SECTION II.
If the head be corrupt, so also must be the members. If the
Pope be essentially Pagan, what else can be the character of his
clergy? If they derive their orders from a radically corrupted
source, these orders must partake of the corruption of the source
from which they flow. This might be inferred independently of any
special evidence; but the evidence in regard to the Pagan
character of the Pope's clergy is as complete as that in regard
to the Pope himself. In whatever light the subject is viewed,
this will be very apparent.
There is a direct contrast between the character of the
ministers of Christ, and that of the Papal priesthood. When
Christ commissioned His servants, it was "to feed His
sheep, to feed His lambs," and that with the Word of
God, which testifies of Himself, and contains the words of
eternal life. When the Pope ordains his clergy, he takes them
bound to prohibit, except in special circumstances, the reading
of the Word of God "in the vulgar tongue,"
that is, in a language which the people can understand. He gives
them, indeed, a commission; and what is it? It is couched in
these astounding words: "Receive the power of
sacrificing for the living and the dead." * What
blasphemy could be worse than this? What more derogatory to the
one sacrifice of Christ, whereby "He hath perfected for
ever them that are sanctified"? (Heb. x. 14). This is
the real distinguishing function of the popish priesthood. At the
remembrance that this power, in these very words, had been
conferred on him, when ordained to the priesthood, Luther used,
in after years, with a shudder, to express his astonishment that "the
earth had not opened its mouth and swallowed up both him who
uttered these words, and him to whom they were addressed." *
The sacrifice which the papal priesthood are empowered to offer,
as a "true propitiatory sacrifice" for the
sins of the living and the dead, is just the "unbloody
sacrifice" of the mass, which was offered up in Babylon
long before it was ever heard of in Rome.
Now, while Semiramis, the real original of the Chaldean Queen
of Heaven, to whom the "unbloody sacrifice" of
the mass was first offered, was in her own person, as we have
already seen, the very paragon of impurity, she at the same time
affected the greatest favour for that kind of sanctity which
looks down with contempt on God's holy ordinance of marriage. The
Mysteries over which she presided were scenes of the rankest
pollution; and yet the higher orders of the priesthood were bound
to a life of celibacy, as a life of peculiar and pre-eminent
holiness. Strange though it may seem, yet the voice of antiquity
assigns to that abandoned queen the invention of clerical
celibacy, and that in the most stringent form. * In some
countries, as in Egypt, human nature asserted its rights, and
though the general system of Babylon was retained, the yoke of
celibacy was abolished, and the priesthood were permitted to
marry. But every scholar knows that when the worship of Cybele,
the Babylonian goddess, was introduced into Pagan Rome, it was
introduced in its primitive form, with its celibate clergy. *
When the Pope appropriated to himself so much that was peculiar
to the worship of that goddess, from the very same source, also,
he introduced into the priesthood under his authority the binding
obligation of celibacy. The introduction of such a principle into
the Christian Church had been distinctly predicted as one grand
mark of the apostacy, when men should "depart from the
faith, and speaking lies in hypocrisy, having their consciences
seared with a hot iron, should forbid to marry." The
effects of its introduction were most disastrous. * The records
of all nations where priestly celibacy has been introduced have
proved that, instead of ministering to the purity of those
condemned to it, it has only plunged them in the deepest
pollution. The history of Thibet, and China, and Japan, where the
Babylonian institute of priestly celibacy has prevailed from time
immemorial, bears testimony to the abominations that have flowed
from it. * The excesses committed by the celibate priests of
Bacchus in Pagan Rome in their secret Mysteries, were such that
the Senate felt called upon to expel them from the bounds of the
Roman republic. * In Papal Rome the same abominations have flowed
from priestly celibacy, in connection with the corrupt and
corrupting system of the confessional, insomuch that all men who
have examined the subject have been compelled to admire the
amazing significance of the name divinely bestowed on it, both in
a literal and figurative sense, "Babylon the Great, THE
MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH." * Out
of a thousand facts of a similar kind, let one only be adduced,
vouched for by the distinguished Roman Catholic historian De
Thou. When Pope Paul V. meditated the suppression of the licensed
brothels in the "Holy City," the Roman Senate
petitioned against his carrying his design into effect, on the
ground that the existence of such places was the only means of
hindering the priests from seducing their wives and daughters!! *
These celibate priests have all a certain mark set upon them
at their ordination; and that is the clerical tonsure. The
tonsure is the first part of the ceremony of ordination; and it
is held to be a most important element in connection with the
orders of the Romish clergy. When, after long contendings, the
Picts were at last brought to submit to the Bishop of Rome, the
acceptance of this tonsure as the tonsure of St. Peter on the
part of the clergy was the visible symbol of that submission.
Naitan, the Pictish king, having assembled the nobles of his
court and the pastors of his church, thus addressed them: "I
recommend all the clergy of my kingdom to receive the
tonsure." Then, without delay, as Bede informs us, this
important revolution was accomplished by royal authority. * He
sent agents into every province, and caused all the ministers and
monks to receive the circular tonsure, according to the Roman
fashion, and thus to submit to Peter, "the most blessed
Prince of the apostles." * "It was the mark," says
Merle D'Aubigne, "that Popes stamped not on the
forehead, but on the crown. A royal proclamation, and a few clips
of the scissors, placed the Scotch, like a flock of sheep,
beneath the crook of the shepherd of the Tiber." * Now,
as Rome set so much importance on this tonsure, let it be asked
what was the meaning of it? It was the visible inauguration of
those who submitted to it as the priests of Bacchus. This tonsure
cannot have the slightest pretence to Christian authority. It was
indeed the "tonsure of Peter," but not of the
Peter of Galilee, but of the Chaldean "Peter"
of the Mysteries. He was a tonsured priest, for so was the god
whose Mysteries he revealed. Centuries before the Christian era,
thus spoke Herodotus of the Babylonian tonsure: "The
Arabians acknowledge no other gods than Bacchus and Urania [i.e.,
the Queen of Heaven], and they say that their hair was cut in the
same manner as Bacchus's is cut; now, they cut it in a circular
form, shaving it around the temples." * What, then,
could have led to this tonsure of Bacchus? Everything in his
history was mystically or hieroglyphically represented, and that
in such a way as none but the initiated could understand. One of
the things that occupied the most important place in the
Mysteries was the mutilation to which he was subjected when he
was put to death. In memory of that, he was lamented with bitter
weeping every year, as "Rosh-Gheza," "the
mutilated Prince." But "Rosh-Gheza" *
also signified the "clipped or shaved head."
Therefore he was himself represented either with the one or the
other form of tonsure; and his priests, for the same reason, at
their ordination had their heads either clipped or shaven. Over
all the world, where the traces of the Chaldean system are found,
this tonsure or shaving of the head is always found along with
it. The priests of Osiris, the Egyptian Bacchus, were always
distinguished by the shaving of their heads. * In Pagan Rome, *
in India, and even in China, the distinguishing mark of the
Babylonian priesthood was the shaven head. Thus Gautama Buddha,
who lived at least 540 years before Christ, when setting up the
sect of Buddhism in India which spread to the remotest regions of
the East, first shaved his own head, in obedience, as he
pretended, to a Divine command, and then set to work to get
others to imitate his example. One of the very titles by which he
was called was that of the "Shaved-head." *
"The shaved-head," says one of the Purans, "that
he might perform the orders of Vishnu, formed a number of
disciples, and of shaved-heads like himself." The high
antiquity of this tonsure may be seen from the enactment in the
Mosaic law against it. The Jewish priests were expressly
forbidden to make any baldness upon their heads (Lev. xxi. 5),
which sufficiently shows that, even so early as the time of
Moses, the "shaved-head" had been already
introduced. In the Church of Rome the heads of the ordinary
priests are only clipped, the heads of the monks or regular
clergy are shaven, but both alike, at their consecration, receive
the circular tonsure, thereby identifying them, beyond all
possibility of doubt, with Bacchus, "the mutilated
Prince." * Now, if the priests of Rome take away the
key of knowledge, and lock up the Bible from the people; if they
are ordained to offer the Chaldean sacrifice in honour of the
Pagan Queen of Heaven; if they are bound by the Chaldean law of
celibacy, that plunges them in profligacy; if, in short, they are
all marked at their consecration with the distinguishing mark of
the priests of the Chaldean Bacchus, what right, what possible
right, can they have to be called ministers of Christ?
But Rome has not only her ordinary secular clergy, as they are
called; she has also, as every one knows, other religious orders
of a different kind. She has innumerable armies of monks and nuns
all engaged in her service. Where can there be shown the least
warrant for such an institution in Scripture? In the religion of
the Babylonian Messiah their institution was from the earliest
times. In that system there were monks and nuns in abundance. In
Thibet and Japan, where the Chaldean system was early introduced,
monasteries are still to be found, and with the same disastrous
results to morals as in Papal Europe. * In Scandinavia, the
priestesses of Freya, who were generally kings' daughters, whose
duty it was to watch the sacred fire, and who were bound to
perpetual virginity, were just an order of nuns. * In Athens
there were virgins maintained at the public expense, who were
strictly bound to single life. * In Pagan Rome, the Vestal
virgins, who had the same duty to perform as the priestesses of
Freya, occupied a similar position. Even in Peru, during the
reign of the Incas, the same system prevailed, and showed so
remarkable an analogy, as to indicate that the Vestals of Rome,
the nuns of the Papacy, and the Holy Virgins of Peru, must have
sprung from a common origin. Thus does Prescott refer to the
Peruvian nunneries: "Another singular analogy with Roman
Catholic institutions is presented by the virgins of the sun, the
elect, as they were called. These were young maidens dedicated to
the service of the deity, who at a tender age were taken from
their homes, and introduced into convents, where they were placed
under the care of certain elderly matrons, mamaconas, * who had
grown grey within their walls. It was their duty to watch over
the sacred fire obtained at the festival of Raymi. From the
moment they entered the establishment they were cut off from all
communication with the world, even with their own family and
friends.... Woe to the unhappy maiden who was detected in an
intrigue! By the stern law of the Incas she was to be buried
alive." This was precisely the fate of the Roman Vestal
who was proved to have violated her vow. Neither in Peru,
however, nor in Pagan Rome was the obligation to virginity so
stringent as in the Papacy. It was not perpetual, and therefore
not so exceedingly demoralising. After a time, the nuns might be
delivered from their confinement, and marry; from all hopes of
which they are absolutely cut off in the Church of Rome. In all
these cases, however, it is plain that the principle on which
these institutions were founded was originally the same. "One
is astonished," adds Prescott, "to find so
close a resemblance between the institutions of the American
Indian, the ancient Roman, and the modern Catholic." *
Prescott finds it difficult to account for this resemblance;
but the little sentence from the prophet Jeremiah, which was
quoted at the commencement of this inquiry, accounts for it
completely: "Babylon hath been a golden cup in the
Lord's hand, that hath made ALL THE EARTH drunken" (Jer.
li. 7). This is the Rosetta stone that has helped already to
bring to light so much of the secret iniquity of the Papacy, and
that is destined still further to decipher the dark mysteries of
every system of heathen mythology that either has been or that
is. The statement of this text can be proved to be a literal
fact. It can be proved that the idolatry of the whole earth is
one, that the sacred language of all nations is radically
Chaldean--that the GREAT GODS of every country and clime are
called by Babylonian names--and that all the Paganisms of the
human race are only a wicked and deliberate, but yet most
instructive corruption of the primeval gospel first preached in
Eden, and through Noah, afterwards conveyed to all mankind. The
system, first concocted in Babylon, and thence conveyed to the
ends of the earth, has been modified and diluted in different
ages and countries. In Papal Rome only is it now found nearly
pure and entire. But yet, amid all the seeming variety of
heathenism, there is an astonishing oneness and identity, bearing
testimony to the truth of God's Word. The overthrow of all
idolatry cannot now be distant. But before the idols of the
heathen shall be finally cast to the moles and to the bats, I am
persuaded that they will be made to fall down and worship "the
Lord the king," to bear testimony to His glorious
truth, and with one loud and united acclaim, ascribe salvation,
and glory, and honour, and power unto Him that sitteth upon the
throne, and to the Lamb, for ever and ever.