see the king before he left Paris. His sole object in so doing was to
obtain, if possible, some concessions, or at least some guarantee for
the future protection of the persecuted Protestants, of whom he was a
member. The king received him well, promised him all he asked; but the
king consulted the Pope's nuncio, who was then in the city, and that
_holy_ man advised him to keep no faith with that Protestant Coligny,
but on the contrary, to make all the use he could of him, in order the
more effectually to accomplish the destruction of the heretical band
to which he belonged. After receiving this Christian advice, the king
became apparently more friendly to Coligny, and went so far as to
promise him a safe escort on his way home. "If you approve of it," said
the king to Coligny, "I will send for the guard of my Arquebusiers
for the greater safety of all, for fear they might unawares do you a
mischief; and they shall come under officers who are known to you." The
generous and unsuspecting Christian, Coligny, accepted the offer of the
guards, and twelve hundred of them were ordered into the city. There
were many of the Protestants in the city, who on seeing this array
of troops, felt alarmed for the safety of their friend Coligny; they
whispered their fears to the brave warrior, who until then did not even
dream of treachery. But now, fearing that something might be wrong, he
resolved to see the queen mother. She expected this, and granted him
an interview with great apparent pleasure. As soon as he commenced to
suggest any fears or apprehensions of treachery, this _holy daughter_
of the church, suddenly interrupting him, exclaiming, "Good God, sir
admiral," said she, "let us enjoy ourselves while these festivities
continue. I promise you on the faith of a queen, that in four days I
will make you contented, and those of your religion." Coligny had now
the word of a king, and the honor of a queen, as a guarantee for his
own safety, and that of the Protestants in France. Who could any longer
doubt that they were safe? Who could believe that a king would violate a
solemn promise freely given? Who could question the honor of a lady and
the promise of a queen? Who would venture to assert that a mother would
not use her best effort to redeem the honor and plighted faith of a son,
and that son a king? No one but a Roman Catholic could doubt it. Charles
was a Roman Catholic king. His church taught him, that no faith was
to be kept with heretics. Coligny was a heretic. Catharine, the queen
mother, was a Roman Catholic; her church taught her to keep no faith
with heretics, but to "destroy them, root and branch, under pain of
eternal damnation." _Heritici destruendi_ is the doctrine of the Roman
Catholic church; and accordingly, on the evening of that very day on
which Coligny had an audience with the queen, these distinguished and
pious children of the holy Roman Catholic church appointed an interview
with the Pope's nuncio, and after that _holy man_ sung the _Veni Creator
Spiritus_, (a hymn which they invariably sing, when laying any plan
for the destruction of heretics,) these three worthy children of the
infallible church resolved to send for the "king's assassin," a man
named Maureval, and ordered him to assassinate Coligny. It must be
observed here, that the Pope's legate allowed Charles and his mother to
keep an assassin, to cut down _such thistles or tares as the devil may
plant in the vineyard of the holy see_. Soon after this, Coligny had
occasion to go out on some business. The Popish assassin pursued him
at a distance, secreted himself in a house where he knew he could
deliberately shoot at him; he did so, but the wound, though severe in
the extreme, did not prove mortal. Among the first who visited him were
the king and his mother; and such was the apparent grief of Catharine,
that she shed tears for the sufferings of the warrior. The good son
of this good mother mingled his tears with hers, promising that the
assassin, whoever he was, should be brought to condign punishment; but
need I now tell you, Americans, that the tears of this Popish queen, for
the sufferings of this Protestant, were like those of the hyena, that
moans in the most piteous strains, while sucking the life-blood of its
victim? Need I tell you they were like those of the crocodile, which
sheds them in abundance while devouring its prey? Need I inform you that
by her promises of future protection, she resembled the filthy buzzard,
which spreads its wings over the body or carcass of its prey, while
plunging its beak into its very entrails? And such I tell you now, as I
have told you before, Americans, and shall tell you while I live, is the
sympathy, and such the protection which every good mother and son of the
holy Roman Catholic church would extend to you, your Protestant religion
and its followers, in these United States.
We will now pass over the various meetings held by the king, his mother,
queen Catharine, and the Pope's nuncio, for the purpose of devising ways
and means, not for the death of Coligny, but for the destruction of
all the Protestants in France. To detail these would be a tedious
undertaking; and not more tedious than revolting to the best feelings of
humanity. Depravity was reduced to a science in the court of Catharine,
and her son Charles. She employed even her _ladies_ of honor for the
seduction of her young nobility. They were ladies--I should say human
things--selected for their beauty, and trained up by this royal mother
in the Romish church, in habits of utter abandonment to seduction
and lasciviousness. Young men of honor, virtue, and patriotism, were
introduced to them, by Catharine, especially those who were at all
suspected of being favorable to Protestantism. These _maids_ were
required to ascertain from these young noblemen who, and how many of
their young friends were friendly to the cause of Protestantism, with
a view of marking them for extermination, as soon as herself and
the Pope's legate should deem it expedient to do so The hour at last
arrived, when the holy trio deemed it expedient to order a general
massacre of the Protestants. The order was issued. The bells of the
Roman Catholic churches were rung, and the royal order "Kill! kill!
kill!" all, was issued by the king, and repeated by his Roman Catholic
mother. I could not if I would, nor would I if I could, describe the
scene that followed. Suffice it to say, that particular orders were
given not to spare Admiral Coligny. Blameless as was his life, and
devoted as he was to his king and government, yet he was a Protestant,
and must die, and that by the hand of a Popish assassin. The holy church
reserved to herself the glory of murdering this heretic. As soon as
the order to murder was given, a rush was made towards the residence of
Coligny. They entered his chamber, and to use the language of another,
they found him sitting in an armchair, his arms folded, his eyes half
upturned with angelic serenity towards heaven, looking the image of a
righteous man falling asleep in the Lord. One of the murderers, a pious
Catholic, called Besma, fixing his fiendish eye upon the admiral, asked
him, 'Art thou the admiral?' pointing his sword at him at the same time.
'I am the admiral,' replied Coligny. 'Young man, thou shouldst have
regard for my age and infirmities;'" but the murderer plunged his sword
into the Christian hero's breast, pulled it out, and thrust it in again.
Thus died this noble Protestant! Thus died the veteran Coligny, by the
hands of a Popish boy! And for what? He believed in the Bible--he was a
Protestant. And thus, fellow Protestants of the United States, will your
posterity be sacrificed, for similar crimes, unless God in his mercy
drive from your land, and mine by adoption, every vestige of the Popish
religion. No sooner was Coligny put to death, than his head was cut off
and presented to Queen Catharine, who sent for her perfumer, and ordered
it to be embalmed and forwarded to the Pope, as a mark of her devotion
to the holy see. But even this did not satisfy the queen. Her Popish
bloodhounds, on hearing of Coligny's murder, rushed through the streets
to his apartments, searching every where for his mangled body, and
having found it, a general cry was raised, "The admiral! the admiral!"
They tied his legs and his arms together, and dragged them through the
streets shouting, "Here he comes, the admiral!" One cut off his ears,
another his legs, another his nose, hands, &c. They abandoned the body,
to let the boys amuse themselves by inspecting it, and then tumbled it
into the river. But the zealous Catharine was not satisfied yet. This
good daughter of the Pope ordered the river to be dragged, until what
remained of Coligny was found, and then ordered it to be hung in chains
on a gibbet at a place called Mountfacon. A contemporary writer, a Roman
Catholic, speaking of this, says: "the road to Mountfacon was a scene of
incessant bustle, created by the gentlemen of Catharine's court, who, in
splendid dresses and perfumed with essences, went to insult the relics
of Coligny. Catharine also went with her numerous retinue. Charles
accompanied his mother. On arriving before the gallows, the courtiers
turned away their heads, and held their noses on account of the stench
arising from the half putrefied remains. 'Poh!' said Charles and his
mother, to their courtiers, '_the dead body of a heretic_ always smells
well.' On returning home she consulted with her confessor, who advised
her, now that the devil had the heretic's body, it would be well to have
a solemn high mass for the occasion, to be said at the church of St.
Germain, at which Charles and his mother attended, and a Te Deum was
sung in honor of the glorious victory gained by the church, by the
destruction of so many heretics.
As soon as the Pope heard this news, his holiness despatched a special
messenger to France, to congratulate the king on having "caught so
many heretics in one net." So joyous and elated did his royal holiness
appear, that he offered a high reward for the best engraving of the
massacre; having, on one side, as a motto, "the triumph of the church;"
and on the other, "the pontiff approves of the murder of coligny." This
engraving is now to be seen in the Vatican of Rome.
The number of those who were massacred on St. Bartholomew's day is
variously stated. Mazary makes it thirty thousand; others over sixty:
but the Pope's nuncio, who was on the spot during the massacre, in
a letter to the Pope, tells him, "the number was _so great it was
impossible to estimate it._"
Recollect, American Protestants, that this massacre, and others to which
I have alluded, was not the work of a few fanatics. It was the work of
a nation, by their representative, the king, empowered to do so by the
head of the Roman Catholic church. In vain is it for Papists to tell us
that all this blood-shedding and destruction of human life was the work
of a few, with which the church was neither chargeable nor accountable.
Americans may believe them if they will. Let them believe. "There are
none so blind as those who will not see." If neither the testimony of
history, nor a statement of facts, bearing all the necessary evidence
of truth, will convince them, vain indeed are my efforts to do so.
But there is no impropriety in my earnestly and solemnly appealing to
Americans, and suggesting one or two questions, which they should put
to any Roman Catholic who may deny that the church ever sanctioned those
evil deeds of which I have spoken. Have you any record of the fact, that
the church ever discountenanced the destruction of heretics? Did the
Popish authorities ever deliver up those whom they knew to have murdered
heretics to the civil tribunals? Were there ever any heretics murdered,
as such, except by the advice, counsel, and connivance of the Popish
church and her priests? If there were, in what country, in what age, and
in what reign? Until these questions can be truly answered, you are not
to be satisfied. But why will Americans, for a moment, entertain a
doubt upon the subject? Popish historians never deny it. The actions
of Papists all over the world proclaim it. The church of Rome has ever
thirsted for the blood of' heretics. She now yearns for an opportunity
of shedding it again; all for the purpose of "purifying the earth of
heresy." Do you not see that her conduct, in all ages and all places
where she had opportunities, confirms this? Do you not even see, that in
this country, the members of that church can scarcely keep their hands
off you; and so bloody are the sentiments which they inherit, that, for
want of other subjects, they will sometimes shed that of each other?
What would they not have done, a few weeks ago, in Philadelphia, had
they the power? What in New York? What in Boston, or any where else in
the United States? Do you not see, in all your intercourse with
them, the ill-concealed hatred which they, bear you? If you have any
charitable institutions for the support of Protestants, will they aid
you? If you hold a fair for the purpose of building a church, or for
any other Protestant purpose, will they attend it and purchase from you?
They will not. If they do, they commit a sin against the church, and
the power of absolving from that sin is _reserved_ for the bishop of the
diocese. It is a _reserved case_, as the church terms it. It is only by
virtue of a _dispensation_, granted by the Pope to this country, that
a Roman Catholic is even allowed to attend the funeral of a Protestant;
and should he go into one of your churches, even though there was no
service at the time, if he is a true son of the church, he will hasten
to his priest and obtain absolution for that special crime. Yet, if they
want churches built, you will furnish them with money. If they want land
to build them upon, you will give it to them. Is this wise in you? You
are denounced in those churches as heretics; your religion ridiculed,
and yourselves laughed at. Your motives are undoubtedly good. You
believe, because you do not know to the contrary, that, by your
contributions, you are advancing the cause of morality. You do not
reflect--and perhaps the idea never occurred to you--that there is
a wide difference between the religion of a Protestant and that of a
Papist. That of the Protestant teaches him to be a moral and virtuous
man; whereas, that of the Papist has not the remotest connection with
virtue. A Catholic need not dream of virtue, and yet be a member of that
church.
The most atrocious villain, as an eminent writer expresses it, may be
rigidly devout, and without any shock to public sentiment in Catholic
countries, or even among Roman Catholics in the United States, Religion,
as the same writer says, and as we all know, at least as many of us as
have been in those countries, and who are acquainted with Catholics in
this, is a _passion, an excuse, a refuge_, but never a _check_. It is
called by Papists themselves _refugium peccatorum_. Hence it is, that
priests may be drunkards, and their flocks never think the worse of
them. I have known some of them, whose private rooms where they heard
confessions, were sinks of debaucheries, which a regard for public
decency prevents me from mentioning. I have known females, who have been
seduced by them, and who afterwards regularly went to confession, under
the impression which every Catholic is taught to feel, that no matter
what a priest does, provided he speaks the language of the church.
_Don't mind what he does, but mind what he speaks_, is a proverb among
the poor Irish Papists. None of them dare look me in the face and
deny this, and yet these wretches talk of morals. But what think you,
Protestants, of this kind of morality or of the church which does
not even forbid it, and only requires to have it "concealed from
_heretics?_" Do you desire it propagated amongst you? Do you wish your
children to learn it? No virtuous daughter or decent woman should ever
venture under the same roof with those men.
Paganism, in its worst stages, was a stronger check to the passions
than Popery. I will give you one instance of the abominations of Popery.
Papists believe in the doctrine of the _real presence_ of Christ, in
the sacrament of the Eucharist. It is the duty of every priest in
that church to administer this _sacrament_ to the dying, and for this
purpose, they consecrate a number, of small wafers, made of flour and
water, each of which, they pretend to believe, contains _the body and
blood, soul and divinity_ of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, or in
other words, the Lord God himself. The priests carry with them, in &
small box called _pixis_, a number of them to be given to the sick
and dying. There are but few of them in the United States, in whose
breeches' pockets may not be found, at any hour of the day, at least a
dozen of _those gods_. Can there be religion here? Can there be morality
among those men or their followers? I would go further, and ask, Is
there any thing in Paganism equally impious or more revolting to God or
man? They know full well that such a creed cannot be sustained either by
reason or Scripture, and hence it is, they want all power concentrated
in the Pope of Rome, in order to extirpate their opponents, Protestant
heretics. Papists understand the character of Americans, and are well
aware, that if sufficiently satisfied of the existence among them, of a
sect who believed in a doctrine so absurd, and so impiously profane,
as that of the real _bodily presence of Christ in the Eucharist_, they
could not countenance them. My own impression is, that if the people of
Boston, where I write, knew that Catholic priests taught their followers
to believe, that they (the priests) could make god's by the dozen, carry
them in their pockets, take them out when and where they pleased, and
there kneel to them, in _adoration_, they would have them indicted under
the statute against blasphemy. The Rev. Abner Kneeland was indicted
because he denied the procession of the Holy Ghost, and found guilty
of blasphemy. But what was his crime, when compared with that of Romish
bishops and priests! It was bad enough, to be sure, in the eyes of all
Christian men, and few questioned the righteousness of the verdict of
his guilt. If a Pagan priest should arrive amongst us, bringing with him
his gods, and worshipping them in our midst, should we _sanction_ him?
I know not that our constitution forbids such a thing, but the reverence
which we have for the _one true God_, our love of morality and good
order, would forbid it. We would accuse and indict them for blasphemy.
But is their blasphemy more horrid than that of the Romish church?
The Pagan priest hews his god out of wood; the Popish priest makes his
out of flour and water. The Pagan priests convey their gods in some
vehicle, from place to place, and stop to worship them, wherever their
inclination or devotion prompts them. The Romish priests carry theirs in
their pockets, or otherwise, as occasion or love of pomp may suggest.
Where, Americans, is the difference? Which is the greater blasphemer?
Which is the bolder and more reckless violator of that great
commandment, "_I am the Lord thy God." "Thou shalt have none other gods
before me"?_ You will not hesitate to decide. The Pagan may be honest in
his belief; he may worship according to the light that is in him, or the
knowledge that has reached him. He may never have seen the Gospel. _The
Day Star from on high_ may never have arisen over him, or illumined his
path! "The morning upon the mountains" may perhaps never have gladdened
his vision; he may, to us at least, be excusable, and as far as we can
see, without offence before God. But is the Romish priest, who makes
his god out of flour and water, and worships it, sinless? Is he not an
idolater? What can be more blasphemous than to believe that a wafer,
made of flour and water, can be changed, by the incantations of a Romish
priest, into the God of heaven and earth!
The Popish church teaches that the flour, of which the wafer is made,
loses its substance, and all its natural properties, and is changed
by the words of consecration into the Almighty God; that is, it is
no longer flour and water; it is changed,--not _spiritually_, as
Protestants believe,--but actually and really becomes the _body and
blood, soul and divinity_ of Jesus Christ, such as it was when nailed to
the cross, and as such they worship the wafer. If this is not idolatry,
I cannot understand what idolatry is. If this is not blasphemy, I wish
some New England gentleman of the ministry, or the bar, would explain
it, and tell me what they mean by their statute against blasphemy.
Does blasphemy, in their estimation, mean nothing? or is it something
introduced into our laws, only for the purpose of exercising the
ingenuity of legal and ecclesiastical casuists? Surely, if the word has
any meaning whatever, in law or morals, in church or state; if it can
be enforced at all, and there is such a crime as blasphemy, it should be
enforced against the Romish priest or bishop, who bows and teaches his
followers to bow, in adoration, to a piece of bread and water, and thus
blasphemously insult, as far as poor mortals can, the great and living
God. Surely, the state authority, which would institute a criminal
prosecution for blasphemy against Kneeland, because he did not believe
the Holy Ghost to proceed "from the Father and the Son," and does not
prosecute for blasphemy Popish priests, who believe, and teach their
followers to believe, that they can create, or rather manufacture as
_many gods_ as they please, out of flour and water, either neglects his
duty, or his knowledge of it is very equivocal.
Either this is the case, or the treatment of Kneeland originated in some
cruel persecution. The latter I am far from believing.
As a citizen of this state, I would ask respectfully, why proceedings,
under the statute against blasphemy, are not immediately commenced
against Popish priests? Is it because Kneeland was friendless and
alone, that he was selected as a proper victim? and is it because
Popish priests are supported by a large party, equally criminal with
themselves, that they are spared? Not at all, say the _sympathizers_
with Papery. Kneeland made a noise in his meetings; they were
troublesome in the neighborhood where they were held. Be it so. I
will not deny this, nor do I wish to be considered as the apologist
of Kneeland, his blasphemies, or his meetings; but I would ask the
prosecuting officer of the state, whether Kneeland's meetings were
more noisy than _Popish repealers?_ Were they even half so turbulent or
uproarious? Let those whose duty it is answer the question, and tell us
why priests are not prosecuted for blasphemy. I contend that if there is
one blasphemy under the sun more revolting than another, it is that of
believing and teaching that a wafer can be changed from what God made
it, into that same Almighty God, by mumbling over it a few Latin words.
It makes me shudder at the weakness of man, and the unaccountable
influence of early education, to think that I myself once believed in
this horribly blasphemous doctrine.
The doctrine of Popish priests in adoring a wafer made of bread and
water, and their mode of manufacturing the wafer into God, is not only
blasphemous, but extremely ludicrous.
Has the reader ever seen a Popish priest in the act of making, or
metamorphosing bread and water into _flesh and blood?_ If he has not,
it would be well, if not profane, to witness it; for never before has he
seen such mountebank tricks. The priest, this great _creator_ of flesh
and blood out of flour and water, appears decked out in as many gewgaws
as would adorn a Pagan priestess, and about twice as many as would be
necessary for a Jewish rabbi. Amid the ringing of small bells, dazzling
lights, genuflections, crossings, incense, and a variety of other such
"tricks before high Heaven," this clerical mountebank metamorphoses this
wafer into _God_, and exhibits it to his followers, whom he calls upon
to go on their knees and adore it. This horrible practice should induce
our philanthropists, who are sending vast sums abroad for the conversion
of the Pagan, to pause and ask themselves, whether there is, in the
whole moral wilderness of Paganism, any thing worse, or half so bad, as
that idolatry which we have at our own doors!
If a being from some unknown world, and to whom this world of ours was
as little known as the one from which he came was to us, should, by
accident or otherwise, arrive among us, and we were to take him into
a Roman Catholic church during the celebration of mass, and there tell
him, that the _great actor_ in the service was making flesh and blood
out of bread and water, and could actually accomplish that feat, he
would unhesitatingly award to these United States the credit of having
among them some of the most accomplished jugglers in the world.
What are your Eastern fire-eaters, sword-swallowers, and dervishes, to
a Popish priest? Why, it would be easier to swallow a rapier, ten
feet long, or a ball of fire as large as the mountain Orizaba, than to
metamorphose flour and water into the "_great and holy God_, who created
the heavens and the earth, and all that is therein."
Let me not be accused of levity, or want of reverence to that Almighty
Being, to whom I am indebted for my creation and preservation, and on
whom alone, through the merits of the Saviour, my hopes of salvation are
placed. My only object is, to call the attention of my fellow-citizens
to the absurd and profane doctrines of Popery; and that having seen
them, in their true colors, it is to be hoped they will find little
favor from a thinking and reflect-ing people.
It is extremely unpleasant to my feelings, thus to expose the profanity
of a religion which I once professed, and inculcated upon the minds of
others; but the best atonement I can make for my unconscious offence
to my God and my fellow-beings is, to acknowledge my error, and caution
others against falling into the snares which an early education,
received from priests and Jesuits, had precipitated me. The reader will
therefore pardon me if I lay before him a few more Popish extravagances.