It has always been the practice of Roman Catholicism to cover up her dirty deeds and hide criminals from justice to save her reputation. The Vatican Ratlines are just one example. Roman Catholic intelligence operations assisted thousands of Nazi war criminals such as Adolph Eichmann, Franz Stangl (the commandant of Treblinka), Walter Rauf (the inventor of he "mobile" gas chamber), Klaus Barbie (the "Butcher of Lyons") and Ante Pavelic (the bloody dictator of Croatia) to escape from justice. Pope Pius XII personally authorized the smuggling of Nazi war criminals and the operation was directed by his political advisor Giovanni Montini (later known as Pope Paul VI). Many of the Catholic monasteries were used as asylums to hide these criminals from justice, since no one is permitted to enter them. Rome knew that these criminals were able to point the finger at her for her collaborations with them. Of course, this left no other option for Rome but to hide them, for in so doing, she could hide herself.

Things have not changed! The Vatican is still defending the criminals and doing whatever it takes to protect its own reputation. Just recently, a group called the Coalition of Catholics and Survivors have discovered, amidst thousands of documents, one specific document from May 25, 1999, that proves the pope put theVatican’s “image” before the welfare of innocent children. In the document, Pope John Paul II says a defrocked Catholic priest (Burns) who had a history of molesting boys should leave the areas where his “condition” was known — or stay put as long as it caused no scandal. Of course, this would explain why other bishops have moved sex offenders from parish to parish without notifying the parishioners of the dangers. They had orders from their head, the pope, a man who knew little children were in danger and being molested yet turned his back on their cries for help.

Roderick MacLeish, a Boston attorney who released the archdiocese’s file on Burns along with those of other priests accused of sexual misconduct, said, “Now for the first time we’ve seen documents from the Vatican that emphasize the word that we’ve seen so often here in Boston: ‘scandal,’”. The pope’s order came in response to a memo Law wrote to the Vatican in which he explained that the archdiocese had assigned Burns to two Boston-area parishes even though it had been advised by a center for troubled priests that the man should not be given a job that would put him in contact with children because of his history. At the time the memo was written, the archdiocese said it was aware of at least six young men whom Burns allegedly molested while he worked in Boston between 1982 and 1991.

Rev. Robert Bullock, a leader of the Boston Priests Forum, a group that represents about half of the 600 or so priests in the archdiocese, speaking of Cardinal Law, said, “He’s in hiding. He can’t appear in public here. We need new leadership.” Why blame Cardinal Law’s leadership? After all, wasn’t he just obeying the pope’s order, to whom he swore allegiance? Who’s leading who? Why not demand that the pope step down from his position for protecting pedophiles and endangering little children? When a soldier follows his commander’s orders, are not both responsible? But Rome will protect its pope’s reputation and let Cardinal Law take the fall for the pope’s orders.

Of course, this is not the first time nor the first pope to protect pedophile priests. In 1973, one Catholic priest, James Porter, confessed directly to Pope Paul VI that he had been sexually molesting children. The pope took no action whatsoever. This priest went on to molest 50 more children. Rather than suffer a scandal, the pope allowed little children to suffer molestation.

Irish Times editorialized that the church “faces the greatest institutional crises in its modern history”, having to pay out $110 million to an estimated 3,000 victims of child molestation and abuse, the problem being so bad that they actually set up a “child-protection office”. In England, twenty-one priests were convicted of child molestation. Canada has faced devastating sex abuse scandals, where over 2,500 victims of physical and sexual abuse at Catholic boarding schools filed complaints, some even given electroshocks and confined to straitjackets though there was nothing wrong with them. The order, “Oblates of Mary Immaculate” filed for bankruptcy protection yet never once offered an apology to the victims. In Australia, 50 priests and brothers were sentenced for the “worst involved sex rings” at four orphanages. In Sydney, Australia, hundreds of orphaned children, many from Britain, suffered public floggings, sadistic torture and sexual abuse at the hands of Roman Catholic nuns. The brutality took place over 90 years at the Sisters of Mercy orphanage in northern Queensland. The Queensland state government, has apologized for the cruelty, described as some of the worst atrocities that Australia has ever known. The report by Professor Grundy describes a "catalogue of terror":

"One woman told her that the nuns once thrust a red-hot poker down her back to 'exorcise the Devil'. Another child almost lost her legs, which became infected after a nun pulled out troublesome ingrown toenails with plyers while other children were forced to hold her down. Yet another was severely scalded and permanently injured after a leg was thrust into a bucket of boiling water by a nun who thought the water she had been washing in was not hot enough. Boys and girls were routinely violated and sexually abused by priests or men working at the orphanage. Some girls had miscarriages and fetuses were flushed down lavatories. To hide injuries from visitors, children were locked away in the "black hole" -- an underground cell --without bedding, ventilation or light...Madness, ruthless and sadistic madness, on the part of at least some of the nuns, and a depthless depravity on the part of some of the men who inhabited the place, are the defining characteristics of some of those who ran the orphanage...There's no limit to the sexual deviance that could be engaged in with those unlucky enough to find themselves singled out as 'the chosen ones'."

It’s evident that these Catholic priests and nuns were hiding each other's crimes and that this conspiracy among the Catholic hierarchy reaches to the very top, the pope.

Has the Roman Catholic church always been so deceitful in protecting criminals? The answer is “Yes”. The truth is that protecting criminals has always been the practice of Rome. Monasteries and nunneries, which in olden times were called "asylums" were used by Catholicism to scuffle criminals and conceal them without fear of having the civil law bring them to justice. By claiming to be a “religious organization”, they were able to cover up the infamy of their actions. According to ex-priest Bernard Fresenborg, in his book, Thirty Years in Hell: From Darkness To Light:

“Catholicism teaches, and acts accordingly, that if a confessor forgives the sins of these criminals that God has taken away all guilt from their heinous crimes and that the civil laws have no right to punish these criminals after a Catholic priest has forgiven their sins, and on this damnable dogma, Catholicism bases her right for the existence of these ‘asylums’” (141).

To better understand how Rome works, we need but look at some historical facts. John Wilkes Booth, a Roman Catholic, was the assassin of President Lincoln. The Roman Catholic Church was always believed to be responsible for this diabolical assassination. That plot was laid to destroy the republican form of government of the United States, and the assassination of Abraham Lincoln was the first step. Here in America, Catholics, with their houses adorned with crucifixes, rosaries, scapulars, and religious images of “saints” and relics, would plot assassination against the president.

It was to the house of Mrs. Surratt, located in the very heart of Washington, D.C., that the officers of the United States government proceeded after the assassination of President Lincoln, and the occupants of this house were arrested. The ones who were arrested were: Mrs. Surratt, a Roman Catholic; her daughter, Anna, a Roman Catholic; Mrs. Fitzpatrick, a Roman Catholic, and Miss Hollahan, a Roman Catholic. Before the officers had left this house a light knock was at the door and a young man appeared in disguise, as he was dressed as a common laborer and carried a pick upon his shoulder; his hands were white and soft and he was also arrested, and his name was Powell, another Roman Catholic.

John Wilkes Booth, the assassin, was also a Roman Catholic. Consequently, the belief is undoubtedly well founded that not only the was the scheme to assassinate Abraham Lincoln laid in the City of Rome by Roman Catholics, but was carried into execution by the same set in this country. Booth, after the assassination, fled to Surrattsville to the hotel of Mrs. Surratt, and there a Roman Catholic woman had concealed a carbine. Mrs. Surratt, at Washington, had warned the folks at the hotel that the weapon would be called for the night of Abraham Lincoln's assassination, which is prima facie evidence of the plot to assassinate Lincoln. After the assassination Booth fled, but on the eastern shores of the Potomac he was concealed in a Roman Catholic Church for nearly a week. As we relate this history, which is true, the evidence becomes more damaging against Roman Catholicism. The finale of this national tragedy was that Herald, Powell and Mrs. Surratt were hung, and Dr. Mudd and O' Laughlin were committed to lifelong imprisonment, and all of these were Roman Catholics.

The question now arises: How did John H. Surratt escape from the same fate of Herald, Powell, and Mrs. Surratt? John H. Surratt escaped by the assistance of Catholic officials and went to Canada, was concealed in a "Trappist cloister" near Montreal, and remained there until 1865, when, as a Priest, he went to Liverpool. In the spring of 1866, Mr. Wm. H. Seward was informed by a Mr. King, at Rome, Italy, that John H. Surratt had enlisted in the Papal Guards, under the name of John Watson. He was arrested at Teroli, in Italy, but escaped by plunging down a ravine twenty-three feet deep. He was wounded by the fall and crawled off to a monastery and remained there until he was healed and then resumed his flight.

Vatican helped this criminal escape justice by using monasteries. Now, bear in mind, the reason that the Catholic Church is such a refuge for criminals is because no police or detective is ever allowed to cross over the door-sills into these places of Catholic refuge, “where the worst chapters of crime never will be told, and where these criminals flee to avoid the punishment of their crimes.”

Another example took place on December of 1900. A boy named Edward Cudahy, Jr., was walking to his father's mansion when he was invited to step into a buggy and was informed that he was under arrest, This was in reality ploy to abduct him. Soon a ransom note demanding $25,000 was sent to his parents, or “the boy's eyes would be put out and he would forever lose his sight.” The poor frantic mother insisted that her millionaire husband, Edward Cudahy, Sr., give up the $25,000 and save her precious boy's eyesight. Her husband resisted as long as he could, but at last took the $25,000 in gold and drove to a certain spot, designated by Pat Crow, who is the one who abducted Cudahy, and with the $25,000 bought his boy's liberty. Pat Crow made away with the $25,000 in gold.

Cudahy offered a reward for the capture and arrest of Pat Crow. All of America was looking for this man, but he escaped justice. You see, Pat Crow was a “good” Irish Catholic who had gone through the Catholic school system and was a “brother in the cloisters”. With these credentials, he traveled on a “permit as Father O’Connor”. When he arrived in St. Louis, disguised as a Catholic priest, he immediately went to the confessional and confessed to murder, robbery, kidnapping and then asked if he could do “penance”. He then said:

“He [the priest] was impressed with me because I was a 'big fish' in his line, and because I had done no harm to the millionaire's boy. I told the inmates of St. Anthony's Church that I wanted to make confession and do penance the remainder of my life. A brother came with the scissors and I received the 'tonsure' for the third time, which left only a circle of hair around my head, and no Pinkerton detective, or even Bertillion himself could have identified me. In a short time I left this St. Anthony Church in a 'Catholic Habit,' which disguised me as a Catholic official, and I went to Omaha and passed myself off as 'Brother Clement from St. Louis.' When I reached Omaha I had no trouble in passing myself off as 'Brother Clement.' After I had remained there awhile I excused myself and in my priestly robes I walked to the banks of the Missouri River and raised by buried treasure, as I had left a part of the money that I received from Cudahy buried near the river, and I took the train to St. Louis, and from there to New York, and from New York I took a German steamer to Southampton. "I stayed in London two weeks and read in the paper all about Pat Crow. London was not the place for a man like me, as I had been there before, and they knew me; so I sailed for the diamond fields of South Africa, where I am now free, by the system of 'asylums' (which are Catholic monasteries) of the Catholic Church” (Thirty Years in Hell, 140).

Pat Crow’s final words were, “...if you ever needed to try this plan you could do it...the Catholic Church is the refuge of criminals.”

Rome has not changed her ways. The criminal is still being protected and that criminal is the pope. He ordered the moving of pedophiles from parish to parish to protect the reputation of Rome. Cardinal Law should be prosecuted for child endangerment even though he was only obeying the pope’s orders. Meanwhile, the criminal who ordered the children to be endangered will be hailed as a “saint”, and his reputation will be protected. How true and fitting are the words of our Lord Jesus Christ:

“And he said unto them, Ye are they which justify yourselves before men; but God knoweth your hearts: for that which is highly esteemed among men is abomination in the sight of God.” (Luke 16:15)

By Rebecca A. Sexton