On the continuance, strength, and union of this party, depen

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.

Popery! As It Was and as It Is. Also, Auricular Confession; And Popish Nunneries · 第 1 / 15 段