IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-S) fe A // A^ £». feL-> '^^v^ 1.0 I.I 125 Hi u 2.5 2:1 2.0 U IIIIII.6 ^ ge with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, and ending on the last page with a printed or iliuatratad impression. The last recorded frame on each microfiche shall contain the symbol -i^^- (meaning "CON- TINUED"), or the symbol V (meaning "END"), whichever applies. I\^ap8, piatea, charts, etc.. may be filmed at different reduction ratioa. Thoae too large to be <^ntirely included in one exposure are filmed beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to right and top to bottom, as marvy frames aa required. The following didgrams illustrate the method: L'exemplaire film* fut reproduit grice h la g^niroBltit da: McLennan Library McGill University Montroal Lea images suivantea ont iti raproduites avac la plus grand soin, compta tenu de la condition at de la nattet* de i'exemplaira film*, et en conformity avac lea conditions du contrat de filmage. Lea exempiairea originaux dont la couverture en papier est imprimte sont filmte en commen9ant par la premier plat at en terminant soit par la derniAre page qui comporte une empreinte d'impreasion ou d'illustration, soit par la second plat, salon la caa. Toua lea autres exempiairea . originaux sont filmte an commandant par la premiAre page qui comporte une empreinte d'impreaaion ou d'illustration at an terminant par la derniire page qui comporte une telle empreinte. Un des symboles suivants apparaftra sur la darnlAre image de cheque microfiche, selon lu cas: le symbols -♦- signifie "A SUIVRE", le symbols V signifie "FIN". Les cartes, planchea, tableeux, etc., pi»uvent Atre filmAf A dee taux de reduction diff«rents. Lorsque le document est trop grand pour dtre reproduit en un seul clichA, 11 est filmA i partir de I'angle supArieur gauche, de gauche A droite, et de haut en baa, en prenant la nombre d'images nAceasaira. Les diagrammea suivants illustrent la mAthode. 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 ^ #* i m DECISIVE CONFIRMATION Of th« #■ AWFUL DISCLOSURES of* MARIA MONK» ncvtm HiER tssi&aiioB m th* t-*-- HOTEL I>lEU NUNNERY, ASp TXB sikzaTEMOB OF TBB ... ;^' t ', ■ - r BY SAMUKL B. SMITH, Late a Popbh Prie«t. # NEW YORK: PUBLMMD AT TM omCE OP THE " DOWNFALL OP BABTMWf." '31 NMdAU WHBET. 1836, /I i^** !►•. •^ * M *■ 'l^!' ■J "'V M EMTSftlDi AoeOTdtog to the Act of jCongrese, in the year 1836, by SAMUEL B. SMITH, '^ In the ClerWa office of the District Court of the Southern District o£ Wkw YoMt '* %- in:'' "*^.^ KM .••»■■•», s^t^ * nil U DECISIVE CONFIRMATION. [«»j^>~,. 1 AM pleased, indeed, at this interesting crisis, to have it in s7terrth/"f '"' V.''''^ --eof the^most i^™ fec^ M.H« M n J "^^^^u^i^I^i«<^r.osuKEs." I allude ti the fact of Maria Monk's having been a Nun in the Hotel Dieu Nunnen^ atMontred; and to that of the subterranean passage leadfnT from that Nunnery to the Seminary or residencfof cfe S^ .vhn. ^'\"°''' '*? ^^"' ""'^y '^^^'■^1 persons "f respectability,' whose veracity we have no reason to doubt, who ha^ commu- mcated to me various lacts relative to the Hotel Dieu Nunnery and to the Priests of Montreal, which leaves not a doubt on my rnmd but that the Disclosures of Maria Monk, aUeast, L to some of the most important of her statements, ire true. «ome of these persons are professing Christians, members of different evangelical churches in this^cJty, and aU of Them I beueve without exception, sustain a good, moral chamber One of them is a rnember of the church to which I belong my-' «el^a brother in whom I place the most implicit confidence. ^ 1 he testimony of these persoiis appears to be, and, I think ij wholly disinterested. They were all living in Montreal ai the time connected with the facts to which they bear tSony and have since removed to this city. i«suraony, As most of the persons, whose testimony I am now about to lay before the public, have, for various and weighty relons de sired nie to suppress their names, I lay their "testimony o,Si precisely as I received it, without the slightest alterS a^ mentahon or diminution. The testimony of most of the'^I ^B VimtT «""/-d-"^>".- If necesLry,both I aiid^y ate willing to confirm our testimony upon oath. . */ Monk M h^v £"' ^"^i""^^ -^^^ testimony which proves Man^ ^^pf It^fl .^V ^"" '? '^^ ***^^^^ ^'^"^ Nunnery in Mon {[vfniri^ /hV^^''''Tuyf ^ '^^J^^^° i« now married and wT h^M ?/"T "^'t^^' hnshand. She states that she was with Maria Monk at Mrs. Workman's school in Montreal • and that she and Maria Monk entered the CongregatioSine^ vL,^'?n *?h T' '^'"^ '• '^^l ^'^ MonkirSained about t^ years m the Congregational Nunnery ; and that shortly aC ^w ^■VP T V 41 DECISIVE CONFIRMATION. this she entered the Black Nunnery. She states that she saw Maria Monk while she was a novice in the Black Nunnery, and conversed with her in the garden when she went to see an ac- quaintance in the Hospital of that Nunnery. This same lady states, in regard to herself, that her brother called to see her at the Congregational Nunnery, where she was stili residing as a novice, and that while they were talking to- gether in the pailoir, Ixer brother saw a Priest, the Rev. Mr, , in the adjoining room, put his anus around the neck of a Nun, and kiss her. " Seeing this, my brother," (says she,) " exclaimed, ' O, my God, what kind of a place is this ! ' — or some such expressions — ' Is it possible that my sister is in such a place as this ! — I will get you out of this place if I have to tear you out.' " In consequence of this, the lady states, that her parents withdrew her from the Nunnery. She states, further- more, that some time after she left the Congregational Nunnery she visited the Black Nunnery, to see an acquaintance in the Hospital, and that there she saw Maria Monk serving the col- lation, or lunch, and thai she was there a veiled Nun. She states that she was going to speak to Maria, but that she made a sign, by putting her finger across her mouth, that it was time of silence. 2. The next testimony we have of Maria Monk's having been a Nun in the Hotel Dieu Nunnery at Montreal, is that of a re- spectable young gentleman, who states that he was personally acquainted with "Maria Monk and her family in Montreal, and that he has heard Maria Monk's own mother say that she was in the Nunnery. Both the above witnesses say, moreover, that the Maria Monk who is now in this city, the Authoress of the "Awful Dis- closures," is identically the same Maria Monk who was in the Hotel Dieu Nunnery at Montreal. Having now proved, by two respectable and disinterested witnesses, that Maria Monk was a Nun in the Hotel Dieu Nun- nery in Montreal, we will now proceed to substantiate the fact of the subterranean passage spoken of by Maria Monk, which her book tells us leads from the Nunnery to the Seminary of the Priests. The testimony which we now bring is that of a respectable lady in this eity, who is a pious member of an cvangeHcal church. She states that she saw a subterranean passage four or five feet, as near as she can remember, from the surface of tlie ground. It was built of stone, and appeared to her to be about seven feet wide. She states that she saw only a part of the depth of the v/all of this subterranean passage, and that it ap- |>eared to extend from the Hotel Dieu Nunnery in Montreal 1 DECISIVE CONFIRMATION. § passed on in a directotlards the Se ' ufar. ^^""f'^' "P^ that he understood, ftom the CaJiXn^Kere'SanSt; /^ |pZt,r„eTS tfe S"elr.^ '"« ^ ^-^ "^S e^t"Z tCrr '""'^'^•' ^^PealS^in her tooMoe^Sly passage from the Seminary"„ ,"„„erv is us J^?™"'"" because, there, most ce?3 kk 5?^^'*^ ^Pl" '° l^^ ^^^^' .«■ ""^Mi*- •he appellat.^„,Tot' of s epl eMs K tta^''™'' ' """ ™"' Ecclesiastics, pkompted hv .v.n.l^ 5 i "" '^^genera'e barter assassins ion,rduliervinte,f^,^'r' *" «"'"' ^^n '» I«rjury. What iwS bjfe PaKL^v' ,7""^' ■""■ Monk, relative to her mn.W ,' 'V'^'d™'!"' "^^' ^V Maria great logician to see Zm 1,^" "• "^T"- " '■«l"'f«« ■"> must come to are that M.r?, m "'' ^""^ inclusions we womw when sheUs L Pan st '?^i', /""f ^""^'' "'•Pri>"=ip'«l have been loeical and wS;.„ conclusions would at least Monk was wTe^' *e wl'Tpa^ist." Xt^h^rs^M "^'^ no beannsr at all upon her testimony now *"' '**"■ """^ ob^'tio™°ti";h''e"J^:city'o''f Mkr^lJ? V"" "" '"»■--'"<' «.ujething,hat herco4V e&^„t'*'J.'tuTr''■ '™™ "1^^ ^ir'lh"" '" '''"' ""'"''■'«= 'WsVrtterdTcin, Lr,iri,™- fac^^wSi^fe^v^oV^t itfff^i:',^^ such thino-as her sau^nn.f^„.f u : ^","/<' P- -«"> and find no nery al\1^ZrZflt^' she entered the school of the Nun- lows • <' When T w£ ^ ^^' '''''^ ^'^ precisely as fol- Frenrh ^^«^ 1 i ^ "^' ^^^® *^ learn to read and write iNTthe^rn 1 -^^l" ?.^^^^ "^^ -"^'^^ seriously OF atJ-d^ iNG the school in the Congregational Nunnerv » n 20 if Z THiVo^^nT^cTuIn' '/"'"^^ between ^JSl^LtBoL^" .>^-: g DECISIVE CONFIRMATION. The young lady does not pretend to state her age pre- cisely. There is nothing at all strange, or \incomn(on in it, if she did not know exactly how old she was. When she speaks of her ago in rclatio?i to the facts which she de- scribes, she «Tenerally uses the expression about; showing, thereby, that she did not pretend to know at what werise pe- riod of her age the facts sho relates occurred. In place of ten years old she might have been eleven, or even i^st eleven, when she' entered the school : would this prove that jJ|» was relating what sho knew to be bo false ? I have seen Maria Monk several times, and if she had not told me that she is twenty years of age, 1 would not have be- lieved that she is more than eighteen. Mr. Vale states that "Mr. Tappan informed him that Maria Monk was then, when in the Alms House, or when he was in the habit of seeing her, about twentv-five years old." The Rev. Mr. Tappan, whom I have spokeii to on this subject, absohitoly denies that he ever said any such thing. The general impression of those who have seen her, is, that she is about twenty vears old Any one that would judge her to be twenty-five ye ci of ago, must, we should think, be defective in his eye-sight. Since Mr. Vale, in his candid Review, is pleased to make so much of a difficulty upon *his part of the subject, we will now clear it all up. , . ,, , «« About ten years ;"— we will say that Maria Monk was eleven years old when she entered the school. She informs us, that, from this time until she quit thy Convent, that is, previous to her re-entering it again to become a Nun, there elapsed /oMr or five years, p. 43. Add this to the eleven, and it will brmg her to sixteen years of age. After she was out of the Nun- nery some time, how long is not s.ated, she went to St. Dennis, and after remaining there three months, she returned to Mon- treal, and was re-admitted into the Nunnery, p. 43. This add- ed to the former, brings her age up to sixteen years and three months. She remained in the Nunnery, after her admission the last time, as she states in the title page, two years. This brings h .r age to eighteen years and three months. She made her final escape from the Nunnerv, in the month of December, in the year 1834. From that tirne to the present date, March, 1836, is one year and two montiis. Now l^t ns add this to her age as above calculated, and it makes Maria Monk to Ixi now nineteen years and live months old. When she tells us, there- fore, that she is twenty years of age, we have no just reason whatever, for doubting her word. After her escape from the Nunnery, she changed her dress, and during the few months thai she still remained in Canada, she passed through various 1^ ^mfw DECISIVE CONFIRMATION, 9 Mencs and trials, whicl-., in tha precipitation of ffettinjr out the hrst eduion of hor book, vas entirdv iieir)cctcd to ^)e publish- ea I his, however, will all ajjpeur in the second edition, which IS now being prepared for the press. Mr. Vale states that ho was informed by Mr. and Mrs Ton- pan, the '^liaplain and his lady, that Mana Monk was dehvered f/iJ'tr'', f. 'f \^"tumn, If last July was last AHt,^mn, then It is true that she was dehvered of a ciiild last Autwnn ; other- wise It IS untrue that she was delivered of a child laft Au- tumn ; because her child was born in the month of Julv. I have calleci on Rev Mr. Tappan, who confirms what I have said, tnat tho child of Maria Monk was born in Julv. He do- mes e^er having told Mr. Vale that the child was born in tho Autumn, or thuc Maria Monk was twenty-five years old It was on the eighth of August that I v. sited the Alms IIouso myself to see Maria Monk, at which time, her child xvas al- ready about three weeks old. We have now one with Mr Vales Review, in which tlie facts are so fairly stated, and so candidly exammeu - -Mr. Vale is one of those ^^entlemen who deny the divinity of the Christian religion, an^ who was con- spicuous by the pan which he took in tho public discussion against Dr. Sleigh. ^ The facts which are related in the "Awful Disclosures," are so diabohcal, that one, at first, seems instinctively moved to disbelieve them. But when we turn over the pages of history, and read ah the atrocities whicli are there recorded of the Ro- mish Priesthood, ani recorded, too, by their own historians, we ponder on the question, " why are they not now as capable of tne same enorrmties for which they have been characterized during a long succession of ages .'"— Therj iias, just at this time, been issued from the Press, a work er.titled "Rosamond or a Na-rative of the Captivity and Sufferings of an Ameri- can t emale.tmder the Popish Priests in the Island of Cuba, with a full Disclosure of their Manners and Customs • writ- len by herself ^^ in regard to the truth of which, we think, there IS not the shadow of a doubt. The fact is, that the disclosures made by Rosamond," are confirmed by testimony that is de- monstratively conclusive. The disclosures of Rosamond are i!;"?'!?^ '^P'^'' u"^ ^° 'f ^'"^' ^' t'»e^« ''^••" true, then, nothing that Maria Monk has related is at all incredible. In reading the "Am-ful Disclosures of Maria Monk" there is one fact that sho relates, which at first sight, one mio-lu suppose is altogether too improbable to be believed. This^ is the pit m the cellar of the Convent. In this pit she states that he bodies of the children who are the illegitimate offspring of the Priests and the Nuns, are thrown, after being murdered 10 DECISIVE CONFIRMATION. This pit, she states, is " so deep that she could perceive no bottom," and that " it is about twelve or fifteen feet across, situ- ated in the middle of the cellar, and unprotected by any kind of curb, so that one might easily have walked into it in the dark." The incredibility of this fact, however, all things considered, will, we think, afford a motive of credibility. If the authoress were here relating a fiction oi Jier own imagination, it is by far the more reasonable to suppose that she would have described this pit in a very different manner from what she has done. Who is there that \vould not have described it as being sit- uated in the most concealed place that could be found? and instead of representing it as being entirely open, and of the width of twelve or fifteen feet, would not have statea that it was closely cover «3d over, with a small trap-door to open into it .' Tiiis is what every one would expect to find in regard to such a place. This, however, she has not stated. There is something, therefore, in her relation relative to this pit, which evidently seems to be in direct opposition to what can be rea- sonably expected from fit lOn. It must be granted, too, at the same time, that there is something of incomprehensible about it, when we reflect upon what reason the Priests or Su- perior of the convent could have for thus leaving the pit open. But in proportion as ouv difficulty increases here, the credibili- iy of the authoress increases with it. It would seem, then, that the thing was so, and that the authoress has stated the fact, incredible as she certainly must have known it would ap- pear, just as it was, rather than relate a mere fiction for the sake of making a plausible tale founded on falsehood. We have now one more obserr^ion to make, and that is in regard to the challenge made by the authoress; she says, "Permit me to go through the Hotel Dieu Nunnery at Mon- treal," (the place where the horrors she describes are said to have taken place,) " with some impartial ladies and gentlemen, that they may compare my account with the interior parts of the building, into which no persons but the Roman Bishops and the Priests are ever admitted ; and if they do not find my description true, then discard me as an impostor. Bring me before a court of justice — there I am willing to meet Latargtie, Dufresne, Phelan, Boniti, and Richards, (the Priests,) and their wicked companions, with the Superior, and any of the Nuns, before ten thousand men." p. 15. This challenge being made, and the accusations laid against the "Hotel Dieu Nunnery" beinof of the most atrocious character, the Bishop and Clergy of Montreal have now a fair opportunity of vindicating their innocence, and proving Maria Monk to be an impostor, if an impostor she is. 4 DECISIVE CONFIRMATION. 11 The statements made in these "Disclosures" are creating universal excitement through the whole United States, as well as in Canada. Many, and perhaps the generality, believe them to be true. Under such circumstances, the Romish Clergy at Montreal ought to accept the challenge. It is notliing more than what is due to public opinion. It is a duty, moreover, which they owe to themselves. If they refuse to let the interior, or at least, p. part of the interior of the Convent, be examined, the pubhc, then, will be confirmed in the belief, that the disclosures made by MariaMonk are true. Let us suppose, for instance, that such horrible disclosures had been made respecting some religious or literary institution ill the United States. Let this institution, for example, be Yale College, at ^e\v Haven, or any other of our institutions, would not the officers of that iuotitution, in order to remove the least ground of suspicion, open their doors, and invite investigation? Most certainly they would. In like manner, if the Romish Clergy at Montreal, who have now an opportunity of viiidicat- ing their innocence, do not avail themselves of that opportunity, what can, and what will the world conclude, but that they are guilty } They deny that Maria Monk was a Nun in the Hotel Dieu Nunnery »t Montreal. They have now an opportunity of provmg, (if it is true that she was not a Nun,) that Maria Monk is a calumniator. Deference to public feeling, and duty to themselves, if they. are innocent, loudly demand of the Bishop of Montreal, to prove that the Disclosures of Maria Monk are calumnies and falsehoods ; and this they can do, provided her statements are false, by merely opening a (aw doors in the Con- vent, and introducing some respectable and disinterested persons into the interior of it. They will have to do this, we repeat n again, or else the world must, and will believe, that the Disclosures, awful as they are, are but too true. I know not whether the Disclosures are all true or not. Some, and I can say many of her statements, I know to be true ; and I know it, from my own personal knowledge relative to Nunneries. I have been a Popish Priest, have had the super- intendence of a Nunnery in Kentucky, and consequently, I must know something about what Nuns are, and what Nun- neries are. I am now preparing for the Press a second edition of the first volume of the "Downfall," to be printed m a book-lbrm. In this, I have some important disclosures to make relative to Nunneries in the United States, part of wbich has never ap- ■ * » •"'■ ip \2 DECISIVE CONFIRMATION. peared before tlie public. If this were out, the public mind would be well prepared for the "Awful Disclosures" of Maria Monk; or for any other disclosure whatsoever ; for in my humble opinion, and I speak from personal knowledge of the subject, there is nothing, however- shocking it may be, which is not perpetrated in the secluded haunts of Popish Nunneries. Truth needs not the aid of calumny and falsehood. If the statements of Maria Monk are false, I would be among the first to hold her up to public scorn. The truth or falsity of her Disclosures can be easily attested by the accepting of the chal- lenge she has given. If it be not accepted, I, for one, will be- lieve her statements lo be true, awful as they are. Evasion now is futile. Jesuitism is brought to its dernier ressort. The door must be opened, or every mouth that speaks will cry out, guilty —guilty —guilty. The annexed plate represents a fact described by Rosamond, the American female, who was held captive under a Popish Priest, in the island of Cuba during five years. It is the cut- ting up of young negroes and making them into sausages: " Father Francisco, who was the Confessor of Poncheetee, was the Priest who obtained the reprieve of some of the robbers who were condemned for killing black people, and making sausages of them. This occurred "just before, and at the lime of my first coming to Havanna, about eight years ago. They were Spaniards, Frenchmen, Italians, and Portuguese, who belonged to the gang. They had their trial while I lived on the island, and were condemned. I saw twelve of them hung. There were about fifty belonging to the gang. Some were sent to the Spanish mines. Of "those who were reprieved was the captain. He had a great deal of money ; and with the former governor, and the Priests, money would save any person's life from the gallows.* I have frequently heard people say, that they carried on their robberies two years before they were de- tected. They lived about two miles out of the city, by the Montserat gate. They used to seek out the young and fat ne- groes, to make up the sausages. Those who bought and eat them, said they were the best they ever eai. They called them French sausages ; and people far and near would buy them. They were detected by two young negresses, who were sent out according to the custom of the city, with dry goods, and other articles for sale, in the streets, as is customary. One of * Captnin J. E. Alexander, in his tour through the^West India islands, tells us that, " 11" a criminal has money, he may put oil capital punishment for years, even after sentence is passed upon him ; but he who is friendless and penniless, mourjts the scaffold immediately after he has been found guilty of a capital offence." Alexander's Transatlantic Sketches, Vol. I. o. 357.— Ed. DECISIVE CONFIRMATION. 13 went to the door, to ask for hpr r i?? ^''^"^ ' ^"^ *'^^» out at the back door some „; dnce Thi t '7 '^\^' T^ they had robbed her of some S" h^^^lds 1 1^™^. ^''' ^''' men for the natives to rail in tl iS u ' ^^ '^ '^ "^^ uncom- pilfer theml annhen 'he noors'li^"'^""'' ^"'^^ ^^^' ^«°^«' ^« master or distress inost^'c^u^U^^orZ^o^^^^^ '^^^^^-'^ consequence of their puaishment uSt i" -^^^^ ^^^ ^" they come by their deaih ' ' "''^^'^ '° ^"^^^^^^ ^^«^^ he^a^b^St^hfrToCll'Z^^^^^^ ^ '"'^^^? -^^«^<^ ing out again ; and she took tlfp^ '"''"'"' ^"^ "«* ^°'"- thl soldiers, who tua?d die ri t ''''T''"^''''' *"^"^'^^^ ^^*'h • demand her' sla^e, fvltf IL^ ^'^'1^^ murtred^^^V girffth^^^^^^^^^^^ i^-t Jtd^^T V'^^ '?^"^ ^^^^ ber of other dead bodies whlhtht ^"' °^' '''''^ ^ """^- fortunate in getting hold rf Sns whn L^ "'^^ 'i'""'''" tioned this inslanci of his beSdinJ^h. TT'^'""'^ '"™- it." •' Rosamond," p 188 '"™'*"'S: *e cannibals in proof of i^mm described. executed lor the atrocious crime above the Ln's bSHxecuted fof tlt'^T*'^ mentioned the fact of befora such a pers^ JTr ' l^^u ^^^n^'^n^ deed, evtm known in'hilC "- "^^'^"'^"^' "^^^"^ ^^ Havanna was ■ '^ ' ^"" i^osamoaa, the authoress of the Nar- # u DECISIVE CONPlUMATlON. rative, related the fact to her friends in this city, previous to her acquaintance with Doctor ^'7ard, and without knowing that any one had been informed of it. . Nor is this the only instance of such a horrid crime. Ihe same deed took place a few years ago, in the city ot Fans; and the miserable criminals were publicly broke upon the wheel for it. The facts upon record are as follows : » A countryman (of the richer sort) having come to Paris on business, went into a barber's shop to get shaved ; (from whence, in the sequel, it appears he never came out again.) He was followed by his little dog, who attracted the notice of the bar- ber's neicrhbours, by remaining near his door, day and night, howlin'r and moaning without intermission, to the great annoy- ance of the barber, Who tried to drive him away or destroy him without success. In the interim the countryman s friends coming to ascertain the reason why he did not returri, heard of the dog's singular conduct, and knowing their friend had a little dog with him, these persons proceeding to the barbers, knew the dog to belong to their missing friend ; he also knew them, and his rage against the barber became furious. 1 he Police, attracted by the man's friends accusing the barber ot murder, ajid the unceasing rage of the dog, commenced search- incr the premises ; and, to the horror of all, discovered a trap in^the siiop floor to let any unfortunate being whom the barber mio-ht choose to destroy, fall headlong to the cellar beneath. Searching further, they noticed a door artfully concealing a passage leading under ground, to a celebrated pie-makers kitchen four or live houses oif. Horrible to relate, they found the master pie-man, and another, making minced meat for pies of the flesh of persons whom the barber had entrapped for that purpose. Shocking as this seems, it is nevertheless a real fact, and publicly substantiated." There is another fact related in the "Awful Disclosures, which appears, it seems to many, to be wrapped up wholly m incredibility ; and this is the account given by Maria Monk, of the Priests, keeping a register of the names of the infants that are destroyed in the Nunnery. , We would ask, in the first place, who is there upon earth that can account for all the oddities and irreconcilabilities in the conduct of the Popish Priesthood, those advocates and support- ers of that despotic spiritual power which in Scripture is em- phaUcally styled, "Mystehy, Babylon the Gi^^at the Mother OF Harlots, and abominations of the earth? ^HavSgLeived the ''Mark of the Beast'' in my right , . H .- r„..-. n-.4;,,^tinr« and ^<^"secration to the ser- hano ai the unie ui luy r^iuiiiauvit i»ij' >-- - DECISIVE CONFIRMATION. 15 vice of the ^' Beast» I will endeavour, since I have heen ini- tiated^mto some of the mysteries, to state what I think is the probable reason for keeping a register of the names of those jjoor unfortunate children, who, Maria Monk declares, are first baptized, then murdered, and finally thrown into the pit. I think It IS very probable that the Nuns do not generally know that the children are allmurdered, but, that they, on the con- trary, are made to believe that some of them, at least, are pre- servea and sent to the Foundling Hospital. In order, therelbre, to gratify these poor deluded women, the birth of the children is puf upon record, that they may afterwards know how old their children are, and, fiom time to time, have the gratification of seeing and conversing with them. If the children are females, the day may come when they, too, will be introduced as novices and ultimately take the veil themselves. In Popery every child that is christened has its name registered, and if this ceremony were omitted, the Nuns would consider themselves too much slighted to submit to it. Therefore, as it is the policy of Popery to be all things unto all men, this punctilio must be complied with. Be the reason what it may, we have no reason for dis- believing the fact as it is slated. Vr\t?^^^% ^^^* *^^ P"^^\° "^^y '^^ ^^^ completely the Romish Priesthood can screen themselves from detection in any un- lawful mtercourse they may have with females, we will lay be- fore the world the doctnne of the Romish church on the sub- ject of those who are possessed with the devil. Let any one •In ^nf ^A ^?^^ T"" • ^^^ '*^^'^" ^^hy s"^'i ^ doctrine was invented. Their doctrine upon this subject is, th^t, The devil has the power, and actually exercises the power, of assum- mg a human shape, and, under the appearance of a man, of seducing females. But, strange to tell ! in this case, the off- spring of such connexion, is said to belong not to the devil neither to the woman but " sed illius cujus est semen.- Ligor.' rheol. Prax. Conf C. vii. N. 111. f his is the most cSm^ modious doctnne that Popery, or rather the devil, [for none but a demon could have devised it,] could have framed, in or der that the Priests might indulge with impunity their lustful appe ites. Under the cover of this " doctrhJof devilsrs licentious Priest, in order to exculpate himself from the con demnation of il hcit connexion, has nothing more to do than to lay It to the charge of the devil. It would be in vain fo th woman to pretend to identify the Priest's person. He won W tell her ,t was the devil, who assumed his shape, and imita ed his voice; and he being a Holy Confessor she wo^d be obliged to believe him. Nor does the abomination end here for the doctrine is so well adapted to accommod.tP ^Zr^H^t 16 DECISIVE CONFIRMATION. ness, that oven if it is certain that the Priest himself is the oM who is cfuilty of the action, still the blame may be laid wholly on the devil, and the Priest be excused from the guilt of sin in what he does. The following is what is said by the Saint on the subject ; and is confirmed, as he says, by « Cardinal Pe- trucci, and St. Thomas Aquin." " It is known that the devil can take possession of any part of a man ; for instance, his eyes, his tongue, or even verenda. Hence it happens that the man utters words the most obscene, although his mind may be far from thinking about what he says. Hence it sometimes happens, also, that the impulse is so strong, that he is ^en urged on to strip himself naked ; and to do other filthy things, which 1 am ashamed to write about." [! ! !] « When the devil has thus suspended the use of reason, there is no more sin in what the man does, than there would be if it was done by a beast." [! ! !] Ligor. Prax. Cont. vii. N. 111. This authority of Ligori no Papist dare deny, since his doctrine is declared by the church of Rome to be " sound, and according to God, sana ac secundum Deum." Ligor. Theol. Praef And the man himself has lately been Canonized and en- rolled among the Saints.* We believe the " Awful Disclosures" of Maria Monk to he substantially true. * For a full development of this doctrine of the Romish church in regard to persons possessed with the devil, see " Downfall op Babylon," a semi- monthly Paper, published at No. 131 Nassau street. s* ^