EXAMINING the TOUGH ISSUES

FACING CHRISTIANS TODAY!

 

Issue #26  // December 14, 2006 // Editor: Darryl Eberhart

(Updated through: July 26, 2007) (www.toughissues.org)

 

“Celibacy, Sexual Abuse, and the Catholic Church”

 

(Celibate priests and nuns – Are they in the best interests of any

 Church that calls itself “Christian”?)

 

NOTE: All “emphasis” throughout this newsletter, unless otherwise noted, is by the editor of “Examining the Tough Issues (ETI)”.

 

WARNING: This issue of ETI may seriously “disturb” some folks’ “comfort zones”; however, TRUTH is far more important than any of our “comfort zones”. 

 

DEDICATION:  This issue of ETI is dedicated first and foremost to the King of kings, the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God; it is secondarily dedicated to all those who have fought, and who are currently fighting, against false doctrine, corruption, and tyranny – including ecclesiastical tyranny! (See Ephesians 5:11.)

 

DEFINITIONS (hopefully in alphabetical order):

 

“Auricular Confession” (See “Confession”) [NOTE: One of the meanings of the word “auricular”, per Webster’s 1828 Dictionary, is “told in the ear”.]

 

“Babylon” (per Webster’s New World College Dictionary, Fourth Edition; 2006): “Ancient city on the lower Euphrates River (in what is now central Iraq), the capital of Babylonia: noted for wealth, luxury, and wickedness.”

 

“Babylonia” (per Webster’s New World College Dictionary, Fourth Edition; 2006): “Ancient empire in southwestern Asia, in the lower valley of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers: it flourished c.2100-689 B.C. and again, as Chaldea or ‘New Babylonia’, c.625-538 B.C.”

 

((Ed. Comment to the two preceding definitions: Alexander Hislop, in his book The Two Babylons, reveals the remarkable similarities between the pagan Babylonian priesthood and the priesthood of the Roman Catholic Church, e.g., auricular confession to an authorized priest.))

 

“Celibacy” (per Webster’s 1828 American Dictionary of the English Language): “An unmarried state; a single life. It is most frequently if not always applied to males, or to a voluntary single life.”

 

((Ed. Comment to the preceding definition: Loraine Boettner, in his book Roman Catholicism (1962), on page 298 tells us: “By celibacy…is meant the sectarian requirement of the Roman Catholic Church that its priests, monks, and nuns abstain from marriage. It is not to be confused with the vow of chastity, which is also taken by the members of these groups, and which means abstention from sexual relations. According to Canon Law the vow of celibacy is broken if the priest marries, but not if he engages in sexual relations.”  Boettner then adds this comment: “The requirement for celibacy…is entirely without Scriptural warrant, and was not generally enforced in the Roman [Catholic] Church until more than 1000 years after the time of Christ.”))

 

“Celibate” (per Webster’s 1828 American Dictionary of the English Language): “(Noun): A single life; celibacy; chiefly used when speaking of the single life of the Popish [i.e., Roman Catholic] clergy.”

 

“Chaste” (per Webster’s New World College Dictionary, Fourth Edition; 2006; adjective: first two meanings): “1. Not indulging in unlawful sexual activity; virtuous. 2. Sexually abstinent; celibate.”

 

“Chastity” (per Webster’s New World College Dictionary, Fourth Edition; 2006): “The quality or state of being chaste; specifically, a) virtuousness b) sexual abstinence; celibacy; c) decency or modesty d) simplicity of style.”

 

((Ed. Comment to the preceding definition: Loraine Boettner, in his book Roman Catholicism (1962), on page 298 tells us: “By celibacy…is meant the sectarian requirement of the Roman Catholic Church that its priests, monks, and nuns abstain from marriage. It is not to be confused with the vow of chastity, which is also taken by the members of these groups, and which means abstention from sexual relations. According to Canon Law the vow of celibacy is broken if the priest marries, but not if he engages in sexual relations.”))

 

“Cloister” (per Webster’s 1828 American Dictionary of the English Language): “(Noun): Literally, a close [i.e., an enclosed place]; a close or inclosed [i.e., enclosed] place. A monastery or nunnery [i.e., convent]; a house inhabited by monks or nuns…”

 

“Cloister” (per Webster’s 1828 American Dictionary of the English Language): “(Verb Transitive): To confine in a cloister or monastery. To shut up; to confine closely within walls; to immure [i.e., to enclose within walls]; to shut up in retirement from the world.”

 

“Cloistered” (per Webster’s 1828 American Dictionary of the English Language): “[1.] Shut up in a cloister; inhabiting a monastery.  2. Solitary; retired from the world…”

 

“Close” (per Webster’s 1828 American Dictionary of the English Language): “(Noun): An inclosed [i.e., enclosed] place; any place surrounded by a fence or other body [e.g., a high wall] which defends or confines it…”

 

“Confession” (per the Roman Catholic Baltimore Catechism): “Confession is the telling of our sins to an authorized priest for the purpose of obtaining forgiveness.”

 

“Confession” (Meaning #3 per Webster’s 1828 American Dictionary of the English Language): “The act of disclosing sins or faults to a priest; the disburdening of the conscience privately to a confessor; sometimes called auricular confession.”

 

“Confessional” (per Webster’s 1828 American Dictionary of the English Language): “The seat where a priest or confessor sits to hear confessions; a confession-chair.” ((Ed. Comment: Ex-Roman Catholic priest Charles Chiniquy at times refers to the “confessional” as the “confessional-box”.  A more modern term would be the “confessional booth”.))

 

“Confessor” (per Webster’s 1828 American Dictionary of the English Language):  (#3): “A priest; one who hears the confessions of others, and has power to grant them absolution.”

 

“Convent” (per Webster’s 1828 American Dictionary of the English Language): “1. An assembly of persons devoted to religion; a body of monks or nuns.  2. A house for persons devoted to religion; an abbey; a monastery; a nunnery.”

 

“Convent” (per Webster’s New World Dictionary, Second College Edition; 1974): “1. A community of nuns or, sometimes, monks, living under strict religious vows.  2. The building or buildings occupied by such a group.”

 

“Fornication” (per Webster’s 1828 American Dictionary of the English Language): “The incontinence [i.e., lacking self-restraint as regards sexual activity] or lewdness of unmarried persons, male or female…”

 

“Fornication” (per Webster’s New World Dictionary, Second College Edition; 1974): “1. Voluntary sexual intercourse, generally forbidden by law, between an unmarried woman and a man, especially an unmarried man…  2. Bible: a.) Any unlawful sexual intercourse, including adultery; b.) Worship of idols.”

 

“Friar” (per Webster’s 1828 American Dictionary of the English Language): “1. An appellation common to the monks of all orders; those who enter religious orders considering themselves as a fraternity or brotherhood. Friars are generally distinguished into four principal branches, viz. [namely]: [a.] Minors, gray friars, or Franciscans; [b.] Augustines [i.e., Augustinians]; [c.] Dominicans or black friars; [and] [d.] White Friars or Carmelites. 2. In a restricted sense, a monk who is not a priest; those friars who are in orders being called ‘fathers’.”

 

“Friar” (per Webster’s New World Dictionary, Second College Edition; 1974): “Roman Catholic Church: A member of any of several mendicant orders; especially, an Augustinian, Carmelite, Dominican, or Franciscan.”

 

“Hierarchy” (per Webster’s New World Dictionary, Second College Edition; 1974):

(a.) “A system of church government by priests or other clergy in graded ranks”

(b.) “The group of officials, especially the highest officials, in such a system”

(c.) “A group of persons or things arranged in order of rank, grade, class, etc.”

 

“Jesuit Order” (per Darryl Eberhart, Editor of ETI): “The Jesuit Order is a religious order of the Roman Catholic Church, officially approved by Pope Paul III in 1540. The primary goals of this order are (1) to roll back the Protestant Reformation and the freedoms that it brought to many of the inhabitants of this planet; (2) to enhance the power and prestige of the Papacy; and (3) to rule despotically over the governments of the world through the Papacy.  The head of the Jesuit Order is the Jesuit Superior General – the ‘Black Pope’ – the real power behind the Papal throne. The Jesuit Order is infamous for fomenting revolutions and wars, assassinating heads of State, and subverting nations.”

 

“Mendicant” (per Webster’s 1828 American Dictionary of the English Language): “(Adjective): 2. Practicing beggary; as a mendicant friar.”

 

“Mendicant” (per Webster’s 1828 American Dictionary of the English Language): “(Noun): A beggar; one that makes it his business to beg alms; one of the begging fraternity of the Romish [i.e., Roman Catholic] church.”

 

“Monastery” (per Webster’s 1828 American Dictionary of the English Language): “A house of religious retirement, or of seclusion from ordinary temporal concerns, whether an abbey, a priory or a nunnery.  The word is usually applied to the houses of monks, mendicant friars and nuns.”

 

“Monastic” (per Webster’s New World Dictionary, Second College Edition; 1974): “1. Of or characteristic of monasteries.  2. Of or characteristic of monks or nuns or their way of life; ascetic; austere.”

 

“Monk” (per Webster’s 1828 American Dictionary of the English Language): “A man who retires from the ordinary temporal concerns of the world, and devotes himself to religion. Monks usually live in monasteries, on entering which they take a vow to observe certain rules. Some however live as hermits in solitude, and others have lived a strolling [i.e., wandering] life without any fixed residence.”

 

“Mother superior” (per Webster’s New World Dictionary, Second College Edition; 1974): “The woman head of a convent.”

 

“Nun” (per Webster’s 1828 American Dictionary of the English Language): “A woman devoted to a religious life, and who lives in a cloister or nunnery, secluded from the world, under a vow of perpetual chastity.”

 

“Nunnery” (per Webster’s 1828 American Dictionary of the English Language): “A house in which nuns reside; a cloister in which females under a vow of chastity and devoted to religion, reside during life.”

 

“Papal Rome” (per Darryl Eberhart, Editor of ETI): “The government of the Roman Catholic Church, whose headquarters is presently in Rome, Italy.”

 

“Penance” (per Webster’s New World College Dictionary, Fourth Edition; 2006): “1. Roman Catholic Church, Eastern Orthodox Church: a) A sacrament involving the confession of sin, repentance, and acceptance of the satisfaction imposed, followed by absolution by a priest; b) the satisfaction imposed, as the recital of certain prayers. 2. Any act of reparation, self-punishment, etc., done in repentance for a sin or wrongdoing.”

 

((Ed. Comment to the preceding definitions: For Roman Catholics, “penance” involves the requirement that they make “auricular confession” to an authorized Roman Catholic priest at least once a year.))

 

“Penitent” (Two meanings from Webster’s 1828 American Dictionary of the English Language):

 (a.) “One that repents of sin; one sorrowful on account of his transgressions.”

 (b.) “One under the direction of a confessor.”

 

((Ed. Comment to the preceding definition: Meaning “b.” above most often refers to a Roman Catholic under the direction of a “father-confessor” – in other words, under the direction of a Roman Catholic priest who hears confession.))

 

“Vatican” (per Webster’s New World Dictionary, Second College Edition; 1974): “1. The papal palace, consisting of a group of buildings in Vatican City.  2. The papal government or authority.”

 

IMPORTANT COMMENT #1:  Editor of ETI is not a Roman Catholic; he also is most definitely not anti-Roman Catholic as far as individual Roman Catholics go.  His dad and 90% of his relatives are Roman Catholic; and the majority of his friends are Roman Catholic. Editor of ETI is, however, against the top levels of secret societies (from the hierarchy of the Jesuit Order to the hierarchy of Freemasonry).  This is because these secret societies control the leadership of the Roman Catholic Church (through the Jesuit Order and P2 Masonry), and have often used this hierarchical system for evil purposes, such as “holy” Inquisition, “holy” crusades, “holy” wars, and religious genocide. The hierarchical system of the Roman Catholic Church is used quite efficiently by secret societies not only to keep over one billion Roman Catholics “in line”, but also to gather intelligence, and to infiltrate (through its Knights of Malta, Jesuit “temporal coadjutors”, etc.) governments and various Christian denominations. Editor of ETI is also against any hierarchy that tries to place itself equal to, or above, the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God – or equal to, or above, God’s Holy Word and His Ten Commandments! There must be a standard against which all doctrine is “measured”, and that standard must – and can only be – the Holy Bible!

 

IMPORTANT COMMENT #2:  We can no longer afford to REMAIN SILENT on critical issues for fear of offending any particular group – in this case, Roman Catholics. Please carefully consider this quote by author Dave Hunt: “We are told to love one another as Christ has loved us. Pop psychology trivializes that command by equating it with a ‘positive’ attitude.  Forgotten is the first duty of love: to speak the truth (Ephesians 4:15). Real love does not flatter or soothe when correction is needed but [rather] points out the error which is blinding and harming the loved one. Christ said, ‘As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten; be zealous, therefore, and repent’ (Revelation 3:19).  Instead, the idea is now current that love excludes rebuke, ignores the truth, and seeks unity at any price. Only disaster can result.”  (A Woman Rides the Beast; 1994; Page 403)

 

Why Am I Writing More & More About Roman Catholicism?

 

            This editor of the ETI and TTT newsletters has been writing more on the Roman Catholic Church’s hierarchy, and especially the Jesuit Order, in recent newsletters because I keep uncovering more and more about the deep hatred that the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church has for independent Bible-believing Christians, Protestants, Orthodox Christians, and Jews. We Americans have, for the most part, been largely ignorant of the well-documented history of the Roman Catholic Church in conducting brutal religious genocide (via Inquisition, “holy” wars, and “holy” crusades) against all the afore-mentioned groups. Sadly, many Americans believe the “ecumenical rhetoric” of the Roman Catholic Church’s hierarchy – i.e., that she has “changed her ways” and now loves all the “separated brethren”.  However, my study of the Papacy shows me that this is just a RUSE [i.e., a “stratagem” – per Webster’s Dictionary: “any trick or scheme for achieving some purpose”]. The “purpose” is to bring all Christians under the “umbrella” [i.e., the control] of the Papacy!

 

Yes, the Papacy, despite its “ecumenical rhetoric”, has not changed a bit over the many centuries in the following categories:

 

bulletIts deep hatred of Jews, all independent Bible-believing Christians, Protestants, and Orthodox Christians ((as recently as the 1940s we find Roman Catholic Ustashi (“Catholic Action”) military units in Croatia, led and urged on by Franciscan priests, monks, and friars, slaughtering from 600,000 to one million innocent Serb Orthodox Christian men, women, elderly, and children – many of the victims being first brutally tortured));
bulletIts long-held dream to bring all Christians under its monopolistic, totalitarian, ecclesiastical control;
bulletIts long-held dream to head up a totalitarian one-world religious organization; and,
bulletIts long-held dream to bring all world leaders – especially those in “Christian” countries – under the temporal power of the pope. (That is, the Papacy would be the top player and “controller” in a one-world government – just like it was the top player and “controller” on the European continent for many centuries! Kings indeed bowed before popes.)

 

Indeed, power – absolute power – has long been the pursuit of Papal Rome.  History has recorded Papal Rome’s deep hatred for religious liberty and freedom of conscience. The U.S. Constitution, with its “Bill of Rights” guaranteeing such liberties, has long been hated by Papal Rome. (For a good example of this hatred, please read the Syllabus of Errors issued in 1864 by Pope Pius IX.) I have heard that there is an acronym in use by some Knights of Columbus in America. This acronym is “M.A.C.”: “Make America Catholic”.  America is the last “roadblock” in the way of Papal Rome and her globalist rich and power elite lackeys in their quest for one-world government and one-world religion. Is America scheduled for a religious genocide – an Inquisition – as occurred in the 1940s in Croatia? I believe the danger is very real and possibly quite imminent – and that is why I have been writing more and more about the Roman Catholic Church’s hierarchy (i.e., Papal Rome), its long-held dreams of world domination, its love of Fascist regimes, and its well-documented history of torture and religious genocide!

 

I. INTRODUCTION

 

            An Associated Press article by Frances D’Emilio reported the following in November of 2006: “A Vatican summit led by Pope Benedict XVI reaffirmed mandatory celibacy for priests Thursday…  In a statement after the three-hour meeting, the Vatican said: ‘The value of the choice of priestly celibacy, according to Catholic tradition, has been reaffirmed.’”

 

            Over the past several decades we have seen much in the open press and media concerning sexual abuse of boys by Roman Catholic priests. As powerful as the Roman Catholic Church is in America, she has not been able to “sweep” this abomination (of priests sexually abusing little boys and teenage boys) “under the rug”. But is sexual abuse of boys the only type of sexual abuse occurring within the Roman Catholic Church? The answer is that the abuse of girls and women (to include nuns) within the Roman Catholic Church may be just as extensive; however, the Roman Catholic Church has been much more successful in keeping that type of sexual abuse hidden from the public.

 

            The Boston Globe reported the following on January 8, 2002 (quote is taken from the book Lucifer’s Lodge: Satanic Ritual Abuse in the Catholic Church by William H. Kennedy): “According to the 1996 survey of nuns in the United States (which was intentionally never published by the [Roman Catholic] Church but was leaked by some Vatican insider), it is reported that a minimum of 34,000 Catholic nuns (about 40% of all American nuns) claim to have been sexually abused. Three of every four of these nuns claimed they were sexually victimized by a priest, nun, or other religious person.  …All nuns who claimed repeated sexual exploitation reported that they were pressured by religious superiors for sexual favors.”

 

            During the past several centuries a few nuns have escaped from closed (cloistered) convents. They have given their testimonies concerning the horrifying things that go on in some of these closed (cloistered) convents. These former nuns who escaped from different convents did not personally know each other. They were often separated by several generations or more – or by distances of hundreds or thousands of miles. Yet their testimonies agree concerning the horrors that have taken place in various closed (cloistered) convents around the world.

 

            Sister Charlotte was an ex-Carmelite nun who escaped the convent, and who gave her testimony in the 20th century. Maria Monk was an ex-nun who escaped from a convent in Montreal, Canada, and gave her testimony in the 19th century. Karlene Lynn had been a nun for ten years, and had been in a convent with 200 other nuns. She had been a Roman Catholic for 53 ½ years before she came to truly know the Lord Jesus Christ. These and other ex-nuns risked both verbal and physical attacks – and sometimes risked their very lives – to tell the world about the sick, perverted horrors that have occurred in some of the closed (cloistered) convents of the Roman Catholic Church. Their testimonies deserve to be heard – and actions should be taken to make sure that these horrors never occur again in any country of the world!

 

            Could mandatory celibacy for Roman Catholic priests and nuns have played a significant role in the sexual abuse of boys, girls, and women by priests and other Roman Catholic clerics? Do some nuns sexually abuse other nuns? Can we find “mandatory celibacy” for the priesthood in the Holy Bible? Should any church calling itself “Christian” practice “mandatory celibacy”?

 

            Let’s first take a look at some interesting and relevant Bible verses and quotations that deal with this topic. Then let us look at the history of mandatory (i.e., enforced) celibacy, and the horrible “fruit” that it has produced.

 

II. HERE ARE SOME RELEVANT BIBLE VERSES (with some comments):

 

            [The Apostle Paul wrote]: “Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;  (Verse 2): Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron; (Verse 3): Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.” (I Timothy 4:1-3)

 

((Ed. comments to the preceding Bible passage:

 

(1) Is there a denomination that has both “forbidden to marry” and asked its adherents during certain periods of history to “abstain from [eating] meat”? The answer: the Roman Catholic Church!

 

(2) The Apostle Paul tells us clearly from where such doctrines as “forbidding to marry” come – i.e., these doctrines come from “seducing spirits” and “devils”.))

 

            [The Apostle Paul wrote]: “Have we not power [i.e., have we no right] to lead about a sister, a wife, as well as other apostles, and as the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas [i.e., the Apostle Peter]?” (I Corinthians 9:5)

 

((Ed. comments to the preceding Bible verse:

 

(1) The Apostle Paul refers to the Apostle Simon Peter a number of times in the Holy Scriptures by his Aramaic name “Cephas”, which means “a stone”. (For example, see I Corinthians 1:12; 3:22; and 15:5.  See also Galatians 2:9.)

 

(2) The Apostle Paul is here telling us that the Apostle Simon Peter took his wife with him on at least some occasions as he traveled to various locations.))

 

            [The Apostle Paul wrote]: (Verse 2): “A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behavior, given to hospitality, apt to teach; …(Verse 4): One that ruleth well his own house [i.e., his household, his family], having his children in subjection with all gravity…”

(I Timothy 3:2 and 4)

 

((Ed. comments to the preceding Bible passage:

 

(1) The Apostle Paul is giving “qualifications” for a bishop in I Timothy 3:1-7.

 

(2) Note that the Apostle Paul states that a bishop is to be “the husband of one wife”, and that the bishop must be able to control his own “children”!

 

(3) How does Roman Catholic Church doctrine concerning celibate priests stack up against what the Apostle Paul taught concerning “married clergymen (i.e., bishops)”?))

 

            [The Apostle Paul wrote]: (Verse 8 a.): “Likewise must the deacons be grave [i.e., sober, serious]…   (Verse 11 a.): Even so must their [i.e., the deacons’] wives be grave…” (I Timothy 3:8 a. and 3:11 a.)

 

((Ed. comments to the preceding Bible passage:

 

(1) The Apostle Paul is giving “qualifications” for deacons in I Timothy 3:8-13.

 

(2) The Apostle Paul states that the deacons’ wives are also to be “grave” – i.e., sober, serious.

 

(3) The “deacons” of the Apostle Paul’s day would be much closer in power and authority to Roman Catholic priests and monsignors than to the Roman Catholic lay deacons of today.))

 

            [The Apostle Paul wrote]: “But if they [i.e., the unmarried and widows – see Verse 8] cannot contain [i.e., to live in continence or chastity – see Webster’s 1828 American Dictionary], let them marry: for it is better to marry than to burn.” (I Corinthians 7:9)

 

((Ed. comments to the preceding Bible verse:

 

(1) The Apostle Paul tells us clearly that if unmarried persons cannot live in continence or chastity, then they should marry so that they will not burn [with lust]. Webster’s 1828 American Dictionary of the English Language tells us, in part, about the word “continence”: “the restraint which a person imposes upon his desires and passions; the restraint of the passion for sexual enjoyment”. Webster’s 1828 American Dictionary of the English Language also lists one of the definitions of “burn” as follows: “to be inflamed with passion or desire”.

 

(2) The Apostle Paul’s advice would surely apply to all unmarried individuals who call themselves “Christians” – to include priests and nuns!))

 

            [The Apostle Paul wrote]: “I will [i.e., desire; direct] therefore that the younger women marry, bear children, guide the house, give none occasion to the adversary to speak reproachfully.” (I Timothy 5:14)

 

III. HERE ARE SOME VERY RELEVANT QUOTATIONS (with some comments by this editor):

 

            “It’s not pleasant to report these things [i.e., sexual abuse by Roman Catholic priests].  Why do we do it? Well, someone has to! The Bible [tells] us to have no part with the workers of darkness, but rather [to] reprove them – expose them – unmask them! [Ed. Note: See Ephesians 5:11.] Why do we do it [i.e., expose sexual abuse by Roman Catholic priests]? [We do so] because we don’t want any more little children to be harmed! We know of the ravages of Satan by these [Roman Catholic] priests. And with tears we warn others: ‘Leave these [Roman Catholic] churches! Get out of them! If it’s true that 50 to 80% of the [Roman Catholic] priests are homosexuals – and many pedophiles – leave these places – these dens of iniquity! Get out – and don’t put your children in harm’s way!’” – Texe Marrs (Host of “Power of Prophecy” broadcast; from his tape/CD entitled “The Priests of Rome and the Ravages of Satan”)

 

((Ed. Comments to the preceding quote:

 

(1) It is not pleasant to deal with the “tough topic” of sexual abuse by many in the Roman Catholic priesthood – but it is a topic that absolutely must be “tackled”!

 

(2) The 50% to 80% figure of Roman Catholic priests who are homosexuals is no doubt accurate. A monsignor in Omaha, Nebraska (who headed up Boys Town) reported similar figures – especially in Roman Catholic seminaries!))

 

            “[Roman] Catholic sources themselves say that over half of the priests – some authoritative sources say up to 80% of all [Roman] Catholic priests – are homosexuals.” – Texe Marrs (Host of “Power of Prophecy” broadcast; from his tape/CD entitled “The Priests of Rome and the Ravages of Satan”)

 

            “I counseled him [i.e., a young man considering entering the Roman Catholic priesthood] and told the young man and his mother that most of the [Roman Catholic] priests who run the seminaries are homosexuals. And if this young man went there [i.e., to a Roman Catholic seminary], they would insist that he would have sex with them – with some of the priests – or they wouldn’t let him become a priest – because now increasingly it was becoming a ‘requirement’ for the [Roman Catholic] priesthood. And they actually cashier out and get rid of those who are not homosexuals. There are people who have written me who told me: ‘I was kicked out of the [Roman Catholic] seminary because I would not have sex with the [Roman Catholic] priests who are the instructors.’ This is happening across America. So more and more we will find fewer and fewer [Roman] Catholic priests who are ‘straight’ – who are normal.”

            Texe Marrs (Host of “Power of Prophecy” broadcast; from his tape/CD entitled “The Priests of Rome and the Ravages of Satan”)

 

((Ed. Comment to the preceding quote: A monsignor in Omaha, Nebraska (who headed up Boys Town) reported that the number of homosexuals was particularly high in the Roman Catholic seminaries!))

 

            “The history of celibacy makes for reading so black.  …A large part [of this history of celibacy] is the story of the degradation of women.

            …Ivo of Chartres (1040-1115) tells of whole convents with inmates who were nuns only in name…[but they] were really prostitutes.”

Peter de Rosa (Roman Catholic historian & former Jesuit; author of the book Vicars of Christ: The Dark Side of the Papacy)

 

            “The fact is that priestly celibacy has hardly ever worked. In the view of some historians, it has probably done more harm to morals than any other institution in the West, including prostitution…

            The proof of the harm done by celibacy comes NOT from bigoted anti-Catholic sources; on the contrary, it includes papal and conciliar documents and letters of reforming saints. They all point in one direction: far from being a candle in a naughty world, priestly celibacy has been more often than not a stain on the name of Christianity.” – Peter de Rosa (Roman Catholic historian & former Jesuit; author of the book Vicars of Christ: The Dark Side of the Papacy)

 

“The doctrine of forbidding priests to marry met with other difficulties over the centuries because of the confessional. It is plain to see that the practice of girls and women confessing their moral weaknesses and desires to unmarried [i.e., celibate] priests could easily result in many abuses. A former priest, Charles Chiniquy, who lived at the time of Abraham Lincoln and was personally acquainted with him, gives a full account of these abuses in his book The Priest, The Woman, and The Confessional.”

Ralph Edward Woodrow (Babylon Mystery Religion: Ancient and Modern; 1966; Page 111)

 

            “If one is on the level of gods, what privileges could not one claim? Gods are above the law. No wonder, then, that the popes began to declare openly that they had power over kings and kingdoms and all persons, and power to behave like tyrants. The added pretense of infallibility only made matters worse.

            Each priest and nun, by association, shares (though to a lesser extent) this same corrupting absolutism and elevation above laypersons. Add to this pretended Godlike authority the unnatural rule of celibacy (an intolerable burden which only a small minority of persons could possibly bear) and the stage is set for all manner of evil.”

            Dave Hunt (A Woman Rides the Beast; 1994; Page 162)

 

            “One must understand that mandatory celibacy is not taught in the Bible, nor was it practiced by the apostles. This teaching developed as in integral part of the evolving papal system and gradually became essential to it. The concern was not morality, for celibacy proved to be a veritable cornucopia of evil. In fact, the rule of celibacy was not the prohibition of sex but of marriage…

            All down through history not only priests and prelates but popes as well had their mistresses and visited prostitutes. Many were homosexuals. No member of the clergy was ever excommunicated for having sex, but thousands have been put out of the priesthood for the scandal of getting married. Why then the strict insistence upon celibacy, even to the present day, if it really doesn’t mean abstinence from sex? It is because the rule of celibacy has a very practical and lucrative result for the Church: It leaves priests and especially bishops and popes without families to whom to bequeath property and thereby impoverish the Church. The clergy must have no heirs.

            Pope Gregory VII, bemoaning the difficulty in stamping out marriage among priests, declared: ‘The Church cannot escape from the clutches of the laity unless priests first escape from the clutches of their wives.’  Here is another vital reason for celibacy: to create a priesthood without the encumbrance (and loving loyalties) of wives and children. Thus fornication and adultery, though forbidden in theory, were preferable to a marriage relationship.” – Dave Hunt (A Woman Rides the Beast; 1994; Pages 162 and 163)

 

            “I read from religion news services – also in the Jackson Citizen Patriot newspaper – recently this article: [Headline]: ‘Notre Dame [University] allows gay films and the [Vagina] monologues’.  [The article goes on to say]: ‘A gay film festival and the play the Vagina Monologues will continue to have a place at the University of Notre Dame, the school’s president has announced.’ [It was called] the ‘queer film festival’ at Notre Dame.”

            Texe Marrs (Host of “Power of Prophecy” broadcast; from his tape/CD entitled “The Priests of Rome and the Ravages of Satan”)

 

            “In the book The Franklin Cover-up by former Nebraska State Senator John DeCamp is other interesting news and information about these perversions within the [Roman] Catholic Church. [The book] The Franklin Cover-up is really the sad and tragic story of young people who are prostituted by some very rich – mostly Republican Party politicians and officials – in the city of Omaha, Nebraska.

            Larry King – not the Larry King of Cable News Network, but another Larry King – a black man who ran one of the largest Savings & Loan Associations [Ed. Note: DeCamp in an interview says it was a credit union] in Omaha, Nebraska – and his cohorts – evidently ran a pedophile sex ring. And they would literally ferry young boys on jet aircraft to Washington, D.C. And they once even had a sex party inside the White House during the administration of President Ronald Reagan.

            …But much of the evidence seemed to also center on the fact that this Larry King – this monster – was obtaining the boys for his sex pedophile parties with these influential Republican Party bigwigs and big shots in Washington, D.C. – and even there in Omaha [Nebraska] – he was obtaining the boys from Father Flanagan’s Boys’ Home. You know, the famous Father Flanagan’s Boys’ Home or Boys Town there in Omaha [Nebraska].

            …And now today they [i.e., the Roman Catholic administrators at Boys Town] say: ‘Please send money to help the orphans at Father Flanagan’s.’  Now there were some newspaper scandals a few years ago, however, that said even while they [i.e., the Roman Catholic administrators at Boys Town] were calling, begging for money, writing letters – and the Catholic faithful across the United States and Europe are sending millions of dollars each year to Father Flanagan’s Boys’ Home – it came out that they [i.e., the Roman Catholic administrators at Boys Town] had already 200 million dollars squirreled away in their accounts [that] they weren’t even using!  200 million dollars!

            …But there is something more horrible than crooked fund raising – it has to do with sexual rape of little boys! And [former Nebraska state senator] John DeCamp – who was, by the way, a captain in the Green Berets [Ed. Note: i.e., U.S. Army Special Forces] involved in Army Intelligence during the Vietnam War – but Senator DeCamp exposed the whole sorry mess in his book The Franklin Cover-up.

            …John DeCamp went to talk to the monsignor…who ran Father Flanagan’s Boys Town to find out whether these things were true. And the monsignor says: ‘Well, they’re not going on now, but they did happen here. Yes, they did.’  [DeCamp’s response]: ‘How could it happen? How is it even possible that you could take little orphan boys and send them off – pick them up here [at Boys Town] and have pedophiles take them away for parties? How could this happen?’  The monsignor actually told Senator DeCamp: ‘I tried to stop it. When I came here I was placed in charge; I saw what was going on. It wasn’t me! It was all – not all, but many of the priests here – homosexuals, others. I tried to stop it!  I called the higher [Roman Catholic Church] authorities over [i.e., above] me – the Archbishop’s office. I was told to keep quiet and to let it all go. It’s a horrible thing – but I could do nothing about it.’

            Really? Have you ever heard of an agency called the local police? Well, that would have been difficult, of course, because according to DeCamp’s book, The Franklin Cover-up, even the sheriff of that particular county – even the editors of the local largest newspaper – were involved in these Satanic sex rings – reportedly molesting boys.

            …But some of the boys themselves gave evidence of such [sexual abuse].”

            Texe Marrs (Host of “Power of Prophecy” broadcast; from his tape/CD entitled “The Priests of Rome and the Ravages of Satan”)

 

            “What really goes on behind the locked doors and walls of [cloistered] convents? You may think that things have improved over the last few decades – but have they really? What is the purpose of the closed convent? Have [nuns’] babies been aborted and murdered – and kept under the floors – their little bodies – deaths – disguised through the use of chemicals, such as lime?” – Texe Marrs (Pastor; author of many books; host of “Power of Prophecy” broadcast)

 

            “Now after all of this [i.e., signing away her inheritance, taking her perpetual “black veil” vows, etc.] has transpired… everything I have is gone…I’ve sold my soul for a ‘mess of theological pottage [i.e., porridge]’, because not only are we destroyed in our bodies – many of us in our minds, and many of us, if we die in the convent, we’ve lost our soul.”

Sister Charlotte (Ex-Carmelite nun)

 

            “[It is] because we are not allowed to be friends [with the other nuns] in the [cloistered] convent. We are all policemen or detectives watching each other – that’s so we’ll tell [on each other]. And the little [i.e., young] nun that finds something to tell on the other nun, she stands in good favor with the mother superior [Ed. Note: woman head of a convent]. And then the mother [superior] teaches that nun to believe [that] when she stands in good favor with the mother superior, she is standing in good favor with God. And so that little [i.e., young] nun, of course, will want that, and she will tell a lot of things maybe that are not even true on the other little nuns.” – Sister Charlotte (Ex-Carmelite nun)

 

            “Then sometimes the priests come [to the convent] and they get angry with us [i.e., the young nuns] because we refuse to sin [i.e., have sexual relations] with them voluntarily…and many, many the times to have him [i.e., the priest] to strike you in the mouth – is a terrible thing! I’ve had my front teeth knocked out [by a lecherous priest trying to force himself on me]…and then get you down on the floor [to molest you]. …Here we are – a body [i.e., group] of little [i.e., young] nuns.  …[One] morning the mother superior might say this: ‘We’re all going to be lined up here…’  …Then you know, there might be ten of us – there might be 15 of us. She [the mother superior] will tell us all to strip. And we have to take every stitch of our clothing off.  …Here we are lined up [without our clothes], and here come two or three Roman Catholic priests with liquor under their belts [i.e., the priests are intoxicated], and there they march in front of those nude girls [i.e., the naked nuns], and choose the girl they want to take to the cell with them.  These are convents – cloistered convents – not open orders. The priest can do anything he wants to and hide behind the cloak of religion! Then that same Roman Catholic priest [after sexually molesting a nun] will go back into the Roman Catholic Churches and there he will say Mass – and there he will go into the confessional box and make those poor people believe that [he has the power to grant] absolution from their sins – when he [the priest] is full of sin, full of corruption [and] vice.  Still he [the priest] acts as their ‘god’.

            And then [sometimes while attempting to molest the nun] [he – the priest will] kick you in the stomach. Many of the precious little girls [i.e., young nuns] have babies under their hearts, and it doesn’t bother a priest to kick you in the stomach with a baby under your heart – he doesn’t mind – the baby is going to be killed anyway – because those babies are born in the convent. Why wouldn’t those babies be born, when you run places like these [i.e., cloistered convents] under the cloak of ‘religion’ – the world thinks [they are] religious orders. And there are babies born in there!  …I’ve delivered those babies with these hands and what I’ve seen with my eyes and done with my hands – I just challenge the whole world to say it isn’t true.” – Sister Charlotte (Ex-Carmelite nun)

 

            “And oh I wish you could see that little [pregnant] nun. She is not looking forward to that [i.e., having her baby]. There won’t ever be a blanket around his body. They’ll never even bathe that baby’s body. But he can only [live] 4 or 5 hours [minutes?], and then the mother superior will take that baby and put her fingers in his nostrils and start [to] cover its mouth – and snuff its little life out.  And why do they build the lime pits in the [cloistered] convent? What is the reason for building it [i.e., the lime pit] if it isn’t to kill the babies? And that baby will be taken into the lime pit and chemical and lime is put over its body – and that is the end of baby!” – Sister Charlotte (Ex-Carmelite nun)

 

((Ed. Comment to the preceding two quotes: There has been much collaboration of those facts stated by Sister Charlotte concerning bodies of dead babies in convents. The population of Spain, which is predominantly Roman Catholic, became so disgusted in the early 1930s upon finding tunnels between monasteries and convents, full of the skeletons of many babies, that they urged the Spanish government to launch a full-scale investigation of Roman Catholic Church property. The result: the Vatican and the Jesuit Order stirred up a civil war, and actually brought in Muslim troops to help defeat the legally elected Spanish government – killing many Roman Catholics and Protestants in the process! The Roman Catholic Church then installed a Fascist government in Spain under dictator Francisco Franco.))

“Horrors of a Nunnery”

What specters pursue me, what visions of fright,  

Whenever the daydreams give place to the night;  

Then gloom, dread and horror my bedside attend –  

Oh, then above all things I long for a friend.  

Unkindness and terror, so oft and so long  

Have been my companions; my foes are so strong.  

I fear the calm evening and even the fair morn;  

Oh, would my past freedom and peace might return.  

Long a prisoner, oppressed, lone, and vainly I’ve grieved –  

Ah, fatal delusion!  I’m now undeceived;  

But my tyrants are round me, and fill me with dread –  

Noble brothers, sweet mother, oh, come to my aid!  

Believe not the falsehoods the wretches will tell  

When they say I am happy, and choose this dark cell;  

Haste, open my prison, delay not to come,  

Unbolt my damp dungeon, and carry me home.  

d. Comment to preceding poem: This poem was taken from the book Maria Monk: The Nun That Lives Again.)) 

            “Miss [Maria] Monk [Ed. Note: a former cloistered nun] relates how young, and all unsuspecting girls would be enticed, in various cunning ways, into becoming nuns, and of their subsequent ruin [Ed. Note: frequently through sexual abuse] by [celibate] priests, and their misery, and often [premature] death afterwards. Rarely, indeed, would parents or friends ever be permitted to see them [i.e., the nuns] again.” (Quote taken from the last section of the book Maria Monk: The Nun That Lives Again)

 

            “The truth is that girls go into convents because they are recruited. They are recruited for the convents and nunneries because the Church of Rome [i.e., the Roman Catholic Church] must have an unlimited number of pauper [i.e., very poor] laborers to insure a fair return on the billions of dollars she has invested in ‘charitable’ institutions, such as schools, hospitals, orphanages, and laundries.”

            Helen Conroy (Ex-nun; Forgotten Women in Convents; Page 32)

 

            “The nun is one of the most remarkable products of the Roman Catholic Church. She is an absolute slave; one whose willingness to offer her life should fill Communist leaders with jealousy; one from whom the [Roman Catholic] hierarchy conceals her slavery by the wedding ring on her finger; one who believes that in shining the bishop’s shoes, waiting on his table, or scrubbing the floor, she is gathering herself ‘treasure in heaven’. She is the one who makes possible the [Roman Catholic] Church’s hundreds of hospitals; the one who teaches in its thousands of parochial schools and orphanages; the one who…does the drudgery behind the scenes in the [Roman Catholic] hierarchy’s drive to ‘make America Catholic’.” – Emmett McLoughlin (Ex-Roman Catholic priest; People’s Padre; 1954; Page 107)

 

            “In the setup of the Roman Catholic Church it is the confessional box that feeds the nunneries [and closed convents]. The groundwork is done on the [Roman] Catholic girl in the parochial school, where the nun is made an object of holy glamour…  The institution of the confessional makes it easy for the [Roman Catholic] priests to find the ones [i.e., girls] they want, and of course they try to select the very choicest ones. That, in brief, is the reason the young nuns, as a rule, are above average in beauty, personality, and ability.

            Ordinarily confessions begin at the age of seven. Through this means the priests come to know the very hearts and souls of those [girls] who confess before them, which [girls] would be desirable in the service of the [Roman Catholic] Church and which would not, which [girls] can be persuaded and which cannot.”

            Loraine Boettner (Roman Catholicism; 1962; Page 319)

 

“Miss [Maria] Monk [Ed. Note: a former cloistered nun] describes fully the cruelties and oppressions of all kinds inflicted upon the nuns, and in hard work exacted of them, and of the demoralization, treacheries, hatreds, and all the evil passions, feelings, practices and miseries necessarily resulting from such immoral and wicked lives and teachings. The effects upon the lives and moral characters of these nuns were just such as belong to the inmates of any other brothel, for this nunnery [i.e., convent] was nothing but a brothel, under another name and [under] the guise of religion.

…She describes minutely and in detail, the underground entrance in the cellar, and deep pit for dead infants [Ed. Note: the “results” of the sexual abuse of the nuns by celibate priests], the lime, the vitriol bottles, the rooms of the imprisoned nuns, and all the other rooms and secret chambers, the furniture of the rooms, the various openings, the instruments of torture to punish the nuns, the gags, etc.” (Quote taken from last section of the book Maria Monk: The Nun That Lives Again)

 

((Ed. Comment to the preceding quote: Sister Charlotte, and other nuns who have escaped cloistered convents, have described these same “details” about cloistered convents as has Maria Monk! These sisters (nuns) who escaped from different convents did not personally know each other. They were often separated by several generations or more – or by distances of hundreds or thousands of miles.  Yet their testimonies agree concerning the horrors that indeed have taken place in various closed (cloistered) convents around the world.))

 

            “…Such horrible things as Miss [Maria] Monk [Ed. Note: a former cloistered nun] reveals are nothing new or strange. They are going on everywhere where popery prevails. The missionaries in Mexico lately wrote an account of their purchasing an old nunnery or convent confiscated by the [Mexican] government, and fitting it up for a school for Mexican children.  In the back cellar part of this building they found a deep pit half-filled with the bones and skulls of infants, the murdered offspring of priests and nuns of former times.”

            (Quote taken from the last section of the book Maria Monk: The Nun That Lives Again)

 

((Ed. Comment to the preceding quote: In order to “head off” Roman Catholic apologists who will try to claim that such abuses inside of cloistered convents occurred only in the far distant past, let me say this: These horrible abuses described by Maria Monk from the 19th century occurred also in the 20th century – i.e., in the 1900s. The so-called Spanish civil war (1936-1939) had for its “catalyst” the Spanish government’s attempts to deeply investigate the “problem” of the skeletons of dead babies found in various Roman Catholic convents – and in some of the tunnels that connected monasteries and convents!  And no matter what time era we could look at – including the present – mandatory celibacy enforced on priests and nuns, and cloistered convents, WILL ALWAYS have the potential to produce such sad and sick results as described by Sister Maria Monk and Sister Charlotte!))

 

            “Can you not see what the [Roman Catholic] nunneries [i.e., convents] are for? Are they not only for the [Roman Catholic celibate] priests to confine women and keep them there for the unholy, ungodly priest to gratify his lust and adulterous nature?”

            Marvin Brown (from the book Maria Monk: The Nun That Lives Again)

 

((Ed. Comment to the preceding quote: While the above statement is not true of every convent, clearly many cloistered convents HAVE in the past been used “for the unholy, ungodly priest to gratify his lust and adulterous nature”! Are any convents used for such purposes today?))

 

            “There is a rule in the convent [Ed. Note: possibly referring only to cloistered convents] that all letters written by or received for the inmates [i.e., the nuns], shall first be scrutinized by the mother superior, except [i.e., unless] it be a letter from a [celibate Roman Catholic] priest. Such a letter [from this celibate priest]…will tell her [i.e., the nun] that on a certain day he will be in the convent for the purpose of hearing her general confession. Having acquainted the Reverend Mother [Superior] of the proposed visit [by the priest], she [i.e., the mother superior] [then] gives the sister [i.e., the nun] permission to absent herself from the duties of the day.

            The [celibate Roman Catholic] priest arrives; he is shown into the retreat parlor; and no matter how long he remains there, no one will disturb him. He is supposed to be talking with his penitent, on the welfare of her soul. Could anyone look through the door they would find the confessor with his arms around the fair penitent, or, perhaps, in a far more compromising position. Does my reader ask whether the sister is willing to submit to these embraces? I answer that in 15 out of every 20 cases, ‘No’. But she is there helpless; the priest has seen her, taken a fancy to her, and, willing or not, he compels her to allow him to satisfy his passion.  …When I think of this system, this system born of the devil, nurtured in hell, and realizing that under the cloak of religion it is stealing away our liberties, entering into our homes, ruining our womanhood, despoiling childish purity, defiling everything it comes in contact with, then…I cannot remain quiet. …I have to stand up and cry out, and warn the people of this and other lands of the great danger threatening us. Convent life is hell on earth – it is a blot on any land.” – Margaret L. Shepherd (“Sister Adelaide”, former nun; from the book Maria Monk)

 

            “The Roman Catholic priests can preach murder in their pulpits, can pour lascivious slime into the ears of pure American girls [in the confessional booth], can pollute the innermost holies of woman’s nature with libidinous [i.e., lewd, lascivious] questions [in the confessional booth], can imprison our boys and girls in Good Shepherd slave pens, can bar out the state authorities from the cloistered convent, where the bachelor [celibate] priests keep their women, can put their Speak-easies under the aegis of ‘Religion’; can cheat their ignorant dupes out of hard-earned money by the use of nasty old bones, fraudulent relics, fake miracles, mythical St. Anthonys and that inexhaustible source of papal greed – the Purgatorial humbug.” – Watson’s Magazine (From the book Maria Monk: The Nun That Lives Again)

 

            “What right has a religious institution [Ed. Note: i.e., the Roman Catholic Church] to imprison girls [i.e., nuns] – to put them in a prison house [i.e., a cloistered convent] with barred windows, and to make escape impossible by surrounding the place with high stone walls and lining the inside of their cages with sharp iron spikes?

            …There must be crime and fearful iniquities practiced there, or our American [police] officers would not be barred out, and parents could see their daughters.

            It must be vile, unlawful, and all wrong, or every man except the priests, and their bishops, would not be shut out. It must be contrary to the law or they would have no objection to our [police] officers and citizens going in.

            They must be opposed to purity, holiness, and all that is righteous and good, or why confine them [i.e., the cloistered nuns] so closely, and so determinedly keep them from all communications with everybody but ‘mother superior’ and that licentious priest, and possibly a few more, who are thus confined?”

            Marvin Brown (from the book Maria Monk: The Nun That Lives Again)

 

((Ed. Comment to the preceding quote: Why is it that in many nations across the world the Roman Catholic Church often claims that the government has NO right to investigate and/or to arrest her clergymen who are guilty of crimes – i.e., who have violated the laws of those various nations? Why is it that in many nations across the world the Roman Catholic Church hides and covers up the crimes committed by her clergymen against the laws of those various nations?  Sometimes the Roman Catholic Church even sends criminal priests (e.g., pedophile priests) out of the nation in which they committed their crimes (in order to avoid prosecution) to “safe havens” in other lands – even to the Vatican itself!  Who or what indeed does this geopolitical-financial-religious giant of an institution [i.e., the Roman Catholic Church] think it is that it considers itself to be ABOVE the laws of any State/Nation in which it has churches and other religious organizations and orders?))

 

            “With the overwhelming evidence – not mere suspicion but judicial proof – of crime in convents, is it not monstrous that these institutions are favored by the [British] government with special exemption and immunities of the law as applied to others? Surely every elector should demand from Parliamentary candidates a pledge to vote for state inspection of all Convents!” – S.J. Abbot (Secretary to the Convent Inquiry Society; from the book Maria Monk)

 

            “Of all the devices that Satan has employed to mislead souls who desire to serve God, this [i.e., the cloistered convent system] is the most perverted and institutionalized program in existence. That it should have been permitted to continue in a land of freedom, where governmental agencies have more and more reached a protective arm into all institutions [Ed. Note: EXCEPT FOR the Roman Catholic geopolitical-financial-religious institution] to defend the physical and spiritual well-being of its sons and daughters, is most astonishing.”

            Dr. Walter M. Montano (“Christian Heritage”; September 1959)

 

            “Let us demand in no uncertain terms that no institution of this character [Ed. Note: he is referring specifically to the Roman Catholic Church] shall be immune from the operation of the law, notwithstanding the fact that they may be cloaking under the shield of some so-called religion.” – Marvin Brown (from the book Maria Monk: The Nun That Lives Again)

 

            “Men and women have been deceived by Rome and fleeced of their money for a thousand years; but of all the victims of the papacy, the nuns deserve our pity most.” – Ernest Phillips

 

            “I was a [Roman] Catholic for 53 ½ years, and a nun for 10 years.  I have now been saved by the grace of God for the last one and a half years.

            …I never even owned a Bible until just recently.  After all, I was Catholic – I didn’t need one, I thought. In fact, during the whole 10 years [that] I was in the convent with 200 other nuns, we had one Bible between us. But – we never opened it.

            I do remember during my 10 years in the convent, all I ever wanted to know was Jesus – I just never knew how easy it was to know Him. The Bible was so close, yet we were discouraged to read it on our own!”

Karlene Lynn (ex-Roman Catholic nun)

 

((Ed. Comment to the preceding quote: The Roman Catholic Church for centuries forbade common folks to read, possess, or distribute the Holy Bible in their native language! For centuries only the educated clergy was allowed to read the Bible, and then generally only in languages such as Hebrew, Greek, or Latin – and often only Roman Catholic Church-approved Bibles! The Roman Catholic Church for centuries made it a crime punishable by death for any common folks to read, possess, or distribute the Holy Bible. Godly men were burned at the stake for printing and distributing Bibles in the language of the common man! Why did the Roman Catholic Church oppose the Holy Bible for centuries? It was because when many Roman Catholics read the Bible for themselves, they found many instances where Roman Catholic “tradition” and teachings actually were 100% CONTRARY to what was written in God’s Word, the Holy Bible! Then these individuals would normally leave “mother Church”, depriving her of some of her income! Sadly, many Roman Catholic priests and nuns today know little to nothing of what is written in the Holy Bible – but most especially they are ignorant of those parts of the Holy Bible that refute Roman Catholic “tradition” and teachings!))

 

            “The policy of silence and cover-up [Ed. Note: concerning sexual abuse by Roman Catholic clergy] promoted by the Vatican is mind-boggling. The vast amount of data which the Vatican collected concerning the sexual activity of clergy makes it clear that the Pope and [the Roman] Curia were well aware of how wide-spread and common the sexual abuse problem was in the [Roman Catholic] Church. It did nothing to redress the situation but continued with a policy of cover-up and silence. It seems that the only reason the Vatican ordered these secret sex studies was to get a global picture of where they stood and to develop informed strategies for hiding the problem in the future. Never was the welfare of the victims of sexual abuse taken into consideration, nor was the question of broken chastity vows apparently of any real concern.”

            William H. Kennedy (Roman Catholic; author of the book Lucifer’s Lodge: Satanic Ritual Abuse in the Catholic Church; 2004; Page 178)

 

((Ed. Comments to the preceding quote:

 

(1) This editor most highly recommends that readers of this newsletter purchase a copy of this 206-page paperback book published by REVIVISCIMUS, South Egremont, Massachusetts, in 2004. (Please see order information at the end of this newsletter.)

 

(2) The book Lucifer’s Lodge: Satanic Ritual Abuse in the Catholic Church gives numerous examples of cover-ups by Roman Catholic prelates concerning sexual abuse by the priesthood within their areas of authority. In fact, some of the worst pedophile priests were simply moved from parish to parish where they were allowed to continue their sexual abuse of boys.))

 

            “No priest who has heard priests’ confessions and has any respect for the truth will deny that sexual affairs are extremely common among the [Roman Catholic] clergy. The principal concern of the [Roman Catholic] hierarchy seems to be that priests should keep such cases quiet and refrain from marriage…”

            Emmett McLoughlin (Ex-Catholic priest; People’s Padre; 1954; Page 94)

 

            “I deliberately kept it [i.e., sexual abuse by a Roman Catholic priest for 13 years] secret. I didn’t think it was helpful to the [Roman] Catholic Church to divulge this information.” – Roman Catholic Archbishop of Milwaukee

 

            [Commenting on the preceding quotation]: “Here’s the priest still out there molesting other little boys, but the archbishop [of Milwaukee] didn’t think that it was helpful to the [Roman Catholic] Church to divulge such information.  So he kept it a secret. And now the very man whose life was damaged [by the sexual abuse inflicted upon him by this Roman Catholic priest] is being sued by the [Roman Catholic] Church after they found out that the statute of limitations had expired.” – Texe Marrs (Host of “Power of Prophecy” broadcast; from his tape/CD entitled “The Priests of Rome and the Ravages of Satan”)

 

((Ed. Comment to the preceding two quotes: The book Lucifer’s Lodge: Satanic Ritual Abuse in the Catholic Church by William H. Kennedy gives a number of examples of Roman Catholic prelates covering-up and hiding sexual abuse by priests under their authority. A google-style search on the topic of sexual abuse by the Roman Catholic priesthood will provide an honest “investigator” with tons of evidence of the cover-ups by Roman Catholic prelates of instances of sexual abuse by Roman Catholic priests that occurred “under their watch”!))

 

            “The [Roman] Catholic Cardinal in charge of the entire California – the Los Angeles area – Cardinal Roger M. Mahoney – acknowledged that he left five priests in the ministry despite valid complaints that they had molested children.”

 Texe Marrs (Host of “Power of Prophecy” broadcast; from his tape/CD entitled “Priests of Rome and the Ravages of Satan”)

 

((Ed. comment to the preceding quote: Other Roman Catholic prelates have allowed priests accused of sexually abusing boys to remain in their ministries where they continued their abuse. It has been widely reported that both Cardinal Bernard Law (in the Boston, Massachusetts archdiocese) and Archbishop of Milwaukee Rembert Weakland allowed pedophile priests to remain in their ministries where they continued to sexually abuse boys!))

 

            “Are they [i.e., Roman Catholic priests involved in sexual abuse] doing great damage to the image of Christianity? Are they preparing the whole world – these [Roman] Catholic priests – to accept the most heinous perversions as something good and legitimate? Are [Roman] Catholic priests today – even a majority of them – involved in literally horrible satanic sexual rituals?”

            Texe Marrs (Host of “Power of Prophecy” broadcast; from his tape/CD entitled “The Priests of Rome and the Ravages of Satan”)

 

IV. HISTORY OF MANDATORY CELIBACY

 

            Some early attempts were made by the Roman Catholic Church to enforce celibacy amongst its priests, but it was not until the year 1079 that the Roman Catholic Church was finally able to decree and effectively enforce “mandatory celibacy”.  Here is what Loraine Boettner, author of the book Roman Catholicism (1962), tells us on pages 307 and 308 of that book:

 

            “The Spanish council of Elvira, in 305, enacted decrees against the marriage of the clergy. These decrees, however, were of limited extent, and no serious effort was made to enforce them.

            …But the Roman [Catholic] Church was persistent in requiring a celibate priesthood. In the year 1079, under the strong hand of Hildebrand, known as Pope Gregory VII, the celibacy of the priesthood was again decreed and was made reasonably effective, although [Pope] Gregory [VII] could not curb all of the abuses. Popes Urban II (1088-1099) and Calixtus II (1119-1124) made a determined fight against clerical concubinage [i.e., cohabitation without a legal marriage]. The decree of the First Lateran Council (1123) declared the marriage of all in sacred orders invalid, and the Council of Trent (1545) made strict pronouncements concerning the celibacy of the clergy.

            …Thus during the first centuries of the Christian era the clergy were permitted to marry and have families, and for more than a thousand years after the time of Christ the Roman [Catholic] priesthood, without too much opposition, exercised the privilege.”

 

V. THE FRUITS OF MANDATORY CELIBACY

 

            Loraine Boettner, in his book Roman Catholicism (1962), tells us the following on page 303: “But celibacy enforced indiscriminately against whole groups of men and women is shown by its fruits to be not only difficult and irksome but [also] productive of untold evils. The quite uniform testimony of those who have experienced it and who are free to talk is that it does not suppress [sexual] desire, but on the contrary increases and heightens it. Priests and nuns are not superhuman…but because of the unnatural laws under which they live they are particularly susceptible to temptation. Both groups are denied normal family life. Both groups therefore live in contravention of the deepest cravings of their nature, and are subject to needless temptations.”

 

            The quotations placed in this newsletter have clearly shown us that the “fruit” of mandatory (i.e., “enforced”) celibacy is as follows:

 

bullet