Priests Quotes

This famous quotation has been attributed to Voltaire, 1694-1778, and French Philosopher, Denis Diderot, 1713-1784. Most quotation collections erroneously attribute it to Diderot in the version “Men will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest.” Both Voltaire and Diderot used the quotation as did many others opposed to monarchy and the then repressive church hierarchies. But the origin of the famous phrase was with Meslier. When the priest died, three handwritten manuscripts were found written and signed by him in which he attacked religion in general and the church and the Bible in particular. His Testament was read by Voltaire and Denis Diderot among others and he was very influential in their development as opponents of organized religion.

This principle, so important to the philosophy of science, was a major component of the philosophy of Spinoza—the part that had him excommunicated by the 3 major religions of the era.

This quotation shows the unique relationship that the Irish Republic has had with the Catholic Church. There was probably no other non Muslim country in the world where a political leaders could get elected avowing this kind of loyalty and control by a religious heirerchy. See {639726} for an even more Irish, drastic departure from the concept of separation of church and state.

Spinoza’s ideas were considered so radical and dangerous that he was the only man in history who was excommunicated by the Catholics, the Jews and the Muslims. This quotation, in the 17th century outraged almost every cleric. This is one of the strongest and unequivocal statements about the desirability of separation of church and state. Interestingly, as early as this statement was, Spinoza believed that harm extended to both religion and government.

1st Baron Macaulay

This was a fairly radical constraint on what had been a traditional priestly prerogative throughout the ages. However, the penalty for such a sin and infraction was rather modest—a warning for the first offence, followed by reducing the cleric’s income. There were more serious punishments proscribed for repeated offenses, but typical of most reform efforts a newly prohibited activity carries a very light penalty. For example $20 fines for providing alcohol to a minor was the initial penalty in some states. A then current comparison can be made since elsewhere in this council dueling between Christians was also prohibited. But the penalty for even the first offence was excommunication.

The Fascist Dictator hinted at all the Church property that the State might seize and began to place taxes on the Church and in a brilliant political stroke actually negotiated the Lateran Pacts of 1929 with the Church whereby the Dictator would guarantee all the churches property and protect its officials end exempt the church from taxation and all the Church had to do was have all their Italian Bishops swear to this oath of political support for the dictatorial fascist state and its outrages and aggression and denial of rights. He actually have the church more religious power than they had enjoyed in Italy for years. For example he turned over the public school curriculum to the church with no other religion considered. Despite thus oath of the Italian bishops, there were a number of individual Catholic priests who aided the anti-Fascist resistance, but for the most part Mussolini bought the political and moral support of the Catholic Church. Apologists for the Church at the time point out that the entire Vatican and the Pope was totally within the dictator’s span of control, and he could jail any of the Holy see who criticized him or have them executed as he did so many others. He could also loot the Vatican and sell off holy relics and other object to finance his wars of aggression and his alliance with Hitler. They argue that there was nothing any priests could say that would break the iron hold Mussolini had on Italy and at least, the priests could perform their pastoral functions so long as they supported the Fascists. The debate continues to this day. However, after WWII Italians left the Catholic Church in droves and it is one of the least religious states in Europe.

Describing the conquest and destruction of Jerusalem and the Second Temple in 70 AD.

Note that the penalty for priests who married was not very great. By this Cannon, they would be forbidden to perform their priestly duties for a short while, and the marriage was dissolved, but they could maintain their rank, status and privileges although they could not advance further. This reflects the greater tolerance for marriage of the Eastern Church then the Westerners of Rome would allow. This grew to total acceptance of married priests in the Eastern Church but there were ideological differences when there was but one church.

Ingersoll was considered to be the greatest orator and political thinker of his day, but his overt atheistic views curtailed his elected political career.

Since Pope Francis was so modern in so many areas there were hopes among some Roman Catholic reformers that the Pope would change the age old, discriminatry prohibition against women being priests.

The Irish Catholic Church had covered up the predatory child abuse behavior of many priests. The Vatican did also. At first they denied that priests had molested children. Then when the facts were becoming public, they argued that it was the behavior of an isolated priest here and there. Then they were faced with the fact that there were many priests who were pederasts, and the church castigated the individuals and denied that the Church officials knew what was going on and covered the crimes up, But many high officials of the Church knew that it was happening. They thought that the harm that would be done by loss of faith and trust in priests if the sexual oredation became known would be worse than if they tried to control the problem quietly inside the church. What they were accused of is just what had happened. Even Pope Benedict XVI when he was a mid-level Vatican official had refused to defrock a perverted California priests who the American church officials had wanted to get rid of. Even when the enormity of the abuse had become public, many Catholic officials denied that there was serious, traumatic harm done to the victims. Archbishop Martin was a leader in facing the issue squarely, admitting the behavior and the effect and trying to make amends and change. He was not at all popular for this among the Irish prelates and the Vatican officials, However, he managed to preserve some trust and support for the Chuch which had a major reform task ahead,

This quotation, 500 years later, would be used by American anti-Catholics to justify their antipathy to the Catholic Church. This was about a most undemocratic statement about the common man and his capabilities which was completely counter to the American view. The fact that it was 500 years past or that many American Catholics did not believe it or that even if they did, it was restricted to matters of theological faith, was not considered by the Know-Nothings and others.