← catalogue

Popery! As It Was and as It Is. Also, Auricular Confession; And Popish Nunneries

by William Hogan · English · Gutenberg #37705 · 386,584 chars · public domain (US)

The Project Gutenberg eBook of Popery! As It Was and as It Is. Also, Auricular Confession; And Popish Nunneries
    
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and
most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online
at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States,
you will have to check the laws of the country where you are located
before using this eBook.

Title: Popery! As It Was and as It Is. Also, Auricular Confession; And Popish Nunneries

Author: William Hogan


        
Release date: October 10, 2011 [eBook #37705]

Language: English

Other information and formats: www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/37705

Credits: Produced by David Widger


*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK POPERY! AS IT WAS AND AS IT IS. ALSO, AURICULAR CONFESSION; AND POPISH NUNNERIES ***




Produced by David Widger






P O P E R Y!

AS IT WAS AND AS IT IS

ALSO,

AURICULAR CONFESSION; and POPISH NUNNERIES.

BY WILLIAM HOGAN, ESQ.,

FORMERLY A ROMAN CATHOLIC PRIEST.

WITH SEVERAL ILLUSTRATIONS

1854.

THE FOLLOWING PAGES

RESPECTFULLY DEDICATED TO

AMERICAN REPUBLICANS,

THE AUTHOR.




PREFACE.

In submitting the following pages to the public, I can say, with truth,
that I am actuated by no other motive than a sincere desire to promote
the interest, and contribute all in my power to perpetuate the free
institutions, of this, my adopted country.

It is many years since I have had any intercourse or connection with the
church or priests of Rome; and I vainly imagined that, after the first
outbreak of their animosity, for repudiating their doctrines, it would
succeed into a calm indifference. I was aware of the custom, in that
church, to defame and calumniate all who "went out from her;" but
especially those who have held any distinguished position.

Against such, appeals are immediately made to the people by their
priests, until, finally, maddened by sophistry, fanaticism, and
falsehoods, they look upon the seceder as one whom it is their duty to
destroy; and in whose word, honor, and virtue, no confidence is to be
reposed. The object of the Romish church, in this, cannot be mistaken.
it is too plain to escape even the least observant eye. A lawyer who
can render legally valueless the testimony of opposing witnesses, seldom
fails in establishing his case; and hence it is that the Romish church
never fails to destroy, if she can, the credibility of all who break
loose from her, knowing them to be the best witnesses of her iniquities.
But for some years back, and until recently, the violence of Popish
priests against myself seemed to slumber. This was natural. In the body
ecclesiastic, as well as in the natural body, a morbid excitement often
succeeds a stupor; and recently these _gentlemen_ have assailed me
again. To apparent indifference succeeded a frantic zeal; and from one
end of this continent to the other, they have tried to injure me, by
appeals to the public through their presses, and especially through the
_confessional_. All this I would have disregarded, as usual, but I find
that these priests have become politicians, and that every blow aimed
at me, for the free exercise of my judgment as to the best mode of
worshipping God, is aimed at the constitution of my adopted country,
which grants this blessing, without let or hindrance, to all the
children of men.

Well aware that Americans are not acquainted with the designs of Popery
against their country and its institutions, I feel it my duty to lay
before them the following pages. The perusal of them will satisfy every
American that our country is in danger, not so much from enemies abroad
as from foes within. They will find that Papists have reduced political,
as well as religious corruption, to a system, and are, at this moment,
practising it amongst us, upon a great and gigantic scale.




SYNOPSIS OF POPERY, AS IT WAS AND AS IT IS.

When this country renounced its allegiance to the British crown, and
proclaimed itself independent Popery was on the wane in Europe; it was
there getting more sickly, more languid and feeble, until it had little
more than a mere nominal existence; but while its blossoms were fading,
its thorns retained their vitality, inflicting pains and wounds on all
who came in contact with them. The Jesuits, one of the most influential
orders of friars belonging to the Roman church, continued still active
as ever in their fiendish avocations; they roamed about, like so many
gnomes, from country to country, and from people to people, carrying
with them, and strewing on their paths, the seeds of moral death on
all that was precious and valuable in the social system. Whatever they
touched was blighted; whatever they said or preached breathed treachery;
wherever they went, vice, crime, and duplicity marked their track. But
dark as the times were then, enshrouded as they had been in ignorance,
and idolatrous as the people were, they began to manifest some
dissatisfaction at the machinations of Jesuits in their efforts to
acquire temporal power. They began to feel it in the loss of their
property, out of which they too late saw themselves gradually swindled;
they felt it in the loss of their liberty and civil rights, out of
which they had been persuaded, all for the good of the church. Endurance
became intolerable, and those unhallowed agents had to be partially
suppressed.

The Popish church, at this time, seeing the influence of her most active
agents gradually diminishing, her ancient glories fading, and her power
vanishing from her grasp; and scarcely able to breathe any longer in the
putrid atmosphere which her own corruption and impurities had created,
very naturally turned her eyes towards this brilliant new world. It was
then young and beautiful; it abounded in all the luxuries of nature; it
promised all that was desirable to man. The holy church, seeing these
irresistible temptations, thirsting with avarice, and yearning for the
reestablishment of her falling greatness, soon commenced pouring in
among its unsuspecting people hordes of Jesuits and other friars, with
a view of forming among them institutions which were already found to
be destructive to the peace and morals of all social and religious
principles in Europe. We now see Popish colleges, and nunneries, and
monastic institutions, springing up in our hitherto happy republic; and,
if similar causes continue, as they have ever done, to produce similar
effects, it needs no prophet's eye to see, nor inspired tongue to tell,
what the consequences must be to posterity. Many suppose that Popery
has been modified; that it is different now from what it was in ancient
times; that the spirit which actuated Papists in those dark days ceases
to influence them now that the faggot, the rack, and various other modes
of torture, are not still in use in the Roman church, and that it has
long ceased to lay claim, by divine right, to temporal sovereignty, or
to any other of those prerogatives which they formerly insisted upon.
There are some so fastidiously liberal as to grant them all immunities
which may be with safety granted to other sects; others there are,
so patriotic as to hold at defiance all their power; and others so
self-conceited as to fancy themselves an over-match even for Jesuits, in
religious chicanery and political intrigue.

All this arises, not from want of true zeal in American Protestants,
but because they are unacquainted with the canons of the Romish church.
These canons are inaccessible to the majority of the American people,
even of theologians, and with the purport and meaning of them none but
those who have been educated Roman Catholic priests have much or any
acquaintance. I hesitate not to say--although I do so with the utmost
respect and deference--that there are but few American theologians
who have much acquaintance with the doctrines or canons of the Romish
church. They form no part of their studies; a knowledge of them is not
necessary in the legitimate discharge of their pastoral duties; and
hence it is, that in many of their controversies with Romish priests,
they are not unfrequently browbeaten, bullied, and often almost
ignominiously driven from the arena of controversy by men who, in point
of general information, virtue, piety, zeal, and scriptural knowledge,
are greatly their inferiors. He who argues with Catholic priests must
have had his education with them; he must be of them and from among
them. He must know, from experience, that they will stop at no falsehood
where the good of the church is concerned; he must know that they
will scruple at no forgery when they desire to establish any point
of doctrine, fundamental or not fundamental, which is taught by their
church; he must be aware that it is a standing rule with Popish priests,
in all their controversies with Protestants, to admit nothing and deny
every thing, and that, if still driven into difficulty, they will still
have recourse to the archives of the church, where they keep piles of
decretals, canons, rescripts, bulls, excommunications, interdicts, &c,
ready for all such emergencies; some of them dated from three hundred
to a thousand years before they were written or even thought of; showing
more clearly, perhaps, than anything else, the extreme ignorance of
mankind between the third and ninth centuries, when most of these
forgeries were palmed upon the world. With the aid of these miserable
forgeries, they attempt to prove, among other things, that the _divine
right of the Pope_ to the sovereignty of this world was acknowledged by
the fathers of the church, in the earliest days of Christianity.

There are to be found now, in the Vatican at Rome, canons and decretals
which go to show that the Pope was considered "equal to God," as early
as the third century. More of these impious forgeries attempt to show
that some of the most pious fathers of the church, in the days of her
unquestioned sanctity and piety, acknowledged "Mary, the mother of
Jesus, to be equal to God the Son, and deserved supreme adoration."
With these forged instruments, they attempt to show that the primitive
Christians believed in the real and actual presence of the whole body
and blood of Christ, in the wafer which they call the _Eucharist_.

Monstrous, horrible, and impious, as these absurdities are, I once
believed them myself. So much for the prejudices of education.

The object of the following pages is to show, first, the origin of Papal
power; secondly, to call the attention of Americans to its rapid growth
in many of the nations of the earth; and, thirdly, to put my fellow
citizens on their guard against giving it any countenance or support
within the limits of the United States.




ORIGIN OF THE TEMPORAL POWER OF THE POPE.

We have no authentic evidence that the bishops or presbyters of the
primitive Christian church laid claims to temporal power, much less to
universal sovereignty, such as Popes have arrogated to themselves, in
subsequent times, even down to the present day. Constantine, as we
are informed by the best authorities, was the first to unite civil and
ecclesiastical power. He introduced Christianity among the Romans by
civil authority. This occurred between the years 272 and 337; but never
during his reign, nor before it, was there an instance of a bishop or
presbyter of the church aspiring to temporal jurisdiction. They were
poor and persecuted; they were meek and humble; they were well content
with the privilege of worshipping God in peace. The instructions of
their divine Master were fresh in their minds--they almost still rung
in their ears. They felt that they were sent into the world with special
instructions to "preach the gospel to every creature." Their heavenly
Master told them that his "kingdom was not of this world." They felt the
full force of that high and holy admonition, "Render to Caesar the things
that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's." They cheerfully
submitted to the civil authorities. They claimed not the right of giving
away kingdoms, crowning emperors, deposing princes, and absolving their
subjects from their oaths of allegiance. These pure Christians and
devout men asked for no distinctions, but those of virtue and zeal in
the cause of Christ; they sought for no wealth but that of Heaven; they
desired no crown but that of glory; they sought no tiara save that of
martyrdom; they were surrounded by no court but that of the poor; no
college of cardinals waited on their pleasure; there were no nuncios
sent from their court; no foreign ambassadors passed between them and
the powers of this earth. The only court with which they had business
to transact, and in which their treasures were laid up, was the court
of Heaven; and their only ambassadors at that court were the angels of
heaven, sent forth to minister unto them. But this state of things did
not last long. As a modern writer beautifully expresses it, "the trail
of the serpent is over us all." The Emperor Constantine, seeing the
poverty of the primitive church,--her vast and progressive increase in
numbers and the consequent demand upon her charities,--granted to her
bishops permission to hold property, real and personal. This concession
on the part of Constantine, simple and trifling as it seemed to be;
this commingling of the things of heaven and earth, was unnatural. It
contained within itself the principles of dissolution, or rather of
entire destruction; and became, in time, the source from which have
sprung most of the wars, massacres, and bloody strifes, that have
desolated and divided into fragmentary sections, the richest, the
fairest, and the finest portions of the globe, during the last fifteen
hundred years; and will continue to do so, unto the end of time, unless
the advance of civilization, and the great progress which the human mind
has made in ethics, morals, and metaphysics, on this continent, puts an
immediate check to Popish interference with the policy of our country.

Could we suppose an individual, who knew nothing of ancient times; who
was an entire stranger to the darkness which pervaded Europe during the
middle ages; who had no acquaintance with the pretensions, arrogance and
insolence of Roman pontiffs; who knew no other constitution and no other
laws but those of our own country; he could not but feel surprised at
being first told, that there now lived in Rome, an upstart ecclesiastic,
called _a Pope_, who has the hardihood to assert that he is Sovereign
Lord, and that too by divine right, of these United States, as well as
of all other kingdoms of this world. He goes even further, and contends
that his predecessors had similar divine rights, and that all the
citizens and inhabitants of this country owed allegiance to him
personally, and to no one else, unless delegated by him to receive it.
But strange as this may appear, it is no less true, as I will show
from authorities, which cannot be questioned, by those who claim such
extravagant immunities.

The Pope of Rome predicates his claim to universal sovereignty upon the
power of _loosing and binding on earth and in heaven_; which, in the
exuberance of their fancy, Roman Catholic writers contend was given
to St. Peter. Their next step is to prove, that this supremacy was
acknowledged by the primitive fathers of the church, and consequently
their rights and claims are beyond dispute. But before I proceed to
give any of the authorities, upon which Roman Catholic writers rest the
antiquity of the recognition of their Pope's temporal power, it may not
be amiss to inform the reader that the very first on which they rely is
one of the most unblushing forgeries on record; and is dated about six
hundred years previous to the time at which it purports to have been
written. It is taken from the words of a conveyance of certain temporal
concessions, said to be made by the Emperor Constantine to Pope
Sylvester, some time between the second and third centuries. It is in
the following words:

"We attribute to the chair of St. Peter all imperial dignity, glory, and
power. We give to Pope Sylvester, and to his successors, our palace of
Lateran, one of the finest palaces on earth; we give him our crown, our
mitre, our diadem, and all our imperial vestments; we resign to him all
our imperial dignity. We give the Holy Pontiff, as a free gift, the city
of Rome, and all the western cities of Italy, as well as the western
cities of other countries. To make room for him, we abdicate our
sovereignty over all these provinces, and we withdraw from Rome,
transferring the seat of our empire to Byzantium; since it is not just
that a terrestrial emperor shall retain any power where God has placed
the head of the church."

It would be a waste of time to show that no such donation as the above
ever existed. No mention is made of it in any history of the Popes that
has ever been written, or in any other document which had reference
to them during the reign of Constantine. It is a forgery so shallow,
unreal, and unsubstantial, that there is no well-educated historian,
and never has been one, who gave it any credence. The historian Flewry
pronounces it a falsehood; and he, being a Roman Catholic, must be
considered good authority upon all matters relating to the _holy
church_. The quotation, however, from this supposed deed of concession,
by Constantine to Pope Sylvester, is not without instruction to the
citizens of this country. It should arouse them to a sense of the
dangers which are hovering over them. It should remind them that every
thing is perishable. The fairest flower must fade; the loveliest lily
must wither; the laughing rose must droop; even our fair republic may
lose its bloom, and pass away. A state of things may arise in this
country, when its executive may be a Papist, its judiciary Papists, and
a majority of its population may be Papists. These things are not beyond
the range of possibility; and are you sure that your own descendants,
and those of the pilgrim fathers, may not, one day or other, give this
republic as a free gift to the head of the Papal church? You are now
strong--so was Rome. Your power is now irresistible--so was that of Rome
and other countries. Your arms are invincible--so were those of Rome.
You are now distinguished all over the world, for your progress in the
arts and sciences; the world looks to you as models of patriotism and
pure republicanism--so did the world once look to Rome. But what is Rome
now, and what drove her from the high position she once occupied? I will
tell you;--the intrigues of the Popish church. And a similar fate awaits
you, unless you cut off all connection, of whatever name, between the
citizens of the United States and the church of Rome. While this sink of
iniquity breathes, it will carry with it destruction and death wherever
it goeth.

We have had several histories of the Popes, and the first mention
made of donations to them, at least of any comparative value, is by
Anastasius, who wrote about the beginning of the tenth century, or a
little before the close of the ninth. He informs us that Charlemagne
conferred upon the Holy See (as that hotbed of iniquity is impiously,
even at the present day, called) _whole provinces_, and acknowledged
that they belonged to the Pope _by divine right_; though it is well
understood, and denied by no competent historian, that Charlemagne never
even owned these provinces. It is well known to the readers of history,
that there existed no empire of any extent, but that of the East, until
the beginning of the eighth century. Charlemagne assumed the title of
King of Italy, in the year eight hundred. He received homage from the
Pope, and so far from being subject to him, he acknowledged no divine
right in him; but on the contrary, he held the Pope in strict subjection
to himself. He even went so far as to prohibit the _Holy See_ from
receiving donations of any kind, when given without the consent or to
the prejudice of those who had just and equitable claims to them.

This, if there were no other proof, is sufficient to show that neither
the Popes nor the Holy See had any pretensions to universal supremacy,
or to supremacy of any kind, as far down as the eighth century. It will
not be denied that the civil authorities of Rome were liberally
disposed towards the Popes or fathers of the church in the early days
of Christianity. The Emperor Theodosius the Great, who died in the year
three hundred and ninety five, recommended to all his subjects to pay "a
due respect to the See of Rome." Valentian III. commanded his subjects
"_not to depart from the faith and customs of the Holy See_." It will
however be borne in mind, that this Valentian was acknowledged emperor
at the age of six, and his affairs were managed principally by his
mother. So dissipated were his habits, that he finally fell a victim to
them. But up to this period there is no evidence whatever that the Popes
either claimed or exercised temporal authority.

About this time several councils met for the purpose of adjusting
disputes that arose between the sons of the successor of Charlemagne,
who unwisely, as historians suppose, divided his empire into three equal
parts among them. It was at one of these councils, that the doctrine of
the _divine right of Popes to temporal authority_ was first broached
by the production of some of those forged documents to which I have
heretofore alluded. Pope Gregory the Fourth took an active part in
fomenting the dissensions which necessarily arose from the division
which the successor of Charlemagne had made of his empire among his
sons. The Pope, with that craft peculiar to all ecclesiastics of the
Roman Catholic denominations, was active in widening the breach between
father and sons, and having effected this to his content, his next move
was to sow further dissensions between the sons themselves, and finally
to create such a general confusion and dissatisfaction among all
parties, as to render a mediator necessary. Having attained his object,
he offered his services to the Imperial Father, and it was accepted. He
presented himself at his camp, obtained an entrance, and what were the
consequences? History tells the tale--it was a tale of treachery.

Americans will bear in mind that Roman Catholics believe their church to
be infallible; that she never changes; that what was deemed right by her
in the days of Gregory and those of his immediate successors, is right
now, and, _vice versa_, what she deems right now was right then. In a
word, the church of Rome is _infallible_. This is believed by every one
of her members at the present day. It is taught by every Popish bishop
and priest in the United States.

The following curse is contained in the Roman Catholic Breviary, in
which, every Romish priest reads his prayers three times every day.
"_Qui dicit ecclesiam catholicam Romanam non esse infallilrilem,
anathema sit_--Whoever says that the Roman Catholic church is not
infallible, let him be accursed." Such is the belief of every Roman
Catholic. Will not Protestant Americans pause and reflect for a moment?
The population of the United States is about twenty millions, and about
two millions are Papists. Consequently, seventeen millions and a half of
our people are _accursed_ and _damned_, according to the doctrine of the
Romish ritual; and yet we Protestants are called upon to extend the hand
of friendship to these Papists, and our legislators are asked to grant
them charters to build colleges, churches, nunneries, and monk-houses,
not for the purpose of teaching the growing generation the revealed will
of God, as read in the Scriptures, but to persuade them that all other
religions, except that of Rome, are erroneous; that their parents,
brothers, and sisters, are heretics, accursed forever, and by
implication entitled to no allegiance from them.

The Pope is now setting on foot a movement which is intended to
embrace the whole world, and of which he desires Rome to be the sole
representative, centre, and circumference. The powers of the Pope have
met with several severe shocks since the Reformation. His forces
have been broken, his armies of Jesuits, his friars of all orders,
Dominicans, Franciscans, and Capuchins, have been scattered and
enfeebled. He determined to arm himself afresh, and this new world
appeared to him as the safest ground on which he could unite his
scattered forces in Europe. This he well knows cannot be done, without
throwing some fire-brand of dissension among our people, which at this
moment he is trying to effect; and which nothing but the resistance
offered to him by American Republicans can check or prevent.

On the continuance, strength, and union of this party, depends the
stability of our government. This the Romish priests and bishops well
know, and are beginning to feel; and hence they are denouncing them from
their pulpits, and in all their presses. But no Protestant opposes this
party Why call it a party? It is no party. It is but the spontaneous
move of the good and the virtuous of all parties who love their God,
their Bibles, and their country, and upon whose strong arm and bold
hearts rests the question whether Americans shall be free or the slaves
of his royal holiness the Pope of Rome. Often have I lifted my voice, a
feeble one, indeed, in favor of _American Republicans_. I believe their
cause is the cause of God and freedom, and upon them every American
and every Protestant foreigner must rely for protection against the
merciless spirit of Popery.

It requires no stretch of imagination to fancy a difference of opinion,
or even of interest, between the citizens of this country. Suppose,
for instance, that the North and South were at variance; suppose them
actually at war with each other; what would be the course of the Pope's
emissaries, hundreds of whom are now roaming through this land? The
safest course and the surest mode of ascertaining what they would do in
such an event, is to look back and ascertain what they have invariably
done under similar circumstances. It is seldom wrong, and as a general
principle it is safe, to judge of the future from the past; and if so,
there can be no doubt of the course which Jesuits and Roman Catholics
would pursue in the event of any difficulties or collisions between
the people of the different sections of this country. Would they try to
reconcile them? Did they ever do so in a like case? What was the conduct
of the Jesuits and Popes as early as the eleventh century, when the
Roman people differed in opinion as to their form of government, and
some points of religious faith? The Pope laid an interdict upon the
whole people; the weaker party was overpowered by the Papal authorities;
and their leader, as Flewry informs us, was burned alive by order of the
Pope Adrian. Frederick, called Barbarossa, who was the tool of the Pope
on this occasion, became the next victim to his barbarity. And why? what
had he done? what crime did he commit against the state? His only crime
was,--he refused to hold the Pope's stirrup. For this he incurred the
displeasure of Adrian, nor did he ever enjoy a day's peace until the
Pope seduced him into an expedition against Saladin; where, together
with thousands of others, who were persuaded to undertake that religious
crusade, he died after several hard fought victories.

The history of the Popes, in all ages, shows that they never abandon any
temporal or spiritual authority to which they lay claim; and had they
the power of enforcing it now, they would exact from this country the
same obedience which they did in the most benighted days of the middle
ages. Should a separation of these States take place; should the chain
that has bound us together for the last half century, in links of
love and social happiness, be unfortunately broken, by any untoward
circumstances; think you, fellow citizens, that foreign Papists in
this country would try to re weld it? Far from it. They would unite in
breaking it, link by link, Until not a particle of it remained. This
they have done in every country where they obtained a footing; this they
are doing now, under various pretences, all over Europe; and should
this country escape the fate of others, where Jesuits and Popes dare
to exercise their supposed authorities, it will stand prominent and
proudly, though solitary and alone, amid the records of ages, and
ruins of time. I have no such hope. The efforts which are now making
to check the progress of Popery, may, perhaps, retard the day of our
downfall; but come it must, unless the allegiance, which is now
demanded by the Pope of Rome from his subjects in the United States, is
unqualifiedly forbidden. The Pope is a temporal prince. Like other
kings and princes, he should never be permitted to meddle, directly or
indirectly, temporally or spiritually, with this country. He should not
be permitted to appoint bishop or priest to any church, diocese, living,
or office in the United States. The Pope's _bulls_, rescripts, letters,
&c., &c., should not be published or read from any pulpit this side of
the Atlantic; and, though Roman Catholics should not be prevented from
the free exercise of their religion, they should be compelled to do so
without reference to foreign dictation. If they must have a Pope, let
him be an American, and sworn to support our constitution. Let him, and
all Roman Catholics, be denied the right of voting, or of holding any
office of honor, profit, or trust, under the government of the United
States, until they forswear all allegiance, in spiritual as well as
temporal affairs, to all foreign potentates and Popes. Until this is
done, an oath of allegiance to this government, by a Roman Catholic,
is entitled to no credit, and should not be received. This will appear
evident to Americans, if they will turn their attention for a moment to
the following oath, which is taken by every Romish bishop, before he is
permitted to officiate, as such, in any of these United States:-- "I
do solemnly swear, on the holy evangelist, and before Almighty God, to
defend the domains of St. Peter against every aggressor; to preserve,
augment, and extend, the rights, honors, privileges, and powers of the
Lord Pope, and his successors; to observe, and with all my might to
enforce, his decrees, ordinances, reservations, provisions, and all
dispositions whatever, emanating from the court of Rome; to _persecute
and combat, to the last extremity, heretics, schismatics, and all who
will not pay to the sovereign pontiff all the obedience which the
sovereign shall require_."

While this oath is obligatory upon Romish bishops, they are not to
be trusted. They should not be permitted to interfere, directly nor
indirectly, with the institutions, laws, or ordinances of any Protestant
country. Their oaths should not be taken in courts of justice; their
followers, every one of whom is bound by a similar oath of allegiance,
should be excluded from our grand juries, from our petit juries,
but more especially, from our halls of legislation; for wherever and
whenever the supposed interest of the Pope clashes with that of the
civil authority, or even with the administration of reciprocal justice,
a Papist, under the control of his bishop, will not hesitate to
sacrifice the good of the country, the interest, life, and prosperity
of his fellow-being, for the good of the church. Of the truth of this,
history abounds with examples, and Popish writers are replete with
authorities.

Thomas Aquinas, whose authority no Roman Catholic questions, says in
his work _de Regem_., "The Pope, as supreme king of all the world,
may impose taxes and destroy towns and castles for the preservation
of Christianity." The American reader will bear in mind, that by
Christianity, St. Thomas means Popery. Pope Gregory the Seventh, about
the year one thousand and fifty, has made use of the following language,
and proclaimed it as the doctrine of the Romish Church. "The Pope ought
to be called Universal Bishop. He alone ought to wear the tokens of
imperial dignity; all princes ought to kiss his feet; he has power to
depose emperors and kings, and is to be judged by none." Pope John the
Twelfth, in the year nine hundred and fifty-six, announced the following
to be the universal belief, that "Whosoever shall venture to maintain
that our lord the Pope cannot decree what he pleases, let him be
accursed." Pope Bonifice the Eighth, in 1294, declares, _ex cathedra_,
"that God has set Popes over kings and kingdoms, and whoever thinks
otherwise declares him accursed." The same Pope, in another place, says,
"We therefore declare, say, define, and pronounce it to be necessary
to salvation, that every human creature should be obedient to the Roman
pontiff." The Pope of the present day, as every Roman Catholic writer
maintains and teaches the laity to believe, has the same power _now_
that the Popes had at any period of church history.

The council of Trent, the last held in the Popish church, declares that
Pius the Fifth, who was then Pope of Rome, "was prince over all nations
and kingdoms, having power to pluck up, destroy, scatter, ruin, plant,
and build." Cardinal Zeba, a sound theologian according to Popish
belief, maintains, with much ingenuity, "that the Pope can do all things
which he wishes, and is empowered by God to do many things which he
himself cannot do." All writers upon canon law compliment the Pope by
calling him _our Lord the Pope_, and this title was confirmed to him
by the council of Lateran. In the fourth session of that council, it is
maintained "that all mortals are to be judged by the Pope, and the Pope
by nobody at all." Massonius, who wrote the life of Pope John the Ninth,
tells us that a bishop of Rome, namely, a Pope, cannot commit even sin
without praise.

Were there no other reproach upon the Romish church but the bare
utterance of such blasphemy as this, it would be enough to disgust
mankind; it should raise every voice in her condemnation, and every hand
to pull down this masterpiece of satanic ingenuity. But strange as it
may appear, the present Pope maintains similar claims, and enforces
obedience; nay, more;--in this year of our Lord, 1845, insists upon the
right of deposing all in power, and of absolving their subjects from
further allegiance.

But, extravagant as Papal pretensions were between the ninth and tenth
centuries, it was only about the middle of the eleventh that they
began to show themselves in the full blaze of their hideous deformity.
Hildebrand, whom we have had occasion to mention as Gregory the
Seventh, shook off all civil restraint, and proclaimed the universal and
unbounded empire of the Popes over the rest of the world.

As Shoberl expresses it, "he caused to be drawn up a declaration of
independence in all things, temporal and spiritual, expressly specifying
the Pope's divine right of deposing all princes, giving away all
kingdoms, abrogating existing laws, and substituting in their place such
as the holy Pope for the time being may approve of." This declaration,
or bill of rights, is correctly translated by Shoberl, and published in
his work, entitled, "The Rise and Progress of the Papal Power." Many,
probably, may read this volume, who have had no opportunity of seeing
Shoberl's work; and others there are, who may refuse giving his
statement that credence which circumstances compel them to give the
writer.

Having been educated a Roman Catholic priest, and the fact being well
known that admission cannot be had into her priesthood without being
well versed, at least in her own doctrines, it is fairly to be
presumed that my statements are entitled to full credit, when those of
Protestants may be denied by Romish priests, who, while united with that
church, are compelled, under pain of being cursed, to subscribe to any
falsehood, however gross, provided it subserves the interest of the
Pope; and deny any truth, however plain, rather than contradict
or weaken the authorities by which the impious follies and wicked
pretensions of the church of Rome are supported. I will give this bill
of rights to my readers. It should be in the hands of every American.
It should find a place in every primary school in the United States. It
should be among the first lessons of infancy, so that every child, when
he grows up and sees a Roman Catholic bishop or priest, should pause
and ask himself, Does that man believe those things? Are we called on
to pass laws for the support and protection of churches, where such
doctrines, as this _bill_ contains, are promulgated? Can we trust the
man who promulgates them, or those who subscribe to them? Is it safe
to live in the same community with them? Do they not endanger our civil
institutions? Do they not jeopardize the morals of our children? Will it
not, at some future day, be a blot upon the page of our history, and
a foul stain upon our character for intelligence, that we have ever
sanctioned such doctrines, or that we had ever allowed men who professed
them, any participation in our civil rights? But let Pope Gregory's
declaration of Papal divine rights speak for itself.

"The Romish church is the only one that God has founded.

"The title of universal belongs to the Roman pontiff alone.

"He alone can depose and absolve bishops.

"His legate presides over all the bishops in every council, and may
pronounce sentence of deposition against them.

"The Pope can depose absent persons.

"It is not lawful to live with such as have been excommunicated.

"He has the power, according to circumstances, to make new laws, to
create new churches, to transform a chapter into an abbey, and to divide
a rich bishopric into two, or to unite two poor bishoprics.

"He alone has a right to assume the attributes of empire.

"All princes must kiss his feet.

"His name is the only one to be uttered in the churches.

"It is the only name in the world.

"He has a right to depose emperors.

"He has a right to remove bishops from one see to another.

"He has a right to appoint a clerk [priest] in every church.

"He, whom he has appointed, may govern another church, and cannot
receive a higher benefice from any private bishop.

"No council can call itself general without the order of the Pope.

"No chapter, no book, can be reputed canonical without his authority.

"No one can invalidate his sentences; he can abrogate those of all other
persons.

"He cannot be judged by any one.

"All persons whatsoever are forbidden to presume to condemn him who is
called to the apostolical chair.

"To this chair must be brought the more important causes of all the
churches.

"The Roman church is never wrong, and will never fall into error.

"Every Roman pontiff, canonically ordained, becomes holy.

"It is lawful to accuse when he permits, or when he commands.

"He may, without synod, depose and absolve bishops.

"He is no Catholic who is not united to the Romish church.

"The Pope can release the subjects of bad princes from all oaths of
allegiance."

Those who have not been educated Roman Catholics, or who have not lived
in Catholic countries, will find it difficult to suppose that such
pretensions as the above should ever have been entertained or submitted
to: extravagant, absurd, wild, and wicked as they are, they have been
acquiesced in by the court of Rome; and are, at this day, contended for,
and would be enforced, in this country, had that church the power to do
so. She has never resigned the rights claimed in the above declaration;
and there is not a Roman Catholic who dares assert the contrary, without
a dispensation from his bishop or his priest to tell a deliberate
falsehood, with a view of deceiving Americans for the good of _the
church_, This, however, they can always obtain and grant to each other,
as circumstances may require.

While a Roman Catholic priest, I have often received and given such
indulgences myself; and there is not a period in the Christian world,
since the days of Pope Gregory, when all the powers and prerogatives,
enumerated in the above Papal bill of rights, were not claimed and acted
upon by Popes of Rome, down to the hour at which I write. Let us test
the truth of this assertion by the unerring rule of history, although it
may seem unnecessary, as no Roman Catholic will deny it; at any rate,
it will not be questioned by those who have any acquaintance with the
history of their own church. I am well aware that the majority of
Roman Catholics in this country know nothing of the religion which they
profess, and for which they are willing to fight, contend, and shed the
blood of their fellow beings. I am not even hazarding an assertion, when
I say there is not one of them who has read the gospels through, or who
knows any more about the religion he professes, than he does about the
Koran of Mohammed. He is told by the priest, "that Christ established
a church on earth; that it is infallible; and that they must submit
implicitly to what its popes, priests, and bishops teach, under pain of
eternal damnation." This is all the great mass of Roman Catholics know
of religion; this is all they are required to learn; and hence it is
that these people are unacquainted with the pretensions of the Pope, the
intrigues of Jesuits, or the impositions practised upon them by their
bishops and priests.

But to the history of Papal pretensions. As early as the year 1066,
Gregory, who was then Pope, summoned William the Conqueror, king of
England, to repair to Rome, prostrate himself upon his knees, and do
homage to his holiness. This William refused; but his holiness deemed it
expedient to compromise the matter, though he did not yield a jot of
his very modest pretensions. This humble follower of the Redeemer looked
upon Sardinia and Russia as a portion of his dominions. The following
extract of a letter of his, to the sovereign of Russia, is a fair sample
of the insolence of this man Pope, or rather this God Pope, as his
subjects considered him. "We have given you a crown to your son, who is
to come and to receive it at our hands on taking an oath of allegiance
to us." He also commanded the emperor of Greece "to abdicate his crown,"
and he also deposed the king of Poland. This modest Pope wrote to the
different princes of Spain, "that it would be much better to give up
their country to the Saracens, than not pay homage to the See of Rome."
He excommunicated Philip the First of France, because he refused to
"pay homage to him." Writing to the French bishops, he says, "Separate
yourselves from the communion of Philip; let the celebration of the
holy mass be interdicted throughout all France; and know that, with the
assistance of God, we will deliver that kingdom from such an oppressor."
This same Pope excommunicated Henry the Fourth, "because he refused to
acknowledge him as his superior," and absolved his subjects from their
oath of allegiance to him: and what was the result? Henry was obliged
to submit. Having repaired to the Pope's court, he was stopped at the
entrance, and before he was permitted to appear in the presence of this
ruffian Pope, who was then shut up with Matilda, countess of Tuscany,
one of the numerous women with whom he lived on terms of _intimacy_,
he was compelled to undress and put on a hair shirt. The Pope then
condescended to say, "that Henry should fast three days, before he could
be permitted to kiss his holiness's toe; and he would then absolve him
upon promise of good behavior."

Alexander the Third, about the year 1160, deposed Frederic First, king
of Denmark; and placing his foot upon his neck, he impiously exclaimed,
"Thou shalt tread upon the lion and the adder." This practice and these
pretensions to sovereign power, continued down to the days of Elizabeth;
and from thence down to the present moment. Pope Pius V. excommunicated
Elizabeth, and absolved her subjects from their oath of allegiance;
and while doing so, addressed to himself the following words from the
Psalmist: "See, I have this day set thee over the nations, and over the
kingdoms, to root out and to pull down, to destroy, to build up, and to
throw down." More of this hereafter.

Such were the doctrines of the Romish church in 1558. Such were the
practices of that church for centuries previous; nor is there one single
instance on record of her having modified or abridged the extent or
magnitude of her claims, unless when compelled to do so by coercion; and
even then she did not abandon her claim, but only ceased to exercise it
in obedience to the law of force. The Romish church, in this country, as
I shall show, claims the same temporal powers now which she has always
claimed and exercised for so many centuries. She would now depose the
executive of this country, as she did Philip of France, if she dared do
so. The Pope would absolve our citizens from their oath of allegiance,
had he the power of carrying his dispensation info effect; and what
is the duty of Americans under such circumstances? Are you to submit
passively? Is it your duty to wait and witness the growth of Popery
among you, to nourish and feed it with the life blood of your existence
as a nation, until the monster outgrows your own strength and strangles
you, to satiate its inordinate appetite? I lay it down as a sound
principle in political as well as moral ethics, that if a government
finds, within the limits of its jurisdiction, any sect or party,
of whatever doctrine, creed, or denomination, professing principles
incompatible with its permanency, or subversive of the unalienable right
of self government, and worshipping God, according to the dictates of
each and every man's conscience, that sect or party should be removed
beyond its limits, or at least excluded from any participation in the
formation or administration of its laws.

Would it, for instance, be wise in our government to encourage the
Mormons to introduce among us, as the law of the land, the ravings and
prophesies of Joe Smith? Suppose that sect maintained that Joe Smith
was their _Lord God_; that the kingdoms of this world were his; that he
claimed and did actually exercise the right of dethroning kings, and was
endeavoring, by every means in his power, to place himself in a position
to exercise, at no-distant period, the right of deposing our presidents,
state governors, and absolving our people from their oaths of
allegiance. Should not that sect, as such, be instantly crushed? Should
it not, at least, be forbidden to interfere, directly or indirectly,
with our civil institutions? Let us suppose the prophet Joe Smith to
hold the seat of his government in Europe, and that Europe was full to
overflowing with Mormons; we may further suppose this great high priest
to have thousands and millions of subordinate officers, sworn and bound
together by oaths cemented in blood, to sustain him as their sovereign
ruler, by every means which human ingenuity could devise, and at every
sacrifice of truth and honor. Suppose, further, that this high priest
was annually sending thousands of his subjects to this country, with
no other view but to possess your fertile lands and overthrow your
government, and substituting in its place that of this _foreign priest_
and tyrant; would you permit them to land upon your shores? Would you
allow them to pollute the purity of your soil? Would you allow their
unclean hands to touch the altars of your liberty? Would you not first
insist that they should purge themselves from the sins and slime of
Mormonism, and free themselves from all further connection with this
monster man, and would-be God, who impiously demanded blind obedience
and unqualified homage? I could answer for you, but I will not; the
history of your republic answers for you; the movements, which are now
going forth from one end of your country to the other, are answering for
you, in tones too solemn and too loud to be drowned by the roaring of
Popish bulls. But it is much to be feared that Americans do not yet
fully understand the dangers to be apprehended from the existence
of Popery in the United States. It is difficult to persuade a
single-hearted and single-minded republican, whose lungs were first
inflated by the breath of freedom, whose first thoughts were, that all
men had a natural right to worship God as they pleased--that any man
could be found, so lost to reason, interest, and principle, as to desire
to barter those high, privileges, which he may enjoy in this country,
for oppression and blind submission to the dictates of a Pope, or even
any body of men, civil or ecclesiastic; still less can an American
believe, without difficulty, that he who sees the excellence and
practical operation of our form of government, will try to overthrow it,
by submitting to any creed, to any king or Pope, who requires from
him allegiance, incompatible with that which he has already sworn to
maintain. Nor, generally speaking, will men do those things.

While man believes in the moral obligations of an oath, he will not
easily violate it. While he believes that there is an all-seeing
Providence, to whom alone he is accountable for his actions, he will be
cautious in committing offences; but once satisfy a man, that there
is, within his reach, a power which can pardon his sins, even those of
perjury; which can change abstract evil into good, and he will stop at
nothing. While the pardon of offences is a marketable article, it never
will want for a purchaser, so prone are we to the commission of crime.
Let man have an adviser, in whom he is taught to place unlimited
confidence, on whom he looks as the representative of his God on earth,
and he soon becomes his ready tool for good or for evil. Such precisely
is the position in which ninety-nine out of a hundred Roman Catholics
are placed. They are told by their priests, that, as members of society,
the first allegiance they owe is to the head of their church, the Pope
of Rome, and the next to the government, _de facto_, under which they
live; but these well-practised ecclesiastical impostors never forget to
add, that the first allegiance, being of a spiritual character, absorbs
and supersedes the latter; thus annulling, and rendering the oath of
allegiance, which they take to our government, something worse than even
mere mockery; and hence it is, that very few Catholics, particularly
the Irish, ever read the constitution of the United States, nor do they
require it to be read for them. They know not, they care not what it
is. It is enough for them to believe that the oath, which they take
to support it, is not obligatory. Of this they are assured by their
priests. Yet strange, these very priests tell them they commit mortal
sin by becoming Freemasons, or uniting themselves with that excellent
and benevolent association, the Odd Fellows. And why, reader, do they do
this? Why prevent them from uniting with Odd Fellows or Freemasons? Why
has the Pope recently cursed all Odd Fellows? Why has he sent a bull to
this country, cautioning Catholics against having any thing to do with
them? Why have the Romish priests, from one end of this country to the
other, echoed these curses? Did the Pope discover any bad thing in the
constitution or rules of action of Freemasons or Odd Fellows? Are these
institutions aiming at the overthrow of any fixed principles in morals,
_in_ religion, or in virtue? No such allegation is made. Why then do
Popes and priests forbid Roman Catholics from uniting with them? It
is expressly because the Pope knows nothing about those excellent
institutions. It is because he is aware he can make no use of them; but
let those societies beware, if they wish to keep their secrets. They
should not allow any man to join them until he first swears that he is
not a Roman Catholic; otherwise some Jesuits will get among them, and
the next packet will convey their doings to his royal holiness the Pope.

I cannot illustrate more clearly the value which foreign Roman priests
and their followers put upon an oath of allegiance to this government,
than by stating a conversation which occurred between myself and a
Jesuit, the Rev. Dr. De Barth, then vicar-general of the diocese of
Pennsylvania, and residing in Philadelphia. It took place some years
ago, and his opinion of the validity of an oath of allegiance to this
government, is the same now that is held by all Papists. I will give it
by way of question and answer, just as it occurred.

Question by Mr. De Barth. Do you intend becoming a citizen of the United
States?

Answer. I believe not, sir. I don't think I could conscientiously take
an oath of allegiance to this government, without violating that which I
have taken at my ordination.

Mr. De B. You are entirely mistaken. Any part of your oath of allegiance
to this country, which may be incompatible with your _first_ and
_greater_ allegiance to the head of your church, cannot be binding on
you.

Ans. I have doubts upon that subject.

Mr. De B. What! doubt your superior, sir? This looks badly. It threatens
heresy. Have you been conversing with any heretics of this country?
Declare your intentions, sir, to become a citizen. Take the oath; it is
necessary you should be empowered to hold real estate for the good of
_the church_. The church must have her property out of the hands of
trustees; in this country they are all heretics; we must get rid of them
in St. Mary's church.

This led me into an examination of the allegiance which I swore to the
Pope at my ordination. I found that I owed him none; that I was the dupe
of an early education; that I owed allegiance only to my God and
the country which protected my life, my liberty, and my freedom of
conscience; and without further conversation with this intriguing and
debauched Jesuit--as I subsequently found him--I became a citizen of the
United States as soon as possible; renouncing all allegiance, temporal
and spiritual, to his _holiness the Pope_; and firmly resolved to induce
all others, who, like myself, had been the dupes of Popish intrigue, to
cut loose from them. I determined to support no civil constitution
but that of the United States, and to have no one for my guidance in
spiritual matters but my own conscience and the word of God.




POPISH BISHOPS AND PRIESTS ABSOLVE ALLEGIANCE TO PROTESTANT GOVERNMENTS.

I am aware of the difficulty there is in persuading Protestant
Americans, that Roman Catholic bishops and priests teach their people
to believe, that they, the priests, possess the power of absolving them,
either from their oath of allegiance or any other crime. It is, however,
time to speak plainly to Americans. It is time to let them know that
there exists in the midst of them a body of people, amounting in number
to about two millions, who believe in this doctrine, so corrupt in
itself, and so well calculated to disturb the peace and harmony of
society. There is not a priest or bishop in the United States who dares
deny this; they act upon it every day. It is customary with the priests
to confess weekly, and to forgive each other's sins; and I am sorry to
say, from my knowledge of them, since my infancy to the present moment,
that there is not a more corrupt, licentious body of men in the world.
But I will not be judge, accuser, and witness, in this case. I know well
that Americans will take the _ipse dixit_ of no man. They are not in the
habit of lightly judging any individual or body of men, in any case.
I will, therefore, lay before them the Roman Catholic doctrine on the
subject of penance and confession, as taught by the council of Trent,
and now believed and practised by Roman Catholics in the United States.
I will only add, that I have taught these doctrines myself, when a
Roman Catholic priest, and while groping my way through the darkness of
Popery. There are many now living who heard and received them from me,
and to whom I have no apology to make for the errors into which I led
them, except that, like themselves, I was the dupe of early education.
The following are some of the canons of the council of Trent concerning
penance or confession.

"Whoever shall say, that those words of the Lord and Saviour: Receive
the Holy Ghost; _whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them,
and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained_; are not to be
understood of the power of remitting and retaining sins in the sacrament
of penance, as the Catholic church has always understood, from the
beginning; but shall falsely apply them against the institution of
this sacrament, to the authority of preaching the gospel; let him be
accursed!

"Whoever shall deny that sacramental confession has either been
instituted by divine command, or is necessary to salvation; or shall
say that the mode of secretly confessing to a priest alone, which
the Catholic church always has observed from the beginning, and still
observes, is foreign from the institution and command of Christ, and is
a human invention; let him be accursed!

"Whoever shall affirm, that in the sacrament of penance, it is not
necessary by divine command, for the remission of sins, to confess all
and every mortal sin, of which recollection may be had, with due and
diligent premeditation, including secret offences, and those which are
against the two last precepts of the decalogue, and the circumstances
which change the species of sin: but that this confession is useful only
for the instruction and consolation of the penitent, and was anciently
observed, only as a canonical satisfaction imposed upon him; or shall
say, that they who endeavor to confess all their sins, wish to leave
nothing for the divine mercy to pardon; or finally, that it is not
proper to confess venial sins; let him be accursed!

"Whoever shall say, that the confession of all sins, such as the
church observes, is impossible, and that it is a human tradition, to be
abolished by the pious; or that all and every one of Christ's faithful,
of both sexes, are not bound to observe it once in the year, according
to the constitution of the great Lateran council, and that for this
reason, Christ's faithful should be advised not to confess in the time
of Lent; let him be accursed!

"Whoever shall say, that the sacramental absolution of the priest is not
a judicial act, but a mere ministry to pronounce and declare, that sins
are remitted to the person making confession, provided that he only
believes that he is absolved, even though the priest should not absolve
seriously, but in joke; or shall say, that the confession of a penitent
is not requisite in order that the priest may absolve him; let him be
accursed!

"Whoever shall say, that priests who are living in mortal sin do not
possess the power of binding and loosing; or that the priests are not
the only ministers of absolution, but that it was said to all and every
one of Christ's faithful: Whatsoever you shall bind upon earth, shall be
bound also in heaven; and whatsoever you shall loose upon earth, shall
be loosed also in heaven; and whose sins you shall forgive, they are
forgiven, and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained: by virtue
of which words, any one may forgive sin; public sins, by reproof
only, if the offender shall acquiesce; and private sins, by voluntary
confession; let him be accursed!

"Whoever shall say, that bishops have not the right of reserving cases
to themselves, except such as relate to the external polity of the
church, and therefore that the reservation of cases does not hinder the
priest from truly absolving from reserved cases; let him be accursed!

"Whoever shall say, that the whole penalty, together with the guilt,
is always remitted by God, and that the satisfaction of penitents is
nothing else than the faith by which they apprehend that Christ has
satisfied for them; let him be accursed!

"Whoever shall say, that satisfaction is by no means made to God,
through Christ's merits, for sins as to their temporal penalty, by
punishments inflicted by him, and patiently borne, or enjoined by the
priests, though not undergone voluntarily, as fastings, prayers, alms,
or also other works of piety, and therefore that the best penance is
nothing more than a new life; let him be accursed!

"Whoever shall say, that the satisfactions by which penitents redeem
themselves from sin through Jesus Christ, are no part of the service of
God, but traditions of men, obscuring the doctrine concerning grace, and
the true worship of God, and the actual benefit of Christ's death; let
him be accursed!

"Whoever shall say, that the keys of the church were given only for
loosing, not also for binding, and that therefore the priests, when they
impose punishments upon those who confess, act against the design of
the keys, and contrary to the institution of Christ; and that it is a
fiction, that when by virtue of the keys the eternal penalty has been
removed, the temporal punishment may still often remain to be suffered;
let him tie accursed!"

I must be permitted here to remind Americans, that all Roman Catholics
are taught to believe, and distinctly to understand, that whatever they
confess to their priests, is not to be revealed; nor is the individual,
who confesses, permitted to reveal whatever the priest says or does
to him or her, except to another priest. For instance, should a priest
insult or attempt to seduce a woman, and succeed in doing so, she dare
not reveal it under pain of damnation, except to another priest in
confession, who is bound also to secrecy; and thus, priests, bishops,
popes, and all females of that denomination, may be guilty of
licentiousness,--the bare mention of which would pollute the pages of
this or any other work,--with impunity. The priests can first pardon
the woman, and then themselves, according to the doctrines of the
_infallible church_ of Rome. This is not all. It is not enough that the
sanction of the church should be given to these enormities; but priests
also claim the right of concealing, from the civil authorities, any
knowledge which they may have of crimes against the state as well as
the power of forgiving them. The following is the language of the church
upon that subject. Attend to it, fellow citizens, and tremble at
the dangers that threaten the destruction of your republic, from the
introduction of Popery among you.

"Although the life or salvation of a man, or the ruin of the state,
should depend upon it, what is discovered in confession cannot be
revealed. The secret of _the seal_--confession--is more binding than the
obligation of an oath." If a confessor is asked, what he knows of a fact
communicated to him, he must answer that he does not know it; and, if
necessary, confirm it by an oath; and "this is no perjury," says the
Popish church, "_because he knows it not as man, but as GOD_." There is
Popery for you, in its naked beauty! If a man wishes to murder, or to
rob you, he may go to his priest, apprize him of his intention, confess
to him that he will assuredly murder and rob you, or that he has done so
already, and yet this priest may be your next door neighbor, and he will
not make it known; and why, reader? Because he knows it _as God,_ and as
_God_ he tells the murderer to come to him and he will forgive him. It
is not at all impossible but the day may come when this country may be
at war with Europe. We can easily fancy the despots of Europe forming
another holy _alliance_, for the laudable purpose of suppressing
democracy. France, Austria, Spain, Italy, and a large portion of
Germany and Switzerland, together with the holy see, would necessarily
constitute that holy junto; and if so, and war were declared by them
against this country, what would be the consequence? Inevitable ruin;
certain defeat; not caused by foes abroad, but by foes within,
leagued by the most solemn ties, and bound by the most fearful oaths
to sacrifice our country, and all we value, for the advancement of the
Roman church.

That there is a foe in the midst of us, capable of doing so, no man
acquainted with the doctrines and statistics of the Roman Catholic
church in this country can deny.

It has now:--Dioceses, 21; apostolic vicarate, 1; number of bishops,
17; bishops elect, 8; priests, 634; churches, 611; other stations,
461; ecclesiastical seminaries, 19; clerical students, 261; literary
institutions for young men, 16; female academies, 48; elementary
schools, passim, throughout most of the dioceses; periodicals, 15;
population, 1,300,-000. Late accounts carry the population up to
2,000,000.

The increase of the Romish church, in this country, since 1836, amounts
to 12 bishops, 293 priests, 772 churches and other stations, 1,400,000
individuals, and other things in proportion.

Should the said church go on increasing for the next thirty years as she
has done for the last eight years, the Papists would be a majority of
the population of the United States, and the Pope our supreme temporal
ruler.

I have stated to you before what the doctrines of these two millions
are in relation to the power of the Pope; and I repeat it now, and most
solemnly assure you, that there is not a Roman Catholic in Europe or the
United States who does not believe that the Pope has as good a right to
govern this country as he has to govern Italy; and that he is, and of
right ought to be, our king. Pope Gregory VII. has declared, "that the
Pope alone ought to wear the tokens of imperial dignity, and that
all princes ought to kiss his feet." There is not a Roman Catholic
clergyman, whether bishop or priest, who does not believe that it is the
duty of our president, our governors, and magistrates, to do the same.

Bellarmine, one of the best authorities among Catholic writers, says,
"The supremacy of the Pope over all persons and things is the main
substance of Christianity." Mark that, fellow-citizens! That is the
belief of Bishop Hughes, of New York; that is the belief of Bishop
Fenwick, of Boston, and of every other Roman Catholic bishop in the
United States, as I will soon show.

Pope Boniface VIII. says, "It is necessary to salvation that all
Christians be subject to the Pope." Bzovius, an orthodox Roman Catholic
writer, whose authority no bishop or priest will venture to question,
says of the Pope--"He is judge in heaven, and in all earthly
jurisdiction supreme; he is the arbiter of the world." Moscovius,
another eminent Popish writer, informs us that "God's tribunal and
the Pope's tribunal are the same." Pope Paul IV., in one of his bulls,
published in the year 1557, declares, that "all Protestants, be they
kings or subjects, are cursed;" and this doctrine is an integral portion
of the law of the Roman Catholic church, as may be seen in the fifth
book of the decretals of the council of Trent. This is not all. We find
in the forty-third canon of the council of Lateran, that "all bishops
and priests are forbidden from taking any oath of allegiance," except to
the Pope.

We find in another part of the decrees of the council of Lateran, held
under Pope Innocent III., the following denunciation:--"All magistrates
who interpose against priests in any criminal case, whether it be for
murder or high treason, let him be excommunicated." Bear that in mind,
American Protestants! If a priest murder one of you, if he commit high
treason against your government, your magistrates dare not interfere,
under pain of being _damned_. So says the infallible Roman church; and
so will she act, should she ever acquire the power of doing so, in this
country.

It is said by Lessius, an eminent Jesuit writer, and professor of
divinity in the Roman Catholic college of Louvaine, who wrote about the
year 1620, and whose authority no Roman Catholic dare doubt, under pain
of eternal damnation, that "the Pope can annul and cancel every possible
obligation arising from an oath." This he taught to his students in the
college of Louvaine. This same doctrine has been taught in the college
of Maynooth, Ireland, where I was educated myself. It is taught there at
the present day. See the works of De La Hogue.

Judge you, Americans, what safety there is for your republic, while you
support and sustain among you a sect numbering two millions, who are
sworn to uphold such doctrines as the foregoing. The very domestics in
your houses are spies for the priests. Nothing transpires under your
own roofs which is not immediately known to the bishop or priest to whom
your servants confess. But you may say, "The confessor will not reveal
it." Here you are partly right, and partly, mistaken; and it is proper
to explain the course adopted by priests in such matters as confession.

If it be the _interest_ of the church, that what is confessed should be
made public, the priest tells the party to make it known to him, "_out
of the confessional_," and then he uses it to suit his own views;
perhaps for the destruction of the reputation, or fortune, of the very
man, or family, employing domestic. But it may be replied that
Roman Catholics are good-natured people; that they are generous and
industrious. Admitted: I will even go further; there is not a people in
the world moreso. Nature has done much for them, especially those of
them who are natives of Ireland; but the lack of a correct education has
corrupted their hearts and imbittered their feelings; they are not to
be trusted with the care or management of the animals of Protestant
families.

It is not generally known, nor perhaps suspected by Protestant parents,
who employ Roman Catholic domestics, in nursing and taking care of their
children, that these nurses are in the habit of taking their children
privately to the houses of the priests, and bishops, and there getting
them baptized according to the Roman Catholic ritual: I know this as
a fact, within my own knowledge. When I officiated as a Roman Catholic
priest, in Philadelphia, I baptized hundreds, I may say thousands of
Protestant children, without the knowledge or consent of their parents,
brought to me secretly by their Roman Catholic nurses; and I should have
continued to do so till this day, had not the Lord in his mercy,
been pleased to visit me, and show me the wiles, treachery, infamy,
corruption, and intrigue of the church, of which the circumstance of
birth and education caused me to be a member. It was usual with me in
Philadelphia, in St. Margaret church, of which I was pastor, to have
services every morning at seven o'clock; and often when I returned home,
between eight and eleven, have I found three, four, and sometimes six
and eight children, whose parents were Protestants, waiting for me, in
the arms of their Roman Catholic nurses to be baptized. This is a common
practice in every Protestant country, where there are Roman Catholic
priests; but as far as my experience goes, it prevails to a greater
extent in the United States than elsewhere; and 1 should not be in the
least surprised, if at this time, in the city of Boston, nearly all the
infants, nursed by Roman Catholic women, are baptized by their priests
and bishops. Roman Catholic women are unwilling to come in contact, even
with _heretic_ infants. They believe them _damned_, unless baptized by
a Romish priest. There is another fact, indirectly connected with
this subject, which is not generally known. It is believed by Roman
Catholics, that all mothers, after their confinement, are to be
_churched_ by some Romish priest or bishop. This _churching_ is
performed by the repetition of a few prayers, in Latin, a sprinkling
of holy water, and the woman who does not submit to this mummery,
is believed by any Roman Catholic nurse whom she may employ, to be
eternally _damned_, together with her child. They go so far as to
say, that the very ground upon which the unchurched mother walks is
_accursed_; that the very house in which she lives is _accursed_; and
that all she says and does is _accursed_.

So firmly have the Romish priests and bishops fastened this belief upon
the minds of their _dupes_, that at this moment in Ireland, and I may
venture to say in this city of Boston, no Catholic woman will leave
her bed after confinement, without being _churched, lest the ground_ on
which she walks may be accursed. Until this ceremony is performed, none
of her Catholic neighbors will hold any intercourse with her. How then
can Protestant mothers expect otherwise, than that Catholic nurses will
have _their_ children baptized by priests! or what security can they
have that they will not, under the direction of priests, try to turn the
minds of their children from the contemplation of truth, and pure gospel
light, to the foul sources of Popery and superstition! Look to this,
American mothers.

It may not be amiss in this connection, to lay before American
Protestants, the doctrine of the Romish church upon baptism; and, lest
I may be accused of setting down aught in malice, I shall do so in the
words of the council of Trent.

_Canons of the Council of Trent concerning Baptism._

"1. Whoever shall say that the baptism of John, had the same virtue as
the baptism of Christ; let him be accursed!

"2. Whoever shall say that true and natural water is not absolutely
necessary for baptism, and therefore wrests those words of our Lord
Jesus Christ, as though they had been a kind of metaphor: 'Except a man
be born of water, and the Holy Spirit;' let him be accursed!

"3. Whoever shall say that in the Roman church, which is the mother
and mistress of all churches, the doctrine concerning the sacrament of
baptism is not true; let him be accursed!

"4. Whoever shall say that the baptism which is also given by heretics,
in the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost, with
the intention of doing what the church does, is not true baptism; let
him be accursed!

[Here is another of those rules, by which the holy Romish church leaves
herself room to impose upon the public. Can any man believe, can any one
even suppose a case, where a heretic acts, or intends to act, according
to the intention of the church of Rome; The very act of heresy was
against that church and her doctrines; and the truth is, if the church
would speak honestly, or her priests and bishops do so for her, all
who are not baptized in the Romish church, and who are baptized, are
eternally damned. So thinks, and so teaches, the Popish church.]

"5. Whoever shall say that baptism is optional, that is, not necessary
to salvation; let him be accursed!

"6. Whoever shall say that a baptized person cannot, even if he would,
lose grace, how much soever he may sin, unless he is unwilling to
believe; let him be accursed!

"7. Whoever shall say that baptized persons, by baptism itself, become
debtors to preserve faith alone, and not the whole law of Christ; let
him be accursed!

"8. Whoever shall say that baptized persons are free from all precepts
of holy church, which are either written or traditional, so that they
are not bound to observe them, unless they choose to submit themselves
to them of their own accord; let him be accursed!

"9. Whoever shall say that men are so to be recalled to the memory of
the baptism which they have received, that they may regard all the vows
which are made after baptism as null and void, by virtue of the promise
already made in baptism itself, as if by it they detract from the faith
which they have professed, and from the baptism itself; let him be
accursed!

"10. Whoever shall say that all the sins which we committed after
baptism, by the mere remembrance and faith of the baptism received, are
either dismissed or become venial; let him be accursed!

"11. Whoever shall say that a baptism, truly and with due ceremony
conferred, is to be repeated on him who has denied the faith of Christ
among infidels, when he is converted to repentance; let him be accursed!

"12. Whoever shall say that no one is to be baptized, except at that
age at which Christ was baptized, or in the article of death; let him be
accursed!

"13. Whoever shall say that infants, because they have not the act of
faith, are not to be reckoned among believers after having received
baptism, and on this account are to be re-baptized when they arrive at
years of discretion; or that it is better that their baptism be omitted,
than that they should be baptized in the faith only of the church, when
they do not believe by their own act; let him be accursed!

"14. Whoever shall say that baptized children of this kind, when they
have grown up, are to be asked whether they wish to have that ratified
which their sponsors promised in their name when they were baptized;
and that when they reply that they are unwilling, they are to be left to
their own choice; and that they are not in the meantime to be compelled
by any other punishment, to a Christian life, except that they be
prohibited the enjoyment of the Eucharist, and the other sacraments,
until they repent; let him be accursed!"

This last canon, as the reader perceives, explains fully why Roman
Catholics are so anxious for the baptism of Protestant children by their
priests. It gives them the power of compelling those children, should
they deem it expedient to do so, to profess the Catholic faith, and
thereby strengthening her power. They try to alienate the children from
the parents; or calculating upon that natural affection with which a
parent clings to a child, they hope to bring over the parent also to
the _Catholic faith_; or, failing in this, they hope to break up those
alliances of blood which nature has established, and that community of
interest and feeling, which society has sanctioned, and religion and
nature have blessed, between parent and child.

A true Papist will stop at nothing to advance the power of the Pope,
or the interest of the holy church. Heretics, by which the reader will
understand all who do not belong to the Roman Catholic church, are to be
destroyed, cost what it will. Death, and the destruction of heretics,
is the watchword of Popery. Down with Protestant governments, kings,
presidents, governors, judges, and all other civil and religious
authorities, is the war-cry in Popish countries. They desire neither
to live nor die with us. They refuse to be laid down in the same common
earth with us. Need this be proved to Americans? One would suppose not.
Our intercourse with Roman Catholic countries is such, at present, that
there can be no longer any doubt of this fact.

Our commercial transactions with Spain, Portugal, South America, Mexico,
and the neighboring Island of Cuba, enables many of our people to judge
for themselves, and say what is now the condition of Protestants in
those countries where Popery predominates. Can a Protestant worship God
in those countries, according to the dictates of his own conscience? He
cannot. They are all told by their priests, that a Protestant is a thing
too unclean to worship God until he is first baptised and then shrived
or confessed by their priests. A Protestant cannot even carry his Bible
with him, into these countries. Many of my fellow-citizens, who may
see this statement, will bear testimony to its truth. When a Protestant
arrives at any port in a _purely_ Catholic country, his trunks and his
person are examined; and if a bible is found in them, or about him, it
is taken from him. The ministers of his religion dare not accompany him,
or if he does, his lips are sealed, under pain of a lingering death.
Should sickness lay its heavy hand upon him, there is no minister to
attend him, no Bible allowed him, from which he may quench his thirst
for the waters of life. Should death visit him, there is _no one to
close_ the eyes of the lonely Protestant stranger. A good Roman Catholic
would not touch the _accursed heretic_, and when dead he is not allowed
the rights of Christian interment; he must be cast by the wayside, as
suitable food for the hog, the dog, and the buzzard. How many a worthy
American have I seen myself, in Cuba, cast away when dead, as you would
a carrion, not even a coffin to cover him; and why all this? Because he
was a heretic; because he did not believe in the supremacy of the
Pope, and the infallibility of the Romish church; and yet those inhuman
wretches, those libels upon religion and humanity, come among us, ask
you for lands on which to build churches and pulpits, from which they
curse you and your children; become citizens of your republic, inmates
in your families, with smiles on their faces and curses in their hearts
for you. Let not this language be deemed exaggeration. I have heard
it, I have witnessed it, I have seen it. And yet Americans, heedlessly
fancying themselves and their institutions secure, refuse these, their
sworn enemies, and foes of their religion, nothing they ask for. Such
is the listlessness and apathy of our people upon this subject, that, as
far as I am acquainted, no appeal has ever been made to our government,
to ask even for a modification of those barbarities, with which our
Protestant citizens are treated, in Roman Catholic countries; nor has
there been any effort made to alter our free constitution, so as to
enable us to retaliate upon those Popish monsters, and obtain from
the bloodthirsty cowards, at the point of the bayonet, those common
privileges, which are almost among the necessary appurtenances of
humanity, and which even a Pagan would scarcely deny to a fellow-being.

I hold it as undeniable, that even as Protestants, we are, at least by
implication, entitled by our treaties of alliance with Popish countries,
to far different treatment from that which we receive; and had the
question been considered by _our people_, either in their primary
meetings, or through their representatives, they would have long since,
insisted upon due protection and respect for the natural rights of their
citizens abroad. These natural rights can neither be sold nor exchanged;
their free exercise is guaranteed by implication in every treaty we make
with foreign nations, and cannot be violated by them without giving just
cause of war.

Let political casuists say what they please, there is no principle
better established in political ethics, than that all international
treaties of amity and commerce, should be formed, and if formed, should
be kept, upon principles of justice and reciprocity. The same national
amity and courtesy, which our Protestant country extends to Popish
nations and their people, should be extended by them to us By national
friendship and comity, is not, I apprehend, and should not, be meant or
understood, the privilege of selling a bale of cotton here or a bag of
coffee there. It includes the free exercise of the rights of the parties
thereto, so far, at least, as they are not incompatible with each other,
or with the general principles of natural or national law. The Spaniard,
the Portuguese, the Italian, the Mexican, or Cuban, may worship his God,
the Virgin Mary, or any saint he pleases, and no American will disturb
him; no American will forbid him. If he dies, his priests may have him
buried where he will. This is as it should be. Man has a natural right
to worship God; it is a right implanted in his very nature. As well may
we say to a man, thou shalt not breathe the air of our country, as say,
thou shalt not worship the God that gave thee birth; and as well also
may we say, thou shalt not worship that God except according to the mode
which we prescribe, as forbid him doing so at all. The natural right
of worshipping God, or a first cause, implies the right of doing so
according to the dictates of each man's conscience, provided, in doing
it, we interfere with none of those laws, which civilized nations should
reverence. This is the principle on which we act with Popish countries
and people, and upon the principle of reciprocal justice, we ought to
demand similar treatment from them.

We have friendly treaties with these people. Friendly, forsooth! Can
that man or that nation be friendly, who forbids us to read our Bibles
within their territories, or to bury our dead among their dead, or to
worship God according to the usages of our forefathers, or the dictates
of our own conscience? Such treaties should rather be termed _treaties
for the abrogation of natural rights of Americans within Popish
dominions_. We enjoy no rights there; and if we have any by implication,
under our treaties, they are impiously wrested from us by a wicked
rabble of priests and bishops, distinguished only for their ignorance,
rapacity, and licentiousness.

I solemnly call upon every American citizen, who reveres his God,
respects his fellow-citizens, or values the happiness of his country, to
submit no longer to Popish insolence abroad, and to allow them no rights
in this country, which they are not willing to reciprocate. If our
existing treaties of _amity_ with Popish powers are not sufficient to
protest us in the free exercise of our religion, when among them, let us
break them, let us tear them asunder, and scatter them as chaff before
the wind. They were never binding upon us. They were made in violation
of natural rights, which God alone could give, and man cannot take
away. Call upon your government to protect you; choose no man as your
representative who will allow Popery to flourish in this free soil, and
witness the religion of your forefathers trampled upon, with impunity,
by Papists in a neighboring country; and if you cannot obtain your
rights by law, you will show the world that you have, at least, moral
and physical courage enough to redress your wrongs.

Let not Papists, who, at the distance of a few days' sail from your
ports, would deny your brother the rights of Christian interment, or
the consolation of dying with his Bible in his hand, dare call upon your
aid, to propagate a religion, which inculcates principles worse and more
dangerous than were ever practised in Pagan lands.

Much sympathy is felt and expressed, particularly in this state of
Massachusetts, where I write for some of her colored population,
because it is deemed necessary, in slave states, to prevent them
from commingling with their slaves, lest they may excite them to
dissatisfaction with their condition, and ultimately to insurrection.
It is deemed a matter of such magnitude that Massachusetts, in
the plenitude of its sympathy, felt herself called upon to send an
ambassador to South Carolina, to protect her citizens, and demand
redress for this supposed outrage upon her rights. It is not my
intention to enter into the merits or demerits of the question at issue
between the states of Massachusetts and South Carolina. I will merely
state, that the former consists in this, viz: by a law of the state
of South Carolina, every free person of color, entering that state, is
liable to be imprisoned till he leaves the state. This is done by
South Carolina and some other slave states, as a necessary measure
of precaution; but the prisoner is kindly treated; at least, we hear
nothing to the contrary; no such complaint is made by Massachusetts. The
prisoner is allowed the free exercise of his religion; his friends may
visit him almost at any hour; his spiritual instructor is never denied
access to him; he may have his Bible with him, or any other books he
may think proper. But this will not satisfy the sympathizing people of
Massachusetts. They call public meetings of their citizens; threaten to
dissolve the union; and declare they will raise a sufficient military
force to invade South Carolina, and redress this outrage upon a
citizen's rights, at the point of the bayonet.

Man is truly a strange being, and various indeed are the currents of
his sympathies, but still more various and unaccountable are the causes
which often set them in motion. It is comparatively but seldom, that a
colored citizen of the North goes to slave states; but if there should
be the least infraction of his civil rights, the whole North flies into
a passion; and yet this very people of the North can see the citizens of
their own country, kindred, and blood, in a neighboring Popish port of
Havana, for instance, deprived of all their rights, both conventional
and natural, without a murmur. Not a complaint is heard in New England,
from the son, whose father is confined in the dungeons of Cuba, not
because he is suspected of any intention to create insurrection, but
simply because he refused to kneel to some wooden image, which a parcel
of debauched priests are lugging about the streets; or because he
expresses his belief that such processions and mummeries are worse than
Pagan idolatry.

The American Protestant, who will dare worship his God publicly, or even
in private, within the walls of his own house, unless with closed doors,
and without the knowledge of the Popish spies of the Inquisition, is
liable to imprisonment, from which, in all probability, he is never to
be released. If a Bible be found in his house, it is burned, and he and
his family are cast into jail. This is the case in every country where
the Popish church has power enough to make its religion that of the
state; and yet we have treaties of _amity_, with these countries. What
a burlesque upon _amity!_ what a mockery of friendly relations, with
a people who deny us the exercise of the natural right which every man
has, to worship God as he pleases! who compel our fathers, brothers, and
our sons, to bow the knee, in idolatrous worship, to wooden images, and
particles of bread, which are paraded as _Gods_, through the streets,
in Roman Catholic countries. Friendly relations, forsooth, with a people
who consider us damned, and already consigned to perdition! And yet
we hear no complaint in Massachusetts, of cruelties to our citizens;
nothing is said of the violation of those friendly relations, secured
to us by treaty, and annually declared by our presidents, in their
messages, to exist and to be maintained between our people and those
Popish countries. When we hear of an American citizen in Cuba, when
we hear of his natural rights being trampled under foot, by Catholic
governors, bishops, and priests, no complaint is made of a violation
of friendly alliance; no meeting is called to express sympathy for the
individual sufferer, or indignation against the treacherous government
of Popery; no act of our legislature has been passed, making
appropriations to send ambassadors to these neighboring nations, for
injuries done to our citizens; and yet it is a well-known fact, that
where one colored citizen of New England is imprisoned, for a few days,
in South Carolina, there are a thousand of our enterprising seamen and
merchants, confined in the dungeons of Spain, Italy, Portugal, Mexico,
and Cuba, at our very door. How long will these outrages be tolerated?
A Popish captain comes here; the hands before the mast are Papists;
the ship may have her chaplain, or may have as many _little gods_, and
saints, indulgences, scapulas, beads, and rosaries, as they please; they
may land, captain, crew, saints, and all, and no one molests them;
but if an American ship arrives at the very port from which the other
sailed, her captain and crew are forbidden even to carry their Bible on
shore; but should the ship have a Protestant chaplain, and that chaplain
venture on shore, with his congregation of sailors--all American
freemen--he dare not take his Bible with him, or hold religious worship
on this Popish soil; and should this captain, chaplain, or any of the
crew die, he is not allowed Christian burial, unless he can buy the
privilege from, profligate priests, at an enormous sacrifice of money,
and after certain purifications effected by holy water, and smoking,
which they call _incense_. This is what our government calls _friendly
relations_.

How long shall we be amused by the executive messages, annually
informing us of receiving "assurances of friendship from Popish
countries?" Let the people take this subject into their own hands; let
them have no alliance, no treaty, no commerce with a people, who will
deny them the right of worshipping God peaceably and respectfully, or
who will refuse them the right of burying their dead decently and with
due solemnity. The treaties which are made with Papists begin, on their
part, with the most solemn avowal of good faith, in the name of the
Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. They assure us of their friendly sentiments
towards us under this solemn and awful sanction; but no sooner is this
promise made--no sooner have they pledged their honor, their faith,
and all that is holy, to support it--than they disregard all those
obligations, feeling and believing that they are already dispensed with
by their church, which teaches them to hold no faith with heretics.
The priests, however, and bishops, more crafty than the mass of their
people, plead _state necessity_ for withholding from us privileges which
we give them. This is a shallow pretext, and worthy only of the source
from which it comes. Can any case be supposed, or any necessity arise,
to violate the eternal principles of right and wrong, of justice and
truth? Are moral and national obligations anything more than mere dead
letters and leaden rules, which can be bent by hands strong enough to do
so, and to suit their own purposes and designs?

Suppose a man in private life--suppose further that man to be a
Papist--he enters into a treaty of alliance and friendship with a
Protestant; he calls God the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost to witness
that he will fulfil his engagement; we can easily fancy the Protestant,
within the jurisdiction of that Papist, reading his Bible, without
interfering or any way molesting the individual within whose
jurisdiction he is. Let us imagine this Protestant seized by the Papist,
thrown into prison by him, while alive, and if dead, thrown away as food
for the birds of prey. Would you call this fulfilling the obligations
of friendship or friendly alliance? Would the Protestant ever enter
into such a treaty of alliance again? Would not every Protestant who
witnessed this transaction look upon the Papist who committed it,
even though he be but a private individual, as a bad man, with whom no
further intercourse ought to be had? Assuredly, he would. But let it
be borne in mind, that actions do not change their nature; immutable
principles are always the same; they do not change with the paucity
or number of actors; what is bad in an individual will be wrong in a
nation, and in every individual of that nation. The only difference is,
that an act of perfidy and bad faith in a nation is, if possible, worse
in itself, and infinitely more mischievous, than if committed by an
individual.

Our political sophists may deny this, and gloss over the conduct of
Popish governments towards our citizens while among them; but they
cannot long hide from our people that the eternal laws of truth
cannot be violated; nor can their meaning be frittered away by the
technicalities of treaties. Truth, whether moral or political, is like
the suu of heaven; it is but one--it is the same every where. It is
sometimes clouded, it is true, but these clouds are momentary; they
pass away, and it shines again in its native brilliancy. The day is fast
coming, and I trust it has even arrived, when Americans will see, that
by a treaty of amity is not meant the right of shipping our commodities
to Popish countries, and receiving theirs in exchange; reserving to one
party the privilege of denying to the other a right dearer to him
than all earthly considerations; and which is guarantied to him by the
eternal laws of God, while the other party is under no restraint as to
the full and free enjoyment of those natural rights. And here, I beg
leave to say to our legislators, that Protestant Americans, upon due
reflection, will not long give their assent to any treaty, nor form an
alliance with any country, which shall deny them the free exercise of
their religion.

The American, who will enter into an alliance with the Pope, or a Popish
country, explicitly agrees to deny his God, and forswear the religion
of his forefathers. He virtually consents that the party with which
he makes the agreement shall be privileged to curse and damn him, his
country, his religion, and his rights. This needs no proof. Look around
you, and see your citizens in Mexico denying their God by submitting
to Popish laws, which forbid their worship according to the dictates of
their conscience. Were your puritan forefathers to witness this, would
they not exclaim, "Shame upon our degenerate sons, who will barter their
religion and their birthright for the petty advantages of commerce!" No
wonder that Popish priests and Popish presses should call Americans
_cowards and the sons of cowards_. Who but a coward, and what but a
nation of cowards, would surrender that liberty of conscience which
their forefathers purchased at the price of blood? This Americans do by
assenting to a treaty with any country which does not guarantee to them
the right of worshipping God without hindrance. Americans will not
forget, though they cannot too often be reminded of the fact, that those
countries where their feelings are thus outraged are, _de facto,_
governed by the Pope and his vicegerents, whose actions for centuries
back have proved them to have been no other than conspirators against
the improvement and happiness of the human race. What were the means by
which they conducted their governments? The very same that they are now
in every Roman Catholic country, all over the globe; craft,
dissimulation, oppression, extortion, and above all, fire, faggot, and
the sword. There is not an article of their faith, nor a sacrament of
their church, which is not enforced by curses, as I shall show in the
sequel. These vicegerents of the humble Redeemer have the insolence to
ape the very thunders of heaven. History informs us, that their robes
have been crimsoned in blood. Their images of saints, some of which I
have seen in Mexico, made of solid gold, and many of them six feet high
and well-proportioned, were wrung from the poor.

Many of those countries, which they now possess, and where God and
nature have scattered plenty, have been made barren by Popish avarice
and the licentiousness of its priests. The fields, which laughed with
plenty, they have watered with hunger and distress. They found the world
gay with flowers, and with roses: they dyed it with blood. They and
their doctrines acted upon it like the blast of an east wind. Popery,
since the eighth century in particular, has been what a pestilence or
conflagration is to a city.

Come with me, in imagination, to Italy, and judge for yourselves. Pass
on with me, to Spain, Portugal, South America, and you will sec that I
am not exaggerating. You will find that I have only told truth, but not
the whole truth. No tongue can tell it. We have no language to express
it. I will give you a few instances of the fruits of Popery in the
neighboring island of Cuba. What I am about stating has come under my
own observation; and is, besides, a matter of record, and accessible to
many. The natives of Cuba pay fifteen millions per annum to her _most
Christian_ Majesty, the queen of Spain. They support an army of sixteen
thousand men, every one of whom is a native of old Spain, kept there for
the sole purpose of extorting this enormous annual tribute. The number
of priests there is immense. They, too, must be supported at the point
of the bayonet. These priests are known to be the most profligate
vagabonds in creation. And why, it will naturally be asked, should
such men be tolerated? Why supply them with money to gamble at the faro
table, at cock-fights and bull-fights? The reason is plain; they act
as spies for the Pope, who, in reality, manages the government of
old Spain, and contrives to draw, from that already impoverished and
distracted country, the last dollar of a people whom God has endowed
with every virtue, and a capacity of cultivating them, had not the curse
of Popery fallen upon them.

Such is the avarice of the Popish church and Popish tyrants, that, if
a farmer in Cuba kills even a beef for his own use, he must pay the
government ten per cent, upon its value. When I was in Cuba, the farmer
must pay ten and a half dollars duty upon every barrel of flour imported
into the island; when he might raise, in the field, before his own door,
the finest wheat in the world, if the government would let him. Such
are but a few of the blessings of Popish governments. Do Americans desire
this republic reduced to such a state of vassalage as this? or will
you profit by these lessons, which experience is daily teaching you?
Wherever you turn your eyes, and see Popery in the ascendant, you will
find it the Pandora's box, out of which every curse has issued, without
even leaving hope behind. It should, therefore, be suppressed on its
appearance in any country. It should be the duty of every good man to
extirpate it, and sweep it, if possible, from the face of the globe. It
is nothing better than a political machine, cunningly devised, for the
propagation of despotism. It is the masterpiece of satanic wickedness.
Execrated and exploded be this infernal machine! and thanks forever be
to that God, who has shown me its intricacies, in time to save me
from becoming what, I know of my own knowledge, Roman Catholic priests
are--hypocrites, infidels, and licentious debauchees, under the mask
of sanctity and holiness. Their religion is supported by _curses_, as I
have before stated, and will now prove from the doctrines of their
own church. The reader has already been told, that the Popish church
maintains the doctrines that a belief in seven sacraments is necessary
to salvation. These sacraments are designated as follows: _Baptism,
Confirmation, Eucharist, Penance, Extreme Unction, Holy Orders, and
Matrimony_. And she enforces this by _curses_. I have already enumerated
the curses with which she enforces her belief in baptism. The next
sacrament is Confirmation, enforced by the following eloquent curses,
pronounced by the infallible council of Trent:!!!!!

"1. Whoever shall say that the confirmation of baptized persons is a
needless ceremony, and not rather a true and proper sacrament: or that
anciently it was nothing else than a kind of catechizing, by-which the
youth expressed the reason of their faith before the church; let him be
accursed!

"2. Whoever shall say that they do despite to the Holy Spirit who
attributes any virtue to the holy chrism of confirmation; let him be
accursed!

"3. Whoever shall say, the ordinary minister of holy confirmation is not
the bishop alone, but any mere priest whatsoever; let him be accursed!"

The next sacrament is the Eucharist. The following is the doctrine of
the Romish church in relation to this:!!!!!

Decree of the Council of Florence for the Instruction of the Armenians,

"The third is the sacrament of the Eucharist, the matter of which
is wheaten bread, and wine from the vine; with which, before the
consecration, a very small quantity of water should be mixed. But water
is thus mixed, since it is believed that the Lord himself instituted
this sacrament in wine, mixed with water: besides, because this agrees
with the representation of our Lords passion: because it is recorded
that blood and water flowed forth from the side of Christ: and also
because this is proper to signify the effect of this sacrament, which
is the union of Christian people with Christ: for water signifies the
people, according to Rev. xvii. 15. _And he said to me, the waters,
which thou sawest, where the harlot sitteth, are peoples, and nations,
and tongues_.

"The form of this sacrament are the words of the Saviour, by which
this sacrament is performed: for the priest, speaking in the person of
Christ, performs this sacrament: for, by virtue of the words themselves,
the substance of the bread is converted into the body, and the substance
of the wine into the blood, of Christ; yet so that Christ is contained
entire under the form of bread, and entire under the form of wine:
Christ is entire also under every part of the consecrated host, and of
the consecrated wine, after a separation has been made. The effect of
this sacrament, which it produces in the soul of a worthy partaker, is
the union of the person to Christ," &c.

_Canons of the Council of Trent, concerning the Most Holy Sacrament of
the Eucharist._

"1. Whoever shall deny that, in the sacrament of the most holy Eucharist
are contained truly, really, and substantially, the body and blood,
together with the soul and divinity, of our Lord Jesus Christ, and
therefore the entire Christ, but shall say that he is in it only as in a
sign, or figure, or virtue, let him be accursed!

"2 Whoever shall say that in the most holy sacrament of the Eucharist,
the substance of bread and wine remains together with the body and blood
of our Lord Jesus Christ, and shall deny that wonderful and singular
conversion of the whole substance of the bread into the body, and of the
whole substance of the wine into the blood, only the forms of bread and
wine remaining, which conversion indeed the Catholic church most aptly
calls tran-substantiation; let him be accursed!

"3 Whoever shall deny that in the adorable sacrament of the Eucharist,
the entire Christ is contained under each kind, and under the single
parts of each kind, when a separation is made; let him be accursed!

"4. Whoever shall say that the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ
are not present in the admirable Eucharist so soon as the consecration
is performed, but only in the use when it is received, and neither
before nor after, and that the true body of our Lord does not remain in
the hosts, or consecrated morsels, which are reserved or left after the
communion; let him be accursed!

"5. Whoever shall say either that remission of sins is the principal
fruit of the most holy Eucharist, or that no other effects proceed from
it; let him be accursed!

"6. Whoever shall affirm that in the holy sacrament of the Eucharist,
Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, is not to be adored, even with the
external worship of latria, and therefore that the Eucharist is to be
honored neither with peculiar festive celebration, nor to be solemnly
carried about in processions according to the laudable and universal
rite and custom of the church, or that it is not to be held up publicly
before the people that it may be adored, and that its worshippers are
idolaters; let him be accursed!

"7. Whoever shall say that it is not lawful that the holy Eucharist be
reserved in the sacristy, but that it must necessarily be distributed to
those who are present immediately after the consecration; that it is
not proper that it be carried in procession to the sick; let him be
accursed!

"8. Whoever shall say that Christ, as exhibited in the Eucharist, is
eaten only spiritually, and not also sacramentally and really; let him
be accursed.

"9. Whoever shall deny that each and every one of Christ's faithful, of
both sexes, when they have attained to years of discretion, are obliged,
least once every year, at Easter, to commune according to the precept of
holy mother church; let him be accursed!

"10. Whoever shall say that it is not lawful in the officiating priest
to administer the communion to himself; let him be accursed!

"11. Whoever shall affirm that faith alone is sufficient preparation for
taking the sacrament of the most holy Eucharist; let him be accursed And
lest so great a sacrament be taken unworthily and therefore to death
and condemnation, the sacred holy synod doth decree and declare, that
sacrimental confession must necessarily precede in the case of those whom
conscience accuses of mortal sin, if a confessor is at hand, however
contrite they may suppose themselves to be. But if any one shall presume
to teach, preach, or pertinacious assert, or in publicly disputing, to
defend the contrary, let him by this very act be excommunicated."

Canons of the same Council concerning the Communion of Children, and in
both Kinds.

"1. Whoever shall say that each and every of of Christ's faithful ought
to take both kinds of the most holy sacrament of the Eucharist, by the
command of God, or because necessary to salvation let him be accursed!

"2. Whoever shall say that the holy Catholic church has not been
induced, by just causes and reasons, to administer the communion to the
laity, and also to the clergy not officiating, only under the form of
bread; or that she has erred in this; Let him be accursed!

"3. Whoever shall deny that the whole and entire Christ, the fountain
and author of all graces, is received under the one form of bread,
because, as some falsely assert, he is not received under both kinds,
according to the institution of Christ; let him be accursed!

"4 Whoever shall say that the communion of the Eucharist is necessary
for little children before they have attained to years of discretion;
let him be accursed!" &c.


The next in order is Extreme Unction,


Canons of the Council of Trent concerning Extreme Unction.

"1. Whoever shall say that extreme unction is not truly and properly a
sacrament instituted by Christ our Lord, and promulgated by the blessed
apostle James, but only a rite received from, the fathers, or human
invention; let turn be accursed!

"2. Whoever shall say that the sacred anointing of the sick does not
confer grace, nor remit sins, nor raise up the sick, but that it has now
ceased, as if the gift of healing existed only in past ages; let him be
accursed!

"3. Whoever shall say that the ceremony of extreme unction in the
practice which the holy Roman church observes, are repugnant to the
meaning of the blessed apostle James, and that, therefore, they are to
be changed; let him be accursed!"

The sixth sacrament is that of Orders.

Canons of the Council of Trent concerning Orders

"1. Whoever shall say that in the New Testament, there is not a visible
and external priesthood: or that there is not any power of consecrating
and offering the true body and blood of the Lord, and of remitting and
retaining sins: but only the office and naked ministry of preaching the
gospel; or that they who do not preach are surely not priests; Let him
be accursed!

"2. Whoever shall say that besides the priesthood there are not other
orders in the Catholic church, both greater and inferior, by which as by
certain steps, the priesthood may be attained; let him be accursed!

"3. Whoever shall say that orders, or sacred ordination, is not truly
and properly a sacrament instituted by Christ the Lord; or that it is
a certain human invention, devised by men ignorant of ecclesiastical
things, or that it is only a certain ceremony of choosing the ministers
of the word of God and of the sacraments; let him be accursed!

"4. Whoever shall say that by sacred ordination the Holy Spirit is not
given, and that therefore the bishops say in vain, Receive the Holy
Ghost: or that by it character is not impressed: or that he who has once
been a priest may again become a layman; let him be accursed!

"5. Whoever shall say that the sacred unction which the church uses
in holy ordination is not only not required, but is contemptible and
pernicious; likewise also the other ceremonies of orders; let him be
accursed!

"6. Whoever shall say that in the Catholic church there is not a
hierarchy instituted by divine appointment, which consists of bishops,
priests, and ministers; let him be accursed!

"7. Whoever shall say that bishops are not superior to priests, or that
they have not the power of confirming and ordaining; or that which they
have is common to them with the priests; or that orders conferred by
them without the consent or call of the people or the secular power, are
null and void; or that they who have been neither duly ordained nor sent
by ecclesiastical and canonical power, but come from some other source,
are lawful ministers of the word and sacraments; let him be accursed!

"8. Whoever shall say that the bishops, who are appointed by the
authority of the Roman pontiff, are not lawful and true bishops, but a
human invention; let him be accursed!"

Canons of the Council of Trent concerning Marriage.

1. Whoever shall say that marriage is not truly and properly one of the
seven sacraments of the evangelical laws instituted by Christ the Lord,
but that it is invented by men in the church and does not confer grace;
let him be accursed!

"2. Whoever shall say that it is lawful for Christians to Have several
wives at once, and that this is forbidden by no divine law; let him be
accursed!

"3. Whoever shall say that only those degrees of relationship and
affinity, which are expressed in Leviticus, can hinder marriage from
being contracted, and annul the contract; and that the church cannot
dispense in any of them, or appoint that more may hinder and annul; let
him be accursed!

"4. Whoever shall say that the Church could not constitute impediments
annulling marriage, or that in constituting them, she has erred; let him
be accursed!

"5. Whoever shall say that the bond of marriage may be dissolved on
account of heresy, or mutual dislike, or voluntary absence from the
husband or wife; let him be accursed!

"6. Whoever shall say that a marriage solemnized, but not consummated,
is not annulled by the solemn profession of a religious order by one of
the parties; let him be accursed!

"7. Whoever shall say that the church errs, when she has taught and
teaches that according to the evangelical and apostolical doctrine, the
bond of marriage cannot be dissolved on account of the adultery of one
or the other of the parties, and that neither of them, not even the
innocent party who has given no cause for the adultery, may contract
another marriage, whilst the party is living, and that he commits
adultery, who marries another after putting away his adulterous wife, or
she, who marries another, after putting away her adulterous husband; let
him be accursed!

"8. Whoever shall say that the church is in error when, for many
reasons, she decrees that a separation may be made between married
persons, as to the bed, or as to intercourse, either for a certain, or
an uncertain time; let him be accursed.

"9. Whoever shall say that the clergy, constituted in sacred order, or
regulars, who have solemnly professed chastity, may contract marriage,
and that the contract is valid, notwithstanding ecclesiastical law, or
vow, and that to maintain the opposite, is nothing else than to condemn
marriage; and that all may contract marriage, who do not think that they
have the gift of chastity, even though they have vowed it; let him be
accursed: as God does not deny this to those who seek it aright, nor
does he suffer us to be tempted above what we are able to bear.

"10. Whoever shall say that the married state is to be preferred to
a state of virginity, or celibacy, and that it is not better and more
blessed to remain in virginity, or celibacy, than to be joined in
marriage; let him be accursed!

"11. Whoever shall affirm that the prohibition of the solemnization of
marriage, at certain times of the year, is a tyrannical superstition,
borrowed from the superstitions of the Pagans, or shall condemn the
benedictions, and other ceremonies, which the church uses at those
times; let him be accursed! u 12. Whoever shall affirm that matrimonial
causes do not belong to the ecclesiastical judges; let him be accursed!"

The atrocity of the above doctrines, is evident to every reflecting
mind. Protestants can now see for themselves, whether they can safely
hold any communion with them, or have any confidence in Roman Catholics.
There is not a Protestant Christian in the United States, nor in the
world, who is not publicly and solemnly denounced, as an accursed being,
by the Roman Catholic church, and by each and every one of its members;
but in addition to those curses, which I have enumerated, there is
another more solemn; one which is annually pronounced against them, by
the Pope of Rome, and by every bishop and priest in this country. It
is known by the title of _Bulla in cena Domini_. The curse contained
in this bull, is pronounced annually at Rome, by the Pope, on Thursday
before Good Friday. It includes every living being who is not a Roman
Catholic. All our president, congress, governors, magistrates,
municipal authorities, officers of our navy and army, all our Protestant
clergymen, whether Unitarians, Presbyterians, Episcopalians, Baptists,
or Methodists; and upon all these, without distinction, the Pope of
Rome, dressed in his royal robes, invokes the curse of Heaven, once at
least every year. Every priest in the Roman church is bound to do the
same. It was a part of my own duty, and one which I never failed to
discharge, until I protested against the doctrines of the Romish church.
The Popish priests never deemed it prudent to pronounce this curse
publicly?-in the United States, but while I was among them, we never
omitted to do so privately, on the morning of Thursday before Good
Friday. It commences with the following words on the part of the
Pope:!!!!!

"We, therefore, following the ancient custom of our predecessors,
of holy memory, do firstly--excommunicate and curse, in the name of
Almighty God, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, and by the authority of St.
Peter and St. Paul, and by our own authority, all Heretics, Hussites,
Wiekliffites, Lutherans. Calvinists, Huguenots, Anabaptists,
Trinitarians, and all apostates from the faith, and all who read their
books," &c, &c. This curse includes every soul in the United States, who
is not a Roman Catholic. Will you, Americans give these men and their
doctrines footing among you? Will they longer dare to curse you and your
children with impunity?

In the 6th section of the above bull, the Pope and his priests curse all
civil powers, who impose taxes without the consent of the Roman court.

In the 12th section, they curse all who maltreat cardinals, bishops, or
priests. You are, therefore, to take heed and not quarrel with priests,
though they insult your wives, or debauch your families. In the 15th
section, all are cursed, who take away jurisdiction from the court of
Rome, and prefer leaving pauses of difference between them and priests,
to our civil tribunals.

In the 17th section, all are cursed, who in any case appeal to civil
tribunals, when the difficulty is between Romish priests and citizens.

In the 18th section, the Pope curses all who take away church property.

In the 19th section, the Pope curses all who, without express license
from him, impose taxes on priests, monasteries, nunneries, or churches.
Our legislature is sitting while I write. Take heed, gentlemen, lest you
tax the Roman Catholic bishop Fenwick, or any of his priests. Be sure
you do not tax his real estate, his nunneries, or other property. If you
do, you are doubly damned.

In the 20th section, the church curses all judges, and magistrates, who
shall sit in judgment on a bishop or priest, without license from the
holy see.

In the 22d section, this _bull_ is declared to be binding forever, and
it is brought to a conclusion by a solemn assurance that if any priest
shall violate it, he shall incur the wrath of Almighty God, and of St.
Peter and Paul.

I would again ask Americans whether Roman Catholic priests, or bishop,
or the two millions of followers which they have in this country, are
any longer to be trusted. I tell Americans, and I proclaim it to the
world, that they are spies upon our republic; they are the sworn foes of
our laws, of our principles, and of our government; and they are united
by the most fearful oath never to rest while our religious liberty
lasts, and to use every means which ingenuity can devise, and treachery
and perjury accomplish, to effect its overthrow, and substitute in its
place, the religion of the Pope; a religion, if such a name can be given
to a most infamous system of policy, which for sixteen hundred years has
deluged Europe in blood.

I make these assertions, not at random, not upon hearsay, not upon
the authority of Protestant writers, but upon that of Roman Catholic
theologians, and upon my own personal knowledge. I solemnly declare
it to be my deliberate opinion, that it is the duty of all civil
governments on the face of the earth, to unite in excluding, from their
territories, all Roman Catholic priests and bishops, as their deadly
enemies, and the sworn transgressors of all national law; and for us in
this country to countenance them, while they have any connection with
the Pope of Rome, or profess to owe him any allegiance, is nothing short
of a species of insanity. The _bull_ of which I have spoken, is taught
in every Roman Catholic college in the United States. The students in
those institutions are educated in the belief that their church, which
is infallible, requires of them to be unfaithful to this heretical
government, and not only that, but to betray it, whenever the interest
of the church demands it.

Every Irish Roman Catholic priest, who comes to this country, is
instructed by his bishop, to pull down, if possible, the standard of
heresy, which he is told he will find waving over the United States, and
erect in its place that of the Pope, which he swears to defend.

These are the principles of priests and their followers, who are coming
amongst you in thousands; whom you have encouraged for the last fifty
years, until at last, you have emboldened them, by your mistaken
sensibility and mock philanthropy, to say and proclaim to the universe,
_Americans shan't rule us_. This was their motto, during the last
presidential election; a motto devised and blessed by those turbulent
demagogues and pensioned agents of the Pope, in New York. But they are
not the only Papists who have proclaimed that Americans shall not rule
them. The same has been done in Philadelphia and Boston! These men are
at the bottom of all the riots, tumults, and popular commotions, which
have occurred in this country for several years back. Witness the
disturbances in Philadelphia, in 1821 and 1822, by an Irish bishop, in
trying to get possession, in the name of the Pope, of church property,
estimated to be worth over a million of dollars. (I shall refer to this
hereafter.) Witness the riots in the same city last May, where several
Americans have been sacrificed to the fury of a Popish mob. Witness the
proceeding in this city of Boston, on the occasion of a nun having made
her escape from the convent in Charlestown, to avoid, I have no doubt,
what delicacy forbade her to mention. Other causes were assigned for her
escape, and some were weak enough to deem them sufficient; but from my
own knowledge of convents, there can be no doubt of the real cause of
the escape, of the virtuous young lady, of whom mention is made.

Here is another instance of the morbid and mistaken sensibility of many
of our people. A certain number of Popish agents have applied to our
legislature to build a _jail_, which they call a convent, in our very
midst. To this jail, they attach a school, for the education of young
ladies, and for this ostensible purpose, numbers of older ones are kept
in the _jail_ or convent, by the Pope's agents.

The young ladies, who are sent to this school, are treated with kindness
and attention; every thing is done to please, to flatter them, and
even to cultivate their minds. The interior of the jail or nunnery is
depicted in the most delightful colors. The happiness of the inmates is
said to be equal to the saints in paradise. No opportunity is lost to
impress on the minds of their pupils, the temporal as well as eternal
beatitudes of this convent, until, finally, the young minds of the
scholars become perfectly enchanted, and, in the full glow of their
youthful imagination, they determine to become nuns. This step, too,
they are taught to take with apparent caution; they must serve a
noviciate, go through all the ceremony of wearing a white veil; the old
nuns representing to them the happiness they are about to enjoy, when
they are about to assume the black veil. But when this is done, the
poor innocent victims soon feel the horrors of their condition. They
are confined to solitary cells, to which no one has access _but the
priests_, and thus, in our very midst, a free born American citizen is
seduced from her parents, from her guardians, and fellow-citizens,
and no one is permitted to go and ask her freely how she likes her
condition. She is confined there with more severity, and watched more
closely, than any female in a Turkish Seraglio; and as we all recollect,
a few years ago, a Popish bishop, with his priests, and some thousands
of their _subjects_, viz., Irish Papists, threatened to sack the city
of Boston, because the people deemed it necessary to pull down that
synagogue of satan, the Charlestown nunnery. I am not an advocate of
mobs or riots: I would observe the law of the land, and see it enforced
at every risk; but there is a point at which no man would support even
the civil law.

There are laws founded upon necessity, and the eternal laws of
morality, which have a paramount claim upon one. Allegiance. Suppose
some hoary-headed profligate should obtain a charter to build a house
on Mount Benedict; suppose further, he attaches a school to it, to be
governed by the faded victims of his former dissipation, with a view of
making money for himself; suppose he and they had the address to gather
around them some of the most innocent, lovely, and respectable females
in the country; let us even suppose that ninety-nine in a hundred of
those young ladies left that school with unblemished reputation and high
accomplishments; and we had that evidence that _only one_ in a hundred
fell victims to the designs of the founders of this corrupt institution:
who would hesitate to determine what should be done with this
institution, or this nunnery, as Roman Catholic priests would call
it? An answer is not necessary. But suppose the hoary-headed gentleman
should apply to the legislature to rebuild it, would they do so? There
was a time when their acquaintance with Popery might have induced them
to say aye, if such a resolution were introduced; but now that they have
seen Popery in its native colors, withered should be the tongue of him
who would advance such a proposition; and paralyzed should be the arm of
the American who would support it. But it may be replied, that the Roman
Catholic church is different now from what it was in ancient times; that
it has essentially changed in its doctrine and in its discipline.

Others may say that Protestants, too, have been intolerant, and guilty
of many cruelties, in the propagation of their religion. This is freely
admitted: but there is this wide difference between the two religions.
The Popish creed inculcates persecution and utter extermination of all
who do not believe in its doctrines; while on the contrary, the creed
of the latter has never, and does not now, inculcate any other doctrine,
than Jesus Christ, and him crucified. In plain English, the Romish
church curses all who differ from her; while the Protestant church
blesses all, though they may be in error, and sincerely prays for their
conversion. The spirit of the latter breathes nothing but love, joy,
peace, and good will to mankind; that of the former, malice, hatred, ill
will, and persecution. This has been her uniform theory from the middle
of the third century; and as I will now show you, from the lips of her
own divines, and cannonized saints, her members have never ceased to
reduce it to practice. Cyril, who is to this day invoked, and prayed
to as a saint, taught and practised the above Romish doctrine. He was
bishop of Alexandria, in the year four hundred and twelve. There is not
a Roman Catholic, who is not taught to pray to him; and, of course, they
can have no objection to my giving him as authority. Whatever St. Cyril
believed, is believed by Papists now. Whatever he did was right, and
according to sound doctrine consequently as Holy Mother, the church,
never errs, and never can err, it must be right now. Let us see what
this saint has done and believed, in his time. Socrates, a native of
Constantinople, gives the following account of a portion of the life
of St. Cyril, and other bishops of Alexandria. I take it from his
ecclesiastical history.

The bishops of Alexandria had begun, says Socrates, to exceed the
limits of ecclesiastical power, and to intermeddle with civil affairs,
imitating, thereby, the bishop of Rome, whose sacred authority had, long
since, been changed into dominion and empire.

The governors of Alexandria, looking upon the increase of the Romish
episcopal power as a diminution of the civil, watched the bishops, in
order to restrain them within the limits of the spiritual, and prevent
their encroaching on the temporal jurisdiction. But Cyril, from the very
beginning of his episcopacy, bade defiance to civil power, acting in
such manner as showed but too plainly that he would be kept within no
bounds. Soon after his installation, he caused, by his own authority,
the churches, which the Novitians were allowed to have in Alexandria, to
be shut up, seized on the sacred utensils, and plundering the house of
their bishop, Theapemptus, drove him out of the city, stripped of every
thing he possessed. Not long after this, Cyril put himself at the head
of a _Christian_ mob, and, without the knowledge of the governor, took
possession of the Jewish synagogue, drove the Jews out of Alexandria,
pillaged their houses, and allowed the _Christians_--all Papists--who
were concerned with him in the riot, to appropriate to themselves all
their effects. This the governor highly resented, and not only rebuked
Cyril very severely, for thus encroaching on his jurisdiction, and
usurping a power that did not belong to him, but wrote to the emperor,
complaining of him for snatching the sword of justice from him, to put
it into the hands of the undeserving multitude.

This occasioned a misunderstanding, or rather an avowed enmity between
St. Cyril and the governor. With the _saint_ sided the clergy, the
greater part of the mob, and the monks; with the governor, the soldiery
and the better class of citizens As the two parties were strangely
animated against each other, there happened daily skirmishes in the
streets of Alexandria. The friends of the governor, generally speaking,
made their party good, having the soldiery on their side. But one day,
as the governor was going out in his chariot, attended by his guards,
he found himself, very unexpectedly, surrounded by no fewer than five
hundred monks. The monks were, in those days, the standing army of the
bishops, but are now of the Pope's alone. The monks in the service of
St. Cyril, having surrounded the governor's chariot, dispersed the small
guard that attended it, fell upon him, dangerously wounded him, and
determined to put an end to the quarrel between him and St. Cyril, by
taking his life.

The citizens, alarmed at his danger, flew to his rescue, put the
cowardly monks to flight, and having seized on the monk by whom the
governor was wounded, delivered him into his hands. The governor, to
deter others, caused the monk to be put to death. But St. Cyril,
partly to reward the zeal which the monk had exerted in attempting to
assassinate his antagonist, caused him to be honored as a holy martyr.
The partizans of St. Cyril, enraged at the death of the monk, and under
the advice of this Romish _saint_, determined to revenge it; and the
person they singled out among the friends of the governor to wreak their
rage and revenge on, was one who, of all the inhabitants of Alexandria,
deserved it the least. This was the famous and celebrated Hypatia, the
wonder of her age for beauty, for virtue, and knowledge. She kept a
public school of philosophy in Alexandria; where she was born, and her
reputation was so great, that not only disciples flocked from all parts
to hear her, but the greatest philosophers used to consult her as an
oracle, with respect to the most abstruse points of astronomy, geometry,
and the Platonic philosophy, which she was particularly well versed in.
Though she was very beautiful, and freely conversed with men of all
ranks, yet they were so awed by her known virtue and modesty, that none
ever presumed to show, in her presence, the least symptom of passion.
The governor entertained the highest opinion of her abilities, often
consulted her, and in all perplexed cases governed himself by her
advice. As she was the person in Alexandria whom he most valued, St.
Cyril and his friends, to wound him the more effectually, entered into a
conspiracy to destroy this beautiful and innocent lady.

This barbarous resolution being taken, as she was one day returning home
in her chariot, a band of the dregs of the people, encouraged and headed
by one of St. Cyril's priests, attacked her in her chariot, pulled her
out of it, and throwing her on the ground, dragged her to the great
church called Caesareum; there they stripped, her naked, and with sharp
tiles, either brought with them or found there, continued cutting,
tearing, and mangling her flesh, till nature, yielding to pain, she
expired under their hands. Her death did not satisfy their rage and
fury. They tore her body in pieces, dragged her mangled limbs through
all the streets of Alexandria, and then gathering them together, burned
them. Such was the end of the famous Hypatia, the most learned person
of the age she lived in; but she was not a Roman Catholic. Can you,
Americans, believe that this very Cyril is now a saint in the Roman
Catholic church; that he is daily prayed to, honored, and worshipped
by Papists? Can you believe that the Catholics whom you employ in your
houses, the nuns to whom you intrust the education of your children,
daily invoke the intercession of this murderous Cyril?

And think you, fellow-citizens, that the spirit of the Popish bishop,
Cyril, has died with him, or that the church, which approved of his
conduct, would refuse to sanction a similar act at this day? If you do,
you are mistaken. Was the conduct of Cyril ever censured by the church?
Were the murders and atrocities which he committed, and caused to be
committed, even disapproved by the holy mother? If they were, I would
ask at what council was it done? Where and when was such a council
held? Who was the presiding Pope? The fact is, so far from incurring the
displeasure of the Romish church, this notorious Popish murderer of Jews
and heretics was _canonized and sainted_; and similar distinctions would
be now awarded to him who would commit similar crimes, if his holiness
the Pope deemed it prudent to have such crimes committed.

We saw an instance of the spirit which actuated Cyril, some years ago,
in this city, when, in the case of the Ursuline Convent, to which I have
already referred, every Papist within fifty miles of Boston, who
was able to bear arms, volunteered his aid to his bishop, in taking
vengeance upon our citizens, merely because they would not sanction
among them the existence of a house, called a nunnery, and used as a
jail, for the confinement of some of our most virtuous females, against
their will. Had Miss Reed, who escaped from that den of profligacy,
been caught by her Popish pursuers, and without the knowledge of our
citizens, what would have been her fate? She might not have been torn to
pieces, as Hypatia was, but her torments would not have been less cruel.
She would have been kept upon her bare knees, perhaps ten hours in the
twenty-four, for months.

She would be obliged to pray to the same St. Cyril, and a string of such
vagabonds, for the _remission of her sins_. She would be compelled to
kiss the ground and lick it with her tongue, at stated intervals, and
bread and water her diet, until the zeal of her holy confessors was
perfectly satisfied. And if those who aided her escape were detected,
what would have been their fate? Thanks to our republican government,
they could not be punished in this country; but had they committed the
deed under a purely Catholic government, the _infallible_ church would
consign them to the inquisition, and have broken them upon the rack.

This is the church, and her members are the men, whom you are
countenancing amongst you. The Romish church never surrendered the right
which she once claimed of destroying heretics. She only suspends it for
the moment, until her strength and numbers shall enable her to enforce
it. But there are some who will not believe this, especially when
Catholic priests and bishops deny it. Many Protestants, who are natives
of this country, and unacquainted with Roman Catholic doctrines, will
not believe it. Many, even, of our Protestant clergymen will scarcely
believe it; such is the craft and consummate falsehood of priests and
bishops, that I have never met with one Protestant who entertained the
most remote idea that keeping no faith with heretics, and persecuting
them to death, formed any portion of the doctrine of the church of Rome.

This is owing to the fact of their being born in a free country, at a
distance from the seat of Romish power, and their having little access
and no acquaintance with the standard works of Popery.

Many, even, of the native born Americans, who have become Roman
Catholics, know little or nothing of the doctrines of the church into
which they have permitted themselves to be seduced. I will hazard the
assertion, that there are not ten lay members amongst them, in the
United States, who have read the works of Belarmine, the canons, or
decrees of the various councils that have been held in the Popish
church, or even the _corpus juris canonici_, containing the decrees of
the council of Trent.

If the writings of De La Hogue, used in the college of Maynooth,
Ireland, or the works of Antoine or Den, taught in that college when I
was a student there, were thoroughly read, and the doctrines contained
in those standard works of Popery understood, there is not a moral man
living who would not shun the church of Rome, as a thing too unclean,
too impure, too licentious, too wicked, too corrupt, and of too
persecuting a character to be allowed to exist at all. This their
priests well know; and, having recently discovered that a few copies of
Den's "Theology" had found their way into this country, they have the
unblushing effrontery to deny that his work was ever approved of by
the church, or was ever received as such in any college in Ireland. I
studied in the college of Maynooth, and have read speculative theology
under Dr. De La Hogue, and moral theology under Dr. Antoine, in the same
class with several priests now in this country, and among other works
which we read in that class was the "Moral Theology" of the Rev Peter
Den; especially his treatise _de Peccatis_.

I have the pleasure of an acquaintance with some native Americans who
are become Roman Catholics. They are men of honor, moral worth, and
possess highly cultivated minds. They were religious men; and deeming a
connection with some church to be necessary, and seeing nothing of the
Romish church but its seductive and imposing ceremonies, they united
themselves with it, or, if they happened to hesitate in joining it, and
deemed it necessary to consult with Catholic priests and bishops, these
crafty Jesuits soon furnished them with Catholic works manufactured for
such occasions, and unobjectionable to the most pious Christian; taking
good care, at the same time, to keep out of their way such works as I
have alluded to, from which they may learn that there is no religion
in the Popish church, and that it is no more than a political machine,
devised for the suppression of republicanism, knowledge, and the
liberties of man.

Let us pass over the time which intervened between the fourth and
twelfth centuries. The history of the Popes and the Romish church,
during that period, is replete with crimes committed by Popes, and
atrocities sanctioned by the church, the bare mention of which humanity
shudders The very earth is almost saturated with the blood which Popish
despots caused to be shed under the mask of religion, but, in reality,
for the advancement of their own temporal power.

I will now show that the spirit of Cyril had not died with him. During
the reign of Pope Innocent III., that holy pontiff discovered that there
was, in the province of Narbonne and in several other provinces of the
south of France, a religious sect, called the Albigenses, who presumed
to differ from the Romish church, and had the audacity to believe that
the Bible was the only rule of faith. They rejected the external rites
of the Romish church, except baptism and the Lord's supper.

They had no faith in images, indulgences, and other such semi-pagan
mummeries. Auricular confession and the forgiveness of sins by man
they rejected as impious. They looked upon nunneries as places of sin,
instituted by priests, as a sort of substitute for the marriage of the
clergy. They demolished such of them as were in existence among them,
and declared the marriage of the clergy as lawful and honorable. They
scouted at the idea of the temporal jurisdiction of the Pope over the
nations of the earth, and looked upon him as emphatically _the Man of
Sin_.

These crimes, of course, were not long overlooked by the _infallible
church!_ They were heresies. These people were heretics, and the holy
mother, _in the plenitude of her affection_ for her strayed children,
determined that they should be exterminated. But how was this to be
done? The holy father, Pope Innocent III., was not long in determining.
He sent two spies amongst them, of the names of Guy and Regnier. These
were Monks, whose hands were already stained with blood. They were
empowered by the Pope, to use their own discretion in checking the
heresy of the Albigenses by fire, sword, faggot, or the inquisition,
which employed all those means upon such occasions.

The Albigenses however, were so numerous their lives so pure, so chaste
and correct, that this was not easily accomplished; and his holiness had
to preach a crusade against them, and published a bull addressed to
all the authorities of southern France, declaring them _accursed_ and
_excommunicated_, and giving absolution to all who should murder them
and take possession of their property. Here are the words of the bull,
"According to the canonical sanctions of the holy fathers, no faith
ought to be kept with those who do not keep faith with God, or are
separated from the communion of the faithful"--Papists. "We release, by
our apostolical authority, all those who deem themselves bound to them
by any oath, either of alliance or fealty; we permit every Catholic
man to seize their persons, to take their lands, and keep them for the
purpose of extirpating heresy."

Here, Americans, is a specimen of true, genuine Popery, as Innocent
Expresses it, "_sanctioned by the canons and holy fathers of the Romish
church_." People of New England, what think you of it? Bear in mind that
this is not the act of a few fanatics; it is not the belief of a few
zealots. If it were, it would be wrong to charge it to the Romish
church. All denominations have had among them fanatics; but the
extravagances of a few individuals are not chargeable to the body
to which they might have belonged. Even our New England Presbyterian
forefathers had among them persecutors; but who, in his sound mind,
could charge this to the Presbyterian church? There is nothing in their
creed or doctrines which sanctions the persecution of those who differ
from them and there the Romish church differs from all others. The
persecution and destruction of heretics, and the confiscation of their
property, is an _integral part_ of the Roman Catholic faith, and the
watchword of Papists.

The crusade against these unfortunate Albigen-ses commenced its march
about the year 1209. Indulgences were offered to all who would unite
in the war, and history informs as that the Pope and his vassals in the
church raised an army of between three and five thousand men, who were
to serve for forty days; at the termination of which, the Pope, in
one of his heavenly transports, saw that "every one of the sect of the
Albigerises should be massacred." To this army his _holiness_ caused
to be added, by an offer of indulgences, multitudes of peasants, with
scythes and clubs, who were to be under the command of monks, and whose
peculiar duty it was, to slaughter the wives and children of these
_heretics_, while their husbands and fathers were engaged in the field
with their adversaries. Horrible! Yet this is a true picture of what
_has been_, and what _will be_ in this country, at some future day,
should Popery gain the ascendancy.

It is much to be lamented that the Christian League, as it is termed,
had not looked to this, in place of going abroad in search of objects
worthy of their philanthropy. They seem to me to have acted like a man
who, while his own house is in a blaze, runs out to see if there be any
of his neighbors' houses on fire, and leaves his own to smoulder into
ruins. Assuredly, such a man would not be deemed prudent, nor should he
even be considered sane.

Far be it from me to think or speak disrespectfully of the pious and
reverend gentlemen who compose that league; but their solicitude for the
welfare of a foreign country and a foreign people appears to me strange,
when all their charities are much more needed at home. They desire the
suppression of Popery, especially in Italy, where it is kept alive by
Austrian bayonets and Popish bulls, and where it will live until
those bayonets are broken and those bulls are burned. They can no more
suppress Popery in Italy, than they could confine a fire with a flaxen
band.

The continuance of Popery depends upon this country alone. Extinguish it
in the United States, and it dies every where. The old world is sick of
it; it has cursed it long enough. It is for us alone to say whether it
shall live or die. Americans alone can sound the death knell of Popery;
and, if this Christian League will unite their energies and bring them
all to bear, in excluding Popery from the United States, they will be
conferring a blessing, not only upon this, but upon the old world.

But to return to our subject. Cruel, beyond measure, were the sufferings
of the Albigenses, a few instances of which I beg to lay before my
readers, as specimens of Popish charity and their mode of fulfilling
that holy commandment, "Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself." When
the Pope's army arrived at a place called Beziers, the citizens were,
of course, alarmed. The Pope's legate sent many messengers among them,
advising them to give up such heretics, with their wives and children,
as continued obstinate among them. They replied in the following
words--"_Rather than be base enough to do what is required of us, and
abandon our religious principles, we will eat our children first, and
our wives will die with us_." On receiving this answer, the Pope's army,
or rather incarnate devils, rushed upon them so suddenly, and in such
numbers, that they had to surrender, after little or no resistance.

There were many among them who were not heretics, but, seeing the
injustice done to their fellow-citizens, and knowing the purity of
their lives, united with them in resisting oppression. Some of the most
merciful of the Pope's army, entertaining scruples as to what should
be done to those who were not heretics and happened to fall into their
hands, deemed it a duty which they owed to _holy mother_, to consult the
Pope's legate upon this occasion; and what, Christian reader, think you
was the reply of this representative of the _Roman Catholic church?_
What was the answer of this imbodiment of Popery? It was what it would
be this day, under similar circumstances.--"Kill them all; the Lord will
know his own!" At this answer, the bells rung, by order of this legate.
and never ceased to toll, until fifteen thousand were butchered upon the
spot, according to the account given by the legate himself; although a
contemporary historian, named Bernard Itier, and much better authority
than this blood-thirsty legate, informs us that thirty-eight thousand
were slaughtered in cold blood.

During this time, Pope Innocent and the infallible church were not idle
in other parts of France. Wherever heresy existed, or heretical blood
was to be shed, there were to be found the representatives of the
holy church, until not a vestige of the Protestant doctrines of the
Albigenses was to be seen. Nearly all its ministers and its followers
suffered the most cruel deaths, and their church was drowned in the
blood of its defenders. But the man of sin being still apprehensive that
some vestige of Protestantism might remain, or that the life of some
unfortunate member of the Albigenses might have escaped, the Popish
murderers established, in those countries, that accursed tribunal, the
Inquisition; some of whose members appeared in the guise and occupation
of farmers, to act as spies among that class of people; others as
merchants, others as mechanics, &c. To these were added female Jesuits,
some of whom were shop-keepers, milliners, servant-maids, &c.; and,
suitably educated, whenever necessary, were ready to act their parts
well.

Thus no man was safe. No family, no lady, was safe. They dreaded
the very air they breathed. They knew not when the officers of the
inquisition would call them from their homes, their children,
their husbands, and their wives, to be cast into the dungeon of the
inquisition, without knowing their offence, or who accused them.

This was Popery in the twelfth century; this was Popery in the fourth
century; and this is Popery in the nineteenth century. Americans,
are-you aware that there are Jesuit nuns now in this country? Are you
aware of the reasons why they are so anxious to get Protestant rather
than Catholic scholars into their schools? The reason is this; they are
in this country spies upon your actions. Your thoughts, your designs,
your influence, the probable amount of your wealth, and your political
opinions, are known to your children. These Jesuit nuns worm themselves
into your confidence; the young hearts of their pupils are soon laid
bare to these artful hypocrites; and before you scarcely notice the
absence of your children, your domestic secrets are known to some Popish
agent, who makes such use of them as the holy church may direct. This is
done daily. I make this statement of my own knowledge, and I warn you,
if you value your domestic happiness, or the peace and harmony of your
children, never permit one of them, male or female, to enter a school
kept by nuns or Jesuits.

From these observations, the reader must have seen that Popery, in its
teachings and actions, is, and has been, the same always. What, then,
becomes of the assertions, so frequently made by Roman Catholic priests
and bishops, that the doctrines of the church, in relation to heretics,
have been relaxed? Certain it is, at all events, that there has been no
mitigation in the treatment of heretics down to the thirteenth century.
Let us come down a little farther, and see if any had taken place during
the thirteenth century. We discover none whatever.

It was during this century, that the "Greater Excommunication," as it
is called, was pronounced by the Pope, and the whole church, against all
who should interfere with the clergy in the exercise of their _temporal
or spiritual rights_. The curse was pronounced, by every parish priest,
throughout the Papal world, four times a year,---_Christmas, Easter,
Pentecost_, and _All-Hallows day_. The curse is in the following words,
and is now repeated on the same days, by the Pope and all the priests
and bishops of the Romish church, not publicly,--that they dare not
do,--but in private. "Let them be accursed, eating and drinking, walking
and sitting, speaking, and holding their peace, waking and sleeping,
rowing and riding, laughing and weeping, in house and in field, in water
and on land, in all places; cursed be their heads and their thoughts,
their eyes and their ears, their tongues and their lips, their teeth and
their throats, their shoulders and their breasts, their feet and their
legs their thighs and their inward parts; let them remain accursed,
from the sole of their foot to the crown of their heads; and just as
this candle (the curser has a lighted candle in his hand, which he
extinguishes) is deprived of us present light, so let them be deprived
of their souls in hell."

Such is the curse which the Pope pronounced against all heretics in the
thirteenth century! and however surprised you may be, a similar one is
pronounced once a year against all Protestants. There are many Americans
who cannot believe that such a curse as the above, has ever been
pronounced against a fellow-being. I have conversed with some
intelligent Protestants in this city, who doubted whether such an
anathema was ever uttered, and seemed struck with horror, as well as
surprise, when I informed them that it was pronounced against myself in
Philadelphia in presence of, at least, three thousand people. The reader
must know, by this, that I am a heretic, and look upon the introduction
of Popery into the United States, as the greatest evil which Providence
has permitted to fall upon us. Arise, fellow-citizens, in the fulness of
your power,--every Protestant in this country is a heretic, as well as
myself. We are all annually cursed and damned by a set of Popish agents,
bishops, and priests; men who, from my own personal acquaintance with
them, I know to be unworthy of your friendship or your support; who walk
your streets with apparent sanctimoniousness, but whose lives in private
are such as delicacy forbids me to mention.

These men, under pretence of being democrats are attacking your
liberties with the club of Hercules. They are acquiring gigantic force.
You have recently witnessed the truth of this assertion; they fancied
they had strength enough to cut you down as the legate of Pope Innocent
did the Albigenses in the twelfth century. They bid defiance to reason,
argument, and the lew of your land; and it grieves me to see every
thing yielding to their power, as chaff before the wind. But Providence
interposed, and these miserable dupes of Romish priests received a
check, which, if followed up, will have a salutary effect in future.
But, I pray you, be on your guard; watch the movements of Papists among
you: have no confidence in them; have as little as possible to do with
them. Trust them in nothing which may either directly or indirectly
involve their religion. I most solemnly appeal to our national and state
legislatures, to exclude them from every office of honor, profit, or
trust, while they have any connection whatever, _spiritual or temporal_,
with the Pope of Rome. Believe them not, when they tell you that their
allegiance to the Pope is only _spiritual_. I understand what they mean
by spiritual allegiance.

From what has been stated, it is clear that no modification had taken
place in Popish pretensions during the thirteenth century, neither had
the church relaxed one iota in her persecutions of heretics. On the
contrary, her cruelties increased-the declarations of Popish priests to
the contrary notwithstanding.

Let us now see what has been the conduct of the Popish church towards
heretics, from the latter end of the thirteenth century to the
conclusion of the fourteenth.

How was the illustrious John Wickliffe, professor of divinity in Oxford,
treated by the church of Rome, during the reign of Boniface IX. But let
us first see what the crimes of Wickliffe were, for which he had been so
severely punished by the _holy Roman church_. The illustrious and
good Wickliffe, the founder of the Reformation, whose very name every
Christian venerates, maintained, 1st, That the Scriptures contain all
truths necessary to salvation; 2d, That in the Scriptures only, is to be
found, a perfect rule of Christian practice; 3d, He denied the authority
of the Pope in temporal matters; 4th, He maintained that the Pope was
the Man of Sin, the _son of perdition_, to which St. Paul alluded,
"sitting as God in the temple of God." As soon as the opinions of
Wickliffe were ascertained, Gregory XL, the ruling Pope, addressed a
Bull to the primate of England, ordering him to have Wickliffe arrested
and imprisoned, until he received further instructions.

The popularity of Wickliffe was such, that this step was considered
dangerous; and we find that nothing further was done to this eminently
pious man, than banishing him from the university of Oxford into private
life, where he died in peace, and went to his grave with the blessings
of the good and the virtuous. But this did not satisfy the Pope, nor the
_infallible church_. O, no. The _holy mother_ never forgives a
heretic, dead or alive. As soon as Wickliffe departed this life, in
the sixty-first year of his age, the church and Papists exhibited the
wildest symptoms of joy. One of their writers, in giving an account of
his death, uses the following language: "On the day of St. Thomas, the
martyr, that limb of the devil, enemy of the church, deceiver of the
people, idol of heretics, mirror of hypocrites, author of schism, sower
of hatred, and inventor of lies, John Wickliffe, was, by the immediate
judgment of God, suddenly struck with a palsy, which seized all the
members of his body, when he was ready to vomit forth his blasphemies
against the blessed St. Thomas, in a sermon which he had prepared to
preach that day!"

But holy mother was not yet satisfied. She had not the felicity of
hanging Wickliffe; her ears were not delighted with his groans upon the
rack; she did not hear his flesh hissing amid the flames of the faggot,
nor his bones breaking upon the wheel; she must, however, have all the
revenge left to satiate her malice. Thirty years after the death of
Wickliffe, the _infallible_ council of Constance, at which the Pope
presided, passed an order that the body and bones of John Wickliffe,
if they might be known and discerned from the bodies of faithful
people--Papists--should be taken from the ground and thrown _far away
from the_ burial of any church, according to the canon laws and decrees.

This decree was not put in execution for thirteen years afterwards. His
grave was then opened and his body disinterred with great solemnity,
and in the presence of the Catholic bishop of Lincoln, it was publicly
burned, and the ashes thrown into a neighboring rivulet. But the
indignities offered to Wickliffe, while living, and after his death,
were not sufficient to appease the malice of Papists. Blood, and blood
alone, could satiate their thirst for revenge. His followers were hunted
up and mercilessly put to death. Among the first of his followers, who
suffered, was Lord Cobham, a nobleman, distinguished for his valor,
devotion to his country, and true piety. His character was without
blemish, and his morals and patriotism undoubted; but he was a heretic;
he was among the followers of Wickliffe; he believed in the Holy
Scriptures. This was crime enough, and for this he was _excommunicated_.
Cobham appealed to the Pope, but the appeal was refused: he was cited
again; he was offered absolution, if he would sue for it, and submit to
the Popish church. This he refused; the consequence was, he was thrown
into prison, from which he escaped and was not retaken for nearly four
years, he was, however, finally captured after a most heroic resistance.

He might have escaped again, being an overmatch for his captor, had not
a _pious Roman Catholic woman_, while he was nobly defending himself,
taken up a stool, and with a desperate blow, broken both his legs. In
this condition he was recommitted to prison until he was sentenced to
death _for his heresy_. The sentence was, "that he should be drawn from
his place of confinement through the city of London, to Temple Bar,
there to be hanged, and burned hanging." The historian Bale gives a most
affecting account of his execution.

"On the day appointed," says Bale, "he was brought out of the Tower with
his arms bound behind him, having a very cheerful countenance. Then he
was laid upon a hurdle as though he had been a most heinous traitor to
the crown, and so drawn forth into St. Giles's field, where they had set
up a new gallows. When he arrived at the place of execution, and taken
from the hurdle, he fell down devoutly on his knees, and prayed God
to forgive his enemies. Then he stood up and beheld the multitude,
exhorting them, in the most godly manner, to follow the laws of God,
written in the Scriptures, and to beware of such teachers as they see
contrary to Christ, in their conversation and living, with many other
special councils. Then was he hanged up there, by the middle, in chains
of iron, and so consumed alive in the fire, praising the name of the
Lord, so long as life lasted. In the end he commended his soul into the
hands of God, and so, most Christianly, departed home, his body being
resolved to ashes."

Thus was a nobleman, and a noble Christian, most barbarously put to
death for believing that the Bible contained God's truth; and therein
differing from the Roman church, which teaches that the traditions of
the fathers, and dreams of monks, are of equal authority.

Followers of Wickliffe,--and there are many of you in this country, who
are an honor to his name,--have you ever reflected that there are nearly
two millions of Papists in these United States, who entertain the same
belief that the murderers of Cobham did; who believe that you are all
_excommunicated_, as he was, and who, if they had the power, would
consign yourselves, your wives, and children, to the same fate? and who
are taught by their church, that, in so doing, they would be serving
God? Romish priests may deny this. They do well. Otherwise, an indignant
populace would tear them to pieces, or at least banish them from this
land of freedom.

But I tell the priest or bishop, who dares deny it, that they are
liars,--wilful and deliberate liars. I too have been a priest, and I
solemnly declare to the world, and to my fellow-citizens of the United
States in particular, _that to keep no faith with heretics, but to
destroy them, is one of the most solemn duties of a Catholic_; and I go
further, and state to you, that _if a bishop or priest denies this, upon
oath, you are not to believe him_; his church requires from him to keep
no faith with heretics, but to destroy and extirpate them. It allows him
also to deny, under oath, the existence of such an obligation.

Do you, followers of Wickliffe, require any proof of this? It is a
serious charge, and should not be lightly made. I therefore refer you to
the letters of Martin II., who was Pope in the-year 1417, and considered
one of the best Popes the Romish church ever had. This Pope, in one of
his letters to the Duke of Lithuania, makes use of the following strong
and emphatic language. "_Be assured, thou sinnest mortally, if thou keep
thy faith with heretics_." St. Thomas Aquinas teaches the same doctrine.
Innocent VIII., who was Pope in 1484, declares "that _all persons who
are bound by any con-tract whatever to heretics are at liberty to break
it, even though they had sworn an oath to fulfil_ it." You here see,
that I have done no injustice to Roman Catholics, in putting you on
your guard against them, and charging them with a willingness to destroy
yourselves, your wives and children, _as heretics_, had they power and
opportunity of doing so. I am supported by the authority of Pope Martin
V., and Pope Innocent VIII.; and though in your estimation, those
blood-thirsty vagabonds may give no weight to my testimony, still it
cannot fail to be highly satisfactory to Papists. Some of the Catholics
may tell you, that the followers of Wickliffe were a seditious people;
that they threatened to overthrow the civil institutions of the country;
that all law and order were set at defiance by them; and that this
was the cause of their persecution. This is false in fact--it is
historically false.

If the followers of Wickliffe, or Lollards, as they were called, were
disturbers of the peace; if their lives were seditious, disorderly, and
rebellious, why were they not indicted, under some statute of the realm,
made and provided to take cognizance of such crimes? Why were they
not even accused of such crimes? Was the meek, mild, and learned John
Wickliffe, accused or indicted for disturbing the peace? Was it for
disturbing the peace, that his venerable bones were disinterred thirty
years after being deposited in the cold grave? Was it for disturbing the
peace, and for riotous proceedings, his bones were subsequently burned,
and their ashes thrown into the next river? Was it for disturbing the
peace, the learned and brave Cobham was hung in iron chains, by the
middle.

No such accusation has ever been brought against these great and good
men, or against thousands who suffered with them. They were accused only
of _heresy_. Papists were their accusers; Papists were their judges; and
Papists were their executioners.

But the malice of those blood-thirsty Catholics was not even then
satiated. It is as fresh _now_, as it was then. Papists are not content,
that hundreds of years ago, Wickliffe and his followers should be
persecuted, and the greater portion of them massacred and burned. Their
memories, also, are objects of Popish hatred, even to this day on which
I write. They represent them as enemies of the human race. As despisers
of chastity and morality. You will probably see these charges advanced
against them in the Popish presses throughout the United States. But
recollect, Americans, that age does not improve the piety of Papists.
The older _holy mother_ gets, the harder becomes her heart, and the
more bitter her virulence. I might satisfy you, if necessary, on the
testimony of the most respectable Protestant writers, that there lived
not in the world, a people more simple, more pious, or virtuous than the
Waldenses, or Wickliffites. It may be said of them, with truth, "_qualis
pater tales filii_." But I will not refer to Protestant authority;
knavish, lying, Popish priests may question it! I refer you, for the
character of this persecuted people, to an early Popish historian,
Florimond--. History of Heresy, book vii. ch. 7.

"They"--the Waldenses--says this writer, "have nothing in their mouths
but Christ the Saviour--they know nothing else than Jesus Christ. These
people read the Bible continually, in such a manner that they know all
the books of it by heart." Horrid people these Wickliffites must be, to
read the Bible until they know it by heart! And as these Bible-reading
and Bible-loving people now constitute a vast majority of our citizens,
I call upon them to rise in the full force of their moral power, and
ward off from themselves and their children, the curse of Popery, or the
fate of Wickliffe and his followers will assuredly be theirs. Many of
you, Americans, are followers of Wickliffe. You believe as he believed!
You live as he lived! You love peace as he loved it. Do you wish to
continue as you are now? Or will you permit a flood of vile priests,
monks, and nuns, to overrun your country, and seduce your children from
the paths of virtue, in which your own example and the perusal of their
Bibles have taught them to walk?

I now call your attention to the belief and practice of the Romish
church in the fifteenth century, and you will find that heresy and
heretics were still persecuted by her. Witness the conduct of Pope
Innocent VIII. toward the Vaudois. He sent one of his Jesuit legates
amongst them, with instructions to prevail on Louis XII. to extirpate
them from his dominions, without even hearing any deputies which they
might send him. The answer of Louis did him much credit--"Though I were
at war with a Turk or the devil, I would hear what he had to say for
himself." They accordingly made their defence; and, upon this, the good
King Louis sent commissioners to examine the state of things among them.
The following was their report, as history informs us: "Having made a
strict inquiry into their mode of living, we cannot discover the least
shadow of the crimes imputed to them. On the contrary, it appears that
they piously observe the Sabbath, baptize their children after the
manner of the primitive church, and are thoroughly instructed in the
doctrine of the apostles' creed, and in the law of God." On hearing
this report, the king exclaimed, in a passion, addressing himself to the
Pope's legate--"By the holy mother of God, these heretics, whom you and
the Pope urge me to destroy, are better men than you or myself." He,
however, soon departed this life, and every man acquainted with history
knows what their sufferings were from the time of his death down to the
days of Cromwell, who, whatever his faults may have been, fired
with indignation at the barbarities committed by the Romish church,
interposed in behalf of those persecuted people, and called upon
Protestant princes and sovereigns to aid him in protecting them.

I will not burden the reader with a history of the sufferings of these
people. It is familiar even to our schoolboys. I must, however, repeat
the fact, that they were persecuted for no other reason than because
they believed the Bible contained all the truths necessary to salvation,
and because they did not believe in all the mummeries of Popery. Will
Catholic bishops and priests still continue to assert that their church
does not teach them to persecute heretics, and to hold no faith with
them? Will they continue to assert, that the Pope of Rome does not claim
temporal as well as spiritual jurisdiction over the kingdoms of the
earth? or if they do, are we compelled to listen to them?

There is scarcely any one who does not recollect the conduct of the holy
see, as it is nicknamed, towards Queen Elizabeth, on her ascension to
the throne of England. The queen sent a messenger to the court of Rome,
to inform the Pope of the event. This was an act of state courtesy; but
his holiness had the insolence to reply to the messenger who represented
his sovereign: "Tell your mistress that England was held in fief of the
apostolic see; that she could not succeed, being illegitimate; nor could
she contradict the declarations made in that matter by his predecessors,
Clement VII. and Paul III. Tell your mistress," said this insolent
ecclesiastic, "that it was great boldness in her to assume the crown
without my consent, for which, in reason, she deserves no favor at my
hands; yet if she will _renounce_ her pretensions and refer herself
wholly to me, I would show a fatherly affection to her, and do every
thing for her that could consist with the dignity of the _Roman see_."

Fellow-citizens, do you want any other proof to satisfy you that the
Pope of Rome claims universal jurisdiction over kings, queens, nations,
kingdoms, and all mankind? It is only about three hundred years since
this occurred; and is there evidence on record that the Pope has
resigned the prerogative of universal dominion which he then claimed?
You may laugh at the idea of his claiming it over this country; but,
mark what I tell you, some successor of the present Pope will not only
claim, but exercise it in less than half the time that has elapsed since
the days of Elizabeth. Other objects may divert your attention from this
subject; you may sleep on in fancied security, but your sleep may be
fatal.

"America," as a talented writer (Giustiniani) expresses it, "is the
promised land, the land of the Jesuits' operations. To obtain the
ascendency, they have no need of a _mercenary Swiss guard_, or the
assistance of the _holy alliance_, but a majority of votes, which can
easily be obtained by an importation of Roman Catholics from Ireland,
Bavaria, and Austria. Rome, viewed at a distance, is a colossus; near
at hand, its grandeur diminishes, its charm is lost. But the Jesuits are
every where the same--cunning, immoral, and sneaking intriguers, until
they have obtained the ascendency. Rome feels her weakness at home;
she knows herself to be a mere _political_ institution, dressed in
the garment of Christianity. She takes good care to uphold that holy
_militia_, the Jesuits, in order to appear what she is not. It is a
strife for existence. I am not a politician," says this writer, "but
knowing the active spirit of Jesuitism, and the indifference of the
generality of Protestants, I have no doubt whatever, that in _ten_ years
the Jesuits will have a mighty influence over the ballot-box, and in
_twenty_ they will direct it according to their own pleasure. Now they
fawn, in ten years they will menace, and in twenty command."

In this city they not only "fawn," but they have proceeded to "menace."
Some of the knowing ones among the Catholics now boast that they have
the power to govern this city, and they intend to exercise it. This is
no idle threat. Even now, though they are actually less in numerical
strength in the aggregate, than the Protestants, and pay far less for
the support of our free schools, they, nevertheless, have succeeded in
depriving Protestant children of the privilege of using the Bible for a
school-book, as they have been wont to do. Protestants may sleep on if
they will, but they may be assured that they are sleeping on the sides
of a burning volcano, and that ere long they will be awakened, but too
late, we fear, by the angry thunders of the upheaving fires within,
which shall scathe and desolate the fair heritage they now enjoy.

I entreat you, fellow-citizens, never to forget the solemn declaration
of the father of your country: "Against the insidious wiles of foreign
influence, (I conjure you to believe me, fellow-citizens,) the jealousy
of a free people ought to be constantly awake; since history and
experience prove, that foreign influence is one of the most baneful
foes of a republican government." This is the warning of the immortal
Washington, and should not pass unheeded. To the same effect spoke other
revolutionary patriots. Jefferson says, "I hope we may find some means
in future of shielding ourselves from foreign influence, political,
commercial, or in whatever form it may be attempted. I can scarcely
withhold myself from joining in the wish of Silas Deane--that there
were an ocean of fire between this and the old world." And Madison said,
"Foreign influence is truly a _Grecian horse_ to the republic. We cannot
be too careful to exclude its entrance."

The cruelty of Papists, the intrigue and craft of Popes, the hypocrisy
of Jesuits, the dynasties which they have overthrown, the devastations
and carnage which they had occasioned, for centuries back, were matters
of historical notoriety, and were well known to our pure-minded and
clear-headed forefathers. They dreaded similar occurrences in this happy
republic, which they have bequeathed to us as their trustees, to be
handed down to posterity; and hence arose their warnings to be on our
guard against all foreign interference with our institutions or our
country.

Ponder upon those warnings, and let each and every Protestant in the
Union pledge himself to guard our liberties, as the apple of his eye.
I speak from experience. I am myself a foreigner by birth, though a
resident of this country for thirty years. My life has been a checkered
one. Born a Roman Catholic in the south of Ireland, educated a Roman
Catholic priest, officiating in that capacity for some years, here, as
well as in my native country, and for many years a member of the bar
in South Carolina and Georgia, I could not fail to acquire a correct
knowledge of the doctrines and practices of the Romish church. The
result of my experience is, that the doctrines of the Roman Catholic
church are fatal to the morals of any people; at variance with sound
national policy and pure religion. It is a rank and poisonous weed,
which will flourish even in the soil of liberty. Would that I could
eradicate it! Would that you would enable me to tear up this Upas, which
is spreading its poison, from one end of our land to the other! Would
that you could aid me in muzzling those Popish bloodhounds, who are
freely coursing over our eastern mountains and western valleys! Already
have they scented blood, and I warn you to be on your guard or they will
scent more.

I am no sectarian; I am not the tool of any party, either in church or
state. I have never asked the countenance or support of any religious
denomination, nor has any ever been tendered to me. I have stood alone
in my opposition to that hydra-headed monster, Popery. There is no abuse
which I have not received; no calumny which has not been heaped upon me;
no crime which they have not accused me of; no scurrilous epithet which
they have not applied to me. All this I have met single-handed; but I
would bear it again, rather than submit to the iniquitous doctrines of
Popery. I would bear it again, rather than submit, as _native Americans_
have done, and are doing, to be publicly denounced, as _cowards and sons
of cowards and pirates_.

But, fellow-citizens, they do not consider you cowards and pirates
alone; they will, by-and-by, apply to you a term, which you will better
deserve. It is sweet, it is a euphonious name, and I trust you will bear
it with as much Christian philanthropy, as you have that of cowards,
and pirates--_Fools_. It is the only ignominious term, in the English
language, which they have not applied to myself, and I assure my
fellow-citizens, natives of this country, that if you are willing to
be governed by the Pope of Rome, and his priests, and bishops, I shall
never question your paramount claim to this preeminent distinction.
Can you bear the following opprobrious language applied to you by the
Jesuit, now the Boston Pilot, the organ of the bishop of that city. "How
in the name of conscience," says this Popish organ, "can a man have the
impudence to find fault with honest emigrants, whose own fathers were
_emigrant pirates?_" You are also complimented by the Literary and
Catholic Sentinel, another Popish press, in Philadelphia. That blessed
organ of Popery, the Sentinel, in its comments upon a sermon delivered
by that eloquent Presbyterian divine, McCalla, thus eulogizes New
England. He, Mr. McCalla, knew the character of his New England
audience, that their minds were warped by fanaticism, darkened by
bigotry, and vitiated by the abhorred, and atrocious principles
inculcated by the _vile and sanguinary wretches, called the Pilgrim
Fathers_. He well knew that the mental capacity of the generality of his
hearers were chained down by ignorance.

Very flattering this, especially to Bostonians, and their puritan
fathers. Their fathers were sanguinary wretches, if we believe Papists,
and the people of Boston are an ignorant set of boobies. You, Americans,
may bear all this; you know not the designs of Popery, but I do;
and while I have liberty to write, I will write for liberty, and in
opposition to Popery. Truth may be unpalatable to Papists, but it is my
duty to record it.

Among the instructions which I received from my bishop in Ireland, when
he sent me out to this country as a Catholic priest, was one to which
I beg to call your attention. The same is given to every priest in the
United States. "Let it be your first duty to extirpate heretics, but be
cautious as to the manner of doing it. Do nothing without consulting the
bishop of the diocese, in which you may be located; and if there be
no bishop there, advise with the metropolitan bishop. He has his
instructions from Rome, and he understands the character of the people.
Be sure not to permit the members of our holy church, who may be under
your charge, to read the Bible. It is the source of all heresies.
Whenever you see an opportunity of building a church, make it known to
your bishop. Let the land be purchased for the Pope, and his successors
in office. Never yield or give up the _divine right_, which the head
of the church has, by virtue of the _Keys_, to the government of North
America, as well as every other country. The confessional will enable
you to know the people by degrees; with the aid of that _holy tribunal_,
and our bishops, who are guided by the spirit of God, we may expect,
at no distant day, to bring over North America to the bosom of our holy
church."

This needs some explanation. By extirpating heresy, he meant the
conversion of heretics to the Romish church, without violence, if
possible, if not, by such means as the Romish church has adopted in all
ages. You have already seen what these means were--I need not now repeat
them; but you shall see them more plainly, when I lay before you, as I
intend to do hereafter; the ways and means which the church has adopted,
to bring over the Huguenots from the darkness of Protestant error, to
the glorious light of Popish truth.

The Bible, as you are aware, is a forbidden book in the Romish church. I
remember when acting as Popish priest, in Philadelphia, having ventured
to suggest to the very Rev. Mr. De Barth, then acting as vicar-general
of that diocese, the advantages of educating the poor, and circulating
the Bible among them. He scouted at the idea, as heretical, and lodged
a written complaint against me, before the archbishop of Baltimore, then
Romish metropolitan. I was reprimanded verbally, through the aforesaid
De Barth. He was too crafty to send it in writing; the Papists were not
then strong enough to forbid, openly, the reading of the Bible. It
was then too soon to seal up the fountain of eternal life in this free
country. The most sympathizing Protestants could scarcely believe then,
that in less than thirty years, Papists would not only dare forbid it to
be read, by their own people, and in their own schools, but cast it out
of Protestant schools, as they did the other day in New York. What are
we coming to, Americans? Your ancestors have come to this country,
with no recommendations but holy lives; with no fortune but their pious
hearts and strong arms; with no treasure but the word of God.

Will you now permit Papists to cast those Bibles out of your schools, to
burn them on the public streets, as they have done in the state of New
York, under the inspection of Popish priests, as proved on the oath of
several respectable witnesses? That priest, however, did no more than
every priest and bishop would do, did he deem it _expedient_; and here,
fellow-citizens, let me assure you, that same power which authorizes
that priest, or any other priest, to burn your Bibles, also authorizes
him to burn every heretic or Protestant in the country.

The same power which authorizes them to officiate as priests, empowers
them to _destroy heretics_, whenever it is _expedient_; and is ready
to absolve them from the commission of this foul deed. _Saint_ Thomas
Aquinas, in his second book, chapter the 3d, page 58, says: "Heretics,
may justly be killed." But you will answer, there is no danger of this.
They can never acquire the power to enact any laws in this country
which would sanction such a doctrine. How sadly mistaken you are! How
lamentably unacquainted with the secret springs or machinery of Popery!
I regret that circumstances oblige me so often to introduce my own name,
but it cannot be well avoided, for the purpose of explaining certain
Popish transactions in the United States. While I was a Romish priest
in Philadelphia, and soon after my difference with the archbishop of
Baltimore, in relation to the introduction of the Bible, a consultation
was held between the Popish priests in the diocese of Philadelphia,
and it was secretly resolved by them, that the best mode of checking
_Hogan's heresy_, as they were pleased to term my advocating the
reading of the Bible, was to take possession of the church in which
I officiated, in the name of the Pope. They accordingly wrote to his
holiness, humbly praying this man-god to send them out a bishop, and to
give him, and his successors in office, a lease of St. Mary's church, in
Philadelphia, and all the appurtenances thereunto belonging. Accordingly
his royal holiness the Pope sent them a bishop with the aforesaid lease.
I was immediately ordered out of the church; and having refused to
depart, unless the trustees thought proper to remove me, this emissary
of the Pope, only a few days or weeks in this country, had me indited
and imprisoned for disturbing public worship, or in other words,
officiating in St. Mary's church, even with the full and undivided
consent of the trustees.

But the bishop's legal right was questioned; the case was brought before
the supreme court of Pennsylvania, Chief Justice Tighlman presiding. I
was discharged from bail and custody, and the rights of the trustees,
under their charter from the state, sustained. But the priests and
bishops were not content with this decision. They put their heads once
more together, and fancied that they discovered another mode by which
they could rob the people of their rights, and defeat the intentions
of the donors of the property of St. Mary's church; and what was their
plan, think you, fellow-citizens?

The bishop called a meeting of all the priests and leading Catholics
in the diocese. Every lay member was ordered to bring with him a hickory
stick. The meeting was held in the church of St. Joseph; and at the hour
of twelve at night, the _Romish bishop of the diocese of Pennsylvania_,
an Irishman, not more than a few months in the country, attended in his
pontificals, told the multitude who were there assembled to lay down
their sticks in one pile, in order that he might _bless_ them for their
use. This was done as a matter of course.

[Illustration: Bishop of Pennsylvania blessing the sticks. p125]

The bishop said mass, sprinkled holy water upon the sticks, blessed
them, and this done, the whole party bound themselves by a solemn vow
never to cease until they elected a legislature in Pennsylvania that
would annul the charter of St. Mary's church; and, as an American
citizen, I blush to state the fact, they succeeded. The charter was
annulled by an act of the legislature, and property, worth over a
million of dollars, would have passed into the hands of the Pope and
his agents, were there not a provision in the constitution of that state
empowering the supreme court to decide upon the constitutionality of the
acts of the legislature.

We brought the question of the constitutionality of the act, which
annulled the charter, before the court, Justice Tighlman still
presiding. The court decided in the negative, otherwise the trustees
and myself would have been defeated; I should have been fined and
imprisoned, and they ousted out of their trust.

This, I believe, was the first attempt the Pope has made to establish
his _temporal power_ in this country; and it is a source of consolation
to me, dearer almost than existence itself, to be the first to meet this
holy bull. If I have not strangled him, and trampled him to death, I
have, at least, the comfort of seeing his horn so blunted, that his
bellowings have been, ever since, comparatively harmless. But there
seems a recuperative power in the beast. He is again attempting to plant
his foot upon our soil, and establish his temporal power amongst us; and
how is he trying to accomplish this, fellow-citizens? The Papists have
united themselves together as a body, headed by their priests, and
resolved to carry, through the ballot box, what they cannot otherwise
accomplish, at least for the present. Popish priests have all become
politicians; they publicly preach peace, good order, and obedience to
the "powers that be," but they tell the people in the _confessional_, to
disregard those instructions, and stop at nothing which may promote the
interests of _the church_.

They have now, what they call "religious newspapers," under the
supervision of their bishops, but in which, not a word of pure religion,
or Christian charity, is to be found. They are political presses, whose
object is to overthrow our laws, our government, and introduce, in their
stead, anarchy and confusion. These people--and here I allude to Irish
Catholics and their priests in particular--have no regard for the
obligations of an oath. Let the priest only tell them that it is for the
_good of the church_, and they will stop at no crime; no, not even at
murder; and they are daily becoming more audacious in consequence of the
support which they receive from unprincipled politicians, and the morbid
indifference of Protestants.

I have shown you, in a former page, that the increase of Catholics, in
this country, will soon give them a majority of voters: and who, think
you, will they vote for? A Protestant is it? Any man distinguished for
virtue, and for love of republican principles? Assuredly not.

Will they select such a man as the virtuous and pious Frelinghuysen,
of New Jersey? Will they choose such a man as the upright and honorable
Archer, of Virginia? Will they cast their votes for such a man as the
honest John C. Calhoun, of South Carolina; than whom, whatever may be
his politics, there is not a greater or a better man of the age.

I might name hundreds, equally good and great men, who are disqualified,
by their virtues, from receiving the votes of Popish vassals. None but
mercenary demagogues, such as the Pope's tool, Daniel O'Connell, who
_generously_ sacrifices five thousand pounds a year to obtain fifty-six
thousand, the sum which he received last year in order to _ameliorate
the condition of the poor Irish_. Give the power, and they will elect
such a political desperado as this restless O'Connell, a Jesuit by
education, an intriguer by nature, and as great a coward as ever drew
breath. This is the champion, and his followers--the Irish--are the
people, who call Americans _cowards_, and _their_ "pilgrim fathers,"
_pirates_ and _sanguinary wretches_. These are the men, with Daniel
O'Connell at their head, numbering nine millions of the "_bravest men in
the world_," who have been for centuries, and are now, on their knees,
begging favors from the British government. Americans, too, once asked
for favors, or rather their just rights, from that government, but
not having obtained them, they drew their swords, threw away their
scabbards, and, though the whole population of the United States did
not, at that time, amount to two and a half millions, they fought
for their rights, and they won them. Yet these Popish braggarts, but
wretched slaves, call you cowards, and your fathers pirates. How long
will you suffer this?

We know, from history, that Popery and liberty cannot coexist in the
same country. A Popish government has never advanced human happiness. It
never promotes any object truly great or philanthropic. How deplorable
would it be, did this country fall a prey to those who are trying to
establish it amongst us. The truth is, Popish glory, the trappings of
its court, have been always the silly objects of the Roman church,
while the mass of her people has ever been left in the recesses of want,
obscurity, and ignorance.

Americans, at present, seem sunk in a sort of political lethargy; and
this is taken advantage of, by foreign priests and Jesuits; but I
would tell those disturbers of our peace, not to trust too much to this
apparent sluggishness; a calm often precedes a storm: the continued
insolence, abuses, and threats of Papists, may arouse our young lion,
and, if I mistake not--although, appearances are at present against
it--his holiness and his minions, who are trying to set up a power in
this country unknown to our constitution, and not enumerated in our bill
of rights, may have occasion to tremble.

To effect this, however, without the shedding of blood, it is
necessary--indispensably necessary--that no Papist should hold office,
or even vote, until he ceases to have any connection, or hold any
alliance with the Pope, who is a _foreign potentate_, as well as head of
the church. Let them come amongst us, if they will, but let it be with
healing on their wings, and not to disturb our peace and tranquillity.
Let them prove themselves the friends of liberty, religion, and mankind,
and Americans will receive them with open arms, admit them to a full
participation in all their own privileges, and extend to them the
hand of friendship; but never let this be done, until they forswear
_expressly_ and _without mental reservation_, all allegiance, of
whatever kind, and under whatever name, to the Pope of Rome, who is a
_foreign potentate_, and acknowledged as such by the powers of Europe.
When a Papist refuses to do this, trust him not. I repeat it, trust him
not, Americans. He is a spy amongst you, a traitor to your country, and
the sworn enemy of your religion and your liberties.

This, however, they do not. They come amongst you with different motives
and far different characters. Though I know them well, it would be
impossible for me to express to you the designs which mark their
entrance into this country. They cross the Atlantic, under instructions
from their priests, and bring nothing with them but their bigotry,
intolerance, and ignorance. Their tastes, their passions, and their
native hatred of Protestants are wafted over to us, and are already
corrupting the morals of our people. In their native country they feel,
or pretend to feel, oppressed by British laws and British government.
They are taught by their priests to despise their government, at home;
that its laws are all penal, and that there is no crime in evading them.

There is not an Irish Catholic, who leaves that country, but feels it
his duty to resist the laws of Protestant England, and evade, by perjury
or otherwise, their execution. "In no country in the world," says a
modern writer, "are the rights of property so recklessly violated:
amongst no people on the face of the earth are the obligations of an
oath, or the discharge of the moral duties, so utterly disregarded. Any
man, the greatest culprit, can find persons to prove an _alibi_; the
most atrocious assassin has but to seek protection, to obtain it. And
why is this so? Because the religious instruction of the people has
been totally neglected; because their priests have become politicians;
because their bishops, pitchforked from the potatoe-basket to the
palace, have become drunk with the incense offered to their vanity; and
the patronage granted in return for their unprincipled support, instead
of checking the misconduct of the subordinates, stimulate them to still
further violence, and stop at nothing which can forward their objects.
Because the opinions of the people are formed on the statements and
advice of mendicant agitators, who have but one object in view--their
own aggrandizement. Because a rabid and revolutionary press, concealing
its ultimate designs under the motive of affording protection to the
weak, seeks to overthrow all law and order, pandering to the worst
passions of an ignorant and ferocious populace."

Irish priests and Irish bishops complain of poverty and grievances at
home. They complain that men of property leave their homes and spend
their incomes abroad; but as this writer, to whom I have alluded
expresses it, "What encouragement do they give to such as return from
their residences abroad?" Allow me, fellow-citizens, to give you an
instance of the treatment which Protestants of fortune receive from
Irish Roman priests, when they do return to reside upon their estates in
Ireland. I quote from the same author:!!!!!

"The Marquis of Waterford, a sportsman boundless in his charities, frank
and cordial in his manners, not obnoxious on account of his politics,
and admitted on all hands to be one of the best landlords in Ireland,
comes to reside, and spend his eighty thousand sterling per annum,
in the country. He gets up a splendid establishment in the county of
Tipperary; and how is he treated? His hounds and horses were twice
poisoned. There are scarcely any Protestants in the county of Tipperary.
His offices were fired, and his servants, with difficulty, saved their
lives. Compelled to abandon Tipperary--that sink of Popish iniquity,
every nook and corner of which I am acquainted with--this generous and
fine-hearted young nobleman retires to his family mansion, in Waterford;
and how is he received there? I will not tell you; let his parish
priest tell the story. 'Men of Portlan,' says this _holy Romish priest_,
addressing the tenants and neighbors of the Marquis of Waterford, 'you
were the leading men who put down Beresford, in '26 (the marquis's
father); I call on you now, having put down one set of tyrants, to put
down another set of tyrants, the marquis himself.'"

Many of the Romish priests, which we have in this country, are from that
very county of Tipperary, and thousands of the poor Irish amongst us
have had their education, such as it is, from such worthy _apostolic
successors_ as the parish priest of the Marquis of Waterford.

Such are the people to whom you are yielding the destinies of this happy
republic, by allowing them to vote at your elections, or to hold any
office of honor or trust, while they have any connection with the head
of their church, the Pope of Rome. Let the reader pass on from Popish
Tipperary to Protestant Ulster, and he will see that the crimes of the
Irish, and the miseries which many of them suffer, are to be attributed
almost solely to their religion and their priests.

Mr. Kohl, a fair and very impartial writer, at least, upon Ireland, and
who is often quoted by the great agitator, O'Connell, says,--in passing
from that part of the country, where the majority of the inhabitants
profess the Roman Catholic religion to that in which the great bulk of
the population are Protestants or Presbyterians,--"On the other side
of these miserable hills, whose inhabitants are years before they can
afford to get the holes mended in their potatoe kettles, (the most
important article of furniture in an Irish cabin,) the territory of
Leinster and that of Munster begins. The coach rattled over the boundary
line, and all at once we seemed to have entered a new world. I am not
in the slightest degree exaggerating when I say, that everything was as
suddenly changed as if by an enchanter's wand. The dirty cabins by
the road side were succeeded by neat, pretty cottages; well cultivated
fields and shady trees met the eye on every side. At first I could
scarcely believe my own eyes, and thought the change must be merely
local, caused by particular management of that particular state, but the
improvement lasted, and continued to show me that I was among a
totally different people, the Scottish settlers, and the industrious
Presbyterians."

We see, in this country, the same difference of character and habits,
between the Irish Protestants and the Irish Catholics. The Irish
Protestant, wherever you find him, laboring on his loom in the north
of Ireland, working in a factory in New England, keeping a shop in
New York, or cultivating a plantation in Carolina, values his home and
integrity, as pearls of great price. He is generally temperate, frugal,
and industrious. We seldom, or never, hear him accused of disturbing
the peace, or fraudulently voting at elections; on the whole, he arrives
amongst us a worthy man, and, in time, becomes a useful citizen; and to
what is this owing? It is owing to his education. He has been taught
the Bible in his youth; from this he learned to love his God, above all
things, and his neighbor as himself.

But how is it with the Roman Catholic, who comes amongst you? Scarce
does he land on your shores, when he becomes more turbulent, more noisy,
and more presump

Showing first 200,000 characters. Full text: gutenberg.org/ebooks/37705