality practised by priests in the Popish confessionals. But I must\nsay, as I have often done before, that it is impossible to prove to the\nProtestant inhabitants of the United States all, or even many of the\nparticulars of those various accusations which I have advanced against\nPopish bishops and priests. The system of confession itself, and the\nmanner in which it is made, render the thing impossible. No one can\nunderstand the doctrine of Popish confession, except those who have been\nPopish priests, and have acted themselves in the capacity of confessors.\nThe man who has not been a Free Mason, for instance, may accuse that\nancient society of Free and Accepted Masons of sanctioning, or even\nperpetrating crimes, but all his accusations will go for nothing, if he\nhas not been a Mason himself, for the very obvious reason that he knows\nnothing, and could know nothing of Masonry, from his own knowledge; and\nhence it is that we find Jesuit priests and Popish presses turning\ninto ridicule, and not without some cause, many Protestant writers and\nProtestant newspapers for accusing them of things they know nothing at\nall about. Here I have had the advantage of Popish priests and Popish\npresses, and hence it probably is that my books against Popery have\nhad such extensive circulation, and have silenced, as it were by magic,\nalmost every Roman Catholic Press in the United States. And let it not\nbe deemed vanity in me, should I recommend to those editors who have\nestablished presses with the avowed intention of exposing Popery, to be\ncautious in their charges against the Papists, for one unfounded charge\nis apt to destroy the weight of a thousand which may be true; and I am\nsorry to see that many such charges are made by pious men, and even\nby learned men on other subjects, but who seem far in advance of their\nprudence. No man can detect a flaw in an argument sooner than a Jesuit,\nand no press can turn it into more bitter ridicule than a Jesuit press.\nNo matter who the reputed editor of the press may be, every article in\nit is revised and corrected by a Jesuit bishop or his deputy, before it\nmeets the public eye; and hence, perhaps, arises much of the popularity\nof my books. I have never advanced a charge against Jesuits or Popish\npriests, which I did not know to be true; I have never accused them, as\na body, of being guilty of a crime in the confessional, which I did\nnot know, of my own knowledge, to be undeniably true; and to do them\njustice, they have never denied it.\n\nThat the Romish confessionals are sinks of unparalleled corruption,\nseduction, and the most revolting impurities, is but too well understood\nin Papal countries. Michelet understands it in France, so does Eugene\nSue; but still far better does John Ronge understand it in Switzerland,\nbecause he has been, but the other day, a Roman Catholic priest himself.\nThe Catholic priests in almost all Germany understand this, and seem\nnow determined, through their fearless champion Ronge, to lay before\nthe view of mankind the wicked impurities practised in the Romish\nconfessional; and indeed it is a matter of astonishment that any people\nshould sanction amongst them the practice of sending young females to\nconfession to priests who are taught and commanded by their church to\nquestion them on subjects so indelicate and gross that of necessity\nimpure thoughts must arise in their young minds. I can of my own\nknowledge say, that if it had been the intention of any body of men to\ncorrupt the morals of the human race, to habituate the children of\nboth sexes to impurity, filth and profligacy, it would be impossible to\ndevise a scheme more completely adapted to produce that effect than\nthe practice of confessing to priests, and the establishment of Popish\nnunneries amongst them. The common sense of mankind, the ordinary\nfeelings of morality, would have made it impossible to carry into effect\nsuch a project, unless it had assumed the mask of a religious duty to\nGod.\n\nIt is said in the United States that if priests were so immoral as I\nhave represented them to be, and in the habit of taking such liberty\nwith females at the confessional as I have accused them of,\nthat virtuous females--and there must be some such among Roman\nCatholics--would not continue long to go to confession to those priests\nwho take indelicate liberties with them. One would suppose that such\nfemales would leave the church altogether. How little--I repeat it for\nthe hundredth time--do Americans know of the wheels within wheels in the\ngreat machine of Popery! guilty priests who have made attempts to seduce\nvirtuous females at the confessional, and found that they could not\nsucceed, understand how to manage their case well. The church, in her\ninfallible wisdom, has made provision for such events. It is well known\nin Europe, and let it be henceforward known in the United States, that\nthere are two distinct and separate orders of priests--seculars and\nregulars. The secular order is composed chiefly of parish priests\nand their curates, whose duty it is to hear the confessions of their\nparishioners. The order of regulars is composed of friars, who are\nsub-divided into several minor orders, and who have no parochial duties\nto discharge, unless especially deputed to do so by the Bishop or his\ndeputy of the diocese in which they may be located. It is so arranged\nby the secular priests, that whenever they fail in seducing their\npenitents, and are detected by them, that one of these friars shall\nimmediately be at hand to hear the confessions of all such females, and\nforgive them their sins _on condition that they shall never reveal to\nmortal being the thoughtless peccadillo of their parish priest, who for\nthe moment forgot himself and whose tears of repentance now moisten the\nground on which he walks!_\n\nLet me make this more plain by supposing a case or two, by way of\nillustration. Suppose the Popish bishop of New York were a young,\nathletic, amorous man; suppose he fixed his eye upon a young married\nwoman, or some fascinating lady of his flock--the supposition is a\nvery wild one, I admit--suppose he try to seduce one or either at the\nconfessional, and she reject his criminal overtures,--how would his\nPopish _lordship_ act on this occasion? He always has at his elbow some\nfriar, and that friar a foreigner, whom he directs to go, instanter, and\nhear the confession of those ladies. The friar knows his duty too well\nto disobey the orders of the Pope's viceroy in New York, and the whole\naffair is hushed up, perfectly to the satisfaction of the ladies, who\nare absolved from their sins, and entirely to that of his lordship, who\nKnows full well that the affair will never be heard of again. This friar\nis a sort of spiritual rover, and as soon as he has done his business in\nNew York, is despatched to Boston, or elsewhere, until he visits perhaps\nevery diocese in the Union. He then returns home to Rome, never to visit\nthis country again. Another is sent in his place, and thus the work\nof seduction and immorality goes on, from year to year, in Popish\nconfessionals, and almost under our very eyes, without our knowledge,\nwhile the guilty monsters, priests and bishops, are rioting at our\nhospitable tables, feasting upon our richest viands, and sipping our\noldest wines. Things are so arranged in the Popish church, that the\ncrimes of the priests in or out of the confessional, are seldom known to\nthe great mass of the people. Such are the means adopted by the church\nof Rome to cloak and conceal from the public eye the profligacies of\nher priests and bishops, that it is almost impossible to detect these\nculprits and bring them to legal punishment. If, for instance, a priest\ncommit a crime in Boston, which the representative of the Popish church\nin that city thinks may, by possibility, come to light, and throw any\ndiscredit upon the church, or diminish his own personal influence in\nthat city, funds are placed in his hands by the church, to meet the\nexpenses of removing him to any part of the world he chooses, and the\nguilty priest needs only what is technically called an _exeat_, to\ninsure him a warm reception from any Popish bishop in the universe. It\nis a general practice of the bishops in the Romish church, to exchange\nguilty priests with each other; they are very punctual in reciprocating\nsuch favors. When nuns or Roman Catholic females commit crimes in\nconvents, which can no longer be concealed, the holy and infallible\nchurch provides means for their instant removal to a different diocese.\nBut should they still persevere in their iniquities, and should it be\nfound impossible to prevent further illicit intercourse between them\nand their confessors, means are provided to send them to some foreign\ncountry. We have now several foreign nuns in the United States. By\nforeign nuns I do not mean foreigners who became nuns in this country. I\nmean those who became nuns in foreign countries, and who have been\nsent amongst us as such, for the purpose of educating our children,\nand educating them in the doctrines of _their pure religion_. And I\npositively assert, to the best of my own belief, and partly of my\nown personal knowledge, that there is not to be found among them an\nindividual, much of whose previous life has not been spent in criminal\nintercourse and illicit connexion with their confessors and priests.\nThis is no random assertion of mine. I make the allegation with shame\nand sorrow, but the cause of truth demands it; and justice to my fellow\ncitizens who are in the habit of sending their children to school to\nthese consummate hypocrites, renders it imperative upon me that I should\ndeclare the truth, however unpalatable it may be.\n\nWill the reader indulge me, while I quote a passage or two from the\nLondon Quarterly Review, for June, 1844? The editors of that periodical\nare gentlemen of great respectability, and men of well-established\nveracity, whose statements confirm some of my assertions. \"The heads\nof the Church themselves, admit the liability of abuse through the\nconfessional, and frequent exhortations are published, desiring all\nwomen, who have improper _solicitations_ made to them there, to denounce\nthe confessor; but a moment's consideration will show the inutility of\nthis exhortation; and one instance, which we shall give, must suffice\nfor all. An Italian gentleman of our acquaintance, removed with his\nfamily, from the place of his nativity, to a town in another State; soon\nafter their arrival the wife went to the confessional, in the parish\nchurch, where improper proposals were made to her; she ran home and\nacquainted her husband; he made a formal complaint to the proper\nauthorities, in her name; a day was appointed for the examination of\nthe charge; and when the time arrived, the lady naturally declined to\nappear. It is obvious that just in proportion as the person offended, is\ndelicate, and the offence gross, there will be the greater difficulty in\ninducing the complainant to come forward.\" The truth of this is obvious\nto all, and here lies one great security against detecting a licentious\nand criminal priest. Were it not for this, our citizens would hoot at\nthem as they walked our streets. Were it not for this, Popish priests\nand confessors would never be admitted into their houses, or occupy a\nseat at the table of any decent or virtuous family. I know so well, of\nmy own knowledge, the nature of those questions and solicitations, that\nare offered by Popish priests to women in the confessional, that I\ncan scarcely believe any woman could be found, who would appear in the\npresence of men, or before any tribunal, civil or ecclesiastical, and\nrepeat the language by which her ears have been insulted.\n\nPopish priests understand human nature well; they know the timid and\nshrinking disposition of a virtuous woman. They feel that they are safe\nfrom public prosecution, so long as their solicitations and criminal\novertures are known only to women of reputation. If it were not for\nthis, our criminal courts could not contain the number of those reverend\nwretches, among Popish priests, who should appear before our criminal\ntribunals. Even Roman Catholic laymen, of rank and intelligence, have no\nidea of the enormities committed by their priests. Effectual means\nare taken, by the Church of Rome, to conceal their enormities from the\npublic eye. The extent of immorality is so great in Catholic countries,\nin Germany, France, and, _sub rosa_, in Ireland, that it is considered\nan evidence of prudence, in a priest, to keep a mistress, rather than\nbe a public scandal. It is thought by the Irish that their priests are\npeculiarly chaste and virtuous; they boast of this. I know the Irish\npriests as well as any other man living; I have lived among them; I\nwas one of them; I acted as a confessor among them, and held in that\ncapacity a higher position than any of my age in the country; and I\nsolemnly declare, that I never knew a chaste man among them. Every\nparish priest that ever I knew in Ireland, kept a mistress whom he\ncalled a _housekeeper_, or some female whose duty or whose apparent\nbusiness it seemed to be, to superintend his wardrobe or some such\nthing; but such is the credulity of the poor Irish, and such their\nidolatrous veneration for their priests, that I really believe, if they\ndetected one of them in _flagranti crimine_, they would not credit\nthe testimony of their own senses. It occurs, sometimes,--though very\nseldom,--that one of those Irish priests is detected; the punishment,\nin that case, is simply his removal to another parish. I have known\nimmoralities committed in the houses of Irish parish priests, so heinous\nthat they cannot be put to paper; and yet the poor Irish Catholics, who\nseem fated to be the victims of every species of delusion and imposture,\nlook upon their priests as perfect models of piety-; and consider their\nagent, Daniel O'Connell,--that enemy of peace and happiness,--as one of\nthe most perfect specimens of patriotism that ever basked in the\npure air of freedom. The poor Irish believe, most implicitly, in the\nnecessity of Auricular Confession; and such is their delusion, that many\nof them, even in this country, will not be persuaded, at this day,\nthat their priests take any pay for absolving them from their sins and\nforgiving their crimes. It is not many days ago since a respectable\nphysician in Boston told me that an Irish Roman Catholic, in that city,\noffered to bet him five hundred dollars that Roman Catholic priests\ndemanded no pay for pardoning sins. Can this be delusion, or\ninfatuation, or is it a species of witchery that thus deceives,\nenchains, and blinds a people, in all other respects of quick\nimagination and natural talents? I am free to confess, that I know not\nhow to account for it myself. I am perfectly at a loss what to call it;\nbut there it is, strange as it may appear.\n\nI would ask that gentleman who offered to make the above bet, or any\nother Roman Catholic who ever lived in Ireland, whether he has heard of\nsuch a thing as _stations of confession_, which are held two or three\ntimes a year by every parish priest in Ireland; or whether he has ever\nheard of such a thing as the _Viaticum_, which is given to the sick,\nafter confession, and in _arliculo mortis_. I cannot suppose that there\nis, in this country, an Irish Roman Catholic who has not seen and\nheard of both, and who does not know that these are modes and practices\nadopted by Irish priests for the purpose of collecting payment for\nthe pardon of sins. There are regulations published in each diocese\nin Ireland, and put forth among the priests, by episcopal authority,\nregulating _clerical dues_. Specific sums are laid down for mass, and\nfor auricular confession,--which the Church of Rome calls a sacrament,\nby the name of _penance_,--for marriage, for baptism, extreme\nunction, &c. The parish priest selects two or more houses in each\nparish,--invariably those the most wealthy among the farmers,--and gives\nnotice from the altar, the Sunday previous, that on a certain day, of\nthe coming week, he will hold a _station of confession_ at the house of\nA--------; this notice is equivalent to saying,--and is understood in no\nother sense, _all of you who have not come to confession for a certain\ntime, or who wish to go to confession now, come forward and pay me my\ndues_. The wily priest never says, come and pay me for pardoning your\nsins; that would never do. Protestants may hear it, and it would surely\ngo abroad that Irish priests were not entirely disinterested, and that\nthey could no more live by prayer alone than other people. I have, by\norder of the parish priest, for whom I acted as curate during a short\ntime, held many of those _stations of confession_, and never did a\nYankee pedler drive a harder bargain with his customers, than I was\ncompelled to make with those who came to confession to me, for\npayment for pardoning their sins; 'crediti amici,' however strange the\ndeclaration may appear to you; I have been ordered by the same Popish\npriest, in Ireland, to administer what is called, in Popish parlance,\nthe _Sacrament of Extreme Unction_, and to give to the dying patient the\n_Viaticum_; I have done so hundreds of times, but never until, by order\nof the same priest, payment was made to me in advance, whenever there\nwas the least doubt of the ability of the patient or his friends to pay.\nBefore the _Viaticum_ is given, or permitted to be given by the Irish\nbishops, it is required that the dying sinner should confess; for be\nit known, the poor Irish Catholic is persuaded, that this _Viaticum_ or\nwafer, made of flour and water, is the great God himself. The _Viaticum_\nis contained in a small box, called a _pixis_, and large enough to\ncontain from ten to fifty of these wafers or Gods, and is carried in the\nbreeches pocket of the priest. Do not laugh, American Protestants, or\nimagine that I am dealing in fables; I have gone, hundreds of times, to\nhear the confessions of dying Irish Papists, and given them one of these\nViaticums or Gods, fifty or sixty of which, I have often carried at\na time in my pocket My orders were, upon all occasions, never to give\nabsolution or the Viaticum, to any one, until payment was first insured\nto me; otherwise I had to pay the parish priest out of my own funds.\nScenes which take place on such occasions, are truly heart-rending. The\npoor sick and simple Irish Catholic, believes that he shall be damned to\nall eternity, if he is not anointed and forgiven his sins by the priest.\nHe would cheerfully pay him if he had the means; he would cheerfully\nsell the blanket that shelters him from the cold blasts of winter, to\npay the hard-hearted priest; but the blanket is often worth nothing, is\noften but a filthy, lousy rag, such as no American can form the least\nconception of, though the well-fed priest lives in luxury. I have known\nsome curates in Ireland, who had no means of their own, to take the\nchickens, the ducks, or turkeys of poor men whom they _anointed_, and\nwho had no money to pay the priest for pardoning their sins, and tie the\nlegs of those fowls together, throwing them across their saddles, and\ncarrying them home to pay the parish priest The poor curate perhaps was\nnot worth a dollar, and dare not return to the priest without bringing\nwith him his dues.\n\nIt is extremely unpleasant to dwell upon the disgusting scenes which are\ndaily witnessed in the sick rooms of the Irish peasantry. The idea of\ndying without obtaining _absolution_ and extreme unction from a Roman\nCatholic priest, is agonizing and intolerable to a poor Irish Papist,\nand it is considered as an everlasting stigma even upon his posterity.\nEvery effort is therefore made to procure a _shilling_, which is the\nminimum charge made by a priest for administering extreme unction. Any\nman may judge of the feelings and mental distress of a dying man who\nbelieves that he has not an hour longer to live, and that his eternal\nsalvation depends upon the absolution of his sins and the application\nof extreme unction, or _blessed oil_, by his priest. But the dying\nindividual is not the only one who suffers; the wife, the children,\nand grandchildren, participate in his mental sufferings; and those\nwarm-hearted creatures would give, and do give, the last potato from\ntheir table, or the last basket of turf in their possession, to a\npriest, rather than witness any longer the sufferings of the dying\nparent. It must seem strange that this people should not make some\neffort to shake off the chains with which their priests have bound\nthem to the car of Popery; but they will not. Such is the influence of\nsuperstition over their minds, that they will suffer on forever, unless\nProtestant Christians do something to relieve them. The Protestant\ngovernment of Great Britain would willingly break those chains which\nbind this generous and warm-hearted people to Popery, but they will not\nhave them broken. The Popish bishops of Ireland have recently refused\nto accept the provision which the Protestant government of Great Britain\nseems willing to make for the support of the Roman Catholic church and\npriests in Ireland. That demon in human shape--that traitor in the guise\nof a patriot and Christian--Daniel O'Connell, advises the Roman Catholic\nbishops of Ireland not to accept the state provision which Great Britain\nis willing to make for the priests of the Irish Catholic church. This\nman's drafts upon the credulity of mankind are very large--so large\nthat I believe they cannot be honored much longer. Why do Irish priests\nrefuse the state provision which Great Britain is willing to make for\nthem? Why do they not accept it from that source, rather than drag it\nfrom the poor, in shillings, in chickens, ducks, turkies, barrels of\npotatoes, pounds of butter, cishes of turf, &c. &c.? Why does Daniel\nO'Connell advise them, in his traitorous harangues, not to receive the\nliberal provision which the British government seems willing to make for\nthem? The reason is plain to the most careless and superficial thinker.\nThe traitor knows very well that the ultimate success of all his\nambitious designs depends upon the cooperation of the Popish church and\nits priests in Ireland. He knows full well that if the priests were paid\nby the State, they would lose their influence with the people, and that\nhe would lose the cooperation of both in his treacherous designs to\noverthrow Protestant governments and Protestant religion in England and\nelsewhere. Disguise it as he may, cover it over with Jesuitical varnish\nof what thickness or depth be pleases, it is evident that the overthrow\nof Protestantism in Church and State is the grand object which O'Connell\nand the Popish church have in view, in their present movements, both in\nIreland and in the United States. The Popish bishops and O'Connell are\naware that the moment the parish priests and curates of Ireland were\npaid their dues, they (the bishops and O'Connell) must lose their\ninfluence with the great mass of the people. This is evident to\nmyself. But what sort of influence would they lose? Must they lose that\ninfluence which a Christian minister of the gospel would like to possess\nover his flock, and which every good man likes to see in all evangelical\nreligions? I answer in the negative, and I challenge fair contradiction.\nThey could lose nothing which a pious Christian or a good citizen would\ndesire to retain. They could only lose their influence as rebels to God\nand traitors to the rights of man.\n\nWill Americans reflect for a moment that we have about three millions of\nthe disciples of O'Connell and Popish bishops in this country? Let every\nlover of our constitution ponder seriously upon this fact.\n\nHow do Popish bishops persuade their people to blind submission to their\nwill, and to the will of the traitor O'Connell? It is done through the\nconfessional.\n\nThat is the channel through which the poison of treason and idolatry\nis infused into the minds of Papists. But let that O'Connell take heed,\nlest the fate of Dante, once as good a Roman Catholic as himself, should\novertake him. Apropos, Corporal Brownson, Bishop Fenwick's mouth-piece\nin Boston, makes a boast of the fact that Dante was a Roman Catholic,\nand assures us that he was an honor to the Popish Church. I wonder\nwhether the Corporal has ever read Dante's poem on Hell? If he has,\nI would advise him to have written on the door of every Popish\nconfessional, that caution which Dante recommended to be posted on\nits portals. I have not a copy of Dante in my possession, but it was\nsomething to this effect, \"_Pause before you enter this gate_\" This\ncaution should be written in large letters upon the door of every Romish\nconfessional in the civilized world. I can assure those who enter that\naccursed tribunal, that they may as well enter the hell described by\nDante. I owe an apology to the public for the frequent mention of the\nname of Brownson, in these pages; but he has proved to me so great and\nprolific a source of mixed sadness and merriment, that I could not avoid\nfrequent allusion to his name. I verily believe that were it not for\nhim, I could scarcely write the present volume.\n\n\"Without thee [Corporal Browson ] nothing lofty could I sing; Come,\nthen, and with thyself thy genius bring.\"\n\nThe Corporal, I understand, is now lecturing in Philadelphia, on the\n_infallibility_ of the Romish church,--and the simple purity of its\n_democratic form of government_.\n\nAccording to Brownson, who never utters a word until it is first\napproved by the Roman Catholic bishops in the United States, no form\nof government should be allowed, but such as that now established and\nsanctioned by the Pope of Rome. The Pope's subjects, and they alone, as\nBrownson assures us, are fit to bear aloft the standard of liberty. No\nhands should be permitted to touch or embroider the flag of freedom, but\nthose of chaste nuns and sisters of charity in the Popish church; and\nno arms should be allowed the honor of defending that flag, but the\nvalorous ones of those who have been pardoned their sins at the holy\ntribunal of confession. Is this really the state of things? If so,\nthrice welcome the sisters of charity amongst us, and ten thousand\nwelcomes to those Popish patriots who have confessed their sins and been\npardoned by their priests. But what if the government of the Court of\nRome should be found not to be, in reality, all that our Popish bishops\nrecommend, and all that Brownson represents it? What if it should be\nfound that the Pope is not an angel, and that his government is far\nfrom being perfect? How would it be if his Royal Holiness the Pope, were\nproved to be a weak and licentious old profligate, unable to rule, and\nunwilling to obey? What if his government were proved to be one of the\nmost corrupt, avaricious, tyrannical, that ever existed upon earth? This\nwould entirely change the position of affairs, and could not fail to\ntinge with a blush the cheeks of our citizens who are weak enough to\nlisten to the ranting declamations of the hired infidel Brownson. I have\nbefore me the last number of the Westminster Review, a work of\ngreat talent and popularity, widely differing in tone and style, and\nrespectability, from a thing called Brownson's Democratic Review. The\nreader will easily pardon me for quoting a few extracts from it,\nwhich will tend to throw some light on the beauties of that Popish\nrepublicanism which the bishops of the Catholic church are desirous of\nintroducing into the United States. I beg the particular attention of my\nreaders to it. There is more of good sense, sound judgment, truth, and\ngood taste, in it, than in all the _clishmaclaver_ which has been issued\nfrom the Popish presses and Jesuit quarterly reviews in the United\nStates, during the last half century. \"We are not here to treat of the\nPope, that nominal head of the State--all-powerful for evil--absolutely\nimpotent for 27 good. As a general rule, he may be set down as an old\nimbecile, thrust into power by a faction of the Cardinals, who share\namong them the spoils; or as a veteran trafficer in ambition, who\nsettles with his electors the price of his elevation to the Papacy, and\nwho is compelled, at the risk of his life, to observe the conditions of\nthe compact. The real chief is the Secretary of State--_Sacretario di\nStado_--this is he who is the leader of the faction in the conclave. He\nstands above all authority. He is supposed to receive the responses of\nthe Papal oracle, and to utter them in the name of laws. A few strokes\nof the pen, forwarded to a tribunal, enable him to annihilate, without\npublicity, statutory enactments.\" How would our Western citizens,\nWolverines, Suckers, Hoosiers, and Squatters, like such a Secretary\nof State? How would the citizens of Tennessee, and Illinois, like such\ngentlemen, as Secretaries for their respective States? How many votes,\nreader, do you suppose such a man would receive, were he a candidate\nfor re-election as Secretary of State, in Vermont or New Hampshire?\nVery few, I apprehend; and yet the infidel Brownson, who is a native of\nVermont--if I am correctly informed--is trying to establish amongst us\na religion which would force upon us the duty of supporting such\ncharacters for the highest offices in our government.\n\n\"Next to the Secretary of State,\" continues the Westminster Review,\n\"comes a Cardinal. His titles confer upon him the Presidency of the\nApostolic Chamber, and the management of the customs and the mint....\nHis titles would lead one to infer that the general direction of the\npostal department was intrusted to him, though he has nothing to do with\nit The posts are under a separate and independent jurisdiction.... More\ndefinite in duty, but equally unaccountable as to performance, is the\nTreasurer General, who completes a supreme triumvirate of the Papal\nStates. He is the real minister of finance, though with the usual rule\nof misrule, several branches of that head are entirely independent He\nattends to the collection of the revenue, and appoints the provincial\nreceivers; he contracts loans, and orders the sale of public property.\n_He never gives account to any one of his administration, nor of the\ndistribution of the funds that enter the treasury; neither has any one a\nright to demand an account_. He can only be dismissed from his office by\nbeing promoted to the office of Cardinal; he then leaves on his desk a\nkey, supposed to be that of the treasury, being the only formality that\nis indispensable.\" This is taking the responsibility, with a vengeance!\nThe reason why the Popish Church gives this unlimited power to the\nsecretary of her treasury, deserves peculiar notice. Americans should\nview it closely. All Protestant governments and Protestant countries\nshould examine it attentively. The Pope and his government are aware\nthat if their Secretary of the Treasury were compelled to give a correct\naccount of the monies he received, and the uses for which they were\nappropriated, their plans, their bribes, their subornation of\nwitnesses, their intrigues, and various modes of overthrowing Protestant\ngovernments and Protestant churches, could not fail to be discovered,\nand then the Unanimous voice of mankind would cry aloud, Down v with\nPopery! down with the Beast! down with the old harlot of Rome! If\nthe Pope's treasurer were compelled to account for the millions upon\nmillions which Jesuits and Popish priests wring from the hard earnings\nof mankind, the Romish church could not exist an hour longer, and there\nis not a Protestant government upon earth, that would allow within its\njurisdiction a Popish college, bishop, seminary, nunnery, or monk-house.\nWere the treasurer of the Romish church obliged to give a fair account\nof the uses to which he appropriated the funds received and expended by\nhim, Americans could soon know where Bishop Hughes of New York receives\nthe vast sums of money which he has been expending for several years\nback, in erecting colleges and nunneries, into which he may decoy the\nchildren of Protestant Americans. It would then be known where Bishop\nPurcel of Ohio, obtained the funds with which he clandestinely, and\nwithout giving them any notice, purchased the buildings occupied by the\nMisses Beecher and others, in the city of Cincinnati, as a seminary\nfor the education of young ladies. The Popish Bishop Hughes of New York\nnever owned a dollar of his own; it is but a few years since he was\nemployed as a gardener in the college of Georgetown or Emmetsburg, I\nforget which. Bishop Purcel of Ohio was equally poor and destitute; but\nnow these right reverend Jesuits have at their command any amount of\nmoney which they in their judgment may deem necessary to proselytize\nAmerican heretics, and overthrow their republican form of government.\n\nCould we but know how the treasurer of the Pope disposed of the funds of\nhis church, the Jesuit Bishop Fenwick of Boston, could no longer conceal\nfrom the citizens of Massachusetts, where he found means to build a\nPopish college at Worcester; to which, I understand, he soon intends\nadding an extensive nunnery and a Foundling' Hospital, in which\nfatherless orphans, or rather the bastard children of Jesuits, are to be\nprovided for.\n\nIt is sound policy, in the Popish Church, not to require from the Pope's\ntreasurer, any account of the mode or manner in which he disposes of\nthe funds entrusted to his charge. And I cannot withhold from them due\ncredit for this admirable stroke of policy, wicked and demoralizing as\nit is in reality.\n\n\"Yet lower, beneath the class of principals and subalterns, swarms, as\nreptiles in filth, a hideous race, not to be hinted at in good society,\nbut whose abnormal existence must be proclaimed in our effort to\nmake intelligible the nature of papal government--a race of varlets,\nparasites, prostitutes, trafficers in vice, legions of familiar demons,\nwho crawl from the basement to the very summit of the edifice. The\ncelibacy of the clergy,--the occupiers of every avenue to power,--is the\nsource of their influence....... For ages past, the interior corruption,\nand the power exercised at Rome by domestics and women of gallantry, has\nbeen notorious; but before the time of Pius VI. (Pius died only about\nfifty years ago) the profligacy of the priests, though more brazen,\nhad not, in general at least, stained the family hearth. The natural\nchildren of Popes Cardinals, and Bishops, impudently recognized, by\ntheir elevation to the highest dignities, were not the offspring of\ntheir neighbors' wives.... At a later period, the depravity general in\nEurope, during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, the examples set\nby Cardinals Richlieu, Mazarin, and Alberoni, and the morale of theology\ndisseminated by Jesuits,--masters in the art of inciting the human\npassions, to turn them in the end to their own account, and of fostering\ncovert infamy, to lord it over their penitents by the possession of\ntheir secrets (in the confessional,)--taught, by Roman Cardinals and\nBishops, that it was more convenient, and less scandalous, to insinuate\ntheir seduction, where it was the interest of all parties to conceal\nit,\" The Westminster Review is good authority upon any subject; but I\nhave adopted a general rule, in my controversy with Papists, never\nto quote from Protestant authorities, except when I know, of my own\nknowledge, that the facts stated by them are true, and susceptible of\nproof. This is not--as the reader may easily imagine--because I doubt\nthe veracity of Protestant writers, but because Jesuits will persuade\ntheir followers, that my statements are only a repetition of _old lies_,\nfabricated by heretics. I have unqualifiedly accused the Roman Catholic\npriests and bishops of this country, and elsewhere, of using the\nconfessional for the infamous purpose of seducing, females. I have\ncharged upon nunneries, that they were nothing better than legalized\nhouses of prostitution, and established among us, by the Pope of\nRome and his bishops, for the sole purpose of affording them better\nopportunities and greater security in their immoralities and high-handed\nprofligacies; and I appeal to Americans, of all denominations, whether\nI have or have not established my charges against them. I ask any\nwell-read American, who is acquainted with the private history of\nCardinal Richlieu, whether he was not one of the greatest profligates of\nhis day? Is it not well known, that Cardinal Mazarin was so notorious a\nprofligate, that no man's wife was safe in his society, or proof against\nhis political influence and extravagant expenditures. He was Prime\nMinister to Louis XIV. of France; he had, in his gift, nearly all the\noffices under the government; and it was well understood, throughout\nall France, that it was perfectly useless for any man whose wife was\nnot young and beautiful, to apply to him for office. There is not to\nbe found, a well informed man, who has not read the life of Cardinal De\nRetz, and who does not know that his house, and his soirees, were places\nof rendezvous for gay women, and especially for that portion of them\nwhose character for chastity was not the best Let it be observed\nhere, that the parish priests and cures were all in the pay of these\nCardinals, and employed to procure and select for them, through the\nconfessional, the most beautiful and desirable women in Paris; and\nfaithfully did these Popish _pimps_ discharge their commissions.\nBut still, the Jesuits of this country, and that miserable outcast\nmouth-piece of theirs, Brownson, talk of the _infallibility_ of the\nRomish Church, and the superior beauties of its democratic form of\ngovernment. Can it be possible that the enlightened Republicans of the\nUnited States, have patience to listen to the diatribes of this man\nagainst Protestant governments and Protestant Churches? Yet so it is;\nand I have not the least doubt, that many of the indignant expressions,\nwhich I make use of in speaking of him and Jesuits, will be found fault\nwith, as they have been before, by many of the mawkish sympathizers with\nPopery, in the United States.\n\nThere are to be found, among the good and virtuous of our Protestant\npeople, many who think that I should use milder language than much of\nthat contained in my books,--that some of it is too harsh,--that it\nshows a bad spirit, a bad temper, and is--_pro tanto_--an indirect\nevidence, that I possess not a Christian feeling towards Popery or its\nadvocates. That I am not what a Christian ought to be, in thought, word,\nand deed, 1 will freely admit. But those sympathizers, whether Infidels\nor Christians, who think that I should use milder language in my\ncontroversy with Papists, know but very little--as I have often told\nthem before--of the spirit and elements of Popery, or the mode of\nwarfare adopted by its Jesuits; and hence it is, that whenever they\nthemselves enter the lists of controversy with Popish priests, and\nJesuit presses, they are invariably and ingloriously defeated. I would\nask these gentlemen, who find fault with the apparent asperity of my\nlanguage, whether they could, collectively or individually, silence\nthe howlings of a northeast storm by softly whistling Yankee Doodle, or\nhumming Hail Columbia? When they can do this--but I doubt much if it can\nbe done sooner--then they can silence scurrilous Jesuits in their abuse\nof Protestant religion, and check the efforts of the Popish presses in\nthe United States, by using mild, charitable, and gentlemanly language,\nin all controversies with them. The fact is, Protestants and Protestant\ntheologians too, must alter their mode of warfare with Papists.\n\nThe Popish press in the United States, has always endeavored, and never\nfailed in the attempt--as far as I know--to place our Protestant presses\nin a position of defence. A single thrust from their journals, inflicts\na wound which requires months to heal; the prescription alone, which\nis necessary for a cure, occupies whole columns of our presses and\nperiodicals, and thus they have a great advantage over their Protestant\nopponents. I have never given them this advantage, and until my\nProtestant fellow laborers in the glorious cause of religion and civil\nrights, follow my example, in their controversies with Papists, they may\nas well 'pile arms' at once, and retire from the arena. I have carried\nthe war with Papists, into Africa, but not until all overtures for peace\nproved ineffectual. I have inflicted upon them wounds, which it will\nrequire some time to heal. The result has shown the policy of my\ncourse towards them. It is scarcely twelve months, since _repeal\nmeetings_,--which in reality were meetings held for the ill-disguised\npurpose of overthrowing the Protestant Church and government in this\ncountry,--were held in every hall and place of public meeting in our\ncities. I have exposed the covert intentions of those meetings, in pure\nSaxon language. I have called the priests and Jesuits who encouraged\nthem, as well as the presses which advocated them,--traitors, and\nenemies to religion and the civil rights of our people. What has been\nthe consequence? We scarcely hear now, of a _repeal 27* meeting_. Its\nadvocates have been silenced, and they are obliged to abandon the cause,\nor support it under some other name or title, which I understand they\nare doing now, in Boston, under the infamous disguise of taking up\ncontributions for the starving Irish. The Popish bishops, finding\nme rather a troublesome customer, and well versed in Jesuitical\nfencing,--parrying and thrusting with as much skill and precision as\nthey themselves, having been taught in the same school with them, and\nby the same masters,--have come to the wise conclusion, that they had\nbetter let me alone, and tacitly admit the truth of every accusation\nwhich I have brought against them. They seem, however, resolved to die\nhard, and recently commissioned the notorious infidel Brownson to defend\nthem, and, if possible, to exculpate them from the enormous and vile\ncrimes of seduction and treason, which I have brought against them.\nI fondly hoped that when this Brownson took the field in defence\nof Popery, some of those meek, bashful theologians, and editors of\nreligious journals, who think my language too harsh, would come against\nhim and his Jesuit masters. There is not a scurrilous epithet in the\nEnglish vocabulary, which Brownson and his Jesuit masters, have not\napplied to Protestants and Protestant presses. He has encouraged, by\nadvice of Jesuits, treason to this government, by recommending the\ngovernment of the Pope, as a better and more republican system; and\nstill, I find--much to my regret--that there-is not a single Protestant\ndivine in the country, or a single Protestant periodical--as far as I\ncan discover--willing to raise his voice or publish an article against\nhim. They all seem alive to the paramount necessity of finding fault and\ncondemning what they term cheap literature, as calculated to demoralize\nthe community. Eugene Sue, and Michelet, are special objects of their\ncensure. It was only the other day, that an orthodox clergyman, who\nholds a high station and receives a high salary from his church,\ndelivered, in New York, a philippic of nearly two hours' length, against\nEugene Sue's \"Wandering Jew,\" and concluded with a Jeremiad, bemoaning\nthat so many copies of it should have been distributed in the book\nstores in New York. \"The work,\"--observed this learned but mistaken\nlecturer,--\"is flooding the country.\" Very true, it is flooding\nthe country; but is not Popery flooding the country? Are not Jesuits\nflooding the country? Are not Popish concubines, denominated nuns and\nsisters ters of charity, flooding the country? Is not Brownson, the\nPope's Agent, flooding the country with infidel principles and treason\nagainst our government? Which of these floods does the reverend\ngentleman to whom I allude, prefer? He is now fairly between Scylla and\nCharybdis; he must fall upon one; and which does he choose? The Popish\nflood, which Eugene Sue is trying to dam, or the flood occasioned by\nthe sale of the Wandering Jew in New York and elsewhere? The former is a\ntorrent which flows forever; the latter--even if it were destructive for\nthe moment, is but a land flood, that may cover the meadows to-day, but\ndisappear on the morrow. _Utrum horam mavis accipe_. Let the reverend\nlecturer, and those who maintain similar opinions of modern and\nanti-Popish writers, take their choice.\n\nThere is no proportion, I apprehend, to be found between the zeal of\nthose lecturers and their knowledge of human nature. The fact is, that\nvery few of them have travelled far into the regions of general science;\neach seems to be confined within the circle of his own creed, and many\nof them vainly endeavor to lay the foundations of morality much higher\nthan the existence of moral agency itself. They resemble, in a great\nmeasure, some of those ancient philosophers who supposed that the\nessences of things existed before the things themselves made their\nappearance, or could assume any shape or form. For instance, they\nimagined the essence of black and white, red, blue, pink, &c., had\nexistence before there was any such thing as color. There were many\nphilosophers who supposed that the essence of square and circle existed\nbefore there was any such thing as form. Many of our modern moralists\nand lecturers upon morality are little less extravagant in their ideas;\nand if they do not check their imaginations and unmeaning deviations\nfrom common sense, in some of their public lectures, they must soon\nshare the fate of those ancient dreamers to whom I have alluded.\nLecturers now-a-days must recollect that men are permitted to\nexercise--and that freely--their own judgment. We find it very difficult\nto accompany many of our speakers in their extraordinary flights to the\nregions of morality, in which the common sense and sound doctrine of\nmoral agency, are entirely lost sight of. The lecturer who would condemn\nthe efforts of Eugene Sue to arrest the progress of Jesuitism, shows\nbut a very limited knowledge of this world, and impliedly denies the\nefficacy of human agency. He will soon find that his own efforts to\nimpede the progress of Popery will prove ineffectual; they will be lost\nin those regions of fanciful perfection which his own imagination has\ncreated. Theologians of all denominations are peculiarly apt to run into\nextremes; many of them take certain standards of morality, which cannot\nbe defended, and which need not be sustained, and they are very apt to\npronounce all who differ from them to be in error, when in fact charity\nand good sense demand from them a frank acknowledgment, that though\nthey themselves may be right, it does not follow that others are wrong.\nEugene Sue condemns not only the religious doctrines of Jesuits, but\nseverely censures their political creed. He holds the latter up to the\nworld as dangerous and destructive to the happiness of the human kind.\nHe knows man, in every state of society, and he writes to convince him\nin each. He is well versed in the elements of political government,\nand knows that it is upon the preservation and maintenance of it in a\nhealthy form, that the happiness of man, in this world, depends. It is\ntherefore perfectly idle, and worse than idle, for those lecturers who\nperhaps have no other ideas of the moral and political duties of man\nthan those which they have learned from Baxter's Saint's Rest, Four Fold\nState, or his Crook in the Lot, to declaim against Eugene Sue, or any\nother man, whose better experience in the world teaches him to pursue a\ndifferent course in trying to accomplish the same object. Let it not\nbe supposed that I mean to speak disrespectfully of Baxter, or that a\nthorough knowledge of his works and writ* ings would prove useless to\nany one; but no man of sense or prudence could suppose for a moment,\nthat he was a match for Jesuits, or that a knowledge of his and similar\nworks would enable any lecturer to encounter Jesuits on the field of\ncontroversy.\n\nThe policy which Jesuits would introduce into this country, and force\nupon us, by the authority of their church, could not long fail to divide\nthis Union into fragmentary sections, and embroil our citizens in scenes\nof blood and slaughter, such as never have been witnessed before. We\nshould soon have State armed against State; and in place of one united\narmy and one commander-in-chief, we should have twenty? eight armies,\nand as many generals-in-chief. This is precisely what the Jesuits and\nthe Popish church are aiming at This would give them, united, a superior\npower, and to them we should have to appeal for the settlement of our\ndifficulties. The policy of the Popish church has always been a curious\ncombination of ecclesiastical and democratic pretensions. In theory, it\nis democratic enough for our most rabid Locofocos; but in practice,\nit requires from man the most thorough subjection. Let us look back to\nhistory, and the truth of this will appear evident Any opposition to the\nPope of Rome, from any sovereign, or any other authority whatever, is\nconsidered by the Popish church as treason against God and man.\n\nEvery historian will recollect the murder of the Guises in France. The\ndisturbances of the times, and the causes which led to them, are well\nknown to the readers of history; and let it not be forgotten, that the\nPopish doctrines and Popish republicanism which then existed in France,\nare now covertly and treacherously taught in these United States. In\n1589, some of the French people entertained scruples whether it was\nlawful or not to depose a legitimate sovereign, or put him to death,\nafter swearing allegiance to him. The question was one of great anxiety\namong the people, and something was to be done to quiet it Meetings were\ncalled in different places, and it was finally determined by them to lay\nthe subject before the Popish theological faculty of the University of\nParis: This faculty had full power from his Holiness the Pope, to give\njudgment in the case, and the Catholics of France were bound to obey\nit. Accordingly, on the 7th of January, 1589, the great, and holy, and\ninfallible doctors of Popish divinity in the College of Sorbonne met,\nby authority, and pronounced the following decision: \"Having heard the\nnature and free counsels of the Magistri, and after many and divers\narguments heard, drawn, for the most part, verbatim from holy writ, the\ncanon law, and the Papal ordinances, it has been concluded, by the Dean\nof the faculty, without any dissenting voice, first, that the people are\nabsolved from the oath of fidelity and allegiance sworn by them to the\nKing. Furthermore, that the said people may, without any scruple of\nconscience, combine together, arm themselves, and collect money, for the\nmaintenance of the Roman Catholic Apostolic religion, against a king.\"\nThis is republicanism, as taught by Jesuits and Papists. This is the\nrepublicanism which they teach through the confessional in the United\nStates, and this is the democracy which they have commissioned the\ninfidel Brownson to spread over our country. This is the republicanism\nwhich Eugene Sue is cautioning mankind against introducing amongst them,\nand Eugene Sue is the man whose writings many of our philanthropic, but\nmistaken lecturers, are trying to suppress. Eugene Sue has done more to\nstem the torrent of Popish democracy in this country, than any man who\nhas written against Papists. He has attacked it in its very bud. He knew\nwhere it germinated. Our Protestant lecturers know not the source from\nwhich it springs, and therefore they had perhaps better let it alone\naltogether, until they become thoroughly acquainted with the principle\nthat gave it birth, and the influences that sustain it. Eugene Sue knew\nfull well that the Popish confessional was the source and substance of\nall Jesuit treasons, immoralities, plots, and murders. He is a man of\nthe world, and knows that licentiousness and despotism are more closely\nallied than is imagined by our simple-minded and pious lecturers; he\nknows that both are inconsistent with liberty,--which should be the true\nend of all governments,--and he has therefore deemed it prudent to bring\nall his energies to bear against the Popish confessional, knowing full\nwell that if that were destroyed, together with the supremacy of the\nPope of Rome, mankind could not fail to be benefited. He has attacked\nthat confessional, not by whining over the immoralities of the times,\nor the romance of modern literature,--this any old woman can do,--but he\nhas fallen upon it with the club of Hercules, whose well-aimed blows\nI pray heaven no lecturer may weaken. It is far from my intention to\nbe disrespectful to any well-meaning lecturer against Popery, and it is\nstill much further from my mind to be uncourteous towards any of those\nProtestant divines who disagree with me in regard to the anti-Popish\nwritings of Eugene Sue; but I must do my duty, as I understand it\nmyself. I am not unmindful that there was a time when general knowledge\nwas a scarce article among the people, and when the clergy engrossed the\nlargest portion of it; and I doubt whether it is not a great misfortune\nthat many of our lecturer derive most of their knowledge of mankind from\nthe study of works written in those times. Hence much of their unfitness\nto criticise the writings of men of the world. It is, however, an\neasy matter to condemn the writings of any man; but when a Protestant\ntheologian publicly finds fault with Eugene Sue, or any other writer\nagainst Popery, it is reasonable to expect him to supply something\nbetter of his own. A good anecdote is told of Margaret, Governess of\nthe Netherlands. When Luther first commenced writing against Popery, he\nhandled the Pope and his Jesuit priests rather roughly; he knew them of\nhis own knowledge, just as I do myself. Margaret upon one occasion had\naround her some of her courtiers, who were chatting most politely and\ncourteously, and commenting on the inelegance and uncourtliness of many\nof the expressions used by Luther in his writings. Margaret, suddenly\nturning round, asked one of the most garrulous and verbose amongst them,\n\"Who is this Martin Luther?\" \"He is,\" replied the courtier, \"a rough and\nuncouth man,\" and from the \"coarseness of his language, I should suppose\nhe was an ignorant man.\" \"Yes, he is,\" exclaimed the whole circle of\nexquisite theologians and fashionables. \"I am glad of it,\" replied\nMargaret. \"You are learned men, possessing refined minds, and no doubt\nyou will give us something better than he has written. I wish you would\ndo so as soon as possible, and furnish me a copy of your production.\"\nCan the sapient critics to whom I have been alluding take a hint? Eugene\nSue understands much better the strength and power he has to contend\nwith, than our American theologians do. If I estimate them correctly,\nor if it be proper to judge of all by any one of them, I would say they\nknow nothing whatever of the strength of Popery. I recollect having\nrecently seen and read a speech delivered by a distinguished member of\nthe Christian Alliance, at a meeting held in Boston, and the following\npassage in that speech made so vivid an impression on my mind, that\nI have not forgotten it since; nor could I help inferring that if the\nspeaker were a fair sample of the whole, they formed a very incorrect\nestimate of the power of that wily enemy to civil rights, the Pope of\nRome. The following are literally the words of the speaker to which I\nallude: \"I thought the Pope was a man of learning, but he aint; he's\na granny.\" This sentiment, and the mode of expressing it, may be\nsatisfactory to the learned gentleman who uttered it, but to one who may\nbe entirely indifferent, it is a much stronger evidence of the grannyism\nof the speaker, than of the Pope. I refer to this with no other view\nthan to show how unacquainted some American theologians are with Popery,\nin every shape and form. This gentleman should know that if the Pope\nwere a granny, it would be no argument against Popery, or any preventive\nof the evils with which it threatens us. Suppose a meeting of citizens\nwere held, on the subject of our difficulties with Great Britain, we can\neasily fancy some spouter to rise in his place and say, \"We have nothing\nto dread from that nation; the Queen is but a silly woman; she is but\na mere granny.\" Would not any sensible man at the meeting advise this\nspouter to sit down, and no longer intrude upon their time by such\nnonsense? It might be known to the meeting, that the government of\nEngland was not managed by the Queen, but by her Cabinet, composed of\nmen well versed in the science of diplomacy and government intrigues.\nIt is immaterial whether the sovereign of England is in her cradle,\nflirting at a ball, or in her dotage--the power of England is not the\nless to be dreaded.\n\nHad our American theologians as much worldly tact, and knowledge, as\nthey have of single mindedness and true piety, they might easily know,\nthat it is a matter of perfect indifference,--so far as the power of\nRome is concerned,--whether the Pope be a granny or a sage. The affairs\nof his court are managed by unprincipled, crafty, and licentious men,\nwho thirst for power and patronage. They are not without friends in this\ncountry. Many fear them, politicians sympathize with them, and they are\ngaining ground, in spite of the friends of liberty in the United States.\nBut let not the friends of freedom or of religion despair. Popish\ninfluence cannot long prevail over the good sense and cool reflection of\nour Protestant people. No man has ever measured the strength and dangers\nof Popery more accurately that Eugene Sue. He knows that Popery has\nin view, not exclusively the propagation of its religion, but also the\nincrease of its wealth and temporal dominion. It is accomplishing both,\nin the United States, while it is losing the latter, in every other\ncountry in the world; and it is my deliberate opinion, that if Eugene\nSue and Michelet, were put into the hands of every American who can\nread, they would do more towards shutting up the floodgates of Popery,\nwhich are now open upon this country, than any other means we\ncould adopt towards effecting so desirable an object. Americans may\nsuppose--and it will be extremely difficult to persuade them to the\ncontrary--that however the Popish Church may succeed in propagating her\nreligion amongst them, she can never get possession--at least to\nany extent--of their property or temporal power. In this they are\nmistaken--egregiously mistaken.\n\nI beg leave to lay before my readers one instance--and let this one\nsuffice for all--of the secret and fraudulent manner, in which the\nChurch of Rome, through her agents, is gaining power and acquiring\nproperty in the United States.\n\nI had the honor, a few weeks ago, of receiving a letter from the\nHon.--------, an eminent and distinguished member of the Philadelphia\nBar, of which the following is a copy:\n\n\nPhiladelphia, Nov. 14th, 1845. To Wm. Hogan, Esq.\n\nI make no apology for troubling you with this communication, having read\nyour books and thereby perceived that you are willing to serve the cause\nof truth and justice.\n\nA suit has been instituted against the county of Philadelphia, by a\nSociety calling themselves \"the Brothers of the Order of Hermits of St.\nAugustine,\" to recover damages--laid in the declaration, at one hundred\nthousand dollars--for the destruction of the church of St. Augustine of\nthis city. The Act of Assembly, upon which the suit is founded, gives\nthe remedy to the owners of the property, and it is a part of my duty,\nin defending this suit, to see that the suit is brought by the rightful\npersons, as a recovery by the wrong ones, would not bar those justly\nentitled, in a second action. You perceive, therefore, that it becomes\nimportant to know who these Brothers are. I have searched the records\nof their enrolment in vain for their charter and deeds. None are to be\nfound, and indeed everything in relation to them is involved in such\nmystery that it is difficult to get along.\n\nAs you resided a long time in the city and were, doubtless, intimate\nwith some of the parties, would you do me the favor to enlighten me on\nthe following points?\n\n1. Who are the Brothers of the Order of Hermits of St. Augustine? by\nwhom instituted? are they enabled to hold property?\n\n2. What property and estate do they hold? I perceive that, in 1820,\nthey were composed of the following persons; Michael Hurley; Prince\nGalligzen, Catholic pastor at Bedford, Pennsylvania; Lewis Debarth,\npastor of St. Mary's Philadelphia; Patrick Kenney, pastor at Coffee Run,\nChester county, Pennsylvania; and J. B. Holland, pastor at Lancaster,\nPennsylvania.\n\nDid any of these churches belong to this Order? and if so, which of\nthem?\n\n3. It has been often said that the Pope was the real owner of the\nCatholic churches in the United States. Is that true? and if so, how\nshall I be able to prove this upon the trial of the cause?\n\n4. It has been confidently asserted, that this Order of Hermits, is\nconfined to ecclesiastical duties, and is prohibited from holding real\nestate. Is this true, and if so, how shall I be able to prove it?\nAn early answer, if it suits your convenience, will much oblige\nyours,------!!!!!\n\n\nWe see, from the above letter, the _modus operandi_ of the Romish Church\nin acquiring temporal power in this country. It is an axiom, and one\nas well understood by Americans as any other people in the world, that\n\"money is power,\" and Papists understand it equally well. These artful\nencroachers upon liberty, are not deceived in the effects which must\nresult from the possession of property. Give them money, give them real\nestate, give them space and room for their followers, and they will ask\nno more from Americans,--the rest they will have in spite of them.\n\nI would call the attention of any intelligent American, to the above\nletter. I wish he would sit down with me and calculate, for a moment,\nthe probable amount of property which the Popish Church now owns in the\nUnited States. In Philadelphia, one church possessed by an individual\nmember of a comparatively obscure order of friars, is estimated to be\nworth one hundred thousand dollars. Let us suppose that this order of\nfriars owns or claims ownership to fifty such churches in the single\nState of Pennsylvania. That would give the Order of Hermits of St.\nAugustine five million dollars' worth of property in Pennsylvania alone,\nwithout even taking into consideration the appurtenances and real estate\nbelonging to these churches; and if we admit that the \"Brothers of the\nOrder of Hermits,\" own far themselves, or as the Pope's agents, property\nworth five millions of dollars in Pennsylvania, what must be the amount\nowned by other different orders of friars, priests, and Jesuits, in\nthat State? The amount, if correctly estimated, would baffle my limited\npowers of calculation. But Pennsylvania is not the only state in the\nUnion where Popish friars and priests are getting possession of real\nestate. They own millions upon millions' worth of property in almost\nevery slate in the Union, but especially in Maryland, Louisiana, South\nCarolina, Ohio, New York, and Massachusetts. But it will be said, and I\nhave heard it said in Boston, that the Popish Church cannot possibly\nown much property without the knowledge of our citizens, and can\nconsequently acquire no influence of any amount from that source. There\nagain Americans are deceived, and literally, as we term it, gulled by\nthe Church of Rome. This is exemplified in the case alluded to in the\nabove letter. There were but few in Philadelphia,--if any besides Popish\npriests,--who knew even of the existence of such an Order as that of\nthe \"Brothers of St. Augustine.\" I have searched in vain, says my\ncorrespondent, \"for an enrolment of their charter.\" There was no record\nof it to be found; yet the Order exists, and lays claim to damages\namounting to one hundred thousand dollars, for the burning of a church,\nwhich forms but a fraction of that property which they allege to be\ntheir own. In vain do we examine our tax books, to ascertain the amount\nof property claimed as belonging to the Popish Church. We may look them\nover till the day of judgment and not be the wiser. Millions are now\nowned in the single city of Boston by the Popish Church, of which the\nBostonians, with all their shrewdness, have not the remotest idea. It\nis owned under cover, under fictitious names, and otherwise. It may be\nregularly appraised; its taxes may be regularly paid, but who it belongs\nto, or who has the beneficial interest of it, is what cannot be known\nuntil the arrival of the time when the law requires, and imperatively\ndemands, that a legal ownership should be established, as happens to be\nthe case in Philadelphia.\n\nIt will be asked what reply I have made to my correspondent in\nPhiladelphia. I answer none at all; at least I have made none to the\nquestions propounded to me. It may farther be asked, why not? It is\nfor the very reason which my correspondent assigns for propounding his\nquestions to me. I wish to serve the cause of truth and justice, but I\nhave no desire to interfere in party questions, except in the way of\nmy profession, on the emolument of which I am chiefly dependent for the\nmeans of subsistence. Were I to pause, in the course of my opposition to\nPopery, and turn aside to interfere in particular cases of controversy,\nI should soon lose the influence which I may now have in advancing the\nmoral interest of the community at large. I should soon be considered,\nnot the friend of abstract \"truth and justice,\" but a party barrator,\nunworthy the confidence and respect of my fellow citizens. There is,\nbesides, another reason for not yielding to the wishes of my respected\ncorrespondent I have resided, as he himself states, \"for some years in\nPhiladelphia,\" and never have I ceased, during that time, to warn its\ninhabitants against the encroachments of Popery amongst them. But they\nheeded not my warning, and permitted the Papists of that city to heap\nupon me the grossest abuse that man ever endured. I have, over and over\nagain, appealed to the Protestant inhabitants of Philadelphia, to come\nto my aid in my efforts to guard their religion and civil rights against\nthe rapacious and impious efforts of the Court of Rome to destroy and\nrob them of both. I have offered them my personal services gratis for\nfive years, if they would supply me with a church or pulpit, where\nI could preach and protest against the following doctrines; viz.,\nAuricular Confessions, the Supremacy of the Pope of Rome, the Popish\nLatin Mass, and the idolatrous doctrine of Transubstantiation. I made\nthis offer through one or two of the public presses in Philadelphia, but\nthe offer was entirely rejected by some, and coldly received by\nothers. Here I must state--though with great regret--that not a\nsingle Protestant clergyman, of any denomination whatever, either in\nPhiladelphia or elsewhere in the United States, offered me his pulpit,\nhis aid, or his counsel. The doctrines, which I was willing to maintain\nthen, were precisely those which John Ronge is disseminating in Germany;\nand there is not a Protestant clergyman in that country, who would\nwithhold from him the use of his pulpit, or his influence, in so holy\na cause as that in which he is engaged. But I can see a shade of\ndifference, and not a very slight one, between German and American\nProtestants. The heart of a German Protestant can be approached,\nthrough the medium of his understanding and conceptions of his moral\nobligations; that of an American Protestant, in many instances, can be\ntouched only through his pocket. There is a sort of magnetic\ncommunication, or something else, between gold and the souls of some\nAmerican Protestants. Solomon says that money can do all things; and had\nhe alluded to this country alone, the saying of the wise man would have\nbeen doubly true.\n\nBut happily a change seems to have come over the spirits of our\nProtestant Christians. They are coming up to the work of gospel labor\nwith a noble zeal. There is but one voice among them on the subject of\nPopery, and may that voice be heard throughout the four corners of the\nglobe. Down with the Pope Down with Popery! and may the God of mercy\nsave and convert the poor deluded Papists. I believe I am safe in\nsaying that there is not at present an evangelical clergyman in the\nUnited States, who would refuse the use of his pulpit or church to any\nindividual, properly qualified to expose the errors and idolatries of\nthe Popish church. I have had, myself, applications from some of the\nmost eminent men in the Orthodox church in this country, to preach and\nlecture from their pulpits, and should most cordially have accepted\nthe friendly offer, if my feeble state for the last few months, had not\nentirely forbidden it. The same cause also at present forbids it.\n\nI have here digressed from the purpose of this volume. But the Subject\ntowards which the digression is made, is of too much importance to be\nfairly discussed within the limits of any digression, however wide\nor extensive it may be. It is one which must soon occupy the serious\nattention of our most talented and best informed Christian writers. It\ndemands the consideration of all who understand the blasting influence\nof Popery upon the morals of the rising genera-. tion. Protestant\ntheologians must come up to the work; they must open their churches, and\npulpits, and lend their influence and their talents to put down Popery,\nor Popery will put them down. Nor let them suppose that when I charge\nthem with apathy in this good cause, I am indulging any feelings of\npersonal disappointment, or moved by any fitful, fretful, or angry\nthoughts towards them. On the contrary, it is because I entertain no\nsuch sentiments, that I speak with freedom of things as they once struck\nme. I should be as silent as the grave on the subject, were it in the\npower of any man living to attribute to me pecuniary or interested\nmotives.\n\nBut to return to the point from which we have, in a measure, digressed.\nSuch is the deception practised upon Roman Catholics, through the\nconfessional, by their church, priests and their agents, that they (the\nCatholics) will not believe the plainest truths, unless sanctioned by\nthem. I have often known them to discredit the testimony of their own\nsenses, and I have now before me a case in point, confirming this almost\nincredible assertion. It appears that some time ago, when much anxiety\nwas manifested in England and elsewhere, in regard to the alleged\ndestitute condition of the Irish tenantry, the London Times accused\nO'Connell, the Pope's agent in Ireland, of being himself one of the\nmost oppressive landlords, and reducing his tenants to the most wretched\ncondition. This was a serious charge against the Pope's vicegerent\nIt could not, it must not be admitted. It will be recollected by the\nreader, that O'Connell and the Popish priests of Ireland have been for\nyears, without any intermission whatever, accusing Protestant landlords\nand Protestant clergymen of oppressing their tenants, and reducing them\nto the very extreme of want and penury. The proprietors of the London\nTimes, aided by several philanthropic Protestant gentlemen, resolved to\nsend over to Ireland a few gentlemen of known veracity, to ascertain the\ntruth or falsehood of this serious accusation. They accordingly entered\nupon the discharge of their duty, proceeded forthwith to Ireland, and\nreported the condition of affairs just as they found them. According to\ntheir report, the charge against Protestant landlords had no foundation\nin fact, and was pronounced in the Times to be utterly groundless. No\nsooner had the Times reached the Island of Saints, than the whole body\nof saints, angeles, and archangels--by whom we are to understand Popish\npriests, bishops, and archbishops--rose in a body, together with their\npresses, pamphleteers, periodicals, &c, and pronounced the statement\nof the commissioners a base falsehood, and the Times itself a vile and\nscurrilous press. The proprietors of the Times and their friends were\nnot, however, to be put down by this bullying; they were not to be put\ndown by this shameless beggar, inflated gascon and traitor, O'Connell.\nThey proposed to O'Connell to send over six gentlemen, to meet any six\nwhom he and his Popish friends might appoint, to examine the condition\nof the tenants upon O'Connell's own estate, taking that as a fair and\nmost impartial specimen of the condition of the Irish tenantry. Nothing\nfairer than this could be offered. Surely, if all the misery of the\nIrish tenantry were fairly to be attributed to the Protestant church and\nProtestant landlords, no portion of it could be found on those estates\nowned and held by Roman Catholics. But what was the course of O'Connell\nupon this occasion? He called a meeting of the saints, angels, and\narchangels, and laid before them the proposal of the Times; but lo! and\nbehold! he and they shrank from the proposition. On the receipt of their\nrefusal, a competent individual was sent from the Times' office, to\naccompany the commissioners back to Ireland, and to take note of what\nthey saw in presence of Mr. O'Connell, or any of his friends whom\nhe might appoint. The commissioners proceeded to the estate of Mr.\nO'Connell, in the county of Kerry, Ireland. They spent three days\nwalking over it, going into every cottage and making personal inquiries.\nThe result was published in the Times of December 25th, 1845. It speaks\nfor itself, and cannot fail to be satisfactory to any man of truth and\nhonor. The first day, the commissioners were accompanied by an agent of\nMr. Hartop, under whom Mr. O'Connell holds some lands as a middleman.\nThe second day they were accompanied from Valentia by Mr. O'Conner's own\nsteward, throughout the whole of their inspection. The third day they\nwere accompanied by one of O'Connell's sons, Morris O'Connell. They\ninspected his father's estates from Waterville to Derrynane Beg. At\nArdcara,--a town land which Mr. O'Connell holds on a lease of his\nown life, and sublets to a middleman,--the condition of the huts was\nperfectly horrible. The commissioners thus conclude their report upon\nthe condition of the poor tenantry on the lands of Daniel O'Connell, the\ngreat liberator of Ireland--he who is sacrificing his time, his\nfortune, for the amelioration of the condition of mankind at large, but\nespecially the Irish. It is with difficulty I can restrain a tear of\nsorrow, while I read the report which is given of the poor creatures who\nare the tenants of this cold-blooded hypocrite, O'Connell. I can already\nfancy the impatience of my readers to hear the conclusion of it Here\nit is. Listen to it, I pray you, American Protestants. Hear it, you\nsimple-hearted Irishmen in the United States, who have contributed\nthousands and tens of thousands to support in luxury this heartless\nimpostor, O'Connell. \"We have?\" say the commissioners, \"been all over\nEngland, Scotland, Wales, and Ireland, and we declare solemnly, that\nin no part of the United Kingdom is such neglected wretchedness, such\nfilth, such squalor, such misery of every kind, to be seen, as we saw on\nMr. O' Connell's estate, in the presence of his son, Morris O'Connell.\"\n\nThere was a law among the Athenians, which provided that he who\naccused another of crime, and failed to substantiate or make good the\naccusation, should forfeit his head. Some doubted the wisdom of this\nlaw; but there was one good in it which no man can question. It showed\nthat he who accused another justly, was a man of principle, bold and\nintrepid in the cause of truth and justice. It showed, besides, that the\ncrime of false swearing, or falsely accusing another, was looked upon as\na crime hateful in its character, and of the utmost magnitude.\n\nIf this old Athenian law were in force in Ireland, where now would be\nthe head of O'Connell? Just where it ought to be, on the point of a\nspear at the top of some steeple, where the passer-by might point at it\nand say, there is the head of Daniel O'Connell, the false accuser of his\nProtestant countrymen. Where would be the heads of the Roman Catholic\nBishops and Archbishops of Ireland? Where would be the heads of Bishops\nHughes of New York, Fenwick of Boston, Purcel of Cincinnati, and the\nother Popish bishops of this country, who accuse American Protestants,\nand their clergymen, of persecuting Roman Catholics? They might be found\nrolling in the dust.\n\nWe should thank Heaven that no such law is to be found under the\nsanction of our free Constitution. But, though these men do not legally\nforfeit their heads, they lose all claim to the respect and confidence\nof every man of veracity and honor in any country. What now must be\nthought of the veracity of O'Connell, the would-be Liberator of Ireland?\nWhat must an American Christian think of those Popish bishops, who vouch\nfor the truth of O'Connell's statements? I know not, but my mind has\nlong since been formed and long since frankly expressed. They may not,\nperhaps, be worse than others similarly situated, but the position\nof these men, in this country at least, renders them, morally and\npolitically, iniquitous, and Americans should keep a watchful eye on\nthem. Americans are not a very suspicious people; freemen are seldom so.\nBut let not even freemen ever forget, that the world is governed by\nmen, and that men are governed by their passions and interests. It is\npeculiarly the duty of the citizens of the United States, to observe\nclosely, the movements of O'Connell and Irish priests among them.\n\nThere are many of the latter mixed up with Americans, and exercising a\nmighty influence over their political destinies; and it is the business\nof our laws to restrain them. Inquiries are now being made, to ascertain\nhow far the governments of Europe are interfering with our Republican\nInstitutions. Some movements to that effect have recently been made in\nCongress, and I beg to assure him who has originated this inquiry, that\nif he perseveres and carries it through, he will find that there is not\nin Europe, a monarchical power, or a Popish power, under whatever name\nit may appear, that is not engaged in endeavoring to overthrow this\nRepublic They have been planning this for years, and finding that all\nother means were likely to prove inefficacious, they have concluded to\nintroduce a Trojan horse into the citadel of our liberties, taking good\ncare to fill it with Popish traitors fully armed and equipped.\n\nThe limits of this volume do not permit me to dwell farther on this\nsubject, but _graviora manent_.","title":"Auricular Confession and Popish Nunneries: Volumes I. and II., Complete","tradition":"scripture-revelation","translated_text":null,"word_count":119114}