Saint Patrick was a Quartodeciman!!

Last updated March 10, 2003

Saint Patrick (373 — 465) was a quartodeciman. That means that he celebrated the anniversary of the Lord’s Resurrection on the 14th day of the month at the time of the FULL MOON. This was the custom of all the Hibernian Christians for over 500 years after the great Saint Patrick.

When St. Patrick landed in Scotia in 405, he brought a Scriptural calendar  with him. This was the calendar that God gave Moses when he led the people out of Egyptian bondage.

St. Patrick dumped the Druid solar calendar whose new year began in the Fall. His new year began with the new moon after the Vernal Equinox. This was a perfect time to begin the new year. The months were synchronized with the phases of the moon. 

If we had kept this common sense calendar we would not be freezing in January on New Year's Eve!!

The present calendar is called the Gregorian Calendar and is named after that infamous Roman Emperor: Gregory XIII.


The greatest event in the history of the universe took place on the Mount of Olives overlooking Jerusalem at the time of the Jewish Passover in the year 33 A.D

This great event was the death and Resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ when he completely defeated Satan, sin, death and hell.

Since the days of Moses (1,500 B.C.), the Passover was always celebrated 14 days after the new moon during the time of the full moon following the Spring Equinox.

"But now is Christ risen from the dead, and is become the firstfruits of them that slept. For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive" (I Corinthians 15:20-22).

Mount of Olives overlooking Jerusalem where Christ rose from the dead.

Mount of Olives overlooking Jerusalem where Christ rose from the dead.

Saint Patrick lit a candle in Hibernia that has never been extinguished. To walk in the steps of Patrick was the ambition of the men and women who came after him. Thousands of Christians left the Island of Saints and Scholars to preach the Gospel to the benighted Europeans. We could fill libraries with the exploits of these great missionaries, but at the present time we must focus on just one great life who became a martyr for Jesus by telling the Truth about Rome.

Illustrious Son of Scotia

Father Jeremiah J. Crowley (Nov. 29, 1861 — ????).

Father Jeremiah J. Crowley (Nov. 29, 1861 ????).

Father Crowley was the Martin Luther of America . . . leading the Irish-American Catholics out of Egyptian bondage before he was brutally slain by command of Roman Emperor Pius X.

Father Crowley was born in Co. Cork, Ireland on Nov. 29, 1861. His father was a farmer and his mother's  name was Nora Burke. He attended St. Finbarr's College Cork, and St. Patrick's College (Seminary) Carlow, Co. Carlow.

His was ordained a priest in the year 1886 in the diocese of Cork. After serving many years as a priest in Ireland and the U.S., he was finally appointed Pastor of St. Mary's Church, Oregon, Illinois, in the year 1899.

After he was assigned to a parish in Illinois, Father Crowley began to see the unutterable corruption of his superiors. As a sincere priest he believed that Rome was a Christian church and he set about to reform her from within. Together with 25 other priests he wrote letters to the Pope seeking a redress of grievances....All to no avail.

In 1905, he decided to go public and take his campaign of reform directly to the Catholic people. This led him to publish his first book about the corrupt parochial school system:

Inside cover of first book by Father Crowley published in 1905.

Like Luther, he was met with a storm of opposition....He soon realized the truth....Rome was indeed the Whore of Babylon and for her reform was impossible. He obeyed the Lord's command to 

"Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of herplagues." (Rev. 18:3).

In 1908, Father Crowley resigned from the priesthood because he saw that his campaign for reform was hopeless. In 1912, he published his second book entitled: Romanism, A Menace to the Nation:

Cover of the blockbuster 704 page book by Father Crowley published in 1912.

Cover of last book written by Rev. Crowley in 1913.

This is the cover of the last book written by Father Crowley. It brought the wrath of Emperor Pius X down on his head and he died another martyr for Jesus by the cruel hand of Rome. This book is almost impossible to find!! We will honor the memory of our great hero by putting them both online soon.

Father Crowley saw that the greatest threat to his adopted country was coming from the Catholic Parochial School system. He set about to warn his country of the danger. Here is just one chapter from his 704 page book entitled: The Parochial School, a Curse to the Church, a Menace to the Nation, first published in 1905:




    The parochial school in America owes its beginning, according to Bishop Spalding of Peoria, Illinois, to the German Catholics. In his lecture entitled, "The Catholic Church in the United States," delivered at the Church of Notre Dame, Chicago, January 24, 1904, before a representative audience, he said:

"Fifty years ago there was a great difference of opinion amongst Catholics in this country about the religious school. Some of the leading Bishops, some of the most active minds, had misgivingswere rather in favor of simply accepting the school as it existed, and of not attempting to create a distinctively religious school. We owe, I think, this great movement, or at least the beginning of this great movement, largely to the German Catholics.
  It was among the German Catholics first that insistence upon the necessity of a religious school was made, and not made wholly from religious motives. The Germans, as you know, are of all people in this country, the most tenacious of their mother-tongue. They are a tenacious race, strong, sturdy, persevering, without frivolity, not easily influenced by new surroundings, loving their own customs, as well as their own tongue.
  Now, from a desire to perpetuate their language, as well as from a desire to instill into the minds and hearts of their children the faith which they had brought across the ocean with them, they began to establish schools, and they showed us how easy it is
how easily a congregation of one hundred families, in the country, in villages, can build and maintain a Catholic school.
   And then, attention being attracted to it, it more and more grew upon the consciences of the Catholic Bishops, and priests and people, that this was the one thing that God called us to do, more than anything else, if we would make our faith abiding here in this new world, and in this democratic society."


  From the words of Bishop Spalding it will be seen that the Catholic parochial school in America is many years younger than the American public school. The Bishop attributes the adoption and the carrying out of the German Catholics' parochial school idea to the recognition by Catholic bishops, priests and people of a call from God. The fact is that Catholic bishops and priests were the ones who seized upon the parochial school idea. The Catholic people did not want the parochial school. Why did the priests and prelates adopt it and why do they champion it today? The answer is fourfold. First: because they saw and see that there never can be any union of Church and State in this Republic, as long as its citizens are the product of public schools. Second: they saw and see that the indoctrination of Catholic children with liberal and progressive ideas is impossible in schools wholly under Catholic clerical influence. Third: they saw and see that the parochial school gives ample opportunity to train Catholic children to close their eyes, ears and mouths to clerical drunkenness, grafting and immorality. Fourth: they saw and see in the parochial school an immense opportunity for graft.
    The Catholic parochial school in the United States is not founded on loyalty to the Republic, and the ecclesiastics who control it would throttle, if they could, the liberties of the American people.


    It is my profound conviction that the masses of the Catholic people prefer the public schools, and that they send their children to the parochial schools to avoid eternal punishment, as their pastors preach from the pulpit: 

"Catholic parents who send their children to the godless public schools are going straight to hell"                                                               

    The Jesuits are particularly vicious toward the public school.

In the Holy Family Church, the largest parish in Chicago, in 1902, during a mission, at which there were present at least 2,500 people, all being women, the Jesuit preacher said:

"Parents who send their children to the godless public schools are going straight to hell. I make this statement in the Presence of the Blessed Sacrament. Now, I want you, good mothers, whose children attend the parochial school, to kneel down and offer up with me, from the bottom of your hearts, three Our Fathers and three Hail Marys for the conversion of these wicked and benighted parents who are sending their children to the godless public schools."

    A lady friend of mine, a most intelligent and respectable Catholic mother, told me she never was in such a plight in her life. She had a child in the public school, and, of course, remained seated. Women knelt all around her. Right by her side knelt a drunken woman, who, as she prayed from the bottom of her heart, in unison with her pastor, peered right into her face, and nearly suffocated her with the fumes of whiskey. It is needless to add that my friend was not converted to the parochial school. Some priests refuse absolution to parents whose children attend the public schools. Others compel parents, through the confessional, to promise to send their children to the parochial schools.
    Catholic children, who attend the public school, are denied certain spiritual privileges. I quote, as an illustration, the following from the Cathedral Calendar, published by the Holy Name Cathedral, Chicago, September, 1902; P. 7:

"Attendance at the parish school will be an absolutely necessary condition for the children who hope to make their First Holy Communion next spring."

    In some parishes the children of Catholic families who attend the public school are not permitted to receive their first Holy Communion on the same Sunday morning that the parochial school children receive theirs, but have to wait a week or two, although equally prepared. For the parochial school communicants special preparations are made in decorations, processions, music, etc. There are no special preparations made by the pastor for the public school communicants. The course pursued toward the public school children is with malice aforethought and is intended to so humiliate them (and their parents) that they will leave the public school.
    At the children's Mass on Sunday morning the parochial school pupils are given the better seats, while the public school scholars are crowded into the undesirable parts of the church.
    To show still further the pressure put by prelates upon Catholic parents to force them to send their children to parochial schools I quote from page 4 of The Catholic Telegraph (published in Cincinnati, Ohio, U. S. A.) of August 25, 1904, the following letter:

"To the Clergy and Laity of the Archdiocese of Cincinnati: 
Dearly Beloved:
    As the Catholic schools are about to open, We consider it opportune to address you on the important obligation of parents to provide for the Catholic education of their children. There are, We regret to be obliged to say, some fathers and mothers, who, either for the sake of fancied advantages, or through indifference, or on account of feeling against priest or teacher send their children to non-Catholic schools.
    It is undeniable, that as a rule, all Catholic teaching is excluded from non-Catholic schools and that in them there is usually present some kind of false religious influence. Now a system of education for the young, in which Catholic faith and the direction of the Church are excluded, can not be approved by any Catholic. The Church considers it vital to a child's faith, that the spirit of religion should animate every part of the scholar's task, and influence every hour of his time in school. The teachers should be good Catholics, well instructed in their faith, and be capable to thoroughly drill the children in religion. The Church, recognizing this necessity has always opposed the separation of education and religion, and hence has condemned those who advocate it. . . In the Encyclical of Leo XIII , "Nobilissima" of the 8th of February; 1884, occurred the following words: "The, Church has over and over again loudly condemned those schools which are called Mixed or Neutral, warning parents to be careful in a thing so momentous."
    These pronouncements of the Holy See are the law for all. The legislation of the III. Plenary Council of Baltimore is based upon them. It is evident, then, that the doctrine of the church, which it would be erroneous, scandalous and even savoring of heresy to contradict, is that to attend a non-Catholic school constitutes usually a grave and permanent danger to faith, and that, therefore, it is a mortal sin for any parents to send their children to such a school, except where there is no other suitable school, and unless such precautions are taken as to make the danger remote.
    In applying this teaching to practical life there are difficulties. We often meet with parents who object to sending their children to Catholic schools on account of certain features which they dislike or who prefer non-Catholic schools on account of certain advantages. They claim that, if they take due precaution to have their children properly instructed and brought up in piety, they can not justly be interfered with. But such a claim cannot be admitted. This is a religious question and is, therefore, within the sphere of the Church authority. In such questions it belongs to the Church not only to pronounce on the principle involved, but also on its application to particular cases and individual Catholics. It is the office of the Bishops, as the III. Plenary Council of Baltimore teaches, to judge both of the alleged necessity, and of the sufficiency of the precaution. This is a matter, then, which lies within the jurisdiction of the spiritual power, and it is far from the true Catholic spirit to decide such a grave question for oneself.
    Moreover, there is another aspect of the subject which shows still more clearly how necessary it is to abide by the judgment of the Church. It is almost impossible for a Catholic parent to send his child to a non-Catholic school anywhere in the country where there is a Catholic one without causing scandal. That is to say, such action suggests to other Catholic parents to do the same; it has the appearance of religious indifference; and it tends to break down the strictness and firmness of Catholic faith. It is, therefore, nearly always, a very grievous scandal especially when the parent in question is a person of some standing and influence. Now an action which involves scandal of this kind can only be justified by a very grave necessity. It is the duty of the parent, therefore, to take the judgment of the Church both upon the possible extent of the scandal and the reason for risking it. The foregoing principles justify us in laying down the following rules:
    I. In places where there is a Catholic school parents are obliged under the pain of mortal sin to send their children to it. This rule holds good, not only in case of children who have not yet made their first Communion, but also in case of those who have received it. Parents should send their children to the Catholic school as long as its standards and grades are as good as those of the non-Catholic school. And even if there is no school attached to the congregation of which parents are members, they would still be obliged to send their children to a parochial school, college or academy, if they can do so without great hardships either to themselves or to their children.
    2. It is the province of the Bishop to decide whether a parish should be exempted from having a parish school, and whether, in case there be a Catholic in the place, parents may send their children to a non-Catholic school. Each case must be submitted to Us, except when there is question of children living three, or more miles distant from a Catholic school. Such children can hardly be compelled to attend the Catholic school.
    3. As the obligation of sending a child to a Catholic school binds under the pain of mortal sin, it follows that the neglect to comply with it, is a matter of accusation, when going to confession. We fail to see how fathers and mothers who omit to accuse themselves of this fault can believe that they are making an entire confession of their sins.
    4. Confessors are hereby forbidden to give absolution to parents, who without permission of the Archbishop send their children to non-Catholic schools, unless such parents promise either to send them to the Catholic school, at the time to be fixed by the Confessor, or, at least agree, within two weeks from the day of confession, to refer the case to the Archbishop, and abide by his decision. If they refuse to do either one or the other, the Confessor can not give them absolution, and should he attempt to do so, such absolution would be null and void. Cases of this kind are hereby numbered among the reserved cases from September I, 1904.
    5. The loss of Catholic training which the children suffer by being sent to non-Catholic schools must as far as possible be counteracted. Wherefore, we strictly enjoin that Diocesan Statute No. 64, be adhered to: "We decree that those who are to be admitted to first holy Communion shall have spent at least two years in Catholic Schools. This rule is to be observed also by superiors of colleges and academies." This Statute was enacted in Our Synod in 1898, and we regret that it has not always been observed. The necessity of complying with it is evident. It is difficult to properly prepare for first Communion even the children who have always attended Catholic schools; and it is simply impossible to do so when the children are allowed to go to non-Catholic schools up to a few months before they are to make their first holy Communion. Pastors, superiors of academies and colleges are admonished to observe this regulation. No exception is to be made to it without Our permission. In places where there is no Catholic school, Pastors will confer with Us as to the provision, which should be made for the instruction for first Communion.
    6. Pastors seeking to prevent parents from taking their children too soon out of school have made regulations regarding the age of first Communion. As there has been some discrepancy in regard to this matter, some fixing one age, some a different one, and in consequence causing dissatisfaction among parents and children, We hereby direct that no child shall be admitted to first Communion, made publicly and solemnly, unless it has completed its thirteenth year on or before the day fixed for first Communion.
7. It is the Pastor's duty to decide whether the children of his parish have sufficient knowledge for making their first Communion. Hence, children attending a Catholic school other than the parish school, as well as those going to colleges and academies, must not be permitted to first Communion unless their Pastor has testified that they are sufficiently instructed for approaching the Holy Table. . . Pastors will read this letter to their Congregations on the last Sunday in August.
    May God bless all, and especially bless parents, their children and all engaged in the work of Catholic education.

Sincerely yours in Christ,
William Henry Elder,
Archbishop of Cincinnati.

Given at Cincinnati this 18th day of August."

    In the Archdiocese of Chicago, and elsewhere, there is no publicly proclaimed statute such as obtains in the Archdiocese of Cincinnati, but there is in reality a rule that Catholic children who attend the public schools may not (at the option of the pastor) receive instruction for first Communion. Several of the Chicago priests, during the past year, have told their congregations that owing to orders from "headquarters" they would be compelled to refuse instruction for first Communion and Confirmation to Catholic children who attended the public schools.
    On the Sunday preceding the opening of the public schools for the fall term, the studied attack of the priests upon the "godless" schools, from the altar or the pulpit, is appalling. The intelligent, independent parents, who persist in sending their children to the public schools, are pictured as finally arriving in hell, and their children as moral wrecks, the sons in penitentiaries, and the daughters in places of shame. At last there is a family reunion in the place of the damned, where the children curse their parents, and say, " We are here because you sent us to the godless public school."


In 1899, an imposing church dedication took place in the United States. The dedicatory sermon was preached by Archbishop Ireland of St. Paul, Minnesota. The occasion was graced with the presence of Archbishop Kain of St. Louis, Missouri; Bishop Scannell of Omaha, Nebraska; Bishop O'Gorman Of Sioux Falls, Iowa; Rev. Jeremiah J. Harty, pastor of St. Leo's Church, St. Louis, Missouri, and now Archbishop Of Manila, Philippine Islands; the Very Rev. William J. Kirby, Ph.D., Professor of Washington D.C., and many others. Letters of regret were sent from bishop Christie Of Portland, Oregon, Bishop Hogan of Kansas City, Missouril; Bishop Allen of Mobile, Alabama; and Bishop Gallagher of Galveston,Texas.
Prior to the dedicatory sermon the pastor announced that the parochial school would open the following Wednesday, and in this connection he said:

"It will be expected that all of the children of this parish shall attend this school if they attend any. I have determined that I will not ask the Archbishop on behalf of anybody for permission to attend any school other than the parochial. Such requests must go directly from the persons desiring the permission, and not through me."

    In other words this pastor served notice upon the Catholic people of his parish that their children must go to the parochial school if any, and that Catholic parents would have to go to their Archbishop for permission to send them elsewhere. Just imagine plain, Catholic people making such a request of their Archbishop!!  That Archbishop was a Krupp gun against the public school.
    This pastor was later formally charged with sodomy and he was forced to leave his parish by enraged lay people, the ecclesiastical authorities ignoring (as usual) the charges. He is on terms of intimacy with princes of the Church, including American Papal Delegates, and he was instrumental at Rome in securing a Philippine Island See for one of his bosom American clerical chums. He is now himself a high dignitary of the Church in the Philippine Islands. I shall refer to him again in Chapter IV. of this book.


    Catholic Public school opponents declare that at least one third of the American people favor their position. I deny it. I am morally certain that not five per cent of the Catholic men of America endorse at heart the parochial school. They may send their children to the parochial schools to keep peace in the family and to avoid an open rupture with the parish rector; they may be induced to pass resolutions of approval of the parochial school in their lodges and conventions; but if it ever becomes a matter of blood not one per cent of them will be found outside of the ranks of the defenders of the American public school.
    If a perfectly free ballot could be cast by the Catholic men of America for the perpetuity or suppression of the parochial school, it would be suppressed by an astounding majority.
    The plain Catholic laymen know that the public school is vastly superior to the parochial school in its methods, equipment and pedagogic talent. They know, too, that the public is the poor man's school. They know that the public school prepares, as no other can, their children for the keen struggle of American life and the stern duties of American citizenship.
   Prelates and priests work upon the fears and feelings of the women and children, and the fathers, to have peace in their families, yield, and send their children to the parochial school.


    There is and open, notorious and virulent hostility of priests and prelates, at home and abroad, toward the public school. Catholic publications are filled with articles and editorials which show most malignant hatred of the public school. Catholic clerical hostility toward the public school is a fact with which the American people will be forced to deal sooner or later the sooner the better.


    I assert that it is the set purpose of the great majority of the Roman Catholic Hierarchy in America to destroy, root and branch, the present system of American public schools.

    Bishop Spalding says (as I have quoted in the beginning of this chapter), "Fifty years ago there was a great difference of opinion amongst Catholics in this country about the religious (parochial) school." Unfortunately the clean prelates and priests of "fifty years ago " were whipped into line, and the unpatriotic and ruinous course of attacking the public schools prevailed.

    The contents of this book, I submit, amply support my contention under this heading.


    The Catholic clerical scheme to utterly destroy the American public school has these, among other, phases:

    I. The bringing of the public school into contempt by characterizing it as " godless," " vicious," " a sink of corruption," etc., etc.

    2. The securing for the Catholic parochial school the largest possible share of the public school tax funds.

    3. The encouraging of other sects to start sectarian schools and to demand public moneys in payment for the secular education of the children.

    4. The securing of a Catholic majority on public school boards and on the teaching staff of the public schools in the hope of being able thereby to lower the tone of instruction and discipline in the public schools and thus bring the public schools into disfavor.

    5. Securing the employment of nuns and monks as public school teachers. 

    6. The prevention of normal school training of public school teachers.

    By these and other means Catholic ecclesiastics hope to destroy the public school system, and to make the parochial school supreme.

    I have had many conversations with members of the American Catholic Hierarchy during the past eighteen years about the public and parochial schools in America. The ecclesiastical champions of the latter have stated that the insistent demand of the Catholic hierarchy for a division of the public school money would eventually be granted; that the American people would grow weary of the school contention and to escape it would adopt the Catholic view; that then every effort would be made to secure the largest possible grants of public money; that the other sects would out of envy, demand similar grants for their various schools, and that they would be encouraged by the Catholic dignitaries to press their claim; that the consequence would be the disruption of the public school system by the competition and antagonism of such sectarian bodies; and that the ultimate result would be the supremacy of the Catholic Church in secular teaching by virtue of Her strong organization and great resources through Her various teaching orders.


    Catholics have it dinned into their ears constantly that the "education of children belongs to the parents and is foreign  to the State," and that the parents cannot yield this right to the State. They are taught that the State is excluded from educating children.
    The logical effect of this assertion is to take the education of the children of the land wholly from the State and place it entirely in the control of the parents of the children. If the parents are religionists who believe that their church is the mouth-piece of God, then the education of their children comes  naturally under the control of their church. This doctrine would give to the Mormon church, for example, the exclusive training and educating of all Mormon children. And when the parents are not religionists but disciples of peculiar anti-social tenets this doctrine would insure the rearing of the children of those parents in those anti-social tenets. The right of the anarchist under this doctrine is as sacred as the right of the Mormon or of the Catholic.
    But I contend that the State has a vital interest in every child born within its borders. The State is in the child. Self protection and perpetuity indicate at least two of the paramount duties of the State, The State should endeavor to protect itself, and the State should try to insure its own perpetuity. Parents may be permitted to educate their children but it is always on the presumption that the education they impart will not vitiate the State and tend to produce its downfall.
    If parents teach their children to steal, the State must interfere. If parents insist upon rearing their children in ignorance, the State must enforce compulsory education. If' parents teach their children traitorous sentiments towards the Commonwealth by the direction of their church, or permit their church to teach such sentiments to their children in parochial schools, the State is recreant to its paramount duties if it does not intervene.
    The fact is that the Catholic ecclesiastical enemies of the public schools, in their anxiety to imbue the Catholic people with a belief in the exclusive right and duty of parents to educate their children, press the matter too far. They are serving the future, however, for their inimical attitude will eventually cause Americans to demand a full ascertainment of and a rigid insistence upon the rights of the State in the child, and when these are accomplished secular education outside of public schools will be abolished.


    The plea is made by Catholic ecclesiastics that the minority has rights as well as the majority. But in reference to the public schools there is no minority. The public schools are open to all the children none are excluded. It is silly for any set of people, who willfully keep their children from attending the public schools, to declare that they are a minority in the Commonwealth and that as such minority they have a right to impart to their children secular education in parochial schools at the expense of the State. The Mormons can make the "minority" plea with as good grace as Catholics. The State does its full duty when it provides and maintains a thorough system of secular education for the children of the Commonwealth, free to all the children alike. Any parent who wants something else seeks a superfluity or a luxury and should pay for it himself.

A message to the Irish race from Father Crowley.


Of Irish birth and blood myself—proud, too, of it—I desire to add a word for the special benefit of my brethren of that noble race.
    The papacy has been the constant foe of Ireland. Adrian IV, an  Englishman elected to the papacy in the early medieval period, sold Ireland bodily to King Henry II of England, on the latter's payment of a heavy "Peter's Pence" contribution, with the promise of more to follow.
    No successor of Adrian ever revoked this infamous betrayal of a heroic Christian people. As late as Pius VII, in the beginning of the nineteenth century, the papacy was willing to sell out  to the British Government the right of appointing bishops to Irish Catholic sees. The loud, energetic, and unanimous protest of the Irish masses, led by the immortal O'Connell, alone prevented consummation of this iniquitous deed. Rome, not Britain, nor Protestantism, is Ireland's real foe.
    Leo XIII condemned Parnell and Parnellism just at the most trying time of the Irish people struggle for ownership of their own soil and for the undeniable right of self-government. The uprising of the Irish race all over the world against Leo's heartless ingratitude and despotism—portending an enormous decline in "Peter's Pence"  collections in America, the British Isles, Canada, Australia, and elsewhere—brought the lascivious Leo virtually to his knees before indignant sons of St. Patrick
    Now, Ireland and the Irish are worshiped hypocritically in Rome. In proof whereof is the following from The Catholic Telegraph, March 20, 1913:



[Catholic Press Association.]

   "'Rome, March 18.—Bunches of Erin's "green, immortal shamrock," large and small, were to be seen all over the Eternal City yesterday, the feast of St. Patrick, the Apostle of Ireland. Overflowing congregations attended the services in the church of the Irish Franciscans, historic St. Isidore. Archbishop Seton pontificated at the high mass in the morning, and the panegyric of the saint was preached by the Rev. Father Pope, the noted English Dominican. Cardinal Falconio officiated at benediction of the most blessed sacrament in the afternoon.
    In the National Church of St. Patrick in Rome the sermon was preached by Monsignor Benson, and Monsignor Zampini, the papal sacristan, was the celebrant of the high mass. The rector of the Irish College officiated at benediction."

The Irish are the backbone of genuine Roman Catholic strength everywhere the English language is spoken. Rome loves them not, but has to conciliate them through motives of fear and through love of gain.

St. Patrick was not a Romanist. He founded in Ireland a flourishing, independent National Christian church, which fell into desuetude only when papal control put it under merciless curse and into abject helplessness.

The sons of Erin have been, in all times and everywhere, daring. Not wind, nor wave, nor clouded sky; not narrow trail, nor darksome wood, and dim; not crouching panther, nor ravening lion has ever daunted their advance to brother's help and to mankind's betterment. Nor shall any papal threat or menace now deter their gallant race's onward move towards the obliteration of Romish tyranny. Hunter exultant and seaman triumphant does Bret Harte portray the adventure-loving Irishman:

The sky is clouded, the rocks are bare, 
The spray of the tempest is white in air;
The winds are out with the waves at play,
And I shall not tempt the sea today.
The trail is narrow, the wood is dim,
The panther clings to the arching limb, 
And the lion's whelps are abroad at play, 
And I shall not join the chase today.
But the ship sailed safely over the sea, 
And the hunters came from the chase in glee, 
And the town that was builded upon a rock 
Was swallowed up in the earthquake shock.

    No people are more intensely devoted to intellectual emancipation and educational advancement of the masses than the Irish. They are so not because of, but in spite of, priests and bishops. The latter would keep their people ignorant; for the ignorant are invariably superstitious. They held Ireland for centuries in the chains of ignorance, till British Protestant public opinion, of which Irish Protestantism and liberalized Catholicism are no mean proportion, succeeded, in the early nineteenth century, in the inauguration of a National School System for Ireland.
    With savage opposition did the Irish Hierarchy and priesthood first meet this system; but it has, in spite of all priestly efforts, won its way to success through hearty popular endorsement. Ireland has been, under its influence, transformed. The country has in large measure ceased to be priest-ridden.
    To conciliate the bishops and priests of Ireland the government permitted the latter to become, in Catholic districts, managers of the National Schools. The priests had the appointment of teachers in their hands absolutely; to the priests were sent from Dublin checks for the payment of teachers' salaries. The teachers could not, for a time, call their souls their own. Women teachers were, not infrequently, subjected to gross abuses from lascivious priestly school managers.
    Teachers were compelled to teach catechism to the children, not only in the schools, but in the churches on Sundays. Male teachers had to attend mass on Sunday and serve the priest at the altar. Any one failing to do so was certain of dismissal.
    The teachers, forced at length to combine permanently against priestly tyranny, greed, and lustfulness, did so with the full approval of the commissioners and inspectors of education, for the most part Protestants of independent thought and action, appointed directly by the government. The united teaching body of Ireland has finally put the priest in his place. Once the despotic ruler of Ireland's school system, he is now nominal manager only in his own district.
    The priesthood in certain parts of Canada enjoys today a supremacy over Separate [Parochial] Schools almost as despotic as that formerly enjoyed by the priests of Ireland over Irish National Schools and teachers. The priesthood of the United States of America, not satisfied with absolute domination over the parochial schools, is striving, by combination most unholy, with the politicians to acquire control truly forbidding and, in American public opinion, most disastrous over the Public School System of this country.
    The sturdy independence of so enlightened a body as the teachers of Ireland in regard to a tyrannous priesthood is token pleasing, indeed, of what is in store for the Irish priesthood when Ireland has a Home Rule government. The priest will then be dealt with there as he has been in France and other Catholic countries—made to attend his own business and keep his hands off the pure maidens of Ireland who devote themselves to the arduous and noble profession of teaching.
    The Irish teachers had, under priestly rule, to bribe priests for appointment—the position going usually to the highest bidder. The teachers were obliged even to furnish the priests' houses. It was a case of bribery at the beginning and bribery throughout the teacher's career. So flagrantly corrupt did this priestly control of Irish schools become that the teachers and people at last revolted, the bishops themselves took alarm, and the priest was driven out of his selfish, lustful place of domination of teachers and schools.
    Dr. F. W. Merchant, who is one of the leading school authorities of Canada, holding high place in the Department of Education in Toronto, was recently commissioned by the Conservative government to pay an eight months' visit to Europe for the purpose of investigating technical and industrial education in the Old World.
    From The Toronto Globe, bitterly opposed to the Conservative Party, I quote in part:

"Discussing his trip, Dr. Merchant said he visited schools in England, Scotland, Ireland, France, Switzerland, and Germany. He classified the schools under four headings: (1) Ordinary or elementary schools, with a certain technical, industrial, or commercial bias; (2) technical high schools—schools that taught those entering industrial life just what the present high schools do for those choosing a professional career or are preparing for a university course; (3) trade schools pure and simple, where there is an attempt to teach a trade along with a certain amount of elementary education; (4) the polytechnic schools, which attempt to meet the individual needs of a host of people along a variety of lines. These schools work principally at night. The Toronto Globe, May 15, 1913.

Here is what Dr. Merchant finds in the Ireland of today:

"The Irish [said Dr. Merchant] have done more in the last ten years to organize trade schools in small municipalities than any other people I have visited. Splendid schools had been organized in places of from two to ten thousand inhabitants. Itinerant teachers are engaged. Agricultural training is not separated from technical training."

The priesthood, by a determined, enlightened Irish Catholicism, not so strong yet in numbers, perhaps, but overwhelmingly powerful in intellect and civic worth, has been compelled to keep hands off Ireland's National School System. The agitation for political deliverance, led so ably by Charles Stewart Parnell, a noble Irish Protestant, whom the priests drove to a premature grave, gave marked impetus to the movement for Irish liberation from the priestly yoke, started in the days of O'Connell.
    Irishmen, Protestant and Catholic, have in recent years, by patriotic combination for the abolition of landlordism, firm ally of a corrupt priesthood, scored a success more permanent than even did in like regard, the French Revolution. The Irish National teachers, a noble body of men and women, are organized in solid phalanx, free from priestly dominance, for the upliftment of their race and country. Statistics show that their success against obstacles of appalling magnitude, the priesthood principally, has been magnificent.
    The Catholic teachers of Ireland fear not to tell the priests to "keep off the grass" and to see that the once haughty clerics do keep off the shamrocked soil of a people's educational system, worthy successor of that which, soon after Patrick had established his independent, non-Romanist Church in old Erin, attracted scholars and pupils from all over Europe.
    Come, let the day, under a Home Rule government, when all Ireland's bitterness and dissensions, kept alive for its own evil, selfish purposes by Rome, may disappear; when the grand old land of Patrick and Malachi, of Grattan, Swift, O'Connell, and Parnell, may sit as an equal at the table of the world's great peoples.
    No real Home Rule can Ireland ever enjoy as long as she suffers from Rome rule. Home Rule is coming because Rome rule—thanks to High Heaven!—is fading away from Ireland forever! In The Washington Post of February 16, 1912, I read:


"A measure for the better government of Ireland will be submitted to you."
In these simple but pregnant words George V, King of Great Britain and Ireland and the dominions beyond the seas, announced to his liege lords and his faithful commons the intention of his ministers to introduce and pass into law a bill for the restoration to Ireland of her native parliament.
One wonders if fate is at last going to be propitious to the aspirations and desires of the great majority of the Irish people. So often in the past has the cup been held to Ireland's lips, and so often rudely dashed away, that the blind goddess of mischance seemed to be pursuing her with unrelenting hate. Generation after generation of patriots who sought freedom in various ways, by sword and pen, by speech and agitation, passed away sickened with the cruelty of hope deferred. But the sacred spirit of liberty died not. From sire to son the care of the cause was handed down, and the banner that fell from the dying grasp of an O'Connell or a Butt was taken up by a Duffy or a Parnell and passed along to their successors still floating bravely to the breeze.
In 1782 Grattan won a free Irish parliament, and closed his great speech on the occasion with the following magnificent peroration:

"I found Ireland on her knees. I watched over her with an eternal solicitude. I have traced her progress from injuries to arms and from arms to liberty. Spirit of Swift: spirit of Molyneux, your genius has prevailed. Ireland is now a nation. In that new character I hail her; and bowing to her august presence, I say, Esto Perpetua."

But eighteen years later, when his parliament was wiped out of existence, what a hollow mockery his prophecy seemed to be! Yet scarcely was the parliamentary union with England effected, than attempts began to be made for its repeal. Small and ineffectual at first, these attempts grew in volume and intensity with time until at last one of the great English parties was converted to the idea of home rule for Ireland. Gladstone's two home-rule bills met an untoward fate: that of 1886 was killed in the commons by the defection of his own followers, that of 1893 was smothered in the lords by an overwhelming vote.
    But all things come round to him who will but wait. The signs and portents are now favorable. It would really seem at last that in Ireland's case the wheel has come full circle. There is a safe majority in the commons, and while the lords may delay the bill, their power to destroy it has been effectually removed by the amendments to the constitution adopted last year.
    Still there is many a slip. There is a powerful and embittered opposition; parliamentary time is short, and valued accordingly; all is not supposed to be well in the inner circle of the king's ministers. Many an anxious hour will be spent by the promoters and supporters of the bill before it is writ broad and large on the statute book That it must be so written, sooner or later, seems now inevitable."

God bless the day when George V, successor of the kings who drove papal misrule out of Britain, shall open the first Irish Parliament ! That day will be one not alone of civil but, above all, of religious emancipation, disenthralment, and liberation for the Irish race—the beginning of the end of papal, priest-ridden Ireland!


Excerpted from chapter 9 of: The Pope, Chief of White Slavers, High Priest of Intrigue, by Jeremiah Crowley, The Menace Publishing Co., Missouri, 1913.

Roman Emperor Pius X. (1903 — 1914) ordered the death of Father Crowley.

Roman Emperor Pius X. (1903 — 1914) ordered the death of Father Crowley.

Such boldness in telling the Truth was bound to bring the wrath of the Roman Empire down on his head — and it did!! The Papal States had just been abolished 30 years earlier. All the Europeans nations had rejected the Papacy and she was determined to make a last stand in the U.S. That is why Emperor Pius X put a contract on his head. Like Moses who led his people out of Egyptian bondage, only God knows his sepulchre to this day, but he will be one of the first ones up on Resurrection Day!!

Editor's Note

The last reference to Father Crowley in a national newspaper was a brief article in the New York Times of Sept. 13, 1913. In a very brief statement it said that the town of New Lexington, Ohio, was placed under martial law because Father Crowley was due to make a speech there!!

Back to Main Menu