Awful Disclosures

M >> Maria Monk >> Awful Disclosures

Pages:
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23

From those testimonies, direct and unintentional, it is fully evident,
that Maria Monk was a long resident, and is profoundly acquainted with
the doings in the Hotel Dieu Convent at Montreal.

II. What collateral evidence can be adduced of the truth of the "Awful
Disclosures" by Maria Monk?

1. One corroborative testimony is derived from the _silence of the
Roman Priests and their avowed partisans_. Months have passed away
since the first statements of those matters were made, and also the
defence of the Priests, with the affidavits and other connected
circumstances, were presented to the public in the Protestant
Vindicator. One of the persons in Montreal, who was in favour of the
Jesuits, Mr. Doucet, stated that "the Priests never take up such things;
they allow their character to defend itself." There was a time when that
contemptuous course would have sufficed, or rather, when to have spoken
the truth of the Roman Priests would have cost a man his life, and
overwhelmed his family in penury, disgrace, and anguish. The Canadian
Jesuits may be assured that time has passed away, never more to return.
They must take up this thing; for their characters cannot defend
themselves; and every enlightened man in Canada knows, that in a moral
aspect, they cannot be defended.

Argument, denial, affidavits, if they could reach from Montreal to New
York, and the oaths of every Papist and Infidel in Canada,--from Joseph
Signay, the Popish Prelate of Quebec and Jean Jacques Lartigue, the
Suffragan of Montreal, down to the most profligate of the half-pay
military officers, among whom are to be found some of the dregs of the
British army, all of them will avail nothing. They are not worth a puff
of wind against the internal evidence of Maria Monk's book, in connexion
with the rejection of the proposal of the New York Protestant
Association, that the Nunnery shall undergo a strict and impartial
examination. It is one of the remarkable evidences of the extraordinary
delusion which blinds, or the infatuation which enchains the public
mind, that men will not credit the corruptions and barbarities of
Romanism. To account for this stupefaction among persons who are wide
awake to every other system of deadly evil, is almost impossible. Popery
necessarily extirpates the rights of man. It ever has destroyed the
well-being of society. By it, all municipal law and domestic obligations
are abrogated: It always subverts national prosperity and stability; and
it is the invincible extinguisher of all true morality and genuine
religion. Notwithstanding, men will give credence neither to its own
avowed principles, character, and spirit; nor to the unavoidable effects
which constantly have flowed from its operations and predominance.

In any other case but one exposing the abominations of Popery, such a
volume as Maria Monk's "Awful Disclosures" would have been received
without cavil; and immediate judicial measures would have been adopted,
to ascertain the certainty of the alleged facts, and the extent and
aggravation of their criminality. But now persons are calling for more
evidence, when, if they reflected but for a moment, they would perceive,
that the only additional evidence possible, is under the entire control
of the very persons who are criminated; and to whom the admission of
further testimony would be the accumulation of indelible ignominy.

The pretence, that it is contrary to their rules to allow strangers to
explore the interior of a nunnery, only adds insult to crime. Why should
a Convent be exempt from search, more than any other edifice? Why should
Roman Priests be at liberty to perpetrate every deed of darkness in
impenetrable recesses called nunneries? Why should one body of females,
shut up in a certain species of mansion, to whom only one class of men
have unrestricted access, be excluded from all public and legal
supervision, more than any other habitation of lewd women, into which
all men may enter? As citizens of the United States, we do not pretend
to have any authoritative claim to explore a convent within the dominion
of a foreign potentate. The Roman Priests of Canada, exercise a vast
influence, and are completely intertwined with the Jesuits, in this
republic. Therefore, when they remember the extinction of the nunneries
at Monroe, Michigan, Charlestown, and Pittsburg; and when they
recollect, that the delineations of Maria Monk, if they produce no
effect in Canada, will assuredly render female convents in the United
States very suspicious and insecure; if they have any solicitude for
their confederates, they will intrepidly defy research, and dauntlessly
accept the offer of the New York Protestant Association: that a joint
committee of disinterested, enlightened and honorable judges, should
fully investigate, and equitably decide upon the truth or falsehood of
Maria Monk's averments. Their ominous silence, their affected contempt,
and their audacious refusal, are calculated only to convince every
impartial person, of even the smallest discernment, of the real state of
things in that edifice; that the chambers of pollution are above, and
that the dungeon of torture and death are below; and that they dread the
exposure of the theatre on which their horrible tragedies are performed.

It is also a fact publicly avowed by certain Montreal Papists
themselves, and extensively told in taunt and triumph, that they have
been employed as masons and carpenters by the Roman Priests, since Maria
Monk's visit to Montreal in August, 1835, expressly to alter various
parts of the Hotel Dieu Convent, and to close up some of the
subterraneous passages and cells in that nunnery. This circumstance is
not pretended even to be disputed or doubted; for when the dungeons
under ground are spoken of before the Papists, their remark is this: "Eh
bien! mais vous ne les trouverez pas, a present; on les a cache hors de
vue. Very well, you will not find them there now; they are closed up,
and out of sight." Why was the manoeuvre completed? Manifestly, that in
urgent extremity, a casual explorer might be deceived, by the apparent
proof that the avenues, and places of imprisonment and torture which
Maria Monk describes are not discoverable. Now that circumstance might
not even been suspected, if the Papist workmen themselves had not openly
boasted of the chicanery by which the Priests, who employed them,
expected to blind and deceive the Protestants. For in reference to the
Romanists, a Popish Priest well knows that nothing more is necessary
than for him to assert any absurdity, however gross or impossible, and
attest it by the five crosses on his vestments, and his own
superstitious vassal believes it with more assurance than his own
personal identity. But the filling up and the concealment of the old
apertures in the nunnery, by the order of the Roman Priests are scarcely
less powerful corroborative proof of Maria Monk's delineations, than
ocular and palpable demonstration.

2. Some of the circumstances attending Maria Monk's visit to Montreal,
in August, 1835, add great weight in favour of the truth, which no
cavils, skepticism, scorn, nor menaces, can counterbalance.

We will however state one very recent occurrence, because it seems to
us, that it alone is almost decisive of the controversy. A counsellor of
Quebec--his name is omitted merely from delicacy and prudential
considerations--has been in New York since the publication of the "Awful
Disclosures" His mind was so much influenced by the perusal of that
volume, that he sought out the Authoress, and most closely searched into
the credibility of her statements. Before the termination of the
interview, that gentleman became so convinced of the truth of the
picture which Maria Monk drew of the interior of the Canadian Nunneries,
that he expressed himself to the following effect:--"My daughter, about
15 years of age, is in the Ursuline Convent at Quebec. I will return
home immediately; and if I cannot remove her any other way, I will drag
her out by the hair of her head, and raise a noise about their ears that
shall not soon be quieted."

That gentleman did so return to Quebec, since which he has again visited
New York; and he stated, that upon his arrival in Quebec, he went to the
Convent, and instantly removed his daughter from the Ursuline Nunnery;
from whom he ascertained, as far as she had been initiated into the
mysteries, that Maria Monk's descriptions of Canadian Nunneries, are
most minutely and undeniably accurate.

We have already remarked, that Mrs. ----, Mr. Lloyd, Mr. Hogan, and Mr.
Smith, who was a Papist Priest, with scores of other persons who
formerly resided in Montreal, all express their unqualified belief of
the statements made by Maria Monk. Mr. Ogden's acquaintance with the
facts, as Attorney General, and that of other officers of the Provincial
Government, have also been noticed. The ensuing additional circumstances
are of primary importance to a correct estimate of the value which
should be attached to the crafty silence of the Roman Priests and the
impudent denials of infidel profligates.

Mr. Bouthillier, one of the Montreal Magistrates, called at Mr.
Johnson's house where Maria Monk stayed, in the month of August, 1835,
when visiting Montreal.

He addressed her and said:--"There is some mystery about Novices--What
is it? and asked how long a woman must be a novice before she can take
the veil?" Having been answered, Mr. Bouthillier then desired Maria Monk
to describe the Superior of the Hotel Dieu Nunnery. As soon as it was
done, he became enraged, and said--"Vous dites un mensonge, vous en
savez. You lie, you know you do?"--Mr. Bouthillier next inquired--"Was
Mr. Tabeau in the Holy Retreat when you left the Convent?" She answered
"Yes." To which he replied in French--"Anybody might have answered that
question." Something having been said about the Hotel Dieu Nuns being
confined to their convent, Mr. Bouthillier declared, that they were
allowed to go about the streets. He was told that could not be the case,
for it was a direct violation of the rules for Nuns to depart from the
Hotel Dieu Nunnery. He replied--"Ce n'est pas vrai. That is not true,"
Mr. Bonthillier then became very angry, and applied to Maria Monk some
very abusive epithets, for which a gentleman in the room reproved him.
It was evident, that he lost his temper because he had lost his
argument, and his hopes of controverting her statements.

On the Lord's day after Maria Monk's arrival in Montreal, and when the
matter had become well known and much talked about, Phelan, the Priest,
at the end of mass, addressed the Papists, who were assembled to hear
mass, to this effect: "There is a certain nun in this city who has left
our faith, and joined the Protestants. She has a child of which she is
ready to swear I am the father. She wishes in this way to take my gown
from me. If I knew where to find her, I would put her in prison. I
mention this to guard you against being deceived by what she may say.
The Devil now has such hold upon people that there is danger lest some
might believe her story." He then pretended to weep, and appeared to be
overcome with feeling. A number of the people gathered around him, and
he said: "That nun is Antichrist. She is not a human being, but an evil
spirit, who got among the Catholics, and _was admitted into the
nunnery_, where she learned the rules." He also stated, that "in that
nun, the prophecy respecting the coming of Antichrist is fulfilled, to
break down the Catholic religion." Such was Phelan's address to the
people. He declared that Maria Monk had been a nun. Now he knew her, for
he saw her in Montreal, where she could not know him. It would have
saved all further inquiry and research, if, instead of denouncing her
after mass, he had merely assented to Maria Monk's proposition, to be
confronted with those Roman Priests and nuns before impartial witnesses
in the Hotel Dieu Convent.

One of the most impressively characteristic circumstances which occurred
during Maria Monk's visit to Montreal in Aug. 1835, was an interview at
Mr. Johnson's house with a carpenter who had heard Phelan's denunciation
of Maria Monk after mass.

The heinous destruction of all domestic confidence and of all female
purity, is known to be the constant and general practice, not only in
Canada, but in all other Popish countries, and among Papists in every
part of the world. For in truth it is only fulfilling the authentic
dogmas of their own system. The following authoritative principles are
divulged in the Corpus Juris Canonici, which contains the Decretals,
Canons, &c. of the Popes and Councils; and other participants of the
pretended Papal infallibility. "If the Pope fall into homicide or
adultery, he cannot be accused, but is excused by the murders of Samson,
and the adultery of David." Hugo, Glossa, distinc. 40 Chapter, Non vos.
--"Likewise if any Priest is found embracing a woman, it must be
presupposed and expounded that he doth it to bless her!"--Glossa, Caus.
12. Quest. 3. Chapter Absis. According to the Pope's bull he who does
not believe those doctrines is accursed.

As that carpenter was completely overcome by the recollection of the
Priest's information and caution about his marriage, he desisted from
any further questions; but upon Maria Monk's declaration, that she was
desirous to go into the convent, and prove all her accusations against
the Priests and Nuns, he withdrew. Soon after he returned, and stated,
that he had been to the Convent, to inquire respecting her; and that he
had been informed, that she had once belonged to the Nunnery; but that
they would not any longer own or recognise her. Afterwards he exhibited
the most contradictory emotions, and first cursed Maria Monk; then
reviled the Priests, applying to them all the loathsome epithets in the
Canadian vocabulary. Subsequently, he went to make inquiries at the
Seminary; and after his return to Mr. Johnson's house he declared, that
the persons there had informed him, that Maria Monk had lived in the
Nunnery, but not as a Nun; then he offered to assist her in her
endeavours to expose the Priests; and finally disappeared, swearing
aloud as he was retiring from the house; and apparently thinking over
the conduct of the Priest to his wife before their marriage. "Oh,
sacre!"--he repeated to himself--"c'est trop mechant!"

Similar facts to the above occurred frequently during the time of Maria
Monk's visit to Montreal--in which strangers who called upon her, cursed
and reviled her; then believed her statements and assented to them--and
displayed all the natural excitement which was necessarily comprised in
the working of their own belief and convictions of the iniquity of the
Priests, and the dread resulting from their own superstitious vassalage,
and the certainty of a heavy penance.

But in connexion with the preceding collateral evidence is another
remarkable circumstance, which is this: the extensive knowledge which
Maria Monk has obtained of the Canadian Jesuits. Those with whom she has
been acquainted, she affirms that she could instantly identify. For that
object, she has given a catalogue of those Priests whose names and
persons are in some degree familiarly known to her. As the Priests are
often changing their abodes, and many of them residents in Montreal
until a vacancy occurs for them in the country parishes, in those
particulars there may be a trifling mistake; but Maria Monk solemnly
avers, that the Priests, whether dead or living, who are enumerated in
the subsequent catalogue, either have dwelt or do yet reside in the
places specified. When unexpectedly and closely examined in reference to
the Priests of the same name, she particularly distinguished them, and
pointed out the difference between them in their persons, gait, &c.;
thus precluding all objection from the fact of there being more than one
Priest with a similar appellative. This circumstance particularly is
illustrated by the Priests named Marcoux, of whom she says there are
three brothers or first cousins--two called Dufresne, &c.: each of whom
she graphically depicts. It is also certain, because she has done it in
a great variety of instances, and in the presence of many different
persons, all of whom are well acquainted with them, that she describes
Lartigue; Dufresne; Richard; Phelan; Bonin; Comte; Bourget; McMahon;
Kelly; Demers; Roux; Roque; Sauvage; Tabeau; Marcoux; Morin; Durocher;
and all the Roman Priests around Montreal, with the utmost minuteness of
accuracy; while the Chaplain of the Ursuline Nunnery at Quebec, Father
Daule, is as exactly depicted by her, as if her whole life had been
passed under his _surveillance_. Some of the appellatives in the
ensuing catalogue may not be correctly spelt. Scarcely any thing is more
difficult than to acquire proper names in a foreign language; and
especially where the pronunciation itself is provincial, as is the case
with Canadian French; and when also those titles have to be transcribed
from the mouth of a person who knows no more of orthoepy and orthography
than a Canadian Nun. However, Maria Monk attests, that the Priests to
whom she refers did reside at those places which she has designated, and
that she has seen them all in the Hotel Dieu Nunnery--some of them very
often, and others on a variety of occasions.

Nothing is more improbable, if not impossible, than that any Papist girl
should have such an extensive acquaintance among Roman Priests. In
Canada especially, where the large majority of females have little more
correct knowledge of that which occurs out of their own district than of
Herschel's astronomical discoveries, young women cannot be personally
familiar with any Priests, in ordinary cases, except those who may have
been "Cures" of the parish in which they reside, or of the immediate
vicinity, or an occasional visitor during the absence, or sickness, or
death of the resident Curate or Missionary. Notwithstanding, Maria Monk
delineates to the life, the prominent features, the exact figure, and
the obvious characteristic exterior habits and personal appearance of
more than one hundred and fifty of those Priests, scattered about in all
parts of Canada; Among others she particularly specifies the following
men: but some of whom she notes as dead. Others she has named, but as
her recollections of them are less distinct, they are not enumerated.
Jean Jacques Lartigue, Bishop of Telmese, Montreal. The Irish Priest
McMahon, who has resided both in Montreal and Quebec. M. Dufrense, St.
Nicholas. L. Cadieux, Vicar General, Three Rivers. F. F. Marcoux,
Maskinonge. S. N. Dumoulin, Yamachiche. A. Leclerc, Yomaska. V.
Fournier, Baie du Febre. J. Demers, St. Gregoire. C. B. Courtain,
Gentilly. T. Pepin, St. Jean. Ignace Bourget, Montreal. The Priest Moor,
Missionary. J. C. Prince, Montreal. J. M. Sauvage, Montreal. J. Comte,
Montreal. J. H. A. Roux, Vicar General, Montreal. J. Roque, Montreal. A.
Malard, Montreal. A. L. Hubart, Montreal. A. Satin, Montreal. J. B.
Roupe, Montreal. Nic. Dufresne, Montreal. J. Richard, Montreal. C. Fay,
Montreal. J. B. St. Pierre, Montreal. F. Bonin, P. Phelan, Montreal. T.
B. M'Mahon, Perce. J. Marcoux, Caghuawaga. C. De Bellefeuille, Lake of
two Mountains. Claude Leonard, Montreal. F. Durocher, Lake of two
Mountains. G. Belmont, St. Francis. F. Demers, Vicar General, St. Denis.
J. O. Giroux, St. Benoit. J. B. St. Germain, St. Laurent. J. D. Delisle,
St. Cesaire. J. M. Lefebvre, St. Genevieve. F. Pigeon, St. Philippe. A.
Duransau, Lachine. O. Chevrefils, St. Constant. Joseph Quiblier,
Montreal. Francis Humbert, Montreal. J. Arraud, Montreal. O.
Archambault, Montreal. J. Larkin, Montreal. F. Sery, Montreal. R. Larre,
Montreal. A. Macdonald, Montreal. F. Larkin, Montreal. J. Beauregard,
Montreal. R. Robert, Montreal. J. Fitz Patrick, Montreal. J. Toupin,
Montreal. W. Baun, Montreal. T. Filiatreault. Montreal. J. Brady,
Montreal. P. Trudel, St. Hyacinth. John Grant, St. Hyacinth. J. Delaire,
Chambly. J. Desautels, Chambly. P. D. Ricard, St. Joachim. Jan.
Leclaire, Isle Jesus. F. M. Turcot, St. Rose. C. Larocque, Berthier, T.
Brassard, St. Elizabeth. J. B. Keller, St. Elizabeth. J. Ravienne,
Lanorate. J. T. Gagno, Valtrie. Gasford Guingner, St. Melanie. L.
Nicholas Jacques, St. Sulpice. J. Renucalde, St. Jaques. T. Can, St.
Esprit. C. J. Ducharme, St. Therese. J. Valliee, St. Scholastique. J. J.
Vinet, Arganteuil. M. Power, Beauharnois. J. B. Labelle, Chateauguay. E.
Bietz, St. Constant. P. Bedard, St. Remi. C. Aubry, St. Athanase. L.
Vinet, Noyon. J. Roque, Noyon. J. Zeph, Carren. F. Berauld, St.
Valentia. A. Maresseau, Longueuil. P. Brunet, ----. J. Odelin,
Rounilli. J. B. Dupuis, ----. L. Nau, Rouville. A. O. Giroux, St. Marc.
G. Marchesseau, ----. J. B. Belanger, St. Ours. H. Marcotte, Isle du
Pads. E. Crevier, Yamaska. G. Arsonault, ----. Eusebe Durocher, ----.
D. Denis, St. Rosalie. F. X. Brunet, St. Damase. J.A. Boisond, St. Pie.
M. Quintal, St. Damase. L. Aubry, Points Calire. P. Tetro, Beauharnois.
B. Ricard, St. Constant. M. Morin, Maskonche. J. Crevier, Blairfindie.
P. Grenier, Charteaguay. A. Darocher, Pointe aux Trembles. P. Murcure,
La Presentation. R. Gaulin, Dorchester. H. L. Girouard, St. Hyacinthe.
J. Paquin, Blairfinde. E. Brassard, St. Polycarpe. J. Boissonnault,
Riviere des Prairies. F. N. Blanchet, Soulanges. E. Lavoie, Blairfindie.
J. B. Kelly, Sorel. E. Morriset, St. Cyprian. H. Hudon, Argenteuil. M.
Brudet, St. Martin. P. P. Archambault, Vaudreuil. J. B. Boucher, La
Prairie. J. Quevillion, St. Ours. A. Chaboillez, Longueuil. P. J.
Delamothe, St. Scholastique. T. Lagard, St. Vincent. J. Durocher, St.
Benoit. Antoine Tabeau, Vicar General, Montreal. J. F. Hebard, St. Ours.
F. A. Trudeau, Montreal. M. J. Felix, St. Benoit. L. Lamothe, Bethier.
J. Moirier, St. Anne. F. J. Deguise, Vicar General, Varennes. J. B.
Bedard, St. Denis. R. O. Brunsau, Vercheres. F. Portier, Terrebonne. P.
D. Ricard, Berthier. L. Gague, Lachenaie. Joseph Belanger, Chambly. M.
Blanchet, St. Charles. P. M. Mignault, Chambly. F. Labelle,
L'Assumption. F. Marcoux, St. Barthelemi. N. L. Amiot, Repentigny. J. B.
Boucher, Chambly. P. Lafranc, St. Jean Baptiste. P. Robitaille, Monnie.
F. De Bellefeullie, St. Vincent. M. Brassard, St. Elizabeth. P.
Cousigny, St. Mathias. J. D. Daule, Quebec.

It is readily admitted, that any person could take one of the
Ecclesiastical Registers of Lower Canada, and at his option mark any
number of the Roman Priests in the catalogue, and impute to them any
crime which he pleased. But if the accuser were closely examined, and
among such a multitude of Priests, who in all their clothing are dressed
alike, were called upon minutely to delineate them, it is morally
impossible, that he could depict more than a hundred Priests dispersed
from the borders of Upper Canada to Quebec, in as many different
parishes, with the most perfect accuracy, unless he was personally and
well acquainted with them.

Maria Monk, however, does most accurately describe all the Priests in
the preceding catalogue, and repeats them at the expiration of weeks and
months; and the question is this: how is it possible that she could have
become acquainted with so many of that body, and by what means can she
so precisely depict their external appearance?--The startling, but the
only plausible answer which can be given to that question is this:--
that she has seen them in the Nunnery, whither, as she maintains, most
of them constantly resorted for licentious intercourse with the Nuns.

One other connected fact may here be introduced. Maria Monk well knows
the Lady Superior of the Charlestown Nunnery. That acquaintance could
not have been made in the United States, because Saint Mary St. George
as she called herself, or Sarah Burroughs, daughter of the notorious
Stephen Burroughs, as is her real name, removed to Canada at the latter
end of May, 1835; nor could it have been prior to the establishment of
the Charlestown Nunnery, for at that period Maria Monk was a child, and
was not in any Convent except merely as a scholar; and Mary St. George
was at Quebec. How then did she become so familiar with that far-famed
lady as to be able to describe her so exactly? The only answer is, that
she derived her knowledge of the Charlestown Convent and of its
Superior, from the intimations given, and from intercourse with that Nun
in the Hotel Dieu Nunnery.

Young females often have been sent to the Nunneries in Canada under the
fallacious hope of obtaining for them, a superior education; and very
frequently, they are suddenly removed after being there but a short
period; because the persons to whose partial guardianship they are
committed perceive that they are in danger of being ensnared by the
Chaplain and his female Syrens.

But there are two other particulars in American Nunneries, the
toleration of which almost surpasses credibility.

In reference to girls, they are permitted to visit their friends, even
when they reside in the vicinity of the Convent, only for an hour or two
monthly--if their relatives are at a distance, they see them only during
the annual vacation, and often remain in the Nunnery during that term.
No correspondence is permitted between the mother, the guardian, the
sister, or the friends of the young female in the Nunnery School, on
either side, without the inspection of the argus-eyed agent of the
Institution. Parental advice, filial complaints, and confidential
communications are equally arrested; and only furnish to the Superiors
of the establishment, artifices to thwart the Seniors, to entangle the
Juniors, and effectually to cajole both parties. Consequently, it
generally happens, that from one term to another, little or no
intercourse exists between the youth and her relatives; and it is
indubitable, that where any letters do nominally pass between them, they
are forgeries; the real letters being surreptitiously detained. Those
felonious regulations furnish ample scope for the initiation of girls
just entering upon womanhood, into all the wickedness of the Nunnery;
while the girls themselves are unconscious of the design, and the Nuns,
those nefarious artificers of the iniquity, in subserviency to the
Priests, in case of necessity, can exculpate themselves apparently from
all participation in the treachery and crimes.

Pages:
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23