The Pope – Chief of White Slavers, High Priest of Intrigue
Subject: The Pope—Foe of Mankind. Part IV. The Papal Usurpation – And the Convent Schools’ Tragic Mission.
Contents
No doubt whatever that, since 1870, the Roman Catholic American citizen, the Roman Catholic British subject, or the Roman Catholic of any other country, owes first allegiance to the pope, a second and very subordinate one to the country whose protection he enjoys. Well says The Truth Seeker:
Every Roman Catholic is fighting under two flags; or rather, living under one and fighting under the other. And, strange as it may seem, he is fighting the flag under which he lives and which protects him. It can not be denied that the papal flag is one that every Roman Catholic must fight under when the order is given, and, until that order is given, he is working in secret against the Stars and Stripes. No papal flag should ever be hoisted above our soil.
Into many strange inconsistencies and extraordinary contradictions does the doctrine of papal infallibility lead Romanist apologists. The pope, who suppressed the Jesuits in the latter part of the eighteenth century, was, of course, according to modern Romanism, infallible. So also, of a truth, must be considered, according to the same System, the pope who, for reasons of as much weight to papalism as impelled Clement XIV to suppress them, restored the Jesuits, forty years later, as a Religious (?) Order of the very highest standing in the Church.
Pius X, raised to the papal throne on the death of Leo XIII, has repeatedly condemned what he terms “Modernism,” by which he means human betterment and social progress. Ask Pius X, I may without unseemly intrusiveness, whether the papalism of to-day, with its deification of Virgin Mary and of pope, is not a very “Modern” institution. Subservient enough were the spiritual subjects of the Vatican in the Middle Ages, but the pope could not, even then, have forced on the masses of so-called Christians acknowledging obedience to the Roman See, the dogma of Pius IX, dated 1854, making the Virgin Mary part of the Godhead, nor that of the same pontiff, dated 1870, giving the Roman pontiff divine attributes.
The Vatican, through influences open and occult at Washington, has succeeded in securing firm and profitable hold of the Philippine Islands. Did Americans wrest that magnificent archipelago from Spain to hand it over to the papacy? Present conditions do certainly point in that direction. A new Hierarchy, with a very thin American veneer, has replaced the older Spanish ecclesiastical machine; but scratch off a little of the Vatican’s veneer, manufactured expressly by Gibbons, Ireland & Co., for the “Holy Father’s” use, and yon will discover the selfsame deadlyequipment for human enslavement, so long and so lucratively used for the joint profit of inquisition- loving and people-crushing popery.
Paganism was the author of spiritual degradation, and fitting promoter, therefore, of material or manual bondage. The Christian message delivered by Paul of Tarsus, its ablest exponent, was a clear announcement of human deliverance from enslavement in its every form.
In his letter to the Galatians (4:1-7), Paul with admirable force and clearness, propounds the announcement of human upliftment:
Now I say, that the heir, as long as he is a child, differeth nothing from a servant, though he be loved of all; but is under tutors and governors until the time appointed of the father. Even so we, when we were children, were in bondage under the elements of the world: but when the fullness of the time was come, God sent forth His Son, made of a woman, made under the law, to redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons. And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of His Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father. Wherefore thou art no more a servant, but a son; and if a son, then an heir of God through Christ.”
No anarchist, Paul the Apostle, who to the Romans wrote:
No such an institution as the papacy was dreamed of in the days of Paul. Had there been such an establishment as that, since termed by papalists the “one visible head of the Church on earth,’ ‘ the PVicar of Jesus Christ,’ ‘ the “Infallible Pontiff,” “Successor of Peter,” etc., etc., Paul had not assuredly failed to mention it, especially to the Christians in Rome, to whom and for whom he wrote. He preaches loyalty to the civil authorities of the Roman Empire, uttering not one word of allegiance to such a monstrous usurpation as the papal machine of today.
Let every soul be subject unto the higher [civil] powers. For there is no [civil] power but of God: the powers [civil] that be are ordained of God. . . . Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake. For this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God’s ministers [in things civil], attending continually upon this very thing. Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honor to whom honor.—Romans 13: 1-7.
Nothing known in Paul’s day of the Vatican market for the sale of indulgences; of matrimonial dispensations and annulments; of easy exits from purgatorial fires to front seats in glory. When these monstrous perversions of the Christian system made themselves most flagrantly and perniciously present, another Paul, in the person of Martin Luther, arose to call men back to the Pauline vigor and simplicity of the faith. Like unto Paul, Luther thundered forth in language that reached the very ends of the earth:
We beseech you, brethren, and exhort you by the Lord Jesus, that as ye have received of us how ye ought to walk and to please God, so ye would abound more and more. For ye know what commandments we gave you by the Lord Jesus. . . . For God hath not called us unto uncleanness, but unto holiness.—1 Thess. 4: 1-7.
Not even Peter, first pope and bishop of Rome, according to Vaticanist apologists, knew anything of his own supremacy or infallibility. For in his first epistle he says not:
Submit yourselves to every ordinance of mine, as to commands of Christ’s Vicar on earth. I am pope and must be obeyed.
No impostor or usurper, the good Peter. Modestly, but authoritatively, he writes, not as a Hildebrand, or a Borgia, or a Pecci, or a Sarto:
Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord’s sake: whether it be to the king, as supreme ; or unto governors, as unto them that are sent by him for the punishment of evildoers, and for the praise of them that do well. For so is the will of God, that with well-doing ye may put to silence the ignorance of foolish men : as free, and not using your liberty for a cloak of maliciousness, but as the servants of God. Honor all men. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honor the King.—1 Peter 2: 14-17.
Cold day, surely, for the papacy, when even the Apostle Peter adds not: ” Honor the pope, Christ’s Infallible Vicar on earth.’ ‘ The Modernists, anathematized by Pius X, may adopt Peter for patron saint! No pope, no monks or nuns in the early days of the Church. Not one word in apostolic letter or preaching of these later sinister and satanic developments of papal power. No mention, in the times of pristine purity of faith and discipline, of such an agency of enlightenment and humanity as the Inquisition.
At work to-day is the Inquisition in America. Leo XIII declared Torquemada, the infamous Spanish Inquisitor, a ‘ ‘ Saint! ‘ ‘ And there is yet a tribunal of cardinals in Rome, in every-day active service, called ‘ ‘ The Holy Office, ‘ or i ‘ The Sacred and Universal Inquisition. ‘ ‘
Give Rome control of the American Republic and you shall soon see the fires of Inquisitional fury burning and the blood of truth-lovers drenching our soil. And, in secret, the Inquisition is ever at work, even in America. The most fearful punishments are visited on nuns who reject the attentions of lecherous bishops and priests; the most damnable cruelties are visited on the very few self-respecting priests, secular and religious, who, by clean living and manful denunciation of sin in high places, incur the hostility of immoral hierarchs.
The following editorial from the North Carolina Christian Advocate of March 13, 1913, illustrates how the Protestant Church papers are awakening to the situation:
A note in these columns anent Mr. Wilson and the Roman Catholics in our issue of February 20th evidently got under the epidermis of one Roman Catholic. Usually they are very thick-skinned and do not let on, but this time one of them came back through the mails with the meanest letter we have received in many a day. Now, we published the little item as a matter of news, with some plain comment, and we are satisfied from the tone of the letter received, if we had no other evidence, that there is one man, either a Roman Catholic or a Roman Catholic sympathizer, who would love to kindle the fagots around our feet. Any one who thinks that the Roman Catholic Church is any more tolerant in spirit than it was in the days of the Inquisition should revise his notion. To be sure, the Roman Catholics have a right to their place as citizens in this Government, but their hobnobbing for special recognition, such as was given them under Mr. Taft’s administration, will not be regarded with complacency. They have made some bad history, which will continue to plague them as long as they maintain their attitude of bigoted assumption of a divine prerogative in civil matters. Until this attitude is changed and their bigoted claim is relinquished they have no right to expect that the public opinion of this Protestant country will regard them as above suspicion.
Romanism points and presses downward. Humanity is called by Gospel and other messages to look upward and to move in forward direction to the light and in the light. The System which holds in the most degrading White Slavery 150,000 nuns and candidates for nunnish servitude is on trial in America, and sure to be found wanting. Its record is, as I have shown elsewhere, one of darkest infamy.
The black or brown robed sisterhoods of the Romish Church have begging representatives constantly on the road. They visit office buildings, stores, hotels, private dwellings, saloons, and houses of prostitution, with hand out at all times for gifts to coffers bursting already with riches, but as deaf to cries of human suffering as the steel of which they are made.
Let some benefactor of the nunnish collectors meet with poverty and want and sickness ; let him then in his simplicity say unto himself: “Go will I to the Sisters ‘ hospital that I have, week in and week out, so long contributed to.” Let him, in the honesty of confiding faith, knock at the gate of the sisterhood’s “domicile for Christ’s poor,” and his ears will be stunned and heart chilled by the repulse: ‘ ‘ Go, we know you not. The city must take care of you. ‘ ‘
A word of warning right here to Protestant parents. Nunnish agents are everywhere, in the United States and other countries where non- Romanists are in a majority, striving to obtain Protestant-born children as pupils for convent schools. Devilish trick, most assuredly! The Protestant child in the convent school is made special object of lustful attentions from priests, prelates, and even from nuns (Spouses of Christ) ! She is, first of all, induced to take private instructions in religion from the Convent Chaplain, often a lecherous, drunken ruffian. He begins by giving her gilded doses of popishness, and, after a time, seduces her into base surrender of body and soul.
Convent schools have driven hundreds of Protestant, as well as Catholic, girls into houses of sin; forced them into the streets, and ultimately consigned them to prisons and the grave. Turn ye, Christian fathers and mothers, your children’s thoughts far from Rome and popery, but to the Lord God, who “will fulfil the desire of them that fear Him; He will also hear their cry, and will help them.”—Ps. 145:19.
One of the common priestly boasts is of the ease priests find in seducing Protestant girls attending convent schools. The lecherous priest sometimes fears attempts on Catholic girls or women, who might give him away to a jealous confessor, or denounce him to parents or guardians, but little or no fear has he in making attempts on Protestant girls in convent schools, or on other Protestant women, married or single. For, amongst other reasons, should a Protestant woman accuse a priest of wrongdoing, credulous Catholics would throw up their hands in horror and call it a Protestant plot to destroy the priest. A further result might be that the accusing Protestant woman and her family might be forced to leave the neighborhood.
The crafty priest who is a disciple of Venus, and nearly all priests are so, makes it a study to acquire dominating influence over Protestant women. Well knows he that these women know that he must keep lecherous tracks well covered ; and, further, knows he that they, for their own interests and protection, have to keep religiously sacred the story of any of their lapses with him. Hence does the wicked priest feel so noticeably free to give attention with evil intent to women not of his own creed. Protestant fathers and Protestant husbands have small idea indeed of the number of Protestant daughters and of Protestant wives seduced or liable to be seduced by Catholic priests.
No Catholic priest is safe guest for Protestant home. He goes there, not for good, but for evil darkest and most deadly. There was, some years ago, a priest named Nix, stationed in the county of Hastings, Ontario, Canada, who, having lived in open concubinage for some time with a Protestant doctor’s wife, fled, after exposure, to the United States, and there continued to exercise his priestly faculties. Another instance was that of “Father” Charles Ormond Reilly, of Detroit, whose scandalous escapades with women, Protestant and Catholic, aroused the indignation and disgust of all Michigan. Reilly was a Roman D. D., one of the most prominent pastors of the diocese of Detroit, and Treasurer of the Irish National League of America.
Still another example—that of the Rev. Dr. Stafford, of Washington, D. C, some of whose Protestant victims moved in the National Capitol’s highest social circles. And these are but few of the myriad of such incidents that from time to time startle and stupefy the American people.
Priests forbid Catholic men to marry Protestant women, but no prohibition is there in Roman System for priest to seduce Protestant daughter, sister, or wife. Priests succeeding in such efforts of beastliness boast of it, we repeat, in their post-prandial conversations, and to themselves glory in it as a triumph of Romanism over heresy.
