maharba question: Was JWBooth a catholic, did he convert?

Paul Serup:
Was the assassin of Abraham Lincoln a Roman Catholic? As I state in my book:

In Fifty Years, Charles Chiniquy alleged that the actor was a “Protestant pervert to Romanism“. In her 1982 article in the Lincoln Herald, “Insights on John Wilkes Booth from His Sister Asia‘s Correspondence“, historian Constance Head stated that strong evidence pointed to the fact that Booth indeed was a Catholic. Booth’s sister, Asia Booth Clarke, wrote a memoir of her brother which was published after her death. College history professor, Terry Alford, a leading authority on the life of John Wilkes Booth, attested to how valuable a witness Booth Clarke is regarding her brother’s life. He stated, “Asia Booth Clarke‘s memoir of her brother John Wilkes Booth has been recognized as the single most important document available for understanding the personality of the assassin of President Abraham Lincoln“, adding that “no outsider could give such insights into the turbulent Booth‘s childhood or share such unique personal knowledge of the gifted actor“. Alford edited a recent edition of the memoir.
Ms. Head agreed, declaring that “Asia should be accurate in the matter of her brother’s religious preference”. Head quoted from a letter the actor’s sister had written to a friend regarding the assassination and the conspirators. Booth Clarke wrote, “I was shocked and grieved to see the names of Michael O’Laughlin and Samuel Arnold [among the conspirators.] I am still more surprised to learn that all engaged in the plot are Roman Catholics. Wilkes was of the faith professedly and I was glad that he had fixed his faith on one religion”

Head also stated:

Although the Booth family was traditionally Episcopalian, Asia personally was very much inclined toward Catholicism as the result of her schooling at the Carmelite convent in Baltimore. Eventually she became a Catholic herself, and although the date of her conversion is unknown, it is a matter which she and Wilkes may have discussed. It is even conceivable that it was Asia who converted him. On the other hand, perhaps as an actor, he was simply attracted by the dramatic beauty of the Mass. He seems moreover to have entertained a low opinion of certain protestant clergymen who preached the sinfulness of the stage, and thus may have been drawn toward Catholicism as a faith more congenial to his vocation. In any case, it seems certain that Booth did not publicize his conversion during his lifetime. And while there is no reasonable cause to connect Booth’s religious preference and his “mad act”, the few who knew of his conversion must have decided after the assassination that for the good of the church, it was best never to mention it. Thus the secret remained so well guarded that even the most rabidly anti-Catholic writers who tried to depict the assassination of Lincoln as a Jesuit or Papist plot were puzzled by the seemingly accurate information that John Wilkes Booth was an Episcopalian.

Other evidence presented at the 1865 Trial of the Conspirators point towards Booth’s Catholicism as well.>

That would fit well with some others of the assassination team being catholic. And the almost astounding escape of John Surratt and working at the Vatican awhile. As well, a catholic John Wilkes Booth comports with the alias John St.Helen in 1870 Granbury TX requesting a catholic priest to come his (near) death bed. Oh, if we could have gotten a statement, somehow, from that priest who attended in Granbury TX.

Backwards Abraham, if you have studied the Lincoln assassination, surely you know that the only Catholics among the conspirators were the Surratts and Dr. Mudd. Also, why do you never answer our queries regarding what sources you are getting your "information" from? I must admit that, if you are using Wyatt Evans's book for some of this, I never finished reading his psycho-babble style of telling history -- way too deep for my meager brain...

I completely agree about Evan's book, Laurie. It's so poorly written, I found it almost impossible to follow. It's the only assassination related book I couldn't bring myself to finish.

Though I don't believe that there was any Catholic conspiracy involved in Lincoln's assassination, I will say that my own research has led me to lean more toward the idea that John Wilkes was likely a Catholic convert. At the very least, Asia Booth was convinced that he was a Catholic, but I doubt he was ever as devout as she was.

I totally agree with your opinion Dave!

(01-06-2016 08:44 AM)RJNorton Wrote:  Paul, in Fifty Years in the Church of Rome Chiniquy wrote that President Lincoln told him:

"But sooner or later, the light of common sense will make it clear to everyone that no liberty of conscience can be granted to men who are sworn to obey a pope, who pretends to have the right to put to death those who differ from him in religion.

You are not the first to warn me against the dangers of assassination. My ambassadors in Italy, France, and England, as well as Professor Morse, have many times warned me of the plots of murderers which they have detected in those different countries."

(Professor Morse is the Samuel F. B. Morse of telegraph fame)

I assume these warnings referenced by Chiniquy were in the form of letters. Are you able to provide the actual text of such letters to Lincoln? If not, do you know if they are still in existence?

I am not sure, I would think that the ambassadors would have communicated with Washington via telegram essentially. Very sensitive information like intelligence of a planned assassination would, I would think, ideally be delivered personally to the President or to others that would be concerned with his security. I did not search any of the U.S. state papers for this in the time I was in Washington as I was too busy searching for other things in the precious time I had during my research visits.

---

(01-03-2016 10:05 AM)JMadonna Wrote:  It should be remembered that the civil war not only divided north and south over slavery but also religions. Jews and Catholics generally supported the North. Presbyterians divided their church into Old and New School factions in 1837 over roughly sectional lines. The Old School was the branch more accommodating of slavery.Baptists and Methodists divided their respective denominations into Northern and Southern branches between 1844 and 1845, they were unequivocal that the main object of contention was slaveholding.

The Pope refused to step in and stop Irish immigration whose Catholic manpower was essential to the North. It is not surprising that the Catholics and Jews would become scapegoats.

“Jews and Catholics generally supported the North”. I am not sure what the Jews did but Catholics and the Roman Catholic Church did not generally support the North, rather the opposite. Look at the sentiment expressed to a 1905 report in a Catholic publication, American Catholic Historical Researches, which declared: “My! What ‘a great man’ Lincoln is to Catholics nowadays. Forty-odd years ago few Catholics condemned the ‘evils and miseries of slavery,’ and any who did would have fared better to have abandoned their faith. Few thought kindly of Lincoln or that he was a ‘providential’ instrument to save the Union.” This also agrees with what writer Orestes Brownson, considered by some to be Catholicism’s greatest American intellectual, declared during the Civil War: “no religious body in the country stands so generally committed to slavery and the rebellion, or as a body have shown so little sympathy with the effort of the government to save the unity and life of the nation, as the Catholics.” This is to say nothing of the Vatican recognition of the Confederacy or the 1863 New York City Draft Riots, the worst rioting in American history that featured Irish Catholics very prominently.
.
You also stated: “The Pope refused to step in and stop Irish immigration whose Catholic manpower was essential to the North. It is not surprising that the Catholics and Jews would become scapegoats.” I am not sure what you meant by that.
Militarily, according to the U.S. Pension Department, as reported by U.S. Army General Thomas M. Harris, the Irish made up only 6.8 percent of the number of enlisted men in the Union army, (General Harris was a member of the military commission that tried the eight conspirators in the summer of 1865). When it is considered that 72 percent of the Irish are recorded as having deserted, as opposed to five percent for native born Americans, then the percentage of Irish men that swerved in the Union army is even lower. In his book, American Catholic: the saints and sinners who built America’s most powerful church, Catholic writer Charles R. Morris stated, ”The truth is that Irish Catholic were the most underrepresented of all socioethnic groups in the Union army, with German Catholics next”.

---

(01-06-2016 02:28 PM)L Verge Wrote:  QUOTE FROM ABOVE: Was the assassin of Abraham Lincoln a Roman Catholic? As I state in my book:

In Fifty Years, Charles Chiniquy alleged that the actor was a “Protestant pervert to Romanism“. In her 1982 article in the Lincoln Herald, “Insights on John Wilkes Booth from His Sister Asia‘s Correspondence“, historian Constance Head stated that strong evidence pointed to the fact that Booth indeed was a Catholic. Booth’s sister, Asia Booth Clarke, wrote a memoir of her brother which was published after her death. College history professor, Terry Alford, a leading authority on the life of John Wilkes Booth, attested to how valuable a witness Booth Clarke is regarding her brother’s life. He stated, “Asia Booth Clarke‘s memoir of her brother John Wilkes Booth has been recognized as the single most important document available for understanding the personality of the assassin of President Abraham Lincoln“, adding that “no outsider could give such insights into the turbulent Booth‘s childhood or share such unique personal knowledge of the gifted actor“. Alford edited a recent edition of the memoir.
Ms. Head agreed, declaring that “Asia should be accurate in the matter of her brother’s religious preference”. Head quoted from a letter the actor’s sister had written to a friend regarding the assassination and the conspirators. Booth Clarke wrote, “I was shocked and grieved to see the names of Michael O’Laughlin and Samuel Arnold [among the conspirators.] I am still more surprised to learn that all engaged in the plot are Roman Catholics. Wilkes was of the faith professedly and I was glad that he had fixed his faith on one religion”

Head also stated:

Although the Booth family was traditionally Episcopalian, Asia personally was very much inclined toward Catholicism as the result of her schooling at the Carmelite convent in Baltimore. Eventually she became a Catholic herself, and although the date of her conversion is unknown, it is a matter which she and Wilkes may have discussed. It is even conceivable that it was Asia who converted him. On the other hand, perhaps as an actor, he was simply attracted by the dramatic beauty of the Mass. He seems moreover to have entertained a low opinion of certain protestant clergymen who preached the sinfulness of the stage, and thus may have been drawn toward Catholicism as a faith more congenial to his vocation. In any case, it seems certain that Booth did not publicize his conversion during his lifetime. And while there is no reasonable cause to connect Booth’s religious preference and his “mad act”, the few who knew of his conversion must have decided after the assassination that for the good of the church, it was best never to mention it. Thus the secret remained so well guarded that even the most rabidly anti-Catholic writers who tried to depict the assassination of Lincoln as a Jesuit or Papist plot were puzzled by the seemingly accurate information that John Wilkes Booth was an Episcopalian.

Other evidence presented at the 1865 Trial of the Conspirators point towards Booth’s Catholicism as well. END QUOTE

Constance Head was a personal friend of both Betty Ownsbey and me as well as a volunteer docent at Surratt House for several years, making the trek from Western Carolina University to Maryland every chance she could get. She died quickly at the hands of cancer at an early age, and her research materials went to both Terry Alford and Jeannine Clarke Dodels.

Constance was of the Jewish faith, and the question of Booth's religious choices was interesting to her. We know that his father embraced at least bits and pieces from most sects (Christian and non-Christian), and that Mrs. Booth raised her children in the Episcopal faith (when they had a chance to go to church). When their grandfather Booth moved in, I would suspect that he added another stake in the Episcopal (Church of England) worship.

My question has always been, "When did JWB have the time to convert to Catholicism and where are the records?" Such a conversion was not a simple matter; one did not just walk into a rectory one day and ask to be converted. I have been a lifelong Episcopalian, and I married a Catholic who converted to my faith. This was years before the various Ecumenical Councils took away much of the majestic liturgy in both churches. I sat through weeks and hours of cathechism to be confirmed in my faith at age twelve, and my husband did likewise and went through the ceremony of confirmation also. When did Booth stay in one place long enough to do the same? Where are church records to prove his conversion?

Also, we believe that Booth started out supporting the Nativist political party, otherwise known as the Know Nothings. That party was anti-Catholic. Did he also drop his political persuasions to join the Catholic faith?

Do we have records from any church that he even visited? Did any of his many friends mention attending any church with him? What denomination was Lucy Lambert Hale? That would definitely have been a topic for conversation if they indeed intended to marry. There is mention of a religious medal that he wore and also that he pleased the Surratts by supporting one of their church's bazaars. Could he have "earned" the medal by contributing money to that bazaar? Or, was it a medal distributed by the Episcopalians for good deeds or good luck?

There are a lot of simple questions that need answers before anyone can flat out state that John Wilkes Booth converted to Catholicism.

I wondered a bit as to how to respond. I cite a paper published in a historical journal, Constance Head’s in the Lincoln Herald, and you cite,…what, or have I missed something on the subject? I wonder if you have written anything on John Wilkes Booth, particularly concerning his religious beliefs.
You knew Constance Head and you knew that she had written on Booth’s religion. And you disagreed with her, is that correct? Her paper was published in 1982 so that is 33 plus years ago, more than three decades to put something on paper and publish regarding any problems with what she penned. I mentioned that Booth’s sister, Asia Booth Clarke, wrote a memoir of her brother which was published after her death. History professor, Terry Alford, a leading authority on the life of John Wilkes Booth, attested to how valuable a witness Booth Clarke is regarding her brother’s life, stating, “Asia Booth Clarke‘s memoir of her brother John Wilkes Booth has been recognized as the single most important document available for understanding the personality of the assassin of President Abraham Lincoln“, and that “no outsider could give such insights into the turbulent Booth‘s childhood or share such unique personal knowledge of the gifted actor“. Do you disagree with him and if so, why do you disagree with him?
You state that your “question has always been, ‘When did JWB have the time to convert to Catholicism and where are the records?’". Wouldn’t that have been a question to have asked the person you declare you knew, Constance Head? Perhaps you didn’t get the chance with Ms. Head’s unfortunate early death though. Ms. Head was in significant part just delivering the information regarding what Booth’s sister said, that he was Roman Catholic though. The leading authority on Booth says that his sister’s memoir on him has been recognized as the single most important document available for understanding his personality and that memoir says he was a Roman Catholic. How do you deal with that?
You wonder whether Booth would have had the time to convert. Where there is a will, there is a way though. Can you show he couldn’t have had the time to convert, however long it took? In the fall of 1864, he had the time to go to the neighbourhood of Samuel Mudd twice, in November and December, looking ostensibly for land and / or horses, not roles, and though I have not researched his acting career, I recall reading from one or two sources that in the latter part of his life, his acting jobs had started to diminish, which would have given him more spare time.
You asked, “Where are church records to prove his conversion?” Ms. Head answered that, did she not, stating “the few who knew of his conversion must have decided after the assassination that for the good of the church, it was best never to mention it.”? So possible church records were not mentioned and since they weren’t to be mentioned, couldn’t they have then just disappeared, by accident on purpose?
If it is believed that Booth started out in support of a group that was opposed to the Roman Catholic Church then it would be reasonable to assume that he dropped that support when he became a Roman Catholic.
Regarding other proof of Booth’s Catholicism, I also reported in my volume that “Evidence given at the trial of John Surratt showed that at his death, Booth had a small Catholic medal on his person. As well, on at least two occasions, court testimony showed him attending Roman Catholic Church services. There reportedly is also evidence that he made a donation to St. Aloysius Catholic church in Washington.”

(01-07-2016 08:45 AM)Dave Taylor Wrote:  Though I don't believe that there was any Catholic conspiracy involved in Lincoln's assassination, I will say that my own research has led me to lean more toward the idea that John Wilkes was likely a Catholic convert. At the very least, Asia Booth was convinced that he was a Catholic, but I doubt he was ever as devout as she was.

What has brought you to sway in that direction? How familiar are you with the tenets of both the Episcopal and Catholic faiths that would cause him to make the effort to jump across that very fine line that separates the two?

---

Mr. Serup,

Boy, getting a little testy are we when our thoughts and/or research are called into question...?

Don't challenge my friendships with Dr. Head and Dr. Alford since you know absolutely nothing about it. Both Constance and Terry were/are good friends, but that does not mean that I discuss(ed) minute details on Booth and the assassination and Booth's choice of religion with them. I agree with Terry that Asia is probably the only person who truly understood her brother, but we don't know whether Booth told her the truth if he said he was Catholic - was he just pacifying her?

What I posted here were my thoughts on Booth's chances of converting, and I probably said much the same thing to them -- after forty plus years of discussing the Lincoln assassination with probably 25 authors and more wanna-be authors on the subject, I have no idea what I have argued with whom. I'm a used history teacher with an insane addiction to the assassination story. A trained teacher throws out questions to make other people think. I also try to use common sense to determine if things were possible. I detect that you do not appreciate my approach/technique.

Your last paragraph puzzles me because I had just mentioned the religious medal on Booth (could have been either Catholic or Episcopal) and the church bazaar, which was at St. Aloysius, a church that Mary and Anna Surratt sometimes supported.

I seem to touch more raw nerves with you than other posters on this thread have done, so I will back off with my common sense questions. You won't convince me, and I won't convince you.

(01-08-2016 07:14 PM)L Verge Wrote:  

(01-07-2016 08:45 AM)Dave Taylor Wrote:  Though I don't believe that there was any Catholic conspiracy involved in Lincoln's assassination, I will say that my own research has led me to lean more toward the idea that John Wilkes was likely a Catholic convert. At the very least, Asia Booth was convinced that he was a Catholic, but I doubt he was ever as devout as she was.

What has brought you to sway in that direction? How familiar are you with the tenets of both the Episcopal and Catholic faiths that would cause him to make the effort to jump across that very fine line that separates the two?

---

Mr. Serup,

Boy, getting a little testy are we when our thoughts and/or research are called into question...?

Don't challenge my friendships with Dr. Head and Dr. Alford since you know absolutely nothing about it. Both Constance and Terry were/are good friends, but that does not mean that I discuss(ed) minute details on Booth and the assassination and Booth's choice of religion with them. I agree with Terry that Asia is probably the only person who truly understood her brother, but we don't know whether Booth told her the truth if he said he was Catholic - was he just pacifying her?

What I posted here were my thoughts on Booth's chances of converting, and I probably said much the same thing to them -- after forty plus years of discussing the Lincoln assassination with probably 25 authors and more wanna-be authors on the subject, I have no idea what I have argued with whom. I'm a used history teacher with an insane addiction to the assassination story. A trained teacher throws out questions to make other people think. I also try to use common sense to determine if things were possible. I detect that you do not appreciate my approach/technique.

Your last paragraph puzzles me because I had just mentioned the religious medal on Booth (could have been either Catholic or Episcopal) and the church bazaar, which was at St. Aloysius, a church that Mary and Anna Surratt sometimes supported.

I seem to touch more raw nerves with you than other posters on this thread have done, so I will back off with my common sense questions. You won't convince me, and I won't convince you.

Greetings,
I am testy, really? Are you sure I am the one that might be testy? I have not accused anyone of challenging friendships. I really don’t see where you get this from as I don’t have a problem with anyone examining my research and views.
Is it common sense, or more like ridiculous, to assert that I was challenging, for instance, your friendship with Terry Alford, when, as you correctly stated, I know nothing about any friendship you may have him or really anyone? I asked you if you agreed with statements made in Alford’s book. How is that challenging any friendship you may have with him? I am friends with people and we have significant differences on things and we are still friends. You say you take a common sense approach but I would respectfully question whether this makes much sense at all.

At the end of your latest post, you stated: “You won't convince me, and I won't convince you”. Well without evidence you certainly won’t convince me. I will not speak for you but if you are saying that I am ideologically stuck in a single position and I cannot change, you are absolutely wrong. I am happy to believe that John Wilkes Booth was not a Roman Catholic and the Roman Catholic Church had nothing to do with the Lincoln assassination but I am only happy to do so if that is what the evidence shows.

You said that my last paragraph puzzled you. I don’t know why it would as you asked, “Do we have records from any church that he even visited? Did any of his many friends mention attending any church with him?” I was providing evidence concerning his religion, as I said, “Regarding other proof of Booth’s Catholicism, I also reported….”

Regarding what he told his sister about his religion, unless you have more information regarding the context in which he said what he did to Asia Booth Clarke, his relationship with her, for instance, are you not just speculating? Ultimately, John Wilkes Booth professed to be a Roman Catholic. His sister believed that he was a Roman Catholic and so did Constance Head, who had that published. I hope you don’t think I would be challenging your friendship with her but I think you would agree that Ms. Head knew more about the 16th President's assassin’s religion than you do at this point. I hope you do not detect any “testiness” in this post, I ask people things directly at times but that is not because I have any problems with, or am upset with them, I assure you.

(01-11-2016 05:16 PM)Paul Serup Wrote:  

(01-08-2016 07:14 PM)L Verge Wrote:  

(01-07-2016 08:45 AM)Dave Taylor Wrote:  Though I don't believe that there was any Catholic conspiracy involved in Lincoln's assassination, I will say that my own research has led me to lean more toward the idea that John Wilkes was likely a Catholic convert. At the very least, Asia Booth was convinced that he was a Catholic, but I doubt he was ever as devout as she was.

What has brought you to sway in that direction? How familiar are you with the tenets of both the Episcopal and Catholic faiths that would cause him to make the effort to jump across that very fine line that separates the two?

---

Mr. Serup,

Boy, getting a little testy are we when our thoughts and/or research are called into question...?

Don't challenge my friendships with Dr. Head and Dr. Alford since you know absolutely nothing about it. Both Constance and Terry were/are good friends, but that does not mean that I discuss(ed) minute details on Booth and the assassination and Booth's choice of religion with them. I agree with Terry that Asia is probably the only person who truly understood her brother, but we don't know whether Booth told her the truth if he said he was Catholic - was he just pacifying her?

What I posted here were my thoughts on Booth's chances of converting, and I probably said much the same thing to them -- after forty plus years of discussing the Lincoln assassination with probably 25 authors and more wanna-be authors on the subject, I have no idea what I have argued with whom. I'm a used history teacher with an insane addiction to the assassination story. A trained teacher throws out questions to make other people think. I also try to use common sense to determine if things were possible. I detect that you do not appreciate my approach/technique.

Your last paragraph puzzles me because I had just mentioned the religious medal on Booth (could have been either Catholic or Episcopal) and the church bazaar, which was at St. Aloysius, a church that Mary and Anna Surratt sometimes supported.

I seem to touch more raw nerves with you than other posters on this thread have done, so I will back off with my common sense questions. You won't convince me, and I won't convince you.

Greetings,
I am testy, really? Are you sure I am the one that might be testy? I have not accused anyone of challenging friendships. I really don’t see where you get this from as I don’t have a problem with anyone examining my research and views.
Is it common sense, or more like ridiculous, to assert that I was challenging, for instance, your friendship with Terry Alford, when, as you correctly stated, I know nothing about any friendship you may have him or really anyone? I asked you if you agreed with statements made in Alford’s book. How is that challenging any friendship you may have with him? I am friends with people and we have significant differences on things and we are still friends. You say you take a common sense approach but I would respectfully question whether this makes much sense at all.

At the end of your latest post, you stated: “You won't convince me, and I won't convince you”. Well without evidence you certainly won’t convince me. I will not speak for you but if you are saying that I am ideologically stuck in a single position and I cannot change, you are absolutely wrong. I am happy to believe that John Wilkes Booth was not a Roman Catholic and the Roman Catholic Church had nothing to do with the Lincoln assassination but I am only happy to do so if that is what the evidence shows.

You said that my last paragraph puzzled you. I don’t know why it would as you asked, “Do we have records from any church that he even visited? Did any of his many friends mention attending any church with him?” I was providing evidence concerning his religion, as I said, “Regarding other proof of Booth’s Catholicism, I also reported….”

Regarding what he told his sister about his religion, unless you have more information regarding the context in which he said what he did to Asia Booth Clarke, his relationship with her, for instance, are you not just speculating? Ultimately, John Wilkes Booth professed to be a Roman Catholic. His sister believed that he was a Roman Catholic and so did Constance Head, who had that published. I hope you don’t think I would be challenging your friendship with her but I think you would agree that Ms. Head knew more about the 16th President's assassin’s religion than you do at this point. I hope you do not detect any “testiness” in this post, I ask people things directly at times but that is not because I have any problems with, or am upset with them, I assure you.

Just as I would have said to Constance, I say to you, "Show me the proof. Bring me church records." Sorry, end of discussion for me.

At the end of your latest post, you stated: “You won't convince me, and I won't convince you”. Well without evidence you certainly won’t convince me. I will not speak for you but if you are saying that I am ideologically stuck in a single position and I cannot change, you are absolutely wrong. I am happy to believe that John Wilkes Booth was not a Roman Catholic and the Roman Catholic Church had nothing to do with the Lincoln assassination but I am only happy to do so if that is what the evidence shows.

That is my approach to history, genealogy and events uncertain. And I am very glad to get the benefit of your analysis regarding John Wilkes Booth. Whenever I see something that seems not to add up, and if experts constantly seem to evade the point, I begin to wonder why. I mention for instance that Boston Corbett who supposedly shot Booth (or the man in the tobacco barn) either shot another man or he lied about what happened. Corbett claimed many times that God had directed him, that his bullet tracked identically to the wound location of Abraham Lincoln. And the man in the barn did not at all have a bullet wound behind his ear, as did Lincoln. I also ask what did Boston Corbett supposedly use to shoot Booth/Boyd --was it a pistol, was it a rifle? The published experts do not seem to know or care about these striking contradictions. I wonder if they do not want to admit that at the very outset of the supposed 'capture of John Wilkes Booth', their official narrative is grossly contradictory. If JWBooth were a Hindu or a Catholic and the evidence continued in that line, it would all be the same to me. As you say, it is best approached from a point of view that is not idealogically wedded to any fixed position.

Laurie, You asked a question about catholic records. I do know from experience (as a cradle catholic) that baptismal records, holy communion, confirmation and marriage records are kept at the church or diocese that the event occurred. If Booth did convert to Catholicism there would almost certainly be a record of it. If I am not mistaken Booth attended church or at the least met with Dr. Mudd in Charles County Maryland at Mudd's church. This might be a possibility, or perhaps the records (if Booth did convert) might be located in the parish records of the diocese where Mary Surratt was a member. If I lived up in that neck of the woods I would be on it!!! I love a good mystery.

I believe I'm correct in saying that James O. Hall (and possibly others) did search the records of St. Mary's Church, Bryantown, where Booth met Mudd (when Mudd came from his home church, St. Peter's, that Sunday). St. Aloysius and St. Patrick's in D.C. would be logical guesses also. We would also have to check to see when the Archdiocese of Washington was created out of the Archdiocese of Maryland. I think it was during the Civil War. Somewhere Bishop Spalding fits into the history.

One of my original points was when did Booth have the time to train for confirmation/conversion? He traveled so much plying his trade as well as planning his exploits. If he took the classes - or even was allowed to do it as a private "student" - it could have been in any city or town along the East Coast or further inward. Why do I not see Booth worrying about what denomination he was from 1863 on? Why do I see him not even going to church during this time?

I think what irritates me the most with some of the postings here and in another thread in these last few weeks is that they seem to denounce previous expert historians for failing to do their homework and to find answers to some of these spurious subjects. Did it ever occur to some that the experts did research things thoroughly and dismiss a great deal of speculation, etc. as useless and without proof? Just in our generation, we have the likes of Hall, Kauffman, Hanchett, Steers, Loux, Chamlee, Alford, Roscoe, and others who did fantastic work. And now, we have a new generation making strides in the field.

(01-12-2016 09:50 AM)L Verge Wrote:  Just in our generation, we have the likes of Hall, Kauffman, Hanchett, Steers, Loux, Chamlee, Alford, Roscoe, and others who did fantastic work. And now, we have a new generation making strides in the field.

Dr. Steers' opinion is as follows:

"There is no evidence of any Catholic complicity in the plot to capture Lincoln or in his assassination. Nor is there any evidence that Lincoln feared the Roman Catholic Church or the pope."

SOURCE: The Lincoln Assassination Encyclopedia

QUOTE:In 2004 Kauffman published a book on the assassination called American Brutus: John Wilkes Booth and the Lincoln Conspiracies. This account of Abraham Lincoln's murder and his killer reads like a fictional thriller, but rests on a stunning amount of original sources and research. Like Sherlock Holmes, Kauffman ably observes, collects, analyzes, and compiles his findings. We picture him nodding in agreement when Holmes says, "It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts," and "the gravest issues may depend upon the smallest things. END QUOTE.

Some years ago, Michael Kauffman was interviewed online in the great website known as Abraham Lincoln Online. I recently reread some of that interview. The webmasters ably compared Kauffman's style as a historian to Sherlock Holmes's style as a detective. Please see above. I think some of us need to pay more attention to Mr. Holmes and Mr. Kauffman...

Paul, this may be difficult to answer briefly, but what is the major difference between your new book and a similar book written by Burke McCarthy in 1922
https://archive.org/details/suppressedtrutha02mcca

and one written by Thomas Harris in 1882
https://archive.org/details/romesresponsibil00harr