Chapter XIII. The Influence of the Priesthood of America Upon the Morals of This Country.

“HEATHENISH PRACTICES.” “A dupe kissing the supposed bone of “Saint Ann” to cure Rheumatism.”

An institution which is allowed to flourish in this country, should be an institution whose teachers are in harmony with the fundamental principles of godliness, morality and liberty, and unless they are, the teachers at once become traitors.

Now, is not this common sense logic and every-day philosophy?

We want to investigate and see if this logic and philosophy is not reasonable and founded upon common sense, and if we find that it is, then any man or woman of intelligence must acknowledge that if the teachings and the fundamental principles of a free country are correct, then the doctrines of Catholicism are altogether wrong, and the sooner the American people can arrive at this conclusion, the better it will be for us, for if the teachings of our Protestant forefathers are right, and the teachings of Rome are wrong, the quicker we can eradicate and stamp out these popish doctrines, the better it will be for our posterity.

If this country is a home for those who love liberty, then the influence of the priesthood of America is detrimental to the fundamental principles of America, as Catholicism does not teach patriotism and loyalty of country, as the burden of her teachings is, “Loyalty to the Pope,” and the Pope of Rome, who is at the head of the Catholic Church; is a despot pure and simple–yea, he is worse than a despot, as he rules his followers by a superstitious belief, which teaches that not only the body of Rome’s followers is subject to the Pope’s every whim, but the soul as well is directly under the control of this despotic sovereign.

A Roman Catholic form of government is more despotic than a monarchy which is ruled by an absolute despot, as these monarchs who have absolute sway in the affairs of the state only are satisfied with this absolutism, but not so with Catholicism, as she haunts her followers to the grave and then demands of their surviving relatives that homage be paid her in order to keep their dead out of the regions of despair.

It matters not how strong we are in our endeavors to do right, the commission of wrong under our nose will corrupt to a certain extent the morals of the young, and I say without fear of contradiction that the priestcraft of this and every other country are, as a whole, a set of men whose morality is below par; however, I sincerely believe that there are some few who are chaste, but I am sorry to say that this class is greatly in the minority; and why should it be otherwise, as the priesthood is composed of men who are mortal, and the vow of celibacy which they must take before they enter the priesthood is an unnatural and an unreasonable vow, and one which is not kept sacred by one out of every fifty; thus you will see at once that the priestcraft is a cancer upon the body of morality, for whenever the young and rising generation learns that those who are supposed to teach them in chastity and morality, are men who will commit the very sins which they have been taught are heinous. Then, what can you expect of future generations, and what must eventually be the morals of a country which is controlled by the priestcraft?

We do not have to confine ourselves to the recital of the immorality of the priestcraft of foreign countries, but we could mention scores of cases that have happened in this country and which will continue to happen as long as the Romish Church demands the vows of celibacy by the priestcraft.

We will give you an instance of the practices of Romanism in this country which happened no later than November of this year (1903), and if I had the space, I could fill this volume full of such actions by the priestcraft.

Priest Geo. D. Sander, of St. Leonard’s Catholic Church, Hamburg avenue and Jefferson street, Brooklyn, New York, was known in that city as a devout Catholic priest, and he was also known in Far Hills, New Jersey, as a race horse man, by the name of “Geo. West,” who was interested in a stock farm, on which lived a woman known as “Mrs. Geo. West,” but her right name is Mrs. Mamie Kipp, who formerly belonged to Priest Sander’s church, but disappeared from Brooklyn very mysteriously, and whose whereabouts had been unknown to her family and her friends, until it was learned that she was living on this stock farm at Far Hills, N.J., and bore the fictitious name by which this priest was known.

The double life of Priest Sander began in 1901. Then Jos. C. Peck, racer and raiser of trotting horses, met this priest in Albany, who wore the ordinary garb of a citizen. They met at the race track, which was not a very good recommendation to say the least of it, for the Rev. Father Sander. Peck found that this priest was a keen judge of horses and their love for horses established a bond of friendship between them.

In Baltimore, a short time afterwards, these two men again met at the race track. Peck told Priest Sander that he had just sold a stock farm at Millington, N.J., and contemplated buying another. Sander told Peck that he was the owner of a fine mare named “Ethel Burns,” and that he would place her on Peck’s farm if he purchased it. He told Peck that his mare had a track record of 2:20-1/4 and a trial record of 2:16.

Peck informed this priest that he was a bachelor. Priest Sander proposed that they should keep house jointly and said that he would provide a housekeeper and share the expense of the establishment. He was the guardian, he said, of a Mrs. Mamie Kipp, who had had some trouble with her husband and who wanted to get away from Brooklyn. He informed Peck that this lady had a young son, and that he would bring both the mother and son to the farm at Far Hills, N.J.

It was obvious that the priest could not indulge in his love for fast horses, and make regular visits to the stock farm in his priestly robes, as he knew it would cause considerable comment; so this priest suggested to Peck that Mrs. Kipp be called “Mrs. Geo. West,” and that it be given out to the neighbors that she was the wife of a drummer for a large mercantile house in New York, and further stated that he could visit this woman as “George West,” and not create any comment.

The trainmen became acquainted with this priest and considered him a “good fellow,” as he was always smoking and played the part of a “drummer” in an elegant manner, and these trainmen came to know “Geo. West” as Peck’s partner in the race horse business.

The merchants about Far Hills knew this priest as the husband of “Mrs. West,” and when this priest would put in his appearance at Far Hills, the neighbors, of course, thought it was nothing more than natural that “Mrs. West’s” husband should come to see her whenever he could get an opportunity to get off of the road.

The accounts for the supplies of the household were billed sometimes to “Geo. West” and sometimes to Jos. C. Peck, thus you will see that Priest Sander acknowledged by these bills that he was “Geo. West.”

This story got to be noised about, and the Protestant element of Brooklyn as well as Priest Sander’s flock became very much interested in the tale, and sent a reporter out to interview Jos. C. Peck, and the first question this reporter asked him was, “Is that the picture of your sister?” pointing to a portrait of the woman hanging on the wall. “No,” he replied. “That is Mrs. West.” The reporter asked if it was not the picture of Mrs. Mamie Kipp. Peck hesitated, his lips trembling, and he began to look very nervous, then he gave way completely and said: “Yes, it is Mrs. Mamie Kipp.” “How does she come here under the name of ‘Mrs. West,’ and who is ‘Mr. West?'” was then asked, which Peck refused to answer.

With these facts in hand, the reporter returned to Brooklyn and sought Priest Sander in his parlor, in his parish residence, and the first question he asked him was this: “You own a trotting horse out at Far Hills, N.J., don’t you?” The answer was, “Yes.” “Don’t you own a string of trotting horses?” The answer was, “Certainly not! Who told you that?” The reporter replied, “Oh, no; you don’t own a string of horses as Priest Sander, but as ‘Geo. West,’ don’t you?” Priest Sander tried to look surprised, and he folded a slip of paper he held in his hand and got very nervous and replied, “Now, that is a pretty story, isn’t it; who told you all this?”

The reporter laid before him all the facts he had gathered at Far Hills, and demanded that he affirm or deny the story. Then this priest said, “I may as well confess; it will be the ruin of me; it will take the bread out of my mouth, but you have got it absolutely straight.” The reporter asked Priest Sander if he positively didn’t know that this woman who sailed under the name of “Mrs. Geo. West” wasn’t Mrs. Mamie Kipp.

This priest, not being content with the dastardly part that he had played in his immoral conduct with Mrs. Kipp, absolutely denied that it was Mrs. Mamie Kipp, and further declared that he knew nothing about her, except that she was the “housekeeper” at Peck’s farm, and why she was called “Mrs. West” he did not know; thus you will see that while he was guilty of immorality with Mrs. Mamie Kipp, he also was a notorious liar; but bear in mind that this same Priest Sander was still at this time presiding over a Catholic church in Brooklyn.

The reporter was determined to lead him out as far as possible so he repeated again, “Are you absolutely positive that ‘Mrs. West’ at Peck’s farm is not Mrs. Mamie Kipp?”

This priest replied that he was “positive,” and stated that this woman at Peck’s farm was Peck’s housekeeper, and further stated that he did not know anything about her at all, when he knew as well as he knew that he was living that he had been the cause of her forsaking her husband in Brooklyn, and also had been instrumental in her going to Far Hills, N.J., where he could live his life of shame without molestation.

After this vagabond had made this denial, Mr. Peck was again seen at Far Hills, N.J., and emphatically stated that Priest Sander had told him that this woman was Mrs. Mamie Kipp, and that he knew that this priest was living in adultery with her.

What is the consequence? Did the Roman Catholic Church excommunicate this bundle of perfidy for immorality? Ah, no! As the “moguls” and “high up” officials of Catholicism are cognizant of the fact that the priestcraft are, as a whole, the most immoral set of men that ever infested the face of the earth. Now, what can we expect of the morals of a country which has for its leaders and teachers men of this caliber? We might as well expect our daughters to become women of virtue and godliness, who were raised in houses of ill fame, as to expect young men and women to become men and women of morality and chastity, who have for their teachers such men as Priest Sander of Brooklyn, New York.

There is no denying the fact that Catholicism has already a strong hold upon the affairs of this country, as we find the hydra-headed demon in every branch of our government, and since such is the case, it is folly to deny the fact that if Catholicism is what we have shown it to be, that her influence is demoralizing, and the influence of the priesthood of America upon the morals of this country is bound to be detrimental, and who will deny the truthfulness of my assertions, as I have not misstated a single paragraph in this book; and if this is true, what shall we expect of the present generation and the generations that are yet unborn, if we permit Catholicism to make as great headway in the future as she has in the past?

We call to mind another case which belongs to the history of to-day, and in this chapter we desire to refer to the present sins of the priestcraft, as history teems with the abominations of the priestcraft immorality, but in this chapter we want to thoroughly convince the reader that the same immorality that has existed in the ranks of Catholicism in bygone centuries, is to-day as degrading and as rampant as it ever was, and if we can do this, we feel satisfied that we will impress the Protestant world with the importance of overthrowing the power of the Pope, and erecting in its stead the true spirit of Protestantism, whose influence will not blight the characters of our boys and girls, but which will make of them an army of giants, ever ready to battle for the chastity of our American homes.

One of the most fashionable Roman Catholic churches in New York City is “St. Cecilia’s,” situated on North Henry and Herbert streets.

Only a few years ago the organist of this church went to the room of the priest in charge, in company with a little boy. The priest informed this boy to stay down stairs, and invited the organist to his parlor, near which were his living rooms. This priest locked the door behind him, and without a moment’s warning, leaped upon her like a beast and attempted to bear her down upon the sofa and commit an assault, but her cries frightened him away.

With flushed face she rushed from this priest’s room and passed the servant, out into the street, with the priest begging her to say nothing about what had happened. We want to know if this attempted crime injured the priest in the estimation of Catholicism? Not by any means, as he continued to serve the church in the capacity of priest, after both this girl’s father and mother had publicly denounced him as a seducer of virtue.

The entire congregation learned of this priest’s attempted assault upon virtue, but this degrading notoriety did not injure him in the least, as his services are just as crowded as they were before. This outrage was carried before the bishop of the diocese in which this church was situated, but nothing was done.

The priest which we refer to was a drunkard, and he drank as deeply after this attempted assault as before, and in a short time he assaulted a 12-year-old girl, and not long after that he assaulted his servant, who was a girl 18 years of age, and continued his raid upon her virtue until one day, while in a drunken spree, he struck her and injured her, and she made public the actions of this human viper, who had been parading in the robes of a priest.

Did this exposure disgrace him in the eyes of the Catholic officials who were above him? Not at all, as he continued to serve this New York church without molestation, and it was a notorious fact, and known by the members of his church what he was accused of, but still hundreds of boys and girls, young men and young women, and old men and old women, bowed at the feet of this depraved devil and confessed their sins.

If we cared, we could write from now until our old arm would become palsied with age, and each chapter would be a new story of the perfidy and hellishness of the priestcraft, as every age reeks with the stench of their immorality, and the countries which are completely under the power of the Pope of Rome are only the shadows of what this country will become if this demon of darkness is not halted, for the influence of the priesthood in America upon the morals of this country will spread its blight over the face of our fair land until our nation’s morals will be a nauseating sight to behold.

Reader, remember what I tell you to-day: that unless the spirit of Protestantism takes a firm stand in this land against Catholicism, we will find our Protestant hopes and ambitions within the near future paralyzed by the infusion of Rome’s immorality.

Download a PDF file of this article.

Please follow and like us: